Right now I am playing "Always Sometimes Monsters" and looking to buy "Last Dream" (if anyone can give their thoughts on it, that would be nice) and what I have noticed is that people just toss out these games instantly because they look like they were made using RPG Maker. I understand that some people see that as a sign of poor handling/laziness/etc. however I do not understand to throw out an entire game that has garnered positive reviews and attention like the two games I have mentioned before hand, because of something like this.

Can anyone explain to me why do people think like this or get hung up about it? Because the RPG Maker sprites and tiles aren't eye sores; they look decent enough to give a visual representation of the story.

Gamerz luv grafix. That's about it.

As long as the RPG Maker game in question doesn't use default tilesets and sounds that came with the engine, I'm okay with it.

At some point around 2006 all of gamerdom decided that all 2D games should be free because it had been ten years since the Nintendo 64 had come out and 2D games were dead.
That's probably a big part of it but there may be other reasons. You can buy RPG-maker on Steam. Knowing that hypothetically "you" could have made this game decreases it's value. Like a film shot on a hand held camera. And like a hand held film it's seen a cheap, and people don't want to pay money for cheap things on the assumption that cheap stuff is of low quality.

Gamers are tired of retro graphics. And they say that this style has no metric as 16bit Genesis and SNES games where "Always pushing the boundaries". What this all boils down to is people want everything to be triple A or trying to be. Having functional graphics is no good if you can have amazing graphics.

Boiled down even further: Gamers are Graphics Whores.

And people wonder why EA and Ubisoft rule the industry. Even when their games suck they send million on the graphics and people think "The graphics are good. Therefor equal, if nor more effort must have been but into the rest of the game!" (Faceplam)

The main issue is a lack of any coherent visual identity: consider Electronic Super Joy, that game doesn't have the highest quality artwork - not by a long shot, but it makes up for it with it by having a specific coherent style in mind.

Contrast that with certain RPG Maker games where the graphics seem to be taken from myriad different sources - including default graphics and otherwise pre-existing artwork. This often leads to visual styles competing with one another which can be very jarring.

I don't at all mind rpg maker style, but I do mind game creators just using defaults and making nothing themselves.

I think this is exactly it. Did you fart out some generic bullshit that I could have made in a weekend? Well, you're going to get panned.

Did you actually USE RPG Maker to craft an interesting game that brought something new and wonderful to the table; given a packaged toolset? Well, congrats I'm excited and will play it three times over without ever thinking of how you created it.

*edit* And I hate you all for again directing my attention to Always Sometimes Monsters - I have a bit of a backlog (3 games is a backlog to me - in many years of gaming I've made sure to keep it low ;) ) and a "loaded" on deck circle... but ASM has caught my attention! Don't make me want to want it! ;)

I have used RPG Maker (ACE) to make a small game and I hang out at the various forums from time to time. There are ways to make better graphics than the default graphics using parallax techniques. So yes, sometimes it is in fact a question of the game designer being cheap or lazy. On the open market good parallax screens can cost $150 each or more. So when I look at a game made with that program one of the first things I do is look at the graphics. Because if designer isn't willing to shell out the money for upgraded graphics they probably didn't shell out the money for anything else either and the game is going to stink.

The major reason that RPG Maker uses low quality graphics is not because they can't allow for better default graphics but the fact that Enterbrain is scared that if they upgrade the graphics it will effect sales of RPG Maker itself. Eneterbrain does not make a dime off of games made with their program, they only make money by selling RPG Maker itself. So the higher quality of graphics means that the program would run on less computers meaning less sales. People who make games with RPG Maker have clamored for better graphics for years but it has never happened and probably won't.

Finally, as to why users like better graphics the answer is simple--pretty graphics cover up a multitude of game design sins. Even if the story is stupid and the game play awful players will keep playing just to see the next pretty scene. On the other hand, if the graphics are crappy the other flaws in the game becomes obvious quickly because there is no eye candy to distract the user. Because of this I actually think it is harder--not easier--to make a great game in RPG Maker because the designer can't cheat with Fx or 3D jiggle physics.

This. You basically have so many games that not only look the same but feel the same and in rpg maker play exactly the same. It's not about JRPG battle systems or sprites. They need to do something to stand out instead of using the same "actors"/models/system to tell a different story. Unless they can pull off a Kairosoft at least.

The easier is it to work with a tool, the more stuff it will have and the harder it will be to find the hidden gems. Therefore, I'll ignore an RPG maker game until I get some kind of quality assurance. Such as making to GOG, for instance. Once I know they're worth the time of trying them out, I'll treat them as I would any other game.

That's just your opinion, maaaan. /whiff

...No, seriously, you just gave the answer. To people who "get hung up about it", RPG Maker "super-deformed" sprites are one hell of an eye-sore, especially in a serious story. Pixel size or tool choice doesn't come into this, I wouldn't like adult characters with baby proportions any more if they were in ultra-high-def 4d with surround sound.

Well, I LOVE them, often FREE offerings.. Such a link for the lovers : http://www.vgperson.com/games/

I bet I can find games that all those RPG Maker fanboys will consider ugly and won't touch, because:
a) they just don't consider them nice to look at
b) they associate them with a kind of plot or gameplay they generally don't like
c) they believe that that particular style is "of low quality" and suggests an otherwise bad product

That's how I (and probably many others) generally feel about RPG Maker games and I know that that's also how many people who for instance like JRPGs feel about many older western games.

Yep, I concur. I've got nothing against retro-style graphics and I don't even judge games soleley based on their RPG Maker style, but it often makes them look like 'just another one of these', considering how many free (or commercial) RPG maker games are out there, and in most cases there isn't a good (in-game) reason for that look either. It's not so much about the look itself, but about how well it seems to fit with the rest of the game and what connotations and prejudices it comes with (free, cheap, unoriginal, JRPG, manga/anime-affinity, cutesy/childish).