next »

[jwk5]

i thought the point of a hobby was to do something yourself. i mean, if your hobby is gardening, it makes no sense to steal someone else's garden.

I would compare it more to the hobby of building plastic models. Here, everything is practically done for you. All you have to do is cut the parts out and glue it together. Some kits you don't even have to paint. Is it not considered a hobby if you don't mold your own pieces and blend your own paint colors?

This difference there is you did not steal your model parts from the store. It is OK to put your model together with those parts because you paid for the right to put your model together with those resources.

As long as they recognize what they've created for what it is and not anything more than that, I don't see any issues with people using ripped graphics/music for their RPGs. If there are people who prefer that to your entirely self-made work, then that audience was a non-factor to begin with. No reason to rail against someone for filling a niche.

Or, as is the all too common case, if someone has ripped your resources and used them in a game that people wind up playing before they play your game your characters lose some of their legitimacy in your own game (as they've already been defined in another).

Should it be OK for people to gut Aquaria and use its resources? How about Cave Story? What if people browse this forum's very own DevLogs page and start gutting resources from the demos there to use as their own, is that OK too? How do you think Jotapeh would feel if the Giraffe from GiraffeRPG was used in someone else's game before his own was fully released? Why should all these people, putting all this work into their games, be expected to hand over all that hard work to someone who's contributed absolutely nothing to the process of their creation?

For just one character of my own, writing storyline aside, I usually have a good 6 or 7 pages of concept art, several pages of a refined final draft, several sheets of expression and body language, several sheets dedicated to weaponry or accessory concepts, etc. When it comes to the spriting, my sprites get hand drawn (in my own style) and it is a long and difficult process to create all the animations needed. That is a lot of work, care, and time put into just a single character.

I don't mind that people use the RPGMaker RTP files, that is what they are there for. I understand that people will rip from commercial games, and while I don't exactly approve of it I am sure if the companies are really that bothered by it they will send out a cease and desist order (and in some cases they have). However, ripping from the few indies making original RPGs (i.e. original resources) is just poisonous to the community. It is saying "There is no point in hard work, everyone else will just take it from you anyways." Who wants to make an honest effort in an environment like that?

[s0]

i thought the point of a hobby was to do something yourself. i mean, if your hobby is gardening, it makes no sense to steal someone else's garden.

I see it more like this: A lot of musicians start out trying to play or imitate their favorite songs before they develop their own style. I don't think there's anything wrong with using ripped graphics when you're just starting out. If you're a more "accomplished" developer like the guy who made Last Scenario it's a different matter of course.

Anyway, as for the whole "JRPG vs WRPG" discussion: For me, JRPGs are about telling a story the "traditional way" and adding gameplay for enhanced atmosphere (in the best cases) or just to pad out the length (in the worst cases). WRPGs on the other hand are about the way the story interacts with the gameplay, they tend to be more complex and "systems-based" than JRPGs, but the actual literary quality of the story is often not as good. I see them as completely different genres, really. I like both, but my motivations to play them are very different.

[jwk5]

WRPGs on the other hand are about the way the story interacts with the gameplay, they tend to be more complex and "systems-based" than JRPGs, but the actual literary quality of the story is often not as good.

That for me is summed up with one NPC dialog in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion: "Seen any elves lately? ha ha ha!" Retarded, but somehow priceless. The game play in Oblivion was great but I almost loathed having to talk to any of the NPCs because the dialog in that game was so mind-numbingly dull. With a lot of WRPGs it the dialog just feels like you're reading some pretentious novel, not having a conversation.

[s0]

With a lot of WRPGs it the dialog just feels like you're reading some pretentious novel, not having a conversation.

In a lot of cases, it's not even that. Especially in games like Elder Scrolls, NPCs are often reduced to quest kiosks with dialog along the lines of "I have a problem with rats, can you help me random stranger?". 

I wish more WRPGs would abandon the quest system, or at least embed the quests better within the dialog. Vampire Bloodlines does a fantastic job at this. I never talked to NPCs and skipped over the conversation just to receive another quest because the dialog is genuinely well written and interesting. Also, the quests seem to arise very "naturally" from the conversations and the NPCs' motives why they would have you do a certain thing instead of handling it themselves are always believeable. You don't feel like someone who solves random lazy peoples' problems at least.

[jwk5]

In a lot of cases, it's not even that. Especially in games like Elder Scrolls, NPCs are often reduced to quest kiosks with dialog along the lines of "I have a problem with rats, can you help me random stranger?".

