RPG maker VX?

[mawk]

Well, there's clutter and then there's realism. People can still make a bad map regardless of the maker they use. However, I still prefer XP's RTP over that of VX; XP's was far more organic, while VX seems to aim itself more at that "block world" demographic, even with most of its natural formations. Tetris mountains and the like.

 

[Gruuberhans]

Sheesh.... I didn't realize the tileset thing until now. There's no way i'll buy vx if i can't have more than 5 tilesets. Well, unless the size of the tilesets is unlimited.

 

[Prexus]

It isn't. But there are already scripts to overcome that limitation.

 

[HoRe]

But what if you're not very good with scripts just yet?... I tried the trial version of XP back in December, and I am quite the incredible noob. I've been holding out on buying XP just in case VX is 10 ten times better, but one of the features I loved was the ability to add a bunch of tilesets... specifically, frankentilesets I smoosh together so that towns in an area will appear similar but have their own unique qualities as well. You say that there are scripts to get around the limitation of 5, but I have to imagine that for newcomers like myself, changing script is a daunting challenge. (And I make all my webpages in HTML, if that tells you anything.  :smile: )
As someone still on the fence, I'm asking what are the ADVANTAGES of VX? What is the advantage of having 5 tilesets and 2/3 layers? Why should I stick out another month or two for VX instead of buying XP right now?

 

[Diogo //Skyfusion//]

The biggest advantage of VX is that it is more user-friendly than XP while being as powerfull. In other words, it requires less scripting to do more stuff. The big exception to that is the tileset system, which in order to make it more user-friendly (and fit the style of the new RTP), it was dumbed down, so only with scripts can you make it similar to XP's. RMVX also has a better engine, and a very different RTP style than XP's.

Use the one with the RTP style you like the most. Stick with XP if you want to focus on mapping and are aware that it has countless missing features that can only be added by scripts, but if your objective is to just have fun with the making of your project (and actually planning to finish it), while wanting something less script-dependent while being as powerfull, then VX is perfect for you.

VX might not be a "perfectly superior version of XP", it has several disavantages, but it was built in order to solve one of the biggest problems with the rpg maker community: the fact that almost no one can complete their projects. Instead of having several extra features to make it "superior" to XP's, most of the new stuff was only added to make it easier instead.

 

[Prexus]

RMVX's Engine is no different than XP. A few of the classes in the RGSS Library were updated (Graphics for example) and through that, and dumbing down the Tileset related stuff, it made for more improved frame-rates.


RMVX is neither an improved version of XP, nor a side-grade. It's a very different maker, and is designed to make very different games by default. Through scripting, it can make anything, just like XP.

I was an advocate of RMVX, but after seeing how difficult it is to make a 'Mountain Range' map, I have given up on it. If I decide to make a game that doesn't use the tile engine, I will definitely go back to it and use it, but it can't make the RPGs as visually impressive as XP by only using the default tileset editor.

To explain, the issue comes with the way the Autotiles work. You can't make two platforms beside each other that aren't connected, because the autotiles automatically try to connect. And because there is no directional passability, even shift+clicking the autotiles to get it to look right won't work because you can still walk between them. Also, the wall-faces try to blend together, rather than recognizing undulation properly. It's a tricky system to work with, but overall doesn't produce what I want it to. It's a shame, though, because RMVX's RGSS2 Library is just a treat to work with.

 

[Diegoale2000]

i read about that, and I'm just happy about the position I'm in regarding maps. but it sill surp[rises me how they could've made some of those things sop impossible to do. XP is far more broad at allowing different styles of graphics and mappings. it's easer to achieve different results with Tilesets with VX than XP.
Making everything an autotile, in my opinion was definitely not the way to go.

 

[HoRe]

Prexus, what made the VX RGSS2 Library such a treat? I'm trying to do research on VX but it's proving a challenge. What about avaliability of resources? I really love using facesets-are there default facesets that come with the charsets in VX? (I admit grudingly I have to make my own for characters in XP, and I'm not a stellar artist...) What about battlers?

I'm still trying to adjust to the chibi look myself. :tongue2:

 

[Taylor]

Prexus you've said pretty much everything I think about of VX... oh dear grammer crash.

