next »

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

To The Moon is built in RPG maker but it has none of the usual key elements of RPGs. There's no character customisation of any sort. You move from point to point reading the story and solving small puzzles in order to proceed; it's an adventure game.

Yeah, I'd probably consider that RPG-ish enough.

I think the problem is you're (people in general, not you hanako) defining RPG too narrowly. If you defined Platformer very narrowly (linear sidescrolling game with collectibles where mastering the jump mechanics is the core of the game), there could be equal arguments for them being underrepresented (super meat boy being the only one I can remember from the past 3 years, possibly spelunky also)

i think the thing is that it's primarily an adventure game, with no rpg-elements. i'm not sure what you see in that that's rpg-ish? besides it being made in an engine created for rpgs? if there are no battles, no stats, no classes, what exactly makes it rpg-ish? i'm open to the idea that games that have "rpg elements" can sometimes be called a rpg, but a game with *no rpg elements* at all being called rpg-ish, simply because it's made in rpg-maker? i don't really get that

e.g. game maker is primarily used to make platformers, is immortal defense "platformer-ish enough" because it's made in game maker? even though it has no platforms, is not side-view, and has no jumping? or am i being too narrow in defining platformer?

To be brutal, I doubt a full RPG would get proper play time for the IGF.

yeah, i think that's the more important bias -- the bias against rpgs is really a bias against long games in disguise. short rpgs have fewer problems in the igf

the last even moderately long game to win anything in the igf was aquaria, in 2007, five years ago. and even that game was only about 20 hours long. as far as i know, no 50 to 100 hour long game has ever won an igf award

[AndySchatz]

Hugs to both of you.  I was just sitting around the flat with Terry and Sophie yesterday and we were looking for games to play, and were, like "aah we should bug Andy Schatz for a build of monaco if only we knew him a little better it would be perfect for right now" (we ended up playing Jamestown for a bit, followed by Jump 'n Bump).  Best of wishes with it, man - we look forward to playing it

Sent you a private msg.  Thanks for your kind wishes

[biomechanic]

I've never stopped playing a game halfway through saying "It's a great game but I've already spent 50 hours on it". What happens much more often is I play a game for a bit and if it doesn't engage me I just stop.

The bias in this case is not against games that take long to finish, but games that take long to get good.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

I've never stopped playing a game halfway through saying "It's a great game but I've already spent 50 hours on it".

I did. For GTA IV. It was a good game but after 50 hours only getting half way through I just stopped caring.

I also stopped at the real final boss of metroid prime 2 without beating it (until a replay years later). A timed final boss after a long boss with no save point in between? Fo reals?

IMO if you have the time to make a 50 hour long game, you have the time and the responsibility to make the intro compelling and interesting. Its just unfair to the players' time to expect them to "just trust you, it will get better 10 hours in".

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

there are a couple of games i've stopped playing about halfway through that are long; offhand: final fantasy 5, dragon quest 6, unlimited saga, blue dragon. i don't blame the games though, i blame my lack of time, i'm sure i would have enjoyed them had i finished them

i agree that good intros are important, but we had this discussion last year. we didn't really agree on what a "good intro" was. for instance, i felt that super metroid didn't have a particularly good intro (because it wasn't representative of the type of gameplay of the rest of the game, and was more linear and action-oriented, and had no exploration), but others felt that it had a great intro. so it's fine to say 'make a good intro', but you also have to explain what a good intro is, since it isn't obvious, and there's a lot of disagreement about what makes intros good. and it can sometimes be easier to make a good long game than a good intro; just look at spiderweb software's titles as an example

[Glaiel-Gamer]

We are talking about an intro, not a demo, it doesn't have to be entirely representative of the rest of the game as long as it draws you in and gives you a reason to keep playing.

[BlueSweatshirt]

Skrim was that 50-hour kill-off for me. 

I think one problem is that, generally, RPGs are too boring. Yes, I said it. Grinding and grinding on a slow or trivial battle system just to progress a typically dull story.(which, btw, is what makes the game so long, grinding) It becomes such a slow trickle of getting new content that it feels like you have to work for it. This is why I think good RPGs are really good(fun/strategic engagements, good writing, good pace of new content, etc), and bad ones are really bad.
I think it's very difficult to make a good RPG.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

yeah, obviously intros don't *have* to be representative, it's just that i didn't really get anything out of it. walk along a hallway, fight a boss that you can't possibly lose to, then run away with a timer counting down... nothing particularly notable about it to me. the tilting screen near the end of it is the only part that seems interesting

and actually i think rpgs are supposed to be boring, at least in the sense of relaxing. i don't play rpgs for excitement, i play them to feel that i'm gradually uncovering a world and gradually growing in power. i think they fulfill a different role than most games: perhaps most games are intended to excite the senses and arouse the awareness after an otherwise boring day, whereas rpgs are designed more for relaxation after a hectic stress-filled day. they're probably for people who prefer a controlled situation of rules rather than a racing heart

it's possible that the personalities of people who primarily play rpgs are different than the personalities of people who primarily play action games. action games seem devised primarily to stimulate the senses, and rpgs primarily to facilitate the imagination. normally, i'd rather play even a bad rpg than a good action game

[BlueSweatshirt]

I agree with you there Paul. I think there two or three main reasons people play games: stimulation, relaxation, enrichment. But that's getting a bit tangential.

