Games made with RM are 'automatically bad'

[Semolous 2]

I've been seeing this a LOT more recently. People tend to always assume that if a game is made with RPG Maker, that it's automatically bad and not worth their time. While I can understand that the stigma is somewhat justified, I've played  way more good RPG Maker games than bad ones. What annoys me are comments like this 'let me guess, its going on steam for like 25 dollars and will bring nothing new to the table? sorry for being a skeptical dick (i was an rm developer myself a few years ago) but that is basically what rpg maker games have become since steam let everything in their store. generic. the good rpg maker games already exist' and 'unless it's something as outstanding as Hylics or something, its just basic and standard rpgmaker stuff'. This comment is basically saying that no effort gets put into an RM game, which simply is not true. At the end of the day, it's not about the engine, it's what you can do with it. What do you guys think? Do you think the stigma is justified, or do you think the stigma shouldn't exist?

[Tarq 745]

Well, this is far from a new attitude towards the engine; I've been in the scene for six or seven years now and that has always been the case.

I do think its somewhat justified. The various iterations of RM are where a lot of people start devving, rather than something people migrate to, so fledgling devs are commonplace. And, y'know, new devs are all big dreams and bad work ethic (sorry!); they buy those crappy dlc packs (which would be better spent on private commissions supporting other devs in the community), they use the same scripts from YF and hime (if any at all), and they validate the generic visuals and mechanics by saying ~'its all about the story'. We've all seen that guy. Heck, most of us have been that guy, myself included. So whoever you're quoting there is far from inaccurate in saying a lot of released content is 'basic and standard rpgmaker stuff'. Some people stay and improve ofc and I know a handful of people who pride themselves on doing things that 'cant be done in RM' so, sure, its a tool like any other, but then weirdly you can get stick within the community for not migrating to another engine :3

 

So, for a long time, the negativity surrounding the engine hasn't really bothered me; its like playing low-tier :3

My problem has often been seeing mediocre games being praised ~'despite being made in RM', games like Skyborn or Always, Sometimes, Monsters that, when you're familiar with RM, you can see are actually quite poorly made; to me, people thinking this is the best the engine has to offer is way more detrimental.

 

What people do with their finished content is a seperate issue, I think,since its largely irrelevant what engine was used; if its a bad game then its a bad game, and vice versa. Should a bad game be released? Probably. Should it be monetised? Probably not. But no-ones forcing anyone to buy bad games either.

[Semolous 2]

I know it's not a new issue. I've been in the RM community for over 10 years now, and I've noticed the stiga just seems to keep growing.

[Traverse 144]

13 hours ago, Semolous said:

This comment is basically saying that no effort gets put into an RM game, which simply is not true. At the end of the day, it's not about the engine, it's what you can do with it. What do you guys think? Do you think the stigma is justified, or do you think the stigma shouldn't exist?

 

First off, effort is difficult to quantify. Production time and manhours is about the closest you can get, but even then - for example - is there any guarantee that a video game fantranslation project that ends up taking 5 years will be of higher quality than a professional translation job that ends up only taking 1? The answer is "no", and often the professional gets it done faster and to higher standard while the fan group takes longer precisely because they are inexperience, disorganized and less skilled. But are you going to say the professional put in less effort? More effort? You just can't quantify it.

 

Obviously, neither can anyone else - so, as harsh as this might sound, whenever you hear people say "oh, the developer put in no effort"...... they really actually DON'T CARE how much effort went into it. Fact is, how much effort has been put in is going to be of very little consideration to the end user of the game, who is going to be playing it primarily for fun or entertainment (or to admire as a work of art, if they're one of those people who think video games ought to be treated as art). What they really care about is how much fun or enjoyment they get out of it.