I wish more WRPGs would abandon the quest system, or at least embed the quests better within the dialog.

I always liked the quest setups in WRPGs, but I agree, the delivery of the quests makes you feel like an errand boy, not a hero. That is what I loved about Radiata Stories (there I go, mentioning that JRPG again), mid-game you take part in a quest system akin to WRPGs but each of the quests plays out like a story in its own right, not just an errand. Since you recruit most of the characters that are giving you the quests the quests actually serve to flesh them out story-wise and provide you with extra background info on the character.

[terloon]

Good piece, and I agree on all 6, especially since I am an indie rpg developer. One thing I would like to add from 6 reasons is that usually the makers of indie RPGs are obsessed/in love with the genre itself, not just the fans. Supporting them would allow indie developers to explore the genre creatively, hopefully.

[hanako]

As I understand it, the cookie-cutter RPG Maker games sell really damn well. (Not from me; my website's audience is not the right audience. But from what I hear, the people who are into these things absolutely eat them up.) It's hardly surprising that the RPG Maker gamedev crowd keeps popping out more and more of the games if they keep selling like that.

I have the unfortunate tendency of being stubbornly interested in doing my own thing. So the closest thing I've worked on to a JRPG was not RPG Maker, not fantasy (well, not quite), and sells... very little. (Admittedly it also has a 0-dollar budget, but then, so did many of the games I've sold! Less helpfully, I didn't code it and it's had its share of bugs.)

I like the look of the RPG Maker games but I hate the combat too much to manage to force myself through them. Science Girls at least has combat which is IMO more entertaining. And the people who actually buy it seem to really like it. But the impression is that if the developer for SG had just put out Yet Another RPG Maker Game instead, he would have made much better returns.

And I never learn, either. I have a silly project I'm fooling around with which is yet another completely-bizarre RPG....

[gimymblert]

That is what I loved about Radiata Stories (there I go, mentioning that JRPG again), mid-game you take part in a quest system akin to WRPGs but each of the quests plays out like a story in its own right, not just an errand. Since you recruit most of the characters that are giving you the quests the quests actually serve to flesh them out story-wise and provide you with extra background info on the character.

I was about to make this argument, less fetch quests more story arcs  
The difference is minimal, one is just flesh out!

I like PSO and it treats a lot of quests like that, you actually learn the whole background with quests and quest events rather than the "ingame story". They were simple in implementation but it was the simplest example to show it can be done easily!

edit: correct the bold statement

[jwk5]

I wouldn't mind seeing RPGs (especially from the indie community) that are released like issues of a comic book. Where rather than this big, drawn out epic quest you are given short (but focused) stories that are released at regular intervals.

[gimymblert]

Oh it's a common practice, at least on the French scene but i haven't checked for a long times.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i thought the point of a hobby was to do something yourself. i mean, if your hobby is gardening, it makes no sense to steal someone else's garden.

They are doing something themselves. It's not stealing someone's garden, but seedlings from it to plant in their own. In the end they are still getting down in the dirt.
I would compare it more to the hobby of building plastic models. Here, everything is practically done for you. All you have to do is cut the parts out and glue it together. Some kits you don't even have to paint. Is it not considered a hobby if you don't mold your own pieces and blend your own paint colors?
As long as they recognize what they've created for what it is and not anything more than that, I don't see any issues with people using ripped graphics/music for their RPGs. If there are people who prefer that to your entirely self-made work, then that audience was a non-factor to begin with. No reason to rail against someone for filling a niche.

true, but if so, they should *not* call what they are doing making games. it's some other hobby similar to making games, but isn't really about making games, it's about taking other people's games and mixing them up. perhaps one could call their hobby remixing games.

much like one wouldn't call what the people do over at overclocked remix "music composition". they're music remixers: they take the elements of songs of others and mix them up to make something new. similarly, most of the rpgmaker community takes the graphics of others and mixes them up to make something new. it's more like collage than drawing.

[s0]

much like one wouldn't call what the people do over at overclocked remix "music composition". they're music remixers: they take the elements of songs of others and mix them up to make something new. similarly, most of the rpgmaker community takes the graphics of others and mixes them up to make something new. it's more like collage than drawing.

By your argumentation, people who auto-generate their game sound effects with SFXR would be "not making games", I'm not sure I can follow your logic.

