I see it especially on Steam, the overload of RPG-Maker titles out there, still getting several reviews and positive reviews. The same with simple games with content and gameplay milked out several years ago.

I think it is both reassuring and unpleasant as well.

Reassuring because it makes me feel like there is a high chance of getting good reviews when i release my game, because people (appearantly) have very low demands today (though i realize this thought is very dangerous as it can develop into arrogance)

I see it especially on Steam, the overload of RPG-Maker titles out there, still getting several reviews and positive reviews. The same with simple games with content and gameplay milked out several years ago.
I think it is both reassuring and unpleasant as well.
Reassuring because it makes me feel like there is a high chance of getting good reviews when i release my game, because people (appearantly) have very low demands today (though i realize this thought is very dangerous as it can develop into arrogance)

Unpleasant because on the other hand it makes me wonder if the world is truly ready for something untraditional and (imo) original and exotic. What if they have become so used to cliches and simplistics that they cannot tolerate something fresh?
To make it fair, im not declaring that my game in development is and will be superiour and will recieve well scores. I personaly, just attempt to be as original as i can, because that is my style, my taste, my interest. But still, these are the thoughts that sometimes hit me though.
Have you sometimes felt this or something similaire? What is your thought on this?

Take a look at the prices of those simple games, most people will expect and demand much less from a $5 title than they do for a $60+DLC title. When it comes to the rpg maker titles there are quite a few with some rather good writing (which is likely the main reason why some of those games get great reviews, it is an extremely story focused genre afterall), the generic rpg-maker titles tend to get pretty awful reviews on steam.

Not everything has to be a massively ambitious project, and most people just want something fun. Honestly, Nintendo would have way more money if they were able to crank out a Zelda every year. People would eat it up. That's why having two companies working on Call of Duty is a godsend for Activision. People like core, fun gameplay. Exploring new things is actually more taxing and requires a good set-up and leading-into the new concept(s) as opposed to just throwing all of the new concepts at them at once (the reason fighting games are still a niche genre). As much as I love being tossed into a new world and trying to figure it out, most people don't want that. This is also why innovations come incrementally in the game industry. People are willing to explore only so much newness at a time. A game that's impossible to understand is impossible to play and gets ignored.

Activision can also recycle code. "Don't fix it if it isn't broken".

I believe indies will come out with more original concepts. If the ideas are loved, then companies will snatch up the companies like Microsoft did with Mojang.

There is always place for something new and exotic, if something is done well it will shine. The trouble is all the "me too" games that follow it lol

Look at things like "The Stanley Parable" and "Dear Esther", both originally mods that have been re-packaged, that pushed games more into the art experience realm.

We now have a flood of "walking simulators" that all miss what made these two trail blazer titles such a wonderful experience.

Not everything has to be a massively ambitious project, and most people just want something fun. Honestly, Nintendo would have way more money if they were able to crank out a Zelda every year. People would eat it up. That's why having two companies working on Call of Duty is a godsend for Activision. People like core, fun gameplay. Exploring new things is actually more taxing and requires a good set-up and leading-into the new concept(s) as opposed to just throwing all of the new concepts at them at once (the reason fighting games are still a niche genre). As much as I love being tossed into a new world and trying to figure it out, most people don't want that. This is also why innovations come incrementally in the game industry. People are willing to explore only so much newness at a time. A game that's impossible to understand is impossible to play and gets ignored.

I tend to quit games that release new games every year, like Call of Duty and Assassins Creed, I loved them at first then get burnt out and can't trust that any given release will be a good one.

I don't know how big the following is on RPG maker games. My guess is that there's a niche of players for RPG Maker games, and they probably don't see much activity outside of that niche. I'm not sure it says much about the quality people want out of a game. That said, indie games often do unique things, and have a huge range of success and failure.

90% of everything is crap. Of the remaining 10%, probably 0.1% of that is truly original or ground breaking.

This is true of all forms of art, music, TV, movies, etc.
So basically, for every 100000 games, around 1000 are ok, but only ONE is original.

"Originality" does far better with reviewers than gamers. Reviewers are playing a ton of games, so something that stands out as original will more than likely get high scores and end of the year awards (see Undertale).

Gamers are more interested in what is fun and what is going to get them a good return on their money. This is why games like Call of Duty, Madden, and other franchises keep selling well - confidence in a base level of quality and the promise of more of what they liked before. It's also why people like pulling out how long a game is in terms of hours, because they feel like they get more "game" for their money, even if that "more" is repetitive and grindy (see: MMOs and most open world games).

However these days none of the above really seems to matter. What seems to be most important is exposure. All of the game markets (with the possible exception of XB1 and PS4) are absolutely flooded with games with no quality control or checks for outright stolen content, all "sold" at prices that are dropping like a rock to "free" while piling on more and more egregious in-game purchases to squeeze more money out of people that don't know any better.

It's not enough to be "good" or "original". You need to either have huge piles of money to advertise or you need to be awesome and to grab hold of some popular streamers or video creators and get them to love your game. And have a ton of luck.

If you think of it from the developer's persective, OP, it might take you decades to release your game if you don't use something like RPG maker to cut corners.

You want that game in peoples steam list, and in peoples heads as fast as possible so you turn to an engine to crank out the release in weeks. Finished with that, and onto the next idea.

If you can put out lots of mediocre to good games in a row, this works out better for you than risking it all on one huge epic game that may be the next minecraft, or it may be forgotten in obscurity (more likely). I'd say that the people using RPG maker etc to put out very similar RPGs that get their story and idea across quickly are doing possibly the right thing as far as the industry goes, as if you take too long to bring your idea to market you'll just get left behind.

I learned this many times and this is why i now use a large engine. It will still take me ages to finish my game, but not as long as it would otherwise.

Yeah I feel the same way about books, they all just use words to tell a story, they don't do anything original. I'm looking for something new.

Ok, that's unfair, but honestly you're premise is vague. I'd like some examples of games which you consider 'too similar'. I check steam fairly often and I don't remember seeing an 'overload' of RPG Maker titles.