 

Playing a game that is unoriginal in terms of art, sound, mechanics and even quality of writing usually does not make for the most fun or artistically-appreciable experience. If they are telling you that they think it looks like a zero-effort product, they are saying they are not having fun with it - perhaps even just looking at the screenshots makes them groan, because they have seen it all before many, many times in the past and it is getting stale. It doesn't take a genius to realize that something is up after playing half a dozen games using the same RTP graphics, music and battle system. And when they find out they are all stock assets the easy conclusion to draw is that these developers are trying to make a quick buck by what is the video game equivalent of sticking their own label on generic, prepackaged goods and they will say "no effort". There might be some people who play it anyway and find it fun; these are not going to be the ones complaining, they're just going to shut up and play the game.

 

The ones who are complaining are the ones who don't like it. Is it fair to not like something for heavily using generic/stock assets? Many people clearly believe the answer is "yes". While it may simply be their opinion, there are a lot of people who don't like unoriginal products. In this way, the stigma is justified because there are simply too many games that use the stock RTP assets and big-name public scripts and do not include enough originality of their own to stand apart. Maybe the story is original, maybe there's an original minigame, maybe Ralph got renamed Raphael instead. But the RTP tilesets, the sprites and portraits, the sound effects and music, the Yanfly scripts, so much is the same. The term "saturation" got thrown about alot back when Steam Greenlight was flooded with these things and it was flooded.

 

Yes, it's not about the engine, but what you do with it. And at this point, what many, many people have chosen to do is...... put out tons of games with the stock assets on full display and relatively little else in way of originality to draw attention away from it and even less to offer any enjoyment to someone who has been exposed to those assets 4 or 5 times before.

 

Is this fair to other people who were planning to release their own RTP-laden games that they felt could have sold some before, but not anymore now that the potential audience has been saturated by similar products and soured on the brand name? Maybe not...... or maybe yes - after all, if they put in a bit more effort to have a faster development cycle, they too could have been in the first wave to capture sales from the initial bunch of suckers before the RPGMaker brand went toxic.

 

Or does that sort of effort not count as effort?

 

4 hours ago, Semolous said:

I know it's not a new issue. I've been in the RM community for over 10 years now, and I've noticed the stiga just seems to keep growing.

 

Well as you may have realized, the number of people who get tired of generic products only increases over time as they consume more of said substandard goods... as does the supply of the bad goods themselves. So yeah, I'd expect it to grow. The market and audience for video games is also growing in general, but it's not like the supply of shoddy RM games is shrinking relative to it if you know what I mean.

 

Especially not with MV having opened up phone app stores as another potential outlet to flood.

Edited March 3, 2018 by Traverse

[RetroExcellent 369]

Personally, I browse steam specifically for RPG Maker games, but I feel that I am a harsh judge, if I see RTP graphics up front I am turned off, if I see standard RTP classes and battle system I am stepping back, and if I see a generic storyline I ignore any other potential the game could have. This may just be a result of having been a part of the RM community since the PS1 game and RM2k, but I feel like if you are going to charge money for your game, you should be putting in the extra graphics, music, and story.

 

Everyone has a story they want to tell and that makes RPG maker great, but just like any other easily accessible product, people are going to make 100 million clones of the same thing so they can make a quick buck. This happens in mobile games to an absurd degree, in movies and even in AAA games. This puts off potential players from a hidden gem because they assume, and usually rightly so, that it is the same garbage they have already been bombarded with.

 

So yes, due to greed, this stigma is usually justified.

[Saeryen 299]

Okay, I honestly feel pretty insulted.

 

This isn't justified. If the game is not offensive, GIVE IT A CHANCE! Also, consider that there are probably people under 18 years old using this engine to make their first games. Do you think children/teenagers are going to try harder if they're told that their stuff sucks just because of the engine they use? Unless the person has a lot of self-esteem and determination, they're not. GIVE NEW DEVS A CHANCE. Especially give a chance to teen devs who may give up on what could be their dream entirely because all they got from the extremely brave act of putting their work out there was being maliciously shot down.

 

You want a better world? Then be the embodiment of that world. Don't do something that could create a broken soul. Please.

[ShinNessTen 64]

34 minutes ago, Saeryen said:

Okay, I honestly feel pretty insulted.

