I have posted several questions here about your behaviour when going through others games. I’m curious to know what other people feel, could be interesting. There are 10 questions here; I’d like to hear you’re rational for each decision rather then a basic yes or no. I’ve even added capitols ect to help your reading. My personal responses are noted with a “–“ in front of them


1) When playing games made by other people, do you get disinterested in the story fast and speed through text rather then read it? Is this more true when certain things repeat or when its an intensive story or confusing plot? Do you even care about the story when playing another game or only care if the story appeals to you? I often hear people saying that story is the key, yet I wonder if others ignore it entirely when going through a game.

-I generally don’t seam to care, even though I enjoy the story most out of games. Maybe it’s because the presentation is not there to grab interest, or because the story holds nothing for me, or even because long plot pieces are boring, I don’t know.


2) Do you people like to read books found in someone’s game? Will you sit and read through them or just flip through quickly just in case there is a secret. Also, does the way its presented bother you, even if the words themselves are understandable?

-I find I really don’t like to read any books from someone’s game. This turns into loathing when I encounter a difficult plot and I’m met with more confusing text to further derail my experience.


3) Do strange names confuse and confound you? This could be a lot of new made up names such as city names or character names, or even new concepts like magic being called something else. does having lots of new names that are outside the norm bog you down, especially during story sequences or are you able to quickly make note of them and remember them when they are brought up again.

-I personally find that I shut down when forced to remember a lot of names or have to remember that a common name has been called something else (like magic being called fijust or something).


4) Do you search everywhere for treasures in another's game or do you find that since most don’t put anything that isn’t obvious (treasure chests), that you don’t go looking in places like a tree or a river bank unless the story prompts you to with a hint.

-I am the opposite of this, I like to explore everything. When I find that a game has hidden nooks of information or items I explore them more deeply to see what I find. I like consistency here too.


5) Do you strategically plan when you’re battling, or do you just keep pressing the attack button and hope for the best?

-I detest battles so I don’t put any stock in anything else.


6) Do you use items like antidotes, or spells that cause poison, or use spells that add to your defensive stats like shield spells?

-I find I ignore all of these. I can’t even recall a professional game where I did even spend a turn to use any of this besides hp or mp healing. (ff12 I think is the exception here though I used magic rather then items).


7) Do you enjoy a mature plot or prefer a fun and loose story?

-I like a mature plot, yet I also enjoy some rope so the story doesn’t become too tight and serious but isn’t derailed by stupid addons at the same time. Not many games meet this expectation and often include junk that doesn’t match the feel of the game.


8) Do you play every minigame you find or ignore them, or do only what is required.

-Generally, I look for minigames and try to play them as thoroughly as they are enjoyable. If the game is too basic and doesn’t have much interaction or is overly done (slots for instance), then I ignore it. If it’s more tedious then fun then I play it once then forget it.


9) How much do you notice cop outs in a game, such as a piece of story that isn’t explained but is "just the way it is" or given a hasty or bad explanation. This also means pieces of scenery that could easily be overcome at one point but can’t in another; questions that should have been asked but the party was complacent; unrealistic parts of any kind where it looks like the creator was lazy and took the easy, cheap way out. If you notice them a lot, how much do they detract from your gaming experience? Does your suspension of disbelief cover these holes naturally, or does it does it derail your play?

-Depends for me. Mostly I can accept it as creator’s limits but often I find it’s used as an excuse to avoid something difficult or time intensive. I lean towards this when I’m making games yet I rectify the mistake later on when I get something more creative.


10) Last but not least, do you even consider replaying any game, such as one that has a new game plus feature or maybe one you like or is one shot enough for an rpg maker game? In the same token do you even finish the game your playing or just play up to a point and set it down to not return? What common reasons do you find that influence your choice here? Do you ever feel the urge to pick it up again and do long games turn you away?

-I don’t think I’ve finished many games, if any other then short ones. I won’t ever replay a game unless it’s a classic.

I generally agree with what you said.

cop out~

1. Interest depends on story but I'll always give it the time.
2. I don't want to read too much unless it is a puzzle/detective type game.
3. I'm not into the overly fantastic, but if that is what someone wants, I'll learn the important names.
4. I search for treasure within reason. There is no point looking for a treasure if it is going to waste too much real time. It makes for a less enjoyable game.
5. Depends on how balnced the game is. I fight simply until I have to fight with strategy.
6. I love this stuff if it is well done. I think the Shadow Hearts games do a good job of making these things useful and fun in a reasonable amount of battles. I haven't played enough RPGM games to see how balanced other people's games are.
7. Both, either separately or in a single game. But both can get very annoying in their own different ways if not well done.
8. I usually try minigames and then leave them alone unless the overall campaign requires me to learn it or it is particularly fun. If minigames are the point of the overall game then I'll play them more.
9. Realistically, in a fantasy Role Playing Game, cop-outs need to be forgiveable so long as they are not infuriatingly cheap or particularly lame. Really, if someone has all kinds of super strength or magic, why not break open every door or chest that requires a key?
10. Not likely to replay a RPG unless I'm obsessed with it which is very unlikely.

