5 Game Maker Cliches to Avoid
Game Maker is a wonderful tool and it allows those with creative ideas who don’t have all the technical know-how to produce their own games. But after many years, we’ve seen a lot of homebrew games, and its about time some cliche features and thoughtless design failures are put to rest once and for all.
Boxes & Circles Don’t Make Good Characters
Creating a walking cycle (or even just requesting one) is apparently too much for some people. Instead we end up seeing endless amounts of games that substite legitimate character design with colored gliding boxes and rolling balls. Sure, at first it was cute controlling a cube with eyes. But this is 2012; I think after years of lazy character development, those offenders can try a little harder at some actual graphical work. By all means, if a sphere or box is a legitimate part of your game design, go for it. Just be warned, its easy to tell when a feature was considered, and when it was slapped together.
Default Resources
A default load screen and default icons are really offputting. They are designed as placeholders that can later be changed, and nothing more.
As much as we all love the program, you’ve failed your job as a game designer if you haven’t solidly masked that its made in Game Maker. Its another case of graphical laziness. Developing an icon only takes minutes with a free tool like GIMP. And the loading bar can be turned off if you really can’t be bothered whipping a custom one up. The same goes for GM dialogues– don’t use the default messages unless you want to tell the world you are incapable of creating popup windows.
Be sure not to use default sprites either. They are there for initial experimenting with GM. No project worth sharing has ever been made with default sprites and backgrounds.
Windowed Mode
There is a time and place for using full screen, and it isn’t utilized as much as it should be. There is no problem in using windowed mode. Its easier to work with, and depending what kind of game you make it may be the best option for you. I am currently working on an exploration game, and windowed mode is what works best for me. But in the Game Maker world there are a lot of games, especially 3D works, that missed the opportunity to go full screen. It only takes a few lines of code to adjust room sizes or views to any resolution, and adjusting GUI elements to sit correctly on any screen is a matter of simple X and Y positioning.
We really need to embrace full screen more. It will make your game appear more professional, and the end user will appreciate a more immersive experience (its hard to ‘get into’ a game in windowed mode, being constantly reminded you are looking at a computer screen).
Psuedo-Companies
There is a strange obsession with creating game companies in the GMC. New users are often guilty of this more than anyone else. You don’t need to create a logo, or a business name, or assemble a team of people you’ll never end up using (seek help only when you need it, team requests should be used sparingly). Don’t create a phoney website for a non-existent unregistered gaming company. Don’t put fake trademarks on your software (protip: trademarks aren’t free, so stop with the TM symbols). If you want an identity associated with your work, use your username or your real name. Or how about linking to a YouTube channel where you can post videos of your game when its out?
In a nutshell, splash screens and bogus company names don’t make you look credible. Since most people abandon their GM projects and teams, its best to leave any “business” details for later– and only if you plan to stick to it and produce more software. And if you want to protect your work legally and freely, copyright can instantly be applied to your work. You can also use a free Creative Commons license, if your game is freeware or opensource. As for trademarks, you don’t need them.
Short Stories
As indie developers, we have to do all the work ourselves. Sound, graphics, programming, design, and everything inbetween. And we all strive to finish our game and get it out there for the public to see. Sadly the one area that often suffers for this is the game storyline. Its typical for a GM project to feature an unsatisfyingly small amount of levels, or even have an unfinished storyline. It doesn’t matter how good everything else in the game is if the duration of play is only ten minutes.
It is hard to get people to download and play your game, and you get one chance to make an impression. Do you think they will come back to play the update after you finish the storyline a month later? Yeah, keep dreaming.
The flip side to this is having a long storyline that sucks; this isn’t a problem for GM games usually, but its worth putting that warning out there anyway.
Don’t fall into the crowded depressing world of cheap Game Maker creation flops. Tools like Game Maker make it easy to do a bad job. Its takes a good job to reach an audience of players. Its easy to cut corners; its not to create a decent game in an over-saturated indie world.
Glad someone finally mentioned psuedo-companies.
My team uses the name “Wormintheworks” but it’s made clear on our site that it’s a TEAM not a COMPANY. I’m fed up of seeing “Firepoo games LLC” and “PixelGMUsers Ltd” when people clearly haven’t registered as a company…
@Dan: Very true how ridiculous some of the names can be. Its especially tiring when the same person creates multiple fake ‘company’ names and messes people around who have the misfortune of dealing with them as part of a team.