 

This isn't justified. If the game is not offensive, GIVE IT A CHANCE! Also, consider that there are probably people under 18 years old using this engine to make their first games. Do you think children/teenagers are going to try harder if they're told that their stuff sucks just because of the engine they use? Unless the person has a lot of self-esteem and determination, they're not. GIVE NEW DEVS A CHANCE. Especially give a chance to teen devs who may give up on what could be their dream entirely because all they got from the extremely brave act of putting their work out there was being maliciously shot down.

 

You want a better world? Then be the embodiment of that world. Don't do something that could create a broken soul. Please.

A person isn't born with determination and self-esteem. Everything has to be taught by either teaching and sometimes and straight up showing the truth. If you sugarcoat this whole thing, imagine someone who's never been told to about anything in his life get's a Job and suddenly he's getting anxiety and isn't prepared for it. The thing is, it's a better world for him/her... and it's not for us. There are people that set standards high because the hard work and development of ones person only proves that we can evolve and become better by getting punched in the face by reality.

Of course, it's selfish of us to expect great things, but if nobody ever said anything bad, we wouldn't even have great Games to begin with. 

 

And just because somebody is underage, doesn't mean they can't learn from it. Heck, it's maybe even better if they learn it as soon as possible. That's literally the same argument as "VIDEOGAMES ARE BAD FOR OUR CHILDREN, BECAUSE THEY ENFORCE VIOLENCE!", which is just dumb.

[Tarq 745]

@Saeryen Hey, I'm all for youngsters (and anyone else) improving themselves and I think, with all the skills that can be developed, making games is a great way to do that.  But if someones made a bad game its precisely because they haven't developed those skills, or covered for their lack of ability in other ways (by minmaxxing their design, or requesting commissions,for example). And then they've tried to charge everyone twenty bucks so they can pursue a dream which seems to consist of continuing to make bad games.

   Using age as a reason for a bad product being bad isn't sufficient; Everyone has an excuse. Some just don't let it get in the way. And, honestly, age just isn't particularly relevant to an inability to make games adequately; there's not a lot of transferable 'real world' skills that you wont have already picked up from your schooling.

   As for malicious remarks... Everyone here has been pretty reasonable, even the quotes used in the OP. They aren't being malicious by valuing their time or by having standards to inform their decisions. Saying something negative and saying something offensive are very different things.

[Saeryen 299]

I think what @Semolous is talking about isn't just criticism, but saying something is bad without even examining it properly. Reading a description and screenshots and assuming the game is terrible without playing it is, I believe, pretty close-minded. Unless they're clearly promoting racism or something similar it's worth giving it a go.

 

An analogy I can think of is that someone tells you their story idea (and it's not at all offensive) and you just say "it won't be very good" before the thing is even written, which, for some people, causes them to give up on something that could have been amazing.

[Semolous 2]

2 hours ago, Saeryen said:

I think what @Semolous is talking about isn't just criticism, but saying something is bad without even examining it properly. Reading a description and screenshots and assuming the game is terrible without playing it is, I believe, pretty close-minded. Unless they're clearly promoting racism or something similar it's worth giving it a go.

 

An analogy I can think of is that someone tells you their story idea (and it's not at all offensive) and you just say "it won't be very good" before the thing is even written, which, for some people, causes them to give up on something that could have been amazing.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say. Cheers Sae

[Tarq 745]

@Saeryen From everyone's responses, nothing leads me to believe they dont understand the OP. And we've wrote what we have because it is possible to form a fairly accurate opinion about things without fully undergoing the experience. And you do it yourself every day. When you go to the shops do you open the cereal box to confirm the correct cereal is inside?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think any of us are hating on RM as an engine (we all use this forum after all); We use it because we recognise good quality games are as possible in it as any other engine. However, blindly assuming everything is good and great until proven otherwise through personal experience? You'd poison yourself within hours if you took up foraging with that attitude.

[Traverse 144]

9 hours ago, Saeryen said:

This isn't justified. If the game is not offensive, GIVE IT A CHANCE!

