TIGSource Forums

This high quality RPG with amazing artwork and absolutely top-notch quality was released earlier this year. I haven't seen any posts on TIGs or related communities and there's no question, it deserves more attention:

(http://www.johnwizard.com/img/dawnslight_screen1.jpg)

Learn more here:
http://www.johnwizard.com/

Review here:
http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment/gamertell-review-dawns-light-for-pc/

My take:
I played the demo for about 30 minutes last night. I saw it a few weeks ago for the first time and have wanted to try it/buy it ever since, based on the awesome looking art.

Pros:

- The graphics. Wow. Positively top notch stuff. As far as I can tell it's all original graphics, unless somebody wants to correct me on that. Since it's for sale I guess it probably has to be. I'll have to eat my shoe if this is some "generic RPGmaker tileset".

- Quality. It does scream "polish" and I really don't give a rip that it was made with RPGMaker. Indie games that are this finely made are a rare thing indeed.

Cons:

- Premise, story.

I recently played this other game, Melolune (see the Feedback forum). Melolune has a really well-thought-out story, takes itself seriously, and just ultimately drew me in.

Dawn's light feels, well, very bad in this department. The game systems are very well thought out, but the story is just not that interesting. The writing is OK (though I don't think as good as some other reviews have said) but doesn't actually have anything interesting to SAY. A great deal of the first part of the game dialog seems to be trying to explain to you about your "quest journal" without breaking the third wall.

I need to care about this character and his world, first! And I just don't, even after 30 minutes. Compare to any classic RPG, FF2 or FF3 come to mind because the graphics in this game are just about on-par (!), and you know right away what's missing.

I feel bad coming down so hard on this, because I guess the author will probably see it and as a game author it's always hard when somebody rips into your work. Especially because it's so excellent in other ways.

But the thing is, for the first half-hour at least, it's just one bad RPG cliche after another. Your first quest is to find frogs. Second is to rescue sheep from goblins. When you arrive back from rescuing the goblins, the town is destroyed. There is an intro sequence showing some generic evil bad dude doing something randomly bad. Nothing that truly makes me interested in the world, the characters, or the premise.

(Disclaimer: this from a developer who's latest game starts out with you trying to escape from a parkade... so I guess we can all be guilty of this.)

I'm sure the story will develop as I continue to play, and to be honest the game is so good in other departments that I might just buy it anyhow. And it's not really fair to review a game like this based on the first half hour so I want to hold a final verdict until I really have played the whole thing.

But... as far as I can see, it's positively tragic! Here is a game that would be an absolute GEM if only it had a soul. Instead it feels like it drifts dangerously close to self-parody.

John Wizard, if you read this: as a fellow game developer, I urge you not to be afraid of implementing a story or premise more seriously. Think about what kind of stories really move you, and for your next game bring us something truly unbelievably good. You deserve to be rewarded for making games that are this well-polished. If this game only had a more interesting premise and an interesting story, we would all be playing it right now.

That's my take, what does anybody else think of it? Anybody who has played the full game, does the story liven up, or am I just off-base here? Like maybe the story grabs other people, just not myself?

I'm interested in what other people think. There is a free demo and I doubt anybody would feel cheated for trying it out.

Uh, this really is a very bad point IMO. From what I see in the screenshot, you are some knight dude fighting slimes. I mean, come on.

I watched the trailer too, and being familiar with RPG Maker I'm 100% sure it was made with that tool. Not that it's a bad thing. It looks like the graphics are original at least.

But this kind of "epic medieval story" doesn't get my attention anymore. Be as pretty as it can be, a game with a bad story isn't just worth my money.

Ugh, this game is the perfect explanation as to why I can't stand RPGs. I've watched the trailer and from what you (PsySal)said, I must agree with Ein:you're a knight fighting slimes to save the world, with the help of thieves, mages and warriors. It is so full of cliches that I don't even want to try it. :handthumbsdownR:

But I gotta admit that the graphics look awesome.  :)

yeah, but is that really any different than all the cave story platformers and vector-art shmups people make here? do you have the same complaints about cliches within your favorite genre, or is it only in genres you don't like that you don't like cliches?

and actually i gotta admit they look 'meh' to me -- the shadows are inconsistent for instance (some walls have shadows, some don't! and some types of tiles have shadows, and some don't!).

so i kind of have the opposite impression to you: it looks like a fun rpg to try out and review, if i can get past the substandard graphics (judging just from that screenshot)

I do think it's different. The point here is, the story is cliche. It's not like every  :cavestory:-platformer has the same story.

