The first trick is to decide what you want and to stick with it. Adding more ideas later is suicide for your game. With that said, here is my preferred approach:

1. Polish the plot and game mechanics. Know what you want in your game. If your game is story driven, have the entire story planned out so you can design your levels around it.

2. Do as much as the programming as possible. HUD's, battle system, CMS, whatever it is you're putting in, get that implemented ahead of time. Two reasons for this: It speeds up the process later because you don't have to go back and add programming to every page (a lot of custom stuff requires an event on every page to call one thing or another). Second, it forces you to stick with what you've planned so you don't waste time adding a bunch of new features as you go.

3. Plan your levels out. Draw them on paper, however your game is. The project I'm working on is text descriptions of rooms, but I'm still drawing out the maps ahead of time for reference. I recommend doing the game in stages, even if it's an RPG. You'll notice a lot of people release their games in Chapters. This makes completing a project so much easier. If your doing a different kind of game, I recommend putting one level together at a time.

4. This part goes without saying, but gets ignored way too much. No matter what portion of your game you're working on: TEST TEST TEST. No one knows how its supposed to work better than you do. When it comes to story or dialog, READ READ READ so that it makes sense and doesn't contain a bunch of spelling and grammar errors.

5. Is your game complete? Can't wait to release? TEST TEST TEST before you do, otherwise you'll be putting out 7 different versions and people won't usually download past the first 1 or 2 versions unless your game REALLY KICKS ASS. Which in most cases, they don't. And if they do, they don't need a bunch of versions downloaded because they tested their games, and got it right the first time.

+Lots of side missions
+Over 100 beasts to fight
+This is the first of the trilogy
+Huge world to explore
+There is a whole other story through the Cave of Passage

Sorry, I had to comment on this. Lets start by scratching off what you don't have yet...

+Lots of side missions Lets start with a main mission first. Side missions are really easy to add later, but you need to start with your main game first. Don't over promise anything to yourself.
+Over 100 beasts to fight I'd rather see 20 really good monster fights, than 1000 generic shitty ones. Take the time to program 20 unique and challenging fights and then see if you can do it with over 100 monsters.
+This is the first of the trilogy Its nice to see you planning to do this in chapters, but if you're thinking this way now then you're going to start making the second in the trilogy before you finish the first. This will most likely end with you not finishing either.
+Huge world to explore For the first of a trilogy, I'd say keep the world very small. Planning too big will end your passion faster than starting your game with random maps.
+There is a whole other story through the Cave of Passage There isn't even a first story yet.

don't start with a story.

start with a gameplay mechanic or design that makes your game fun or unique. make it so when someone plays it for more then ten minutes, they don't regret it.

then worry about your story.

Out of the entire thread, this is the only advice worth listening to.

Out of the entire thread, this is the only advice worth listening to.

In other words, ignore that advice because there is more worth listening to than that.

Out of the entire thread, this is the only advice worth listening to.


and that my friends is how super mario was created

the plot has sadly not evolved much over 10+ years...

But with few exceptions, the games are still fun, which is exactly my point.

Almost everyone in this thread suggested making the story first.  This is a waste of time, if your game is not fun, it doesn't matter how good a story it will have.  Also, the truth is the vast majority of people here are not writers, and do not have the capability to write a good story, let alone one good enough to carry an RPG.  So, you spend months to write a good story (you can't write one in 2 hours, sorry), and chances are it will still turn out to be some cliched garbage, then you slap it into RPG maker and call it a day.  If that your shining beacon of game design, you are severly mistaken.

It is much easier to forgive a bad story if the game has great gameplay to back it up, than excuse bad gameplay with a good story.  If the game isn't fun, I don't care if you wrote the next great classic, I'm not going to sit through it.  I'll excuse a bullshit story if I enjoy playing the game.  That is, after all, what I bought, a game.  If I wanted to read a good story, I would buy a book.

Think back to a lot of the "classic" games, they did not have good stories, but they sure as hell had great gameplay.

But with few exceptions, the games are still fun, which is exactly my point.

Almost everyone in this thread suggested making the story first.  This is a waste of time, if your game is not fun, it doesn't matter how good a story it will have.  Also, the truth is the vast majority of people here are not writers, and do not have the capability to write a good story, let alone one good enough to carry an RPG.  So, you spend months to write a good story (you can't write one in 2 hours, sorry), and chances are it will still turn out to be some cliched garbage, then you slap it into RPG maker and call it a day.  If that your shining beacon of game design, you are severly mistaken.

It is much easier to forgive a bad story if the game has great gameplay to back it up, than excuse bad gameplay with a good story.  If the game isn't fun, I don't care if you wrote the next great classic, I'm not going to sit through it.  I'll excuse a bullshit story if I enjoy playing the game.  That is, after all, what I bought, a game.  If I wanted to read a good story, I would buy a book.