Agree, there is no problem using an alias or team name to release a game but I don’t like the fakery. I guess the reason for it is that some people decide to emulate games they are familiar with – and one point of this will be the branding they see each time they start up the game.
I dunno, “Firepoo games LLC” sounds pretty legit to me…. which is what I would’ve said if I was 11 years old.
Poor article.
Most of Loaf’s articles are.
I’m sorry you feel that way. I’m always open to constructive feedback, so if ever you want to chat about something I’ve written here or anywhere you can always flick me a PM at the GMC. That goes for anyone. Thanks.
Poor Comment. No but seriously, instead of shooting a quick criticism at someone, why not try and include some reason as why you disliked it? You might also want to comment on what you liked about it as well. Just a thought.
Actually, I think it’s a pretty good article. If your trying to make a good game, and one that folk will want to play, then the 1st 3 points in this are pretty important.
The company name thing I’ve always found is just a bit of fun, I mean why not release your games under a company heading? You don’t need to be registered or anything, just a “group name” – as long as they don’t change for every game.
I have found the story telling of indies to be bloody annoying, as most refuse to let you skip them. I hate sitting through boring cut scenes, and no matter how hard you worked on them, and how pretty they are, please let me skip them or I’ll never play your game again!
The only other one I’d add to all this, is don’t announce a game when you’ve just started. Chance s are you won’t finish it, and it’ll just make you look stupid that you didn’t finish. We ALL have projects we don’t complete, so why not wait until it’s almost finished before you try and generate some interest/PR?
I completely agree with what you said about announcing a project. It kills motivation from the start.
As for story lines, I was referring to the game story more than anything. I have no patience for cut scenes haha.
I like this, nice short, and has some good points.
I am interested though, was it sudo names that you had a problem with. IE Kengine Gaming? Or Branding things as fake companies? (With the LLC and the TM and so on?)
Because I understand using a name and then sticking with it so that it allows people to follow a particular game maker.
-Elmernite
I’ve posted a resposne, following up on these points here:
http://csanyk.com/rants/2012/02/865/
Dang it. My last game used a box character as the main character, but it was a a fun character who changed expressions. The entire game had this box-like feel to all the sprites.
I don’t have a problem with “psuedo-company” names, they are fun to make. The reason why they are disliked is because they are often made by little kids who get a burst of enthusiasm and then quit putting any effort into their “psuedo-company”. There are some great “psuedo-company” out there like MoaCube. They are very much an actual company, but at one time they would have been just like all the “pseudo companies” out there.
Windowed mode doesn’t bother me, but tiny windows really bother me.
Well, as I said, box characters can work if you intentionally use them as part of design. But if its just there as a shortcut, chances are you’ll have a shabby end product.
Actually, I think one of the most amateurish things I see in Game Maker games is the use of overly saturated and/or clashing color schemes. Effective use of colors is a great way to demonstrate that you understand good game design. Cramming as many of the brightest colors you can onto the screen all at once is not.
Good color schemes are important, I agree. Maybe graphics in general is just an area that suffers in GM. People should consider venturing outside of MSPaint heh.
1: If boxes is what someone wants to go for, then let them. Most likely it isn’t via choice (‘boxes are sooo cool!’) so critisizing a game because it uses simple graphics doesn’t interest me. I applaud the fact they even made a game, I know how much work that takes.
More important a point would be that people keep graphics the same/similar style, or don’t neglect sound/music aspects of the game. (like throwing in any old .mp3 to loop away, with 2-3 sound fx only!).
2: Default resources.. what’s wrong with ‘em? Fine set of cards, good chess pieces, some nice breakout graphics. the statement “you’ve failed your job as a game designer if you haven’t solidly masked that its made in Game Maker”
It’s absolute bunk.
For what it’s worth, Pacific Wings looks exactly like a “GM game”:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pacific-wings/id445844946?mt=8
and is fairly popular (2million+ installs).
A better point is only use free graphics resources, so long as they match (or you can make them match) the rest of your game.
3: A bit meh on this one. But yep, I think that players adding the Option to select full-screen is good. Always start the game in windowed, though, at least, if your gonna change the screen res.
4: Null point. Your nit-picking on a different type of person. Someone wants to have fun, forming ‘companies’ and talking with members, and work on a game for a few weeks.. great, and good on them.
5…. no comment.