Here we have villages burning and the usual classic quests. You are a knight fighting slimes and other monsters to save the princess or whatever like that. It is cliche. Maybe the gameplay isn't, but the story sure is.

i think you could consider 'classes' like warrior, healer, thief, mage, etc., to be a part of the gameplay rather than the story. it's something that you often have to build the story around if you want to maintain classic gameplay

but i agree that rpgs can be less cliche, of course. the atlus jrpgs are notorious for setting their games in odd surreal settings, like japanese high schools infested with demons, or the end of the world, or surreal computer simulations. but even those games still have the basic rpg classes of fighters, mages, and healers. you can't really escape them if you want to maintain one of the core basic ideas of a rpg (classes).

in other words, if a rpg *didn't* have fighters, mages, and healers in some sense, it wouldn't really feel like a rpg. it's one of the basic things that ties them all together. so i think to complain that a rpg uses cliches like fighters, mages, and healers misses the point.

it's kinda like saying 'well this is why i hate platformers: they all have running, jumping, and most of them have shooting!' can't platformers be more original?

Yep, I agree with you. Notable examples are Mother and Persona. You got the classic classes but with a different setting it looks all new.

This game's setting plus story elements that we all have seen thousands of times (e.g.: slimes as a basic enemy; your hometown burning in the beginning of the game; save the princess and defeat the great evil, etc) is what transforms it in a cliche-fest.

yeah, but if it's well-written, the story elements used don't matter. did you read the review of this game linked to in the OP? it praised the writing and such -- that's what makes me interested in it; plus i think it's unfair to criticize the story as a cliche-fest if you haven't actually played it, just from a screenshot and a description

(which is also why i qualified my criticism of the graphics, saying that i was only basing it on screenshots, it might be different in-game and in the areas the screenshots don't show)

in particular, read this segment:


so what i'd expect is something akin to working designs translations of jrpgs -- cliche jrpg, quirky writing. lunar and lunar 2 were quite cliche after all in terms of their plot elements, but still great games due to the writing and music.

Yeah, my opinion is somewhat unbiased since I have not played the game. Still, I don't think I'd pay for "more of the same", even if it's really well written and funny.
But that's just me. It's up to anyone if they want to play another fantasy medieval RPG.
I would give this game a try were it freeware or a little more original.

i probably wouldn't buy it either since my funds for buying indie games isn't unlimited, but being a tigsource editor i could probably ask for and get a free review copy anyway

still, when it comes to mainstream games, rpgs are the only genre i even buy any more. most recently i bought the two digital devil saga games, and devil summoner 2 back in the summer, persona 4 in the spring, and fallout 3 back in the beginning of the year -- those are the entirety of my mainstream game purchases for 2009. i think they provide the most time-value per dollar. they're like less than $1 per hour of game time, and that isn't a bad trade if you're on a limited budget and want to get the most playtime per dollar.

Hey guys I want to clarify a bit. First there is a free demo that you can play for an hour, and I highly recommend it. The story isn't bad because there are cliches, to me; the story is bad because there's no soul. I don't know how to explain it. What I meant is that while there are standard RPG cliche's, that's about ALL there is. And the writing is good, as I put in the OP, it's just the overall blandness that I think is such a shame.

Anyhow! I really recommend playing the demo. My feeling is after reading this that it may be a lot of people's cup of tea. And I'm sure they wouldn't mind a free review copy to a TIGS editor.

And let's be clear: I certainly don't mind knights and slimes and so forth! =) Actually, if you've had a look at the Tin Knight footage from sparky, you realize, that ACTUAL medivial is FRESH.

Maybe this just all comes down to taste?

Yeah but John Wizard needs some dough! It's expensive to buy wands these days, not to mention the magic scrolls. The dry cleaning bill on those blue wizard robes are probably sky high in this economy.

Not having read the entire review yet, it seems kinda, bias. I'm basing this purely off of the overall rating they gave the game (97/100) and that the only cons listed were only having 4 save slots and other minor details not really related to gameplay (not having good enough marketing/publicity is a con to a game?) Also, looking at some of the screenshots only, I don't think it is possible to have an almost perfect 97/100 score. Particularly this screenshot http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/gallery/album/dawns-light/6672/. With stuff like this you would need some killer awesome gameplay to bring it to a 97/100, but from reading what you guys have said about it, the gameplay also seems pretty generic. I haven't read that review or played the game yet, but those are a few things that instantly popped out at me and seem a little odd.

I'm going to try to play the demo when I have time.

Wow, deja vue! Guys, I'm pretty sure those are default RPG Maker graphics. You'd think people would start picking up on this after a while.