Think back to a lot of the "classic" games, they did not have good stories, but they sure as hell had great gameplay.

Yeah, I mean, as soon as you embrace the design strategy "start with the story", you instantly exclude the huge number of possible games that aren't story-focused. This is an illusionary crutch for people unable to design games. Even people who develop good story-based games first make the conscious decision to focus their games around narrative, and will have some idea of how they will present their tale effectively before they start writing.

i am going to take a different approach to some of the advice in this thread and say that if you really want to make an rpg, you should work on your writing, as opposed to not even bothering with the story because you can't write it.  i'm pretty much saying that if you can't write, you should avoid making a plot-based rpg to begin with.  maybe pick another genre that isn't so geared toward sacrificing everything in an attempt to make storytelling easier.

i'm no story snob: most of the time, i don't really care whether a videogame's story is terrible if it has good gameplay to back it up.  part of the problem with rpgs, specifically linear plot-based rpgs is (to vaguely quote hundley) that they weave these terrible stories and force you to depend on them for entertainment.  if the story is genuinely enjoyable, i can usually forgive whatever structural/design errors exist.

either discard the story or make it something worth enjoying.  i guess since the latter is way less likely than the former we won't see too many good story-based rpgs!  that doesn't mean you shouldn't make an attempt, though.

Story = one thing
Game Play = another

If your game is going to have both, then both should be well thought out before starting development. If your under the impression that your game doesn't need a solid storyline, than it really doesn't matter at all; compared to game play or otherwise. If your game requires a storyline, develop it before hand just like you would with game play.

I'm not sure why everyone seems to think story has something to do with game mechanics, or that one has to be designed before the other. The fact of the matter is, both need to be designed before you start working on your game unless you intend to exclude one.

I'm not sure why everyone seems to think story has something to do with game mechanics, or that one has to be designed before the other. The fact of the matter is, both need to be designed before you start working on your game unless you intend to exclude one.

I think they just get this easily confused because they know that either way that the gameplay and the storyline both have to work to accomodate each other. For instance, you can put as little or as much detail as you like in the stories you tell, but if it starts getting in the way of the gameplay, in that while going through dialogue box after dialogue box the only thing in the player's mind is "How long do I have to wait before I get to actually do something?". You can also design your game from the ground up and tweak the mechanics so that the player has perfect control over how he wants to play and develop his characters, but if there is no setting or context for which this interaction takes place (even if it's only something as cliche and humble as a fantasy setting anyone could be familiar with), then there is no incentive for the player to interact with the game at all.

Only when both are working together in harmony does the player gain a sense of incentive and value to the actions he takes and the decisions he makes. But there is no problem when you know you are better at designing one than the other, you should play to your strengths for sure. Just make sure to still try and invest time into building your game with the goal of making it as a complete package.

I don't believe there is a system or technique that helps amateur game makers make games and I don't believe there is an order in which you can make a game. I will admit though when I am thinking of implementing ideas and gameplay mechanics I tend to save them in word document, that way if I lose motivation and I decide to come back to the project, I can carry on where I left off.

What I tend to do first is think of the game's setting, the places the player will be able to explore, then from there I go and find some suitable graphics and start by making maps, it is an unusual way to start making games in RPG Maker I know but that has always been a habit of mine.

EDIT: I guess most of us fellow game makers here thought that at first it would be much easier to just plan but that is not the case when your the only person making the game, so most of us just dive in head first anyway. Vanit has made some valid points about game making in general I mean I don't think anyone had a teacher to teach them RPG Maker and game design, we all kind of learnt it our own way by the use of trial and error.

I think trying to give any story related advice to someone that age is just stupid and I'm kind of shocked/annoyed that no one even checked their profile to consider if their input would be even relevant to the OP before spewing out a ton of walls for him to read.

I've lost respect for you and think this deserves a warning. Seriously, many people on these boards are younger. Did you know game development companies think, "the younger the better" because of imagination. Granted, they still look for people with the schooling, but a 12 year old could come up with an idea that could trump any you've ever had.

When is someone supposed to start learning anyway? Should he wait until he's 20 to ask for game development advice? Maybe 17.563 is the right age. Age has nothing to do with advice.

Also, this is a public discussion topic. Most of the bantering here was between those giving advice; attempting to break it down to what works best versus personal perception. I'd much rather see someone ask how to go about designing a game, than come on here asking for FF[insert ][/insert] charsets for another crappy FF remake that doesn't go past large empty rooms full of crappy dialog and graphics used 1 billion times over.

He's taken the proper steps in starting to learn how to make games (a step most people never bother with at all), and you crapped on him for it. Shame on you.