RPG maker , Classic exploration Vs Point and clic. I need you! Your feedback is important!

[Axyal]

Thank you all three of you for sharing your opinions. I mostly agree with your insights.


It’s true that using RPG Maker exclusively for point-and-click gameplay might seem a bit of a waste. But I have to admit, even though I tried Ren’Py—which is incredibly flexible—I just didn’t feel like coding all the mechanics I wanted to include. On the other hand, with RPG Maker, I have more experience, and I’ve already finished the mechanics I needed. Plus, the help of plugins made things even easier.


Now, I’d like to clarify that I’ve made my decision, and honestly, it aligns well with both the poll results and my initial thoughts.


When combining the results of both polls (this one and the “hidden” one on the dev forum), we get 8 votes for classic RPG Maker exploration and 10 for point-and-click.


I didn’t vote myself (little pref to classic ).


In my opinion, there isn’t an overwhelming majority. Both approaches are appealing.


As I mentioned earlier, for combat, I’m sticking with point-and-click/multiple-choice mechanics and avoiding RPG Maker’s default battle systems. That said, I’ll still rely on RPG Maker for stats, inventory, and so on. (What can I say? I’m lazy, and RPG Maker already has these features ready to go! Not ren'py ^^ Plus, I’m far more comfortable using it.)


Initially, I thought point-and-click gameplay might not appeal to RPG Maker. If 80% or more of the responses had been in favor of classic exploration, I would’ve stuck to using point-and-click exclusively for combat or key events.


Conversely, if the votes had overwhelmingly favored point-and-click, I would’ve converted my maps and committed fully to that system.


But as it stands, there isn’t a strong majority either way.


This has led me to an exciting realization: I can, and will, blend the two systems!


There will be classic maps where I’ll try to faithfully recreate my 3D settings in RPG Maker with the tools I have. At the same time, certain zones—side areas, optional paths, or secret locations—will be handled entirely as point-and-click segments.


For instance, a central hub map could be animated and lively using RPG Maker’s classic style, while its outskirts or hidden areas could switch to point-and-click gameplay.


In some cases, I might be forced to lean fully into point-and-click if RPG Maker’s tileset system restricts me too much. Conversely, when I have the tools to make pretty and accurate maps in RPG Maker, I’ll gladly go all out.


I’m reassured to see that both styles are appreciated. While the poll results didn’t push me toward a decisive single direction like I initially hoped, the outcome is even better because I hadn’t considered creating a full hybrid system!


This is similar to how I’ve approached events in the game so far. Without realizing it, I’ve been using hybrid approaches:

• Standard dialogues: Shown with classic text boxes and character busts.
  
  
  
• Major events: Presented with full 3D-rendered visuals.
  
  

The exploration system will follow the same logic!


So, thank you for your feedback. I’ll aim to balance both systems thoughtfully. Central zones will likely use classic RPG Maker maps, while peripheral areas might adopt point-and-click mechanics, depending on what best fits the environment I’m creating.


Your input has been incredibly helpful, even though it didn’t lead to a radical decision. Instead, it gave me confidence in embracing this hybrid approach.


Feel free to share more thoughts—some of your ideas and comments have been enlightening or things I hadn’t considered. Thank you!

 

[moskyx]

Thank you all three of you for sharing your opinions. I mostly agree with your insights.


It’s true that using RPG Maker exclusively for point-and-click gameplay might seem a bit of a waste. But I have to admit, even though I tried Ren’Py—which is incredibly flexible—I just didn’t feel like coding all the mechanics I wanted to include. On the other hand, with RPG Maker, I have more experience, and I’ve already finished the mechanics I needed. Plus, the help of plugins made things even easier.


Now, I’d like to clarify that I’ve made my decision, and honestly, it aligns well with both the poll results and my initial thoughts.


When combining the results of both polls (this one and the “hidden” one on the dev forum), we get 8 votes for classic RPG Maker exploration and 10 for point-and-click.


I didn’t vote myself (little pref to classic ).