How can a person recognize rpgmaker graphics?

that was also my thought, i also thought i recognized a few things but didn't want to say anything, which made it weird to me that people were praising the graphics when they look like either directly ripped rpg maker default graphics (which to be fair can be used for any purpose, even commercial) or very similar to the rpg maker default graphics

as an aside, if you want a pretty shareware indie rpg with nice graphics, look at the aveyond series -- i'd buy those games just for the graphics alone. they're also made in rpg maker, but don't use anything default

By having seen them in the RTP that you can freely download or by having made quite a few RPG Maker games yourself and just knowing that these are the RTP graphics.

Back in the days of RPG Maker 2000 it was really easy to distinguish, but nowadays the RTP has pretty nice graphics and it's harder to tell whether a game has its own graphics (that just happen to look like the RTP ones) or uses the RTP ones.

It is for some reason still pretty easy to recognize a RPG Maker game, even from screenshots, although I cannot quite tell why. Battle System is usually a dead giveaway though.

Ugh, that screenshot really shows some... 'unpolishness'. The characters aren't even on ground.

Also, from the review:

It'd be a great shame if the "great looking enemies", the "portraits" and the "bg music" were from the RTP. I won't make this acusation but the style _really_ looks like from the RM's RTPs.

Even then, 97/100 is what you would expect from a game like Chrono Trigger. I fear that the reviewer might not know what he was talking about. Or playing.


Yume Nikki also doesn't use anything from the RPT. Pretty much everything is original, which is IMO the strongest point of the game. The only way to recognize that as a RPG Maker game is by playing it for a while and noticing the engine/movements/etc.

Well, actually, I do. My fav genre is platformers(like most people here), and it is visible to everyone that most of the recent platformers are somehow close to  :cavestory:. As a player, I like many of them, but as a developer, I must criticize their lack of originality and innovation, which is exactly what I seek in games nowadays.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not depreciating such games, I am just pointing out my opinion.

Have you tried the game?


Anyway the game looks boring as hell from the trailer, and the graphics actually sucks

Actually no but from the OP and the trailer I hardly doubt I missed the plot.

don't forget guys that the karma for judging a game negatively without playing is probably one day to have one of your games negatively judged without the person playing it

True dat. =)

Well, the thing is if it's a default graphics pack from RPGMaker then I don't have as much to praise, simply because the graphics were part of what impressed me. I'm not sure about the folks who say the graphics are bad, they seem extremely nicely done to me.

That said, I've got no problem with using premade graphics (though it's not quite as classy as making your own, and I think you miss out on a lot of the fun of game development).

I guess I felt like I was playing an extremely polished game that (to my eyes at least) a ton of work had gone into, but that didn't have a very good story. And that seemed like a shame. Now, if all the graphics/music were sorta taken from somewhere, and all the developer did was hack together a story, then it's not nearly as good in my opinion.

But... I still have a strong hunch that the graphics are original. Part of the reason is that the "John Wizard" website itself has very smoothly done graphics, in exactly the style of the game.

So guys, what I'm saying is, yeah! I recommend trying this game! =) But don't let that stop you...

Figured I'd jump in here really quick... I've played a bunch of RPGmaker games, including the first two Aveyond games, and they actually do use several of the default RPGmaker assets, mixed in with original sprites (objects like chests, barrels, etc. are often default RPGmaker assets).  Having said that, I agree with Paul Eres that the games are gorgeous, and additionally have fantastic music.

What bothers me about discussions like this is the fixation on whether the graphics are original or not.  Does it really matter whether the sprites that are used are original, if the overall look of the game is beautiful?  I think that especially with the recent versions of RPGmaker the sprites included in the program are actually of quite good quality and can be used to make some really nice-looking maps.  In older versions of the program the default sprites were uglier and easier to spot, and it was very noticeable when games had original graphics instead, but the default assets have improved greatly since then.

Personally, with these games I value the construction of the maps, characters and enemies much more than whether or not the graphics are original.  It is certainly possible to make the game look crisp, seamless and quite pretty using only the default graphics, if the author takes the time to put things together with care.  New graphics can add a nice individual touch, but they can also clash with other parts of the visuals if not implemented well.  People here seem to deride authors for simply using default tilesets, regardless of what the final result actually looks like, which I don't think makes much sense.

Sorry to go off-topic slightly.

Hum... I just realized that the graphics reminds me of Eternal Eden.

http://www.shinegame.com/games/eternal-eden/b3.jpg

I'll just leave this here.
(http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7209/30529453.png)

Waltorious, I work very hard to make original graphics for my own RPGs. It annoys me when a game comes along using artwork taken from someone else, and gets feedback like "RPG with amazing artwork" and "the graphics look awesome." Maybe that's just me, though.