 

6 hours ago, Saeryen said:

I think what @Semolous is talking about isn't just criticism, but saying something is bad without even examining it properly. Reading a description and screenshots and assuming the game is terrible without playing it is, I believe, pretty close-minded. Unless they're clearly promoting racism or something similar it's worth giving it a go.

 

Thing is, a ton of people DO get offended at the prospect of being charged money for a game that appears to consist mostly of RTP assets that have been used in a dozens of other games, a number of which they have probably already played if they are at the point where they're aware it's stock assets. It might not be an insult to their race or sexuality, but it would feel an awful lot like an insult to their intelligence. In the way of feeling like you're being sold tap water under a premium label.

 

I'd also argue that making a judgment after reading a description and seeing screenshots is not particularly close-minded, especially when you likely can't play the actual game without shelling out money (and then having to go through the hoops of asking for a refund afterwards if you didn't like it). Close-minded would be seeing the tag "RPGMaker" and not even bothering to look at the screenshots. But if you bother looking the screenshots and all you see are stock assets - often badly used, maps with huge empty space - and when the description sometimes doesn't even have proper grammar then it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

 

Take this one that managed to slip onto Steam just this year for example. The third screenshot says it all, really. Not only is the mapping less than stellar but the text is... not in good English. Neither in-game nor in the description. I have a feeling the Chinese version is probably more readable, but the fact remains that often you get games that not only (ab)use stock assets and popular scripts but also - despite selling themselves on story - have pretty bad writing which you can already tell from the screenshots and descriptions. If nothing else, that kind of thing tells you that either they didn't even put in the effort to cherry-pick their screenshots or else the whole game is so terrible that those screenshots WERE the best cherry-picked ones they had.

 

Neither case is going to convince me to pony up my wallet. And the fact of the matter is...... these kinds of games aren't the rare exception to the standard. They are dime a dozen. In fact, it seems like there's been an influx of Chinese ones on Steam lately (some have an English description but only Chinese in-game text). Some of the bad ones at least don't charge money, but you also have ones like this one that try to sell themselves on parody and humor and being bad. The sad thing is that if I wanted to play a kusoge, I could just pick a free RPGMaker game on Steam at random and have an 80% chance of getting one anyway.

Edited March 4, 2018 by Traverse

[Amysaurus 721]

To me, buying a game with RTP graphics is like buying a game with pre-made Unity assets: very unlikely to happen.

A major turn-off for me, and I think a lot of others as well, is that RM games get very same-y very quickly. When I'm seeing the same style of maps, sprites, and battle systems over and over, there's a point where a twist on gameplay or a neat story just aren't enough to keep me invested. Personally, the RM games that really stick with me are the ones that go out of their way not to look like one, whether that's through changing the art style, or using a setting/scenario other than generic fantasy, generic sci-fi, or lololol it's a meme game. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Amysaurus

[Rikifive 3,328]

The problem is, that RM helps you make the game with much less effort, thus is considered to be a software used by beginners, mostly because of its pretty much pre-made game structure. I do admit, that even for me it's sometimes hard to consider something made in RM as a 'game', as it looks more like a 'custom story', due to everything the same, except story and characters.

 

Have you heard of 'Amnesia' and all the custom stories people were making? It's almost the same- they were making maps, story, items and stuff using pre-made mechanics and graphics. That was a success, but only for a limited time. I remember that being kind of popular back then, but now it's pretty much dead (I may be mistaking, though I haven't heard of these for years now) -- is it because people got bored of almost-pretty-much-the-same games? In my view it is almost the same for RM games, I suppose.

 

Normally, you have to put so much effort to make a legit game, way more than in RM. Even if making maps and story for years is considered as effort, then imagine projects outside RM, where people have to write all the mechanics from nothing as well as make graphics to all of this and that's where another years kick in. RM offers developers to make a game without even having to use any code - and that's not what game developing is about. It's like... I don't know, making a level or few in some mario maker and consider it as a game.