Earlier someone commented on ‘poor article’, and look, don’t take that too negatively, but it kinda is. It’s just your personal gripes&peeves. Which isn’t so much a discussion point.
I ramble, but yeah.
Your attitude is that of a caring fellow developer. For the end user its not going to cut the mustard.
I agree with Desert Dog on his third point. I’d say starting in fullscreen in much more of an issue, and one criticism I’ve frequently heard from professional reviewers and the like. Always, always start windowed at least. Quite a lot of people use multi-monitor setups these days.
Actually, that was kinda my point. Your article seemed to be less about the end user, and more about GM snobbery.(for lack of a better way of explaining it)
Don’t use GM default graphics (why? Because.. they were made with default graphics!)
Don’t use GM dialogue boxes. (why? Because that’ll tell the world your incapable of making pop up boxes!)
You fail if you don’t mask that the game was made with GM( Why again!?! Why does the user care? Heck, why do I care if someone knows the game was made with GM!)
Don’t use bogus companies/whatever. (why? It doesn’t make you look ‘credible’. Hey, what about the game! Isn’t this meant to be about GM cliche’s?)
And then
Tools like GM make it easy to do a bad job. (Why?!? And c++, flash, etc, make it HARD to do do a bad job on a game?)
I think your full screen point is fair, and people should take the time to implement an options page, turn full screen, turn music on/off, sound, and such. (make sure these settings are persistant!)
And, to be fair, I think your first point about squares has some point to it, I’m just not sure how that’d be an issue, and if so, how/why it’d need to be resolved.
Another point was about the game icon, and loading screen. Make them about the game, a good loading bar can help set the scene for your game.(not about ‘masking’ that is was made with GM or not)
These points are about game design.
FWIW, some of the most professional GM games out there use GM’s dialogue boxes. To name a few..
Cute Knight,
Immortal Defense uses them in the level editor,
Magi ‘did’ use them, (the last update now has a custom one, with a nice animation, which does look nicer!)
Lost Snowmen
..And so forth.
With some graphics, the buttons look great, and work really well.
I think the article itself (making your games better) is a good topic, but you’ve kinda hit it from the wrong direction.
Things like default graphics are lazy, they brand your work as GM made and their make it look generic. You think that is snobbery? Ridiculous.
Its your kind of attitude that keeps GM from being a tool for serious indie developers and instead the laughing stock of the indie world.
I agree, default graphics should only be used for learning and as place-holders.
but what really keeps GM from being a tool for serious indie developers is the fact that GM is targeted for Kids.
Definitely no denying this has been the case in the past, but I’d say if Yoyo Games have been trying to do anything its been rebranding the software as something more than a kids tool, and the step towards iOS and Android is just what it needs.
“Things like default graphics are lazy, they brand your work as GM made and their make it look generic. You think that is snobbery? Ridiculous.”
Yep, keep using words like ‘they brand your work as GM made’ and I’ll keep saying snobbery.
How’s that ridiculous? It’s the obvious conclusion.
“Its your kind of attitude that keeps GM from being a tool for serious indie developers and instead the laughing stock of the indie world.”
So who’s laughing?
I think you’ve got some sort of inferiority complex about GM. You seem obsessed with hiding the fact games are made with it, and you refer to it as the laughing stock of the indie world.
I don’t give a darn. I use GM because it’s fantastic, and I can make games with it.
Oh, and FWIW, plenty of ‘serious indie dev’s use, or have used GM.
(and plenty have started their career/journey/whatever using free-to-use Gfx in their games)
“Yep, keep using words like ‘they brand your work as GM made’ and I’ll keep saying snobbery.”
Game Maker is looked down upon in other indie circles because it is an interpreted language. You can deny this and act righteous if you want, its the reality and unfortunately if you are committed to having your work be more than just a learning curve you are going to have to put a bit more effort into making your game.
You are obviously a hobbyist because your view of quality control is very poor. I am amazed you still think leaving placeholder resources in your work is fine. Very shonky indeed, I’d be surprised if any of your previous work is up to a standard worth getting out there.
You are entitled to your opinion. But either way, you are dreaming if you think any end user will be impressed. Apparently you are making games for you and your friends rather than the world.
“(and plenty have started their career/journey/whatever using free-to-use Gfx in their games)”
This is about making a good product. Perhaps you are confused where this article is coming from.
“Game Maker is looked down upon in other indie circles because it is an interpreted language.”
Hey, what? I thought it was looked down on because of it’s default graphics..!
