seriously, its a good program but it seems it has a very small community, i was expecting alot more...

To be truthful.. it sucks, which is the reason for such a small community.
Hell, RM2K3 can do more.

Think of it as RPG Maker 95, but with better graphics and action capabilities. I just didn't like it die to the limits it held. Some scripting would have been nice...

Edit: Ah it's okay we cannot make promo here.

Anyway, my forum is not active, that's a proof IGM has not a wide audience. I can explain that by a trial limited to 30 days, which is not enough to take hands, not enough tutorials on the net and a help quite bad assembled and explained. As said lower, if scripts had been available it would have made it more useful than game maker, and this horrible MMF2, some told games take too big place but MP3 are available, it's just on the XNA 360 we can't export them, but for my part I Prefer IGM than YoYo game maker, MMF2, and as RMXP was the best for me, IGM now is.

I was wanting to tell the community is growing, as the software is young, not free at the moment but I think everybody should buy it to know all we can do... And trust me, we can do A Lot of things, I'm targetting on making some Role plying Game template with it.

Sorry for the inconvenience.
PS: IG Maker = fail is not a question, but if we asked me I would tell for the 10's or 100's who bought it and loved it that it's not a fail for everyone.
Thank you

Sylvain

HB built up quite a large following ready to roll and then the engine was released and everyone was disappointed, and ended up moving on to other non-enterbrain engines such as game maker or multimedia fusion.

I find it simply good. Ya it might have used many more features, but I am not really against it. Also, you're posting this in an RM-Focused site, where obviously most comments would agree with this ">_>... Sure, we're here for some reason, but the other side might have a completely different mind...



I don't think that advertising your site actually helps this topic .

Posting the link to his site doesn't help this topic, either. Please be careful.
~Ratty524

Omegas be sure not to quote the links to the other sites when responding to an advertiser. Please just use the report button.

As for IG Maker, there was definitely a lot of potential with this, despite some limitations. I found it easier to learn than Game Maker, and way more stable than MMF.

What killed this, ultimately, was that the tool itself and the games produced by it are heavy in file size. I remember downloading something that was over 200 MB just to play a Mario clone. Plus it only takes WAVs as music files, also adding to the heavy file size.

In addition, namely with it's platform editor, it had many features standard for games of the genre that were not included, and a lack of ways to get around it. While it has an EXCELLENT animation editor, it overall just sucked.

The real problem is with the program's learning curve. It's not as simple as RPG Maker, and most of what it does can already be done in RPG Maker XP/VX via scripting and possibly events. As said, if we were given the option to script or maybe even make our own plugins, this maker would probably attract more people. I'm just not using it now because I don't have the time to learn all the stuff I need know in order to use this maker effectively, since I'm dividing my time between business, making my own visual novel (This includes writing, art, programing, and possibly music composing), and learning to code in Renpy.

No, the problem was a $200 price tag, for an editor that can easily be out done by the standard version of GM7.

Isn't it more this?

Click to view attachment

So the standart version of GM7 can export to flash and XNA you tell...

That wasn't it's release price.

Also being exported to .SWF file is fruitless, as that defeats the entire purpose of using flash by compiling into HTML5. You're never gonna post your game online because the sheer size of it will force people to be downloading for hours (56k users.) There's also little point into compiling into .XNA, cause if you wanna sell over XBL, you're still gonna have to pay Microsoft $75. Even after, since IGM lacks any networking features it will be severely behind all of it's generation's makers, that by the way you can get for free after paying Microsoft $75. Exporting to Flash and XNA are the two most useless features someone could've have gridded up for the reasons stated above, if they felt it's necessary to release them them, at least it should've been as a plug-in, and during development time, focused on making a better engine.

As it stands right now, IGM is dead, I've moved on, Enterbrain has moved on, and so should others.

i agree it hadso much potential and the ability to mix and link diffrent types of games in it was good too i.e. you could run one level as a shooter then land and do the next level as a platformer and yet another as a 3/4 view rpg style.. for action based games it's powerful yet only if you actually want to make something within it's framework..

It's core issue is lack of expandability which is odd being that it has the option of having plugin's added.

:/

I do not agree. We have different point of view. Release price: 90 S since I know it. Flash: for me it's useful and takes only one minute to load on a browser. I don't miss scripts, but I admit I would like some if on the next it's available (like the 3D). To finish, maybe the public and community are different between IGM and RM.
Sincerely

When you export it to flash the quality will either be compressed to crap or it's gonna have a large file size. Neither of which are acceptable, since a large part of the world doesn't have 12Mbs download speeds. I may have some knowledge in this area as, I'm a second year student in Web Design at my Vocational School, and I know for a fact that compressing a 120 mb game into Flash would not have positive effects. (Think of the bandwidth!).

I miss scripts, as taking out the scripting language from an ENGINE is equal to removing the venom out of the snake. Yes, you can make most things with IGM that you could while scripting but, that just creates a giant mess.

I wouldn't say IG maker is total fail as almost any battle system can be coded with it(from the snes/early psx era) but a RPG system will most likely be out of reach.. as you can't do much with it's coding.

And no one will want to code a letter by letter dialog system..

particles are fun to do though.

Not to be off topic, but I've seen RM2K3 go full 3D before. Don't underestimate its abilities. But, IG Maker still sucks.

Rm2k3 isn't capable of "3D", what you saw was nothing more than pictures. e

IGM is going to be used by Small Studios and beginners.

I'm working hard have more than one year and my Community still empty of people, it's because amateurs hate something a little bit better than an automatic maker, where you don't need to think in anything and is very limited.