In my opinion, there isn’t an overwhelming majority. Both approaches are appealing.


As I mentioned earlier, for combat, I’m sticking with point-and-click/multiple-choice mechanics and avoiding RPG Maker’s default battle systems. That said, I’ll still rely on RPG Maker for stats, inventory, and so on. (What can I say? I’m lazy, and RPG Maker already has these features ready to go! Not ren'py ^^ Plus, I’m far more comfortable using it.)


Initially, I thought point-and-click gameplay might not appeal to RPG Maker. If 80% or more of the responses had been in favor of classic exploration, I would’ve stuck to using point-and-click exclusively for combat or key events.


Conversely, if the votes had overwhelmingly favored point-and-click, I would’ve converted my maps and committed fully to that system.


But as it stands, there isn’t a strong majority either way.


This has led me to an exciting realization: I can, and will, blend the two systems!


There will be classic maps where I’ll try to faithfully recreate my 3D settings in RPG Maker with the tools I have. At the same time, certain zones—side areas, optional paths, or secret locations—will be handled entirely as point-and-click segments.


For instance, a central hub map could be animated and lively using RPG Maker’s classic style, while its outskirts or hidden areas could switch to point-and-click gameplay.


In some cases, I might be forced to lean fully into point-and-click if RPG Maker’s tileset system restricts me too much. Conversely, when I have the tools to make pretty and accurate maps in RPG Maker, I’ll gladly go all out.


I’m reassured to see that both styles are appreciated. While the poll results didn’t push me toward a decisive single direction like I initially hoped, the outcome is even better because I hadn’t considered creating a full hybrid system!


This is similar to how I’ve approached events in the game so far. Without realizing it, I’ve been using hybrid approaches:

• Standard dialogues: Shown with classic text boxes and character busts.
  
  View attachment 4276968
• Major events: Presented with full 3D-rendered visuals.
  
  View attachment 4276973

The exploration system will follow the same logic!


So, thank you for your feedback. I’ll aim to balance both systems thoughtfully. Central zones will likely use classic RPG Maker maps, while peripheral areas might adopt point-and-click mechanics, depending on what best fits the environment I’m creating.


Your input has been incredibly helpful, even though it didn’t lead to a radical decision. Instead, it gave me confidence in embracing this hybrid approach.


Feel free to share more thoughts—some of your ideas and comments have been enlightening or things I hadn’t considered. Thank you!

Good luck then. As I said, the problem is not about choosing one style over the other, but about how well it's implemented to make players enjoys it (here's where your hybrid approach sounds smart, as you're already noticing there are some parts more suited for classical exploration and others for point-and-click mechanics). Then, at another level, there's still the issue about how you'll atract your target players to your game in the first place, because what whowhawhy said is true: there's a pretty large subset of adult games players who simply disregard games made with a certain engine, no matter what. But that's the kind of problem every dev faces, I guess.

 

[Axyal]

Good luck then. As I said, the problem is not about choosing one style over the other, but about how well it's implemented to make players enjoys it (here's where your hybrid approach sounds smart, as you're already noticing there are some parts more suited for classical exploration and others for point-and-click mechanics). Then, at another level, there's still the issue about how you'll atract your target players to your game in the first place, because what whowhawhy said is true: there's a pretty large subset of adult games players who simply disregard games made with a certain engine, no matter what. But that's the kind of problem every dev faces, I guess.

Hello and thank you.
I completely agree with what you’re saying. It’s true, and even openly acknowledged.


But, once again, this is my first experience, and this game is purely for practice.


And since we’re on F95, while there’s room for trolling, I have no doubt about the massive visibility this site provides.


It’s an opportunity.


So, if I have at least some confidence in what I’m doing, I should be able to manage.


The more time is on my side (and by extension, yours), the more I can level up and improve my results.
The big successful games—at least here on F95—didn’t emerge from the first attempt. (I think, right?)


And I’m not aiming for a massive hit, just to see if what I’m offering is enjoyable, and if it is, then I’ll know to focus on it.
For now, though, this is purely for training.