Unfortunately for you, GM isn’t as looked down on in indie circles as you might like to think.
And being interpreted is their least concern..! Read this to get a better idea of how a ‘serious indie’ views GM:
http://moacube.com/blog/professional-developers-look-at-gamemaker/
“”[snip]..But either way, you are dreaming if you think any end user will be impressed. Apparently you are making games for you and your friends rather than the world.”"
Well.. no, not quite, actually. My game Prison Ball was professionally published by YYG’s, I’m selling a card game on the mac app store, and I’m talking to, and licensing out, HTML5 games to publishers.
“This is about making a good product. Perhaps you are confused where this article is coming from.”
Perhaps I should have added ‘successful’.
And, judging by your 2 paragraph rant on my qualifications to judge such matters, your obviously eager to tell me all about yourself, and what qualifies you to make such *expert and wide-sweeping* statements.
So shoot, go ahead. Knock me out with your professionalism. Once I’m awed, I’ll timidly creep away thinking ‘Loaf must be right!’
Btw, you may want to read what Daniel Cook (Danc) has to say on the matter of using free graphics:
http://www.lostgarden.com/2007/12/how-to-bootstrap-your-indie-art-needs.html
“Hey, what? I thought it was looked down on because of it’s default graphics..!”
Please spare me your awful Internet argument techniques. I never said that and you know it. You are mixing two different responses.
“Unfortunately for you, GM isn’t as looked down on in indie circles as you might like to think.”
Unfortunately for me? I think that sums up you have a personal grievance with me rather than a genuine interest in discussing this.
I can confirm I’ve had GM games that have made their way out of the GMC, and been shot down by “its made with GM”. This was a couple of years a go. One single blog source isn’t exactly convincing compared with actual experiencee in a real situation.
I’m not sure what you expect me to say about your previous work. I guess I was wrong about your intentions with the software, but your view on GM is very inconsistent with your work. Neither of this changes any of my points regardless.
Feel free to PM me on the GMC if you want to continue this discussion. I don’t get into rants in the public domain anymore, and I don’t see this going anywhere reasonable.
You’ve heard what I have to say, I think its quite obvious I’m not buying anything you are saying. Your attitude to GM is one I would discourage.
(oh and, free graphics are not demo graphics– lets stay on track at least)
“Please spare me your awful Internet argument techniques. I never said that and you know it. You are mixing two different responses.”
No… actually, your words were “Its your kind of attitude that keeps GM from being a tool for serious indie developers”
And we know what my attitude was about.. nothing wrong with using free gfx when appropriate. (and yes, that does include the default gfx)
But your right, I was being pedantic. Sorry.
“Unfortunately for me? I think that sums up you have a personal grievance with me rather than a genuine interest in discussing this. ”
Unfortunately for you, as in, it means your premise for your argument is extremely shakey.
? Uh, but yes, if you feel I have a personal grievance against you, go ahead. I’m afraid, I don’t even know who you are…
“I can confirm I’ve had GM games that have made their way out of the GMC, and been shot down by “its made with GM”.”
I’m sorry, but no game can be shot down with it’s made in GM. Just as no game can be shot down because it was made in Flash, or Construct, or C++, whatever.
Take pride in your work. Just because you “mask” the fact it was made in GM, it’s still made in GM! Shallow minded ‘wannabe indie’ jerks are still going to try shoot the game down.
Who cares?
“I’m not sure what you expect me to say about your previous work. ”
I’m not sure, either, but you had a lot to say about my work when you didn’t know what it was. I assumed you were interested in what I’d done.
“Feel free to PM me on the GMC if you want to continue this discussion. I don’t get into rants in the public domain anymore, and I don’t see this going anywhere reasonable. ”
Well.. I thought were were discussing this blog post.
Brotip: TM symbols CAN be used. (C) copyright symbols cannot.
That is not entirely correct.
You can’t fully “own” a trademark for free. It must be registered and it costs to do so. It is to my understanding US law allows you to claim a trademark for a product or service if you have legitimately used the name, but there are many disadvantages to not formally registering it and you will have a hard time getting exclusive use. Legally, an unregistered trademark is very flimsy; you are not fully protected.
For a small indie developer, an unregistered trademark is just another symbol to add to the ‘read me’ file. Its virtually meaningless.
As for copyright, you own all the rights to your work immediately. I’m not sure if this applies to every country or the US, but thats the way it works where I live.