I did games like isometric, plataform, with party system, groups going together in the screen, etc, and it's alway work well, but yes, if you're good with scripts, don't go to RPG Maker VX, just create your own engine!

In December of this year I'm expecting to release my first complete game, called DefCom - Defending the Community, where I made it using characters looking like MapleStory and the background of this game is about the a Forum Community, where the moderator is trying to defend it of Spammers and BOTs.

To sum up everything into one post:

1) Rukiri is right. 2k3, RMXP, VX, none of them are capabale of 3D. They all use sprites, 2D images. You can fake 3D< but you can't actually implement it. What is 3D then? Google Blender Foundation, MAXON Cinema 4D, and Autodesk. Look at that for a minute then look at RPG Maker again. Let it sink in.

2) Flash game son the web require time to load. The larger the game's size, the longer it takes to load. In some cases you have to download additional tools/plugins to view it (Unity games, YoYo, etc). 200+MB Flash = Will not load in under 2 minutes for a dial-up or so. Do not want.

3) telles0808: Shouldn't be posting links to your website here. Wrong subforum.

Edited to add that you CAN render out animations to use and then grab individual frames from those. I had saw some animations of summons or whatever that used a character mesh from a Poser content provider using some of his default preset poses. So yeah, you can use 3D to assist you, but in the end it's only going to be 2D that you can use in RM.

yeah well just look at the demo pics of a micro proof of conecpt game i posted it shows how you can use sprites to render 3d to 2d sprites so to make ig maker look better
http://www.rpgrevolution.com/forums/index....st&p=312333
http://www.rpgrevolution.com/forums/index....st&p=314808
Check those two posts...

I would really like to see a basic rm maker that used 3d just simple 3d using primitives would be more then enough.

Just look a things like second life using primitives and texturing you can make huge buildings and everything you could even make it so you can export and import the 3d buildings so ppl could share.

I mean a simple rm style house is really just a cube with a prism shape put on top of it. A castle is a bunch of boxes, cylinders, cones, pyramids and prisms. take each of those shapes and use them rotated at different sizes and angles and you can make almost anything
___________________
And yeah btw per advertising rules you can have a small banner in your sig or a project page but don't advertise in general forum posts / topics like this that aren't specific to your game.. also might want to use google translate since your main page is not in English and our site is mostly english...
http://translate.google.com/

Is it just me or does IG-maker suck more ass than can be found on twenty-two morbidly obese boars and cows on their way back from an Applebees on two for one night?

Vivid description thar kunitaj
But it's just you.

@Ariel: Well yeah primitives can be used for a lot, and in fact it is one pretty popular method of modeling complex shapes, next to box-modeling and point-by-point modeling. The only concern I could see is the matter of UVW mapping/unwrapping. Especially if one not experienced in 3D (Whatever package capable of UVW unwrapping) wanted to use their own objects. Making textures for said objects - preset or otherwise - can be a daunting task as well for new users. Projection and Frontal mapping would be easiest for flat objects like cubes but would pose a problem and would show obvious stretching on objects like cones. Spheres would have an ugly "squishing" point at the top and bottom which really cannot be avoided unless it was a hexahedron or some other non-standard sphere object. I could post a screenshot of what I mean by this difference in primitive They are both fully spherical, the only difference is the vertex arrangement. They map generally the same way, but unwrapping can vary between meshes. Another matter is the UV map itself. The way computers handle the maps and apply them to the mesh isn't always the way new users would expect, especially dependant on how the model was unwrapped. Each user has their own way of unwrapping meshes, and one popular method for unwrapping organic models (Dinosaurs, dragons, tigers, etc) is from the front down. If you have seen a tanned snake skin or deer skin you should know what the uv map would look like then. This makes it difficult to put, say, a tattoo on the animal's chest. In order to remove seams you have to have half the tattoo on one half of the map and the other half on the other and perfectly aligned. The other method is to use a side-view Frontal Projection which applies the texture used to both sides symmetrically. It is much easier to do than a complete unwrapping but it has some severe downsides. For starters it is always symmetrical. If you wanted a tattoo on the left but not the right, Frontal Projections would apply it to both sides. Second, the top and bottom of the mesh will often be messy where the texture converges. Thirdly, this usually only works for organic meshes and simple primitives due to the way it applies the textures.

Difficulty in the matter may vary between users, but it would probably be best to keep it simple - just use simple primitives. There is also the issue of file formats - what formats the RM would accept. Common formats used are OBJ, 3DS, FBX, etc. 3DS exports are always triangulated, but that shouldn't be an issue. Finally there is file size. However if only simple primitives are used, this should not be an issue either.

EDIT: Alright here is a quick screenshot of what I mean. From left to right: Standard sphere, Hexahedron, Icosahedron

Click to view attachment

If you look closely, all the edges converge on a single vertice in the standard sphere and the icosahedron leaves a small margin of error in the UV. The hexahedron would have the cleanest UV and in fact Human heads can be easily modeled from this variation, among other things.

... I'm sorry i was looking at a kitty. What?
If you don't have anything insightful to say in response, don't say anything at all.

Please do not spam, this is your verbal warning. ~ Ratty524

Ah 3D Cinema, I prefer using 3DS MAX and Zbrush. :3

So, I was looking forward to this thing, mainly for making platform games. However so fare it's only been all negative remarks about it and it's really making me wonder if it even be worth it or not. If the price was a bit cheaper it wouldn't be to big a deal, but hmm.. I'm not so sure anymore if it's worth the price it's set at.

I haven't tried it yet. I was thinking about getting it.

But, here what I'm wondering, If you can export to xna, can't you just open it up in visual C# and add any scripting you'd want in there?