I'm not familiar enough with RPG Maker graphics to have much opinion on this case, but I'd hope the complaints are coming from something a bit more principled than just feeling it's unfair that he did less work and got better results ...

what -- have you played your own games? perhaps an artist working less hard on your graphics would be better than you working hard on them

as an aside, i still will review it for the frontpage, sorry for the delay, it's just that rpgs take longer to beat than 5-minute games (the games i reviewed recently have all been 10 minutes or less)

I did not mean to give offense, or to say that original graphics aren't worth doing (the original stuff in the Aveyond games add quite a bit to the great look of those games).  My point was simply that graphics aren't automatically "better" just because they are original.

Also it is misleading to say that the artwork is "taken from someone else"... these are packaged graphics that come with RPGmaker for authors to use when making RPGs with the program, and it is perfectly legal to use them in commercial games as well as free games.  It's not as if the author has "stolen" graphics from another game without permission or something.

Not off-topic at all, and I think this is really to the point. We are moving into an era when having to hack every pixel by hand is maybe not going to be as necessary.

I guess as a game dev I was sort of @.@ at the graphics and otherwise polish of the game, and couldn't understand why someone would put that immense amount of effort into one aspect and then not say anything. If the graphics are premade then it's less of a mystery.

Now, the real interesting question isn't why an honest enough indie game developer would do that, but why the major game studios do, and then trot it out to the tune of multi million dollar advertising and promotional budgets.  Hah! Now that's a question we need to ask... At least when movies do this, the critics pan them as meaningless even if everybody does still go see them out of cultural obligation.

And, well, I could be wrong but wasn't there was a when gamemaker games weren't taken very seriously, either?

Guys, really, I'm regretting my original post. I didn't intend to trash this game, actually quite the opposite. If we tear each other's work down on the basis of this or that weakness, we'll not get anywhere together. I do think the story is weak here and I lament it. Even if the graphics aren't original, and therefore the game doesn't represent a vast amount of work, I'd still like to see this developer take himself more seriously. But hey, that's just an opinion, is all =)

Erm, sorry! I didn't mean to turn this into a thread about my game artwork or how long it takes. That's not really germane to the point I was trying to make--I was just thinking through the reasons why I find undeserved credit for game art annoying.

As for a broader principle, I believe very strongly in the moral right of attribution: the right to be credited for work you have done, and the right to not be credited for work you haven't. As a corollary, when people are credited for work they haven't done, it typically means someone out there who did that work is not being credited for it.

I don't think that the game author here "stole" the graphics, or that he even intended to steal credit for them, but I still dislike it when people misplace credit for hard work. That's all.

But before you were complaining about
which has nothing to do with attribution; it's not a statement about who did the art.  It's not misplacing credit to say the graphics look awesome.

I think the worst part of this game is the fact it's shareware.
Looks like he just put the maps together and a storyline to fill the hole and then sold the game. If the music is original, that's one point. But who'd pay for a game of this kind?
20$, you must be kidding me. Better spent with other games that have full original content with GREAT quality (Aquaria, Noitu Love 2, just to say some).
Also, I'm sure there are other rpgs JUST LIKE THIS ONE in the RPG Maker communites, maybe even better, for free. Maybe there are some BETTER, with original assets and a better storyline, for free.

$20 seems to be par for the course for many RPG Maker games. Not sure why.

[Completely off topic but...] I find it shocking how many of these games are being released nowadays.

It seems like every month 2 shareware games of this type are released.

I guess using RPG Maker makes creating this type of game SUPER EASY, which is a great thing.  It's too bad many of them seem to be based on the same idea...

I'm not impressed. As someone said before, it's using pretty much default RPG Maker (VX) graphics, seems to have a mediocre storyline and even the map work seems to be pretty average.

The latest RPG Maker software, XP and VX (mostly VX), seem to have spawned so many average games, with people coming up with one or two decent ideas and just throwing them into a plug-n-play engine with free graphics nabbed from the net and scripts nabbed from various websites. There have only been a handful of really great RPG Maker games, and I'm afraid I can't think of any of those being made in XP or VX.

Such a shame... RPG Maker has such potential. (I'm using it for a big-ass community project atm which is gona be killa.)

Err, wait, upon second reading... This guy is making you pay for this? That's going too far. $20? Wow. There are $2 iPhone apps better than this game. That's just... I cannot express it in words.

:facepalm:

I wasn't aware I was supposed to be playing games for their music or graphics.