Maybe Dargor's using RGSS2 in XP will be of good use? It's in the Tutorial section somewhere.

 

[Kaoii]

I wonder how pissed the jap side of the community is about the mapping limitations. If they're as pissed as many of us here are about VX, that could eventually force Enterbrain to reconsider who their market base is.

 

[Olivia]

Actually, Enterbrain has done nothing wrong. It's only the result that we don't like. You know, most of the Rpg maker community are 2000 users. You do know that, don't you?

This is the feedback a 2000 users or random people would give on XP:

"XP's and 2003's battle system is poor, we want the 2000 one back."

And also...

"Can we have the dungeon generator back, we loved that feature."

"RMXP was too hard to understand, make it simpler"

"I don't want to script facesets into RMXP."

"RMXP's layer style is too confusing" - usually by noobs.

"RMXP's RTP is ugly."

I don't agree to any of them, but that's how life goes and how VX was born.

So yes, that's why enterbrain made VX like it is.

 

[JustinA]

Actually, Enterbrain has done nothing wrong. It's only the result that we don't like. You know, most of the Rpg maker community are 2000 users. You do know that, don't you?

On what are you basing that statement?

 

[Olivia]

Which are you quoting? Well nevermind, i'll give both.

Enterbrain is a company which gather feedback from it's users to make another RPG Maker Program. What have they done wrong?

or

Give a look at charas, how many users on Youtube are using 2003/2000 than RPG Maker XP, even a few years after it's release.
How much more 2000/2003 websites are still being made and RMXP still only has a few. Even thought RPG Maker 95 was a total ditch off with RPG Maker 2000.
How many ditch RMXP and stick with 2003. -__-

I can't say any more in that opinion even if you ask.

 

[Kaoii]

There was still a sizable portion of Japanese RMXP users. Some of the stuff they created could actually compete with a lot of the stuff here - I'm sure you've seen it. I'm just curious if a negative response from them would effect Enterbrain any, if at all.

We all know Enterbrain devotes 99% of their care to their Japanese audience.

 

[JustinA]

Give a look at charas, how many users on Youtube are using 2003/2000 than RPG Maker XP, even a few years after it's release.
How much more 2000/2003 websites are still being made and RMXP still only has a few. Even thought RPG Maker 95 was a total ditch off with RPG Maker 2000.
How many ditch RMXP and stick with 2003. -__-

So you were basing that statement on absolutely nothing at all.

That's what I figured.

 

[Olivia]

How can I base it? Why won't people look around and see, it's simple.

 

[G-manRN]

So I'm a little confused about the Vista, part, I am currently running windows 2000, on this less than new but reliable comp, would I be able to download Rmvx? Or even Xp for that matter?

 

[koopa-on-fire]

So I'm a little confused about the Vista, part, I am currently running windows 2000, on this less than new but reliable comp, would I be able to download Rmvx? Or even Xp for that matter?

You could, but the programs would be utterly impossible to use. However, there are two other programs called RPG Maker 2000/2003 that work for it. They are a bit outdated, though.

Oh, but if you do get a Windows XP, you can run RMVX on it.

 

[G-manRN]

alright then so I guess I'll go for installing Windows Xp then :thumb:
EDIT: Waiiiiit last time I upgraded from 98 to 2000 and my comp lost its sound, I think because 00 wiped the hard disk clean, will it do the same with Xp?

 

[rojo]

Reading through (some of) this thread I'm sad to realize that VX is inferior to XP when it comes down to something as essential as mapping possibilities.

I had really been looking forward to the new release, especially since the step up from 2003 to XP was a significant one, so I assumed this upgrade would be equally significant. This "step up"... um... "down"... is just sad.

Sure the inteface is smooth and the program is made more accessible for beginners. But for those of us who were looking forward to an even more powerful game maker (than XP), VX is a (huge) dissapointment.

These are ofcourse my PERSONAL opinions. You don't have to agree. All I'm saying is that I'm dissapointed (and looking for sympathies). ;-)

Let's just hope that, with VX, those n00b "clutter maps" are a thing of the past... though I doubt it! ;-) We'll just see a shift from "clutter" to more generic, repeating, booring maps. Hehehe!