I was answering every question, but on question 6 I realized I answered the same as you. Why waste my time with a long list?

Ask and you shall be replied to. And then shot.

1) I read through the text like I would any other game. That is, playing the voice in my head as they speak. And they don't go "ithinkthisisreallytroublesomethemonsteriscomingkbyethanks". If things get a little boring and I'm ready for somebody to shut up, I read a little faster. If something's simply being repeated (mostly when I'm seeing if an NPC says something new, and it doesn't), I just rush through the text as fast as I can. But this holds true for any game, not just RPG Maker games.

2) I search everything that looks like it might hold a secret, including bookshelves. If I find a book, I'll read it. So long as the developer doesn't overdo it. *shudders at the thought of Elder Scrolls*

3) I'm terrible with names, but if the name pops up enough, I'll more easily catch on to the name and named. If magic is named something unconventional, I'll definately have trouble remembering what it does.

4) As said earlier, I search everything that might hold a secret. If I come across a game that doesn't have the occasional item in a crate, I'm actually disappointed. And I purposely go into every dead end in a dungeon I can find in hopes of finding treasure. I don't look in trees, though. One normally doesn't put items in trees.

5) It largely depends on what I'm fighting. If the battle requires little thought, I'll just mash Attack. If there's an enemy in the group that has more HP or hits harder or uses bad status attacks, I'll go after it first. In the case of bosses, if the strategy of Attack Attack Attack Heal doesn't work, then I go in with more thought about what I'm gonna do. And gosh, that's a good feeling when a boss requires more thought.

6) If they're actually beneficial, yes. But most cases, I'll have an easier time if I don't waste a turn using Poison. Effects against me, if it's something that spells certain doom if not fixed, I'm fixing in a hurry. Generally, though, I don't worry about poison until after the battle ends. If poison disappears after battle, I'll probably never use an antidote in the entire game.

7) Either one can be entertaining. As long as there is some relevance to what is going on. But I've yet to see an RPG where everything that happens is completely unrelated to each other.

8) It actually depends. If it's something fun, I'll play it. If it's not fun, or if there doesn't seem that I'll be getting much of a prize, I'll pass over it.

9) I have noticed them, but I don't pay much attention to them (except in my own game; why must that plot plague me so!).

10) Generally, with RPGM games, I play it once and move on. Very rarely do I find a game that holds something special that makes it worth replaying as I would a commercial game. That, and downloading an RPGM game is hardly the same as buying a commercial game and owning a physical copy of. I'm also as likely to finish an RPGM game as I am a commercial game. It doesn't happen often; I get distracted too easily. Plus if the game isn't fun, and if it feels clunky, I'm not likely to finish. If the game's long, that's fine by me. I applaud the developer's efforts to making a genuinely long game. Key word: "genuinely". If I have to spend more than 15-30 minutes aquiring gold just because I can't afford new equipment, congratulations, you successfully emulated 80s console RPG gameplay, and I'm moving to something more exciting.

With that said, commence firing.

1)
If the story or text I have to read through is sloppy or poor, I try to speed through it. If the plot of a game (or anything) becomes extremely confusing, I end up just nodding my head along and trying to make sense of it.

If the story is great, a lot of times it can overpower other parts in a game which are lacking. If the story is the focus of the game, then it needs to be cared for. If it isn't, screw it.


2)
Read books? I don't think there's been too many books in people's games. But when they are, I generally take time out to read them. If books are in there, their presentation doesn't bother me much.


3)
Only when there are many introduced in a limited timespan. I can gradually learn them, but being thrown in with everyone talking about a ton of things that I don't understand is overwhelming.

4)

This is an interesting question. Because so many creators refuse to put extra things in their games, it is not my first impulse to look. However, just finding one by accident increases my drive to find extras.

But if it's not in a treasure chest, it's pretty hard to know when to do it unless the game directly tells you that secrets are everywhere.


5)

Depends on the game. So many creators don't give battles enough attention. You must give the players a REASON to plan in battle.

In most games, attack button does the best.


6)

I use antidotes, but rarely use status-inducing items on enemies. I do like shield spells and the like, though, in tough spots.


7)

I like both, if done well.


8)

It depends. If I am extrememly interested in the plot, I will say minigames be damned! But if I want a bit of a break, I do the minigames. Especially if they're fun (Triple Triad) but not when they suck (Tetra Master).


9)

It depends again. Sometimes I care, other times I don't give a damn. It really depends on how glaring the hole is.

