RPG MAKER XP - WORTH $60?

Posts

Pages: 1
Ok, I loved RPG Maker 2k, never really got into 2k3 because I didn't have the time.

Now that I do (I quit playing World of Warcraft, but that's another story), I looked up RPG Maker XP and found that it cost 60 bucks!

Are all the new features worth the 60 bucks??
Starscream
Conquest is made from the ashes of one's enemies.
6110
Hey, guess what? The older versions cost too, but everyone pirated it!

It depends on what you want to do with it. If you want to mess around with RGSS and really customize your game, then yes, the $60 is worth it.

Otherwise it's not worth it, as it actually removes several standard features from RM2K3. I guess they wanted you to script it again on your own or something.
I find it worth it just to go legit. I LOVE RPG Maker, so I don't mind giving Enter brain their due for having made these programs after years of my fiddling with them.

But yeah, Rcholbert pretty much summed it up.



Yes it is definately worth it. With the new Ruby addition you can do so much more with xp. Not to mention the colour quantity and the additional layer make it well worth the $60.

Also if you did not pay for rm2k3 then your using the illegal version just like there is an illegal version of xp. However the rip off is glitchy and you would be better of paying the $60 for the legal version.

Some standard functions have been removed from xp yes but this was so that people would be inticed to enter the world of RGSS. (Ruby)

Also xp also allows for tileset combination to the extent far beyond the limitations of rm2k or rm2k3.
If you're willing to try your hand at actual scripting, RMXP is definitely worth it.
If you aren't going to buy RMXP, I think you should at least stick to the previous versions rather than pirate it.
RMXP is a great program but there are a couple of reasons why a lot of people don't like it.

It's an epic resource hog and has a hardlocked framerate that is actually pretty low. RMXP games will lag on a lot of computers that they very well should not be lagging on, and that's pretty lame. When a computer CAN run RMXP, the framerate is locked at some pretty low number, so it will appear to be lagging anyway. There's a "faster framerate" option that the players can turn on by accessing a configuration menu, but even then it's a little choppy. This is all because RMXP is pretty badly coded as an engine, but on top of that, it uses ZERO hardware accelleration - but that's actually a good thing in many ways.

It has a higher resolution than RM2k3. Because of this, you can't rip graphics from Square-Enix RPGs like everyone used to love doing. It's also a little harder to make convincing edits, because spriting at a higher resolution demands a little artistic ability. I think this is the single reason people tend not to use RMXP -- for some reason, nobody realizes that there are a lot of games (such as Suikoden) with larger sprites and tiles that are prime for ripping off. What is interesting is that, in my opinion, a second-rate but competent pixel artist will have more luck at a higher resolution than a lower one, and that awesome low-res spriting requires true viruosity.

But, you know, as far as making games go, RMXP is a way better program. I bought it for $60, and I would gladly buy it again if I had to! Besides -- you owe Enterbrain your money for pirating their excellent homebrew game-making studios in the past.
Frame rates can be changed using simple scripting. As for lag there is always the anti-lag script and lag all depends on how many events you have running on a map. For instance more than 1-3 parralel process events will result in lag.
author=brandonabley link=topic=240.msg3092#msg3092 date=1188932352
It has a higher resolution than RM2k3. Because of this, you can't rip graphics from Square-Enix RPGs like everyone used to love doing. It's also a little harder to make convincing edits, because spriting at a higher resolution demands a little artistic ability. I think this is the single reason people tend not to use RMXP -- for some reason, nobody realizes that there are a lot of games (such as Suikoden) with larger sprites and tiles that are prime for ripping off. What is interesting is that, in my opinion, a second-rate but competent pixel artist will have more luck at a higher resolution than a lower one, and that awesome low-res spriting requires true viruosity.
I'd agree with that, because I consider myself merely competent with pixel art, and some of my sprites and backgrounds actually come out looking pretty great in higher resolutions....whereas my smaller sprites are, at best, completely unremarkable. Part of that is probably more because my experience is more with higher resolution drawing rather than pixel art, and at high enough resolutions they become awfully close to the same skillset requirements, though.

But yeah, like how you said your first point was actually a good thing in many ways, I consider #2 to be an advantage rather than a disadvantage. I've said many times how much I hate rips, and I stand by that and consider the lack of compatibility with most of them to be a feature. Forces people to not be lazy. Of course, it also means fewer finished games, or maybe just slower creation of games, but I think it's a fair enough trade off.