Who said making games has to be like drawing, as opposed to collage? In fact, I'd love to see more things like Assemblee where people make "collage games" for the "art", not because it's convenient. I had an idea for a game for a game I tentatively titled "Steal This Game" once, where all the graphics, music and even ingame text and dialog would be ripped from other games.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i'd consider computerized generation of something to be quite distinct from stealing it. i don't see how what you said follows my argument at all.

and nobody said it has to, since sometimes it can lead to interesting things, just that that's what the word kind of means. it's just be factually incorrect to call what ocremixers do 'composing music'.

i've enjoyed some fangames, for instance, exit fate as a fangame of the early suikoden series. i enjoyed it just as much as the early suikoden games. but making exit fate wasn't really making a game, because he didn't go through most of the challenges that the people who made suikoden 1 and 2 (and the other games he stole sprites and music from) had to go through when they made the resources he used.

and i've even done so myself -- none of my games ripped graphics, but my very earliest of games used music from commercial games (and&, for instance, uses my remixed music from ecco the dolphin for battles). so i'm not saying it's terrible, just that it's not really making games, and shouldn't be put on the same level as making them. it's taking shortcuts and avoiding having to do the hard work that real game designers who make all their own stuff do. which is fine if you're just starting out, but a lot of people do it game after game, without ever even attempting to learn how to draw or how to compose music.

[Craig Stern]

I see it more like this: A lot of musicians start out trying to play or imitate their favorite songs before they develop their own style. I don't think there's anything wrong with using ripped graphics when you're just starting out.

There's a big difference between a musician doing a cover of someone else's song and someone taking sprites. A closer analogy would be a musician who goes on stage, pops in another band's CD, hits play, then lip syncs along to the song.

Covering a song is more like trying to recreate the original yourself, but putting your own take on it. There could be copyright issues with that, but that at least that involves work, is transformative, and usually the artist acknowledges that it's not his song.

I have no philosophical problem with someone imitating someone else's art style--that's more like the equivalent of covering someone's songs. It's a good way to learn. Simply ripping someone else's finished assets, though, is a little beyond the pale, IMO.

[Gnarf]

true, but if so, they should *not* call what they are doing making games. it's some other hobby similar to making games, but isn't really about making games, it's about taking other people's games and mixing them up. perhaps one could call their hobby remixing games.

Do you make this shit up as you go? How the fuck is making half a game not "game making"?

[jwk5]

Do you make this shit up as you go?

I do!

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

if someone did half of the graphics for their game and stole the other half (as exit fate did -- the battle sprites and portraits were original), i'd consider that partly game-making, yeah. but stealing all of the graphics is different.

[Gnarf]

I was referring to this:

i think videogames are two parts: video + game. if you're making a game but not making the video to go with it, you're only really making half of a videogame.

The idea that making half a videogame should not be called making games, but instead something like remixing games, is pretty far out.



And note that Paul is just randomly drawing a line here. We could just as well argue that using Game Maker is not really making games (because you did not make Game Maker). Or that writing machine code is not really making games (because you did not make the machine). Or that building your own machines is not really making games (because you did not make the pieces you are making the machines from). Etc.

Thing is, it really goes without saying that when someone has "made a game", they have not made all of it. If some guy did a bunch of stuff, and it resulted in a new game, then he made a game. That's what we call it. Trying to find some tiny technicality that determines if maybe it was not really making a game is retarded.

[s0]

it's taking shortcuts and avoiding having to do the hard work that real game designers who make all their own stuff do. which is fine if you're just starting out, but a lot of people do it game after game, without ever even attempting to learn how to draw or how to compose music.

Well, if that's the core of your argument, then generating sound effects does qualify. After all, it's taking the easy route and clicking a single button in SFXR as opposed to using more "advanced" synth software like SuperCollider or even going through the trouble of recording the effects yourself in a studio.

Also, remixing is part of what's called "recomposition" in music theory and is considered a subset of composition, as far as I know. Also remember that classical composers often write variations on pieces and I'm pretty sure that if you tried to explain to a musicologist that's not composition, he'd probably just give you a weird look.

EDIT

And note that Paul is just randomly drawing a line here. We could just as well argue that using Game Maker is not really making games (because you did not make Game Maker). Or that writing machine code is not really making games (because you did not make the machine). Or that building your own machines is not really making games (because you did not make the pieces you are making the machines from). Etc.

This was what I was trying to get at basically.

[Zaphos]

Er, Paul, you don't make the graphics for your games, do you?  You pay others to do them.

Stealing graphics is bad, but the issue of whether it is proper game making to not do everything yourself is a complete red herring.  (And reminiscent of the whole "using game maker / any pre-made engine is cheating, you must code everything in c/asm/whatever" mentality)