My point wasn't necessarily that they're bad if they're not stimulating, but that it if doesn't really have a good storyline/world/etc. to back it up either... Then you're doing it for nothing. And even if the world is really good, I'd call it bad if you have to grind through a dull battle system for long periods of time just to trickle in new bits of world, story, etc. Unless if it's for simulation purposes, if a RPG battle system is not fun or strategic it probably has no place in the game and shouldn't be shoe-horned, especially just to lengthen gameplay hours.

I went kinda everywhere on that rant, but oh well. 

[Glaiel-Gamer]

normally, i'd rather play even a bad rpg than a good action game

here is my first RPG then i  made it when I was 14 http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/213001
(submitted it on my alt newgrounds account one time as a joke)

[st33d]

We are talking about an intro, not a demo, it doesn't have to be entirely representative of the rest of the game as long as it draws you in and gives you a reason to keep playing.

I wish Nintendo thought about this when making, say, oh, ANY FUCKING ZELDA.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i thought the intro to a link to the past was pretty good (the stormy night, rain, the uncle dying, rescuing zelda from a dungeon, her following you through darkness and rats, etc.); that was pretty cool. even the soldiers said interesting stuff to you if you talked to them, like that one who worried he was losing his mind to aghanim's spell

zelda1 and 2 didn't really have intros, but i don't think that hurt those games. unless you count the scrolling text if you waited on the title screen for a minute to be an intro?

link's awakening's intro i found to be a bit slow: walking along the beach flipping over spiked monsters with the shield doesn't do much for me

OoT's intro was also a bit slow, but not as bad as link's awakening, since it was non-linear (you had to get a sword and enough rupees to buy a shield if i recall, but there were multiple possible ways to get the rupees)

majora's mask's intro was just a cutscene from what i remember, there was no interactivity during it

the newer zelda games i have not played

[JoGribbs]

Majora's Mask intro was interactive in spots. Most important thing tho is that it sets the tone effectively in about 10 minutes. Skyward Sword can't even do that in 2 hours

[jonschubbe]

link's awakening's intro i found to be a bit slow: walking along the beach flipping over spiked monsters with the shield doesn't do much for me

Grinding 900 rupees for a bow and arrow? Fook that, they call me thief every time i play that game

[Glaiel-Gamer]

Majora's Mask intro was interactive in spots. Most important thing tho is that it sets the tone effectively in about 10 minutes. Skyward Sword can't even do that in 2 hours

Majora's Mask's intro is the reason I didn't even bother playing that game the first time I tried it. Fucking annoying having to find the kids twice or whatever.

All the 3D zelda games had pretty terrible intros, only reason to keep playing past there is cause its zelda and we know nintendo can do wonders on it for the rest of the game.

[s0]

im playing dark chronicle (dark cloud 2 for all you americans) right now. i'm still at the "intro" portion and goddamn is it ever tedious. cheesy dialog and bad voice acting dont help. i think making players slog through an overlong "intro" before letting them play the "real" game is awful and something games shouldn't do.

i actually prefer intro cutscenes to interactive intros.

[randomshade]

here is my first RPG then i  made it when I was 14 http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/213001
(submitted it on my alt newgrounds account one time as a joke)

I'm not sure how I feel about having my ass kicked by a Giant Moth 

[J. R. Hill]

I bet I can count the number of replies in this thread that are directly about the IGF on one hand.

[randomshade]

the last even moderately long game to win anything in the igf was aquaria, in 2007, five years ago. and even that game was only about 20 hours long. as far as i know, no 50 to 100 hour long game has ever won an igf award

I'm not sure that I've played a 50-100 hour indie RPG that was really good, to be honest. Are there even very many indie RPGs that long? Maybe I'm just too ignorant on the subject, but I've only invested anything near that much time in a couple of Spiderweb games and 2 or 3 RPG Maker games (made by Amaranth and Aldorlea, respectively.) And while I enjoyed those games, none of them stand out as having enough *special sauce* in any respective category to be IGF worthy.

That's not to say that I think all IGF nominees are golden; there are several each year that usually seem out of place to me. I've just not played an indie RPG that deserved to be there that wasn't; but I'd really appreciate any suggestions.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I'm not sure that I've played a 50-100 hour indie RPG that was really good, to be honest. Are there even very many indie RPGs that long? Maybe I'm just too ignorant on the subject, but I've only invested anything near that much time in a couple of Spiderweb games and 2 or 3 RPG Maker games (made by Amaranth and Aldorlea, respectively.) And while I enjoyed those games, none of them stand out as having enough *special sauce* in any respective category to be IGF worthy.

That's not to say that I think all IGF nominees are golden; there are several each year that usually seem out of place to me. I've just not played an indie RPG that deserved to be there that wasn't; but I'd really appreciate any suggestions.

it's surprising you don't think the spiderweb games are worthy of an igf award; to me, avadon, exile 3, and geneforge 2 are masterpieces in the top 1% of rpgs that i've played

as for other indie rpgs besides those which i felt deserved some recognition: barkley shut up and jam, cthulu saves the world, recettear, the spirit engine 2, spellshard: the black crown of horgoth, mark leung: revenge of the b*tch, dangerous high school girls in trouble (arguably a rpg since it has stats and leveling, although the battles are only verbal), space funeral (although that was not very long), sword of jade, origin, tremor, walthros, motrya, the way, ark 22, exit fate (though that one uses ripped graphics), and wingedmene (though full disclosure: i worked on that one). i could probably name more if i spent more time playing indie rpgs, but i haven't been up to date lately. even so, i enjoyed most of the games i named above more than any igf winner