 

I suppose people got kind of bored of similar looking games, that use almost the same gameplay mechanics. I do admit, that I also like to enjoy gameplay, as it's one of the more important factors of the game for me (tbh I don't even need story, but it is of course welcomed- that's because these survival ~ crafting things are my favorite genres, so I don't require much from games). Seeing the very default battle engine itself can be disappointing, but that's for games, that actually focus on battles. As for me, I think that RTP is the issue, not RM itself, because it can create good games. With proper modification to make the game work and look to make it fit the story and the rest, it is possible to make good games.

 

There are good games, that aren't hated, but liked - so the RM engines definitely aren't the ones to blame. How they are used is the key.

 

I don't dislike games because they were made in RM (I was making some games there myself, duh!), but it is much harder to get me interested in the game when having the default look and gameplay, that makes it look like a level/custom story, rather than an actual game to discover. Yeah.. roast me, but I got kinda bored of these as well.  Not saying that these have to be bad of course, don't get me wrong.

Another fact to consider is, that I'm just not really a fan of the RTP. These cute graphics and stuff, not always work well with what devs want to achieve.

[Traverse 144]

22 minutes ago, Rikifive said:

The problem is, that RM helps you make the game with much less effort, thus is considered to be a software used by beginners, mostly because of its pretty much pre-made game structure. I do admit, that even for me it's sometimes hard to consider something made in RM as a 'game', as it looks more like a 'custom story', due to everything the same, except story and characters.

22 minutes ago, Rikifive said:

Normally, you have to put so much effort to make a legit game, way more than in RM. Even if making maps and story for years is considered as effort, then imagine projects outside RM, where people have to write all the mechanics from nothing as well and make graphics to all of this and that's where another years kick in.

 

Strictly speaking, I wouldn't say the problem is that RPGMaker ALLOWS you to make a game with "much less effort". Like I said before, not only is effort pretty much unquantifiable, but frankly speaking, if you had the money you'd probably just be paying a contractor to handle the graphics and music so you could focus on just the coding and design yourself, which is what happens with bigger studios which also use (other and more expensive) third-party game engines. Paying other people is usually not considered personal effort either and if you have a big team, your own part isn't necessarily going to end up that massive in the big picture.

 

The problem is that people HAVE ALREADY made lots and lots of games with mostly stock graphics and sound and very few custom mechanics/scripts (or else alot of the same public scripts to the point where those Yanfly scripts might as well be a built-in alternative to the default engine) and have since put them up for sale in full view of the public. Whether you call this kind of behaviour "low effort" or "engine abuse" or "totally legitimate usage wherein who comes first makes money" is a different story. The problem is that right now, people have already done it and the saturation has happened.

 

Lots and lots of people have taken advantage of the generous library of stock assets to produce their products. And by "lots and lots", the market evidently seems to think "too many" and has for quite a while.

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Traverse

[Semolous 2]

I'll admit, I do use some rtp graphics  and a couple of Yanfly script. But, every script I've chose for my game has apurpose. It's meant to be there. Personally, I don't give a **** if a game uses rtp. If it has a good story that's written well, and the maps look nice, that's enough for me. And, yes, I know I'm in the minority by saying that.

[Kayzee 3,853]

I have said this before, but the thing about RPG Maker is that it's always been kind of more of a toy then a serious game development tool. That's not to say it can't be a serious game development tool a well, but if you look at all the RPG Maker games made since the start of the series it isn't hard to see what I am talking about. Remember scripting wasn't even a thing for a lot of them, and several of the console ones don't even allow custom graphics. I think RPG Maker games have a bad reputation primarily because of this. Historically over all the different versions, there are just so many more RPG Maker projects that just play around with the basic engine features and RTP graphics then there are fully developed games.

[Tarq 745]

3 hours ago, Semolous said:

I'll admit, I do use some rtp graphics  and a couple of Yanfly script. But, every script I've chose for my game has apurpose. It's meant to be there. Personally, I don't give a **** if a game uses rtp. If it has a good story that's written well, and the maps look nice, that's enough for me. And, yes, I know I'm in the minority by saying that.