Neither I was. I think we all should praise this piece of art, with full original content and a mindblowing storyline. Seriously, did you get the point? If this was ASCII art or PS3 graphics it wouldn't matter. The storyline doesn't show quality, the graphics are the same as those in lot of those crappy RPG maker games, which is a huge lack of originality and effort IMO.
I play games for their originality and effort put in it. I would play a monocolor game and Resident Evil 5 the same way, if it showed effort put in the story, the character development, heck, even graphics if they are interesting.

I still don't think this game is worth 20 dollars. Star Guard, Aquaria, Dungeon or whatever good indie games are way better choices.

Ouch.

Hi guys, I just found this thread when I was looking through my google analytics records and boy are you guys overly harsh or what?

I made this game along with one other person and I just thought I'd clear up a few things.

I released my first game just over a year ago, trust me, you wouldn't have heard of it. It took me years to make and I made the engine myself using C++. I spent a whole bunch of money and finally released the game to make ... 3 sales. Well actually 4 but the 4th one was a fraudulent order just to get the full version to put up as a torrent. I made about $50 total.

It wasn't a bad game imo, just the wrong one. Instead of making the same mistake again I decided to find out what game I could make that people would actually want to play. Then I come across Eternal Eden. Apparently the sales were tremendous and after downloading rpg maker to see what it was about, I found out that he used the build in graphics!

I was bitter and mad for a few weeks and then I came to the conclusion that I could either keep making the wrong games and cry about it or I could join in the fun.

Enough back story, here's some facts

• Dawn's Light took about 5 months for two people to make
• I spent a total of about $1000 on supplies.
• To this day, not one commercial rpg maker game has been released without at least some of the default graphics. The players are generally older women who couldn't care less what a game looks like.

Tigsource goers really aren't the target audience for this game. If I wanted to play a deeper rpg I wouldn't be looking for an rpg maker game. My audience, however, really loves the game. Most days I wake up to compliments waiting for me on my forum and in my email.

Dawn's Light is a good game for what it is. You spend your time playing the game instead of grinding or trying to figure out what to do next. It's got some good jokes (and some bad ones  :) ) and it's got a scene with mine carts that took me about 5 straight hours to make (never again).

I would suggest you guys stop being so negative. I'm not some evil, greedy guy who steals graphics and tries to trick people into buying crap. I've just found a type of game that people want to play and I'm good at making those games for them.

Cheer up guys.  :)

Reply if you want but I probably won't be back, it's too depressing here.

Yeah, not to be a dick, but if you had bothered to read anything else on the forum other than the thread about your game in specific, you would see it's only depressing on this thread.

The mindset in this forum tends not to be "Make what other people want" but "Make something you feel really inspired about."

I don't think any one is being overly harsh.  They just think that the game is generic and are giving bad criticism of it.  That's just their opinion and something that us developer's have to deal with.

People on this forum tend to talk like that, but it seems that they just like a particular type of game ie:
!(CaveStory || Aquarius || Indy Retro Game With Simple Play Mechanics And An Abstract Story)=FAIL.

:)

Man, if you can't take criticism, you should just quit making games.
Everybody here is voicing their opinions on your game; they are people who might like it but there are people who have other feelings towards your game. This is natural. It happens to everyone.

Your game simply didn't catch my attention, therefore I have no reason to play it. Just it. 

On a side note, this line creeps me out:

Be happy making your games to older women. Most of us will make games that everyone would like to play.

Um.  That definitely is overly harsh.  Also it sounds like he took the criticism just fine, and wrote a calm, interesting response to it.

No, I'm pretty sure we won't ... and really, I don't see the problem with having an idea who your audience is.

I think the main reason this game got such negative responses here, is because it looks like the type of game that someone puts together without taking too much time to sell some copies of a game. And from what you said, that sounds about right. So I don't see why you would get upset if a couple of people from some random forum don't like your game, you said that it has been selling well and you have fans. Also, 5 months of development time isn't all that long for two people, especially an RPG with all of the features advertised in your game. A lot of indie games that get released for that price take at least twice that long to develop.

Also, this is a thread just for discussing a game that somebody found which happened to be yours. Nobody was trying to give constructive feedback or anything, they were just talking about what they thought of the game. If you would like some feedback from us you should post your game up on the feedback section.

i agree with zaphos, but i also think it's a tragedy that he spent years making a game he loved only to get 3 sales, and spent 5 months and default graphics on a rpgmaker game he didn't really care much for and made (presumably) hundreds of sales. that's kind of an encapsulation of how hard it is to be an indie dev, and how tempting it is to make games you don't like so that you won't starve