FF7: [spoiler]No Phoenix Downs on Aeris???[/spoiler]

Not that I care, it was just how the story was supposed to go.


10)

New Game+ is something that I've always liked and wondered why every professional game doesn't do it.

What's not to like about taking your super-powered He-man team into part 1?

It takes a special RM game to make me return to it to play it again. I do not play RPGs over hardly at all except for Earthbound. I play that basically once a year.

Long games do turn me off to play again. If the game takes like two weeks of playing to beat...well, I don't have many two week chucks to give.

1) I... umm.. I don't play games for the story. As far as I'm concerned, "Dr. Robotnik is trying to take over the world again" is story enough for me. Come to think of it, I don't really like RPGs. What I like about RPG Maker is that you can make a game that doesn't necessarily hold to RPG conventions. I like exploring, finding things, and tough battle strategy that makes me think about who I'm going up against. As far as playing games, I don't speed through text. I try to take it all in. Even though I'm not much interested in the story, a story is part of what brings a fantasy to life, so I have to pay attention if I want to immerse myself in the fantasy world. If it's confusing or if I don't get it, I just ride along.

2) A book in a library or something? I would probably find that to be tedious.

3) City and character names don't bug me. Renaming "magic" something else, that would bug me. Just assume that everything from your fantasy world is being properly translated into English. No need to try to be quasi-intellectually impressive with a slew of made-up names for things that already have names.

4) I go everywhere, to a point of finding bugs that evaded the author. I go places that the author didn't intend for me to go. I go into every dead end in a dungeon maze just so I can say that I went there (even if I can clearly see that it's a dead end from many steps back). I like to explore and find stuff, especially secrets. I put all kinds of secrets into my games, and lots of stuff to see, do, and find. There's always something new waiting around the next corner.

5) Most of the games I've played so far have random encounters, so I am usually doing the same thing over and over. I mostly choose the options that do the most damage and get the encounter over with as soon as possible. I develop a routine for beating each enemy party, then rinse and repeat. This usually involves casting spells that do the most damage, and bringing along a lot of Mp-restore items.

My personal preference is a gaming environment where the battles are few and far between, and the bad guys are tough (even to a point of being closely or evenly matched with my guys). I like tough situations where I have to think about who I'm going up against and formulate a strategy to beat them, then adapt that strategy depending on who hits and who misses. Because the battles are so tough, I wouldn't want very many of them, and I'd want them all to be unique encounters. But that's what my own games are for.

6) I'll use an antidoite if someone needs it on the spot. If the guy can hang in there until we dispatch the opposition, I wait till it's over. Why use a spell that causes poison when you can cast a damaging spell instead (or attack with your weapon if you're a strong warrior type)? I agree, commercial games rarely provide a reason to be using all those attack/defense/magic enhancing spells. Just hit 'em with your best attack rather than waste a turn casting an enhancer.

The enhancer spells are essential in my games. You'd be lost without 'em. The opposition is tough. I get a lot of mileage out of the speed enhancing spell, magic power booster, and melee damage booster.

One thing I always liked about the "Heroes Of Might & Magic" series is that the enhancer spells are more useful than the direct-damage spells. It's actually a better idea to Bless a guy for max damage than to cast Lightning on an opponent.

7) I have no need for sexual inuendo or love interests. That kind of stuff bores me. I don't require any sort of other type of "mature" story. It's just me playing a game. Nothing complicated.

8) I don't like minigames. They're too distracting. Let's stick to the plot so I don't forget what I'm supposed to do next.

9) I don't notice cop outs as much as little details that the author overlooked or just plain didn't think of. There are a lot of things that bug me, especially with regard to presentation. Text presentation, graphical presentation, you name it. I have a lot of hang-ups. Details in the presentation that stand out to me and derail my gaming experience. There are too many to list in one paragraph, and I'd have difficulty describing some of them. In short, I notice everything. Some details bug me more than others. This is more a matter of personal preference than a deficiency on the author's part. I'd be worried if everyone was as strange as I am.

10) Yes, I consider replaying a game, and I have done it! Wow! I always set out to play a game all the way through, but sometimes I don't succeed. I still want to finish the ones I haven't finished yet.

My own games, I can come back and play through many times. I've lost count of how many times I've played through my first game (albeit most of it was for debugging/quality control purposes). I could easily come back and play it again.

"You and your quasi-intellectual hobnobbery! You know what makes me sick? That you get away with it!" ~ Master Shake

wow, excellent input folks! id still like to hear more views but what i have so far is interesting and an honest take on how people behave when playing through a game. its good to make note of what the average person will mainly enjoy, what parts should be left as extras, and what parts should be hinted at rather then left to the imagination of the player.

market research is an important step in any game, without it you cannot know what your player base expects, wants, and will enjoy most.