And you have every right to do so; That's why the rtp exists and why people publically release scripts.

   Just don't be surprised when you struggle to get downloads, even if you release the game for free, because others don't think you're bringing enough to the table; heck, you'll struggle to distinguish yourself within the community never mind outside it where there are even more games to compete with.

   But no-one here is telling you how to make your game or how to best spend your time; you asked others for their opinions about whether they feel the RM stigma in the marketplace is justified and, so far, the answer is a resounding yes. Maybe you were expecting reassurance and validation from the community about your (lets be objective here) 'basic and standard rpgmaker stuff' game, maybe you'll get more of the kind of responses it turns out you were angling for over the next few days, I can only speculate, but no-one here has said ~'pack it in, son', ~'give up and go home', we've just said that, realistically, such games have little commercial viability and, really, were kind of the cause of the stigma in the first place.

[Saeryen 299]

Okay, I'm just going to say it: I feel like everyone here is talking about me personally.

 

I've been using the RTP graphics and a lot of scripts because hey, my big strength is storytelling and design. And with the graphics I'm doing a lot of color changes and I believe unusual combos that make the world feel more ethereal.

 

This game is really important to me, guys. These characters and this world are important to me. It's taken me a lot of effort to even get motivated to work sometimes, given that I've had some personal stuff get in the way. I want to change the world for the better and I believe to do that I was meant to weave stories and songs that convey my message of love, happiness and faith in people, and how I believe we can make a better world. Telling me that something I'm pouring my voice and soul into is rubbish based on some superficial stuff is heartbreaking.

 

That's why I said to please consider the effect this has on actual people.

[Tarq 745]

@SaeryenA lot of discussion is aimed (for lack of a better word) at you because you represent the other side. It would be pretty nonsensical, never mind quite difficult, to debate with the people we agree with, no?

 

That being said, again, I've seen absolutely nothing mean-spirited in this discussion. Even @ShinNessTen behaved himself :3

Nothing has been said specifically about your game, only games that show symptoms of being bad games. if you're concerned that you're seeing those symptoms in your game then your choices are:

1) Keep doing what you're doing because its your game. No-one has any business telling you not to because its your time and money.

2) Consider what changes would be necessary to make the game better in the eyes of the majority.

Instead, you are attempting to demand a third option where others play what they consider bad games, which is unreasonable because then you're making demands on other's time and money (see option 1). Its comparable to demanding that someone who dislikes pop music must listen to the radio since, eventually, they will find one or two songs tolerable amongst hours of dissatisfaction when they knew, beforehand, that this would be the case.

 

This didn't really start out as a discussion about social ideology but since you are determined to 'view the effects on other people' then lets try approaching that third scenario in the way Shin said earlier:

For the purposes of making your game more viable (and therefore make you happy) you want others to lower their standards and spend gruelling hours playing through games they know, from past experiences, that they will not enjoy (which makes them unhappy). It just isn't going to happen. Nor should it.

 

So, again, no-one has said to stop making your game (so far as I can see no-one has even criticised it). Frankly, my own opinion is that you should be making your game because you enjoy the very act of game creation, not for whatever happens afterwards. However, if you get agitated because you merely suspect someone is criticising your game then perhaps it is best to stop because some people think the Venus DeMilo looks like rubble (by the by,you don't get to decide whether someone else's criteria of a good game is 'superficial'; the subjectivity card cuts both ways).

[Amysaurus 721]

1 hour ago, Saeryen said:

That's why I said to please consider the effect this has on actual people.

Easy stuff - as an actual person, I make the choice to play whichever games appeal to me in some way. The effect is that I enjoy more of the games I play. 

I'm never going to tell someone their game is bad because they use RTP/pre-made assets, because I don't know that to be the case. It's just that I'm not not going to play something that doesn't appeal to me, and you can't expect anyone else to. It's just as Tarq says - if your game isn't getting the attention you want, you'll have to decide if it's more important to you to change the project to appeal to your target audience, or to finish the project for yourself. There's no right or wrong choice in that regard.