I agree that RPG Maker XP is worth it. I find it to be superior to the previous versions in every way. It is a shame that there's a smaller community for it, and less good games released....but on the other hand, that also means that the "big thing" that makes the community explode hasn't come out yet....there's still time for one of us to be the maker of that game. Plus it increases the chances that future titles will get translated and released over here.
Shadowtext
It is a shame that there's a smaller community for it, and less good games released....but on the other hand, that also means that the "big thing" that makes the community explode hasn't come out yet....there's still time for one of us to be the maker of that game. Plus it increases the chances that future titles will get translated and released over here.

Your kidding right? Over at my other common visited site rmxp is the only living rpgmaker community. True there aren't any truelly revolutionary projects out there but then again there are people like me working on commercial projects in hope that we may build a full foundation for rmxp popularity.
I'm waiting for RMVista.

And avoiding rips is all well and good if you have any artistic talent whatsoever, but for the rest of us, rips are the only way to avoid using RTP and charasX (not that RTP is a bad thing - except for the big fat bouncy battlechars. God I hate those.).

I can do recolors (but who can't?) and the odd icon for a menu.

I absolutly hate the charset style in RMXP (RTP). The chibi-chinless wonders really grate on me.
Personally, I prefer the RTP sets and over-used Mac and Blue sets infinitely more than rips. I find graphics stolen from commercial games to be distracting and inconsistent. Just because you recolor Setzer and give him a sword does not change the fact that he looks like Setzer. I'd rather put up with seeing Alex Mysterious Blue Haired Guy duke it out for the umpteenth time.

Although, I feel for users who simply can't find the graphics they need in the RTP. Especially if they are confounded to hades and back because of that stupid sea ship chipset.

I will admit that the RTP for 2K3 and XP REALLY don't compete with the modestly handsome 2K graphics. XP's graphics took A LOT of getting used to.

XP really hasn't had a ludicrously good title yet, but there are an awful lot of 'epic' projects made with it. That put mountains of work into a game, give it a laundry list of features and typically turn out to be rather tedious to actually play.
author=Mewd link=topic=240.msg3128#msg3128 date=1189102330
XP really hasn't had a ludicrously good title yet, but there are an awful lot of 'epic' projects made with it. That put mountains of work into a game, give it a laundry list of features and typically turn out to be rather tedious to actually play.
That's because I haven't made a game in it yet.

*kentona stuggles to keep his hat from popping off his swelling head*
The framerate issue of RMXP can be avoided a number of ways. The primary flaw comes from the Event Interpreter, which translates all those nice and easy event codes into Ruby script, for RMXP to process. There are several ways to avoid it, easiest being to keep map sizes small and use minimal events. One of the great things about RMXP's limitless event frame size is being able to cram an entire crowd of people into one event.

Also, you can adjust the default framerate of RMXP with one simple line of code, "Graphics.frame_rate = #"

From the RMXP Help File:

Graphics.frame_rateIn , the number of times the screen is refreshed per second. The larger the value, the more CPU power is required. Normally set at 40. When not in , the refresh rate is halved, and graphics are drawn in every other frame.

Changing this property is not recommended; however, it can be set anywhere from 10 to 120. Values out of range are automatically corrected.
To respond to brandon: I prefer doing 32x24 sprites, myself. But that may be because I have not tried many rmxp size sprites.

I'd probably prefer them, actually... now that I think about it.
author=Tribal Tail link=topic=240.msg3132#msg3132 date=1189112128
To respond to brandon: I prefer doing 32x24 sprites, myself. But that may be because I have not tried many rmxp size sprites.

I'd probably prefer them, actually... now that I think about it.

I was just making a generalization, and I think you'd agree that, generally, it applies. third-rate spriters can almost always perform at a BASIC ability in a lower resolution (see: all of Gaming World), but once a pixel artist has a modicum of experience, it's easier to make spriters larger. This is because, with higher resolutions, you can be less selective about which details you choose to include or not. Spriting very well at a low resolution requires a keen eye and the ability to trick the viewer into seeing things that you aren't actually fully representing in pixels. But, you know, maybe you just have more experience with 32x24 sprites!

But I typed all this before I read the second line of your post, so yeah, I guess you do agree! I've found that hi-res spriting feels a lot more like drawing or something, which is a much more natural way to thing, while tiny lo-res sprites are really technically demanding and a unique skill in and of themselves.
Low res spriting to me feels like trial and error, haha. Y'know?
I agree. The resolution is really what brings out a sprites format.
RMXP sprites are simple. Especially if you have PSP in which you can just change the oppacity of the brush and go over a simple template.

True merging away from people canstart to get more difficult however I tend to custom make a vast majority of my tilesets and charactersets. RGSS is what barricades me.

Plus with higher res you can add so much more detail. Especially when working with Kaizer sprites. ;D
Pages: 1