[ShinNessTen 64]

2 hours ago, Saeryen said:

Okay, I'm just going to say it: I feel like everyone here is talking about me personally.

I didn't even know you had a game, because that's literally the first Time I replied to you... if that makes you feel any better.

RTP or not. A game can be bad in so many different ways and also good in so many different ways. Fact is, the Eye is before the Brain and people that glance over Games will miss out on great story telling Games with RTP, because... the Eye is just a priority to most. It's the unfortunate truth. I'm also not trying to tell you to get good at Art or something. 

A Game is made out of so many Elements, like the Gameplay, Art Direction, Music and nowadays even Story telling. I can actually get behind why People hate Games that don't take the time to develop the rest of the package, like let's say Art or Music because a game is made out of all these criterias. Games are just meant to be so many things and not only just a few of those.

But that's just my Opinion and many others as well... it's just some can't say it like I do and just write "Shit Game". Not everyone can/has the time to write why, because making a Game is complex. And I 100% agree that people should just shut up if they don't tell what's wrong... or just being dicks.

 

Bad stuff is easily louder than the good. If you look at the Universe, you see everything is black. But that's me just philosophizing. lol

[Kayzee 3,853]

@Saeryen I am sure no one here is intending to single you out or make you feel bad, and honestly I doubt anyone in this discussion really believes that your game or any other is necessarily pure garbage just because it might lack things in some areas. Really saying any one thing makes a game 'automatically bad' is an exaggeration at best, because it doesn't. But human beings are good at pattern recognition and, for better or worse, tend to things into little boxes in their mind based on the patterns they see and don't tend to think very critically about if those patterns actually mean anything. Fact is, there have been a lot of RPG Maker games over the years, and not all of them are particularly great in a lot of people's eyes. Because a lot of these games might use RTP graphics and random scripts those features have been linked to poor game quality in a lot of people's minds.

 

Is this fair? Perhaps not. But prejudice rarely is. And yet prejudice is a tool that nearly everyone makes use of isn't it? Maybe in small ways, maybe in big ways, but everyone pre-judges based on the patterns they see. Pattern recognition is too useful a skill for people to ignore. It's true that people can often take it to an extreme and tend to hold onto patterns that are blatantly disruptive and hurtful to others. But it's also true that sometimes people just value different things. It is said 'one man's trash is another man's treasure', but the reverse is equally true. That doesn't mean the object in question could be rightly called trash or treasure in the objective sense. Your work might be judged harshly just because it may fit into someone's pattern of a 'bad game', but that doesn't mean it will necessarily not have people who love it for some of the same reasons. Either way, your work will be judged based on what you feel is superficial stuff as much as it will on things that matter to you.

 

Of course, it also depends on why you are making a game in the first place. For profit? For fame? To share something with others? Just for fun? People make games for all sorts of reasons, and someone doing it 'professionally' hoping to make it big somehow has a much harsher road ahead of them in some ways then someone who is doing it for personal reasons. Just remember why you are doing it and look at if you are actually accomplishing that goal. Everything anyone else might say is fluff.

[Saeryen 299]

Thanks for the kind words, guys.

 

I've decided not to interact with this topic anymore, it's not making me feel very good.

[PhoenixSoul 1,294]

lolz

 

I've NEVER, not EVER, not once have I ever believed in this utter nonsense. RPG Maker is a tool. A tool. It does ABSOLUTELY SQUAT on its' own...

 

Same with a hammer, a gun, a spool of rope, a knife, a saw...(see where I am going here?)

 

People can say what they want, but like @Kayzee said, it is fluff. The reputation that RM has gotten is fully and thoroughly undeserved, and that reputation falls on every single half-assed dev that makes 'games'. I'm not including those that are inexperienced, because I'm quite able to tell the difference between a 'first try' and a 'cash grab'.

 

No game made with RM is automatically bad. Only if it is made to be a cash grab/asset flip is it bad. But even then, that is subjective.

Also, Skyborn is an excellent game, though having more than one ending would of been a good addition.