Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
RM2K3 BATTLE QUIRKS
Posts
bobthebobish
690
bobthebobish
View playlists
Close So after playing through a horrifically tough boss tonight I noticed a new quirk I had never seen before in the default battle system. It was a simple no frills self buff skill that one of my characters used and for no particular reason the animation suddenly landed on the boss instead of the hero (and yes it was setup correctly and had landed succesfully on the correct character many a time).
Another weird one I have I believe has something to do with calling up common events while in battle (best guess). What happens is character A uses a skill that has some fancy event work tied to it (changing skills/class etc) while in battle. Then sometimes Characters B, C and D will choose their actions and afterwards nothing happens until another round passes. They just all stand their staring at each other and eventually everyones attacks go off at the same time! There seems to be an invisible confirm button during this time that sometimes moves the battle along.
Any other strange bugs/quirks that anyone else has noticed?
Another weird one I have I believe has something to do with calling up common events while in battle (best guess). What happens is character A uses a skill that has some fancy event work tied to it (changing skills/class etc) while in battle. Then sometimes Characters B, C and D will choose their actions and afterwards nothing happens until another round passes. They just all stand their staring at each other and eventually everyones attacks go off at the same time! There seems to be an invisible confirm button during this time that sometimes moves the battle along.
Any other strange bugs/quirks that anyone else has noticed?
sometimes after selecting a spell and selecting a target, if a monster (or series of monsters) are attacking at the same time the spell is never cast and the players turn is wasted.
bobthebobish
690
Somehow I feel like exploiting that to my evil whims..... if only it were more reliable....
Drakonais
2787
This damned bug only exists for Link to Event battle commands, and I don't know any way around it. I just changed all of my Link to Event commands to Defend commands. I wish it didn't give heroes the advantage of a defensive stance, but it's better than suffering through bosses getting hero spells cast on them and players losing their turns.
EDIT: Btw, to get the turns to freeze, all you have to do is go into a skill subset menu, cancel out, then select a Link to Event command. I've tested this, worked over and over again in my game.
EDIT: Btw, to get the turns to freeze, all you have to do is go into a skill subset menu, cancel out, then select a Link to Event command. I've tested this, worked over and over again in my game.
bobthebobish
690
Hmmmm there must be another way to replicate the bug as I not only got rid of any 'link to event' battle commands but also wrote a note forbiding me to do this. Think I ran into too many bugs with that process. Although now that I have a way to repeat it I do wonder if there is anything fun that can be done with it >:)
The inability to determine what spell was cast by a hero is an annoying "quirk". I mean, you can test to see what battle command they used, but why not spell? Same goes for status conditions - no way to test them from the battle events page!
Drakonais
2787
At least 2k3 allows you to call common events in battle, so there's a running check on whether a character is afflicted by a particular status. But yeah, these are all things that could've been implemented more elegantly.
Cue the "use VX" crowd.
Cue the "use VX" crowd.
<Craze> Use VX.
<Dude> But VX costs money!
<Craze> RM2k3 costs money.
<Dude> I don't want to learn how to script.
<Craze> I can teach people who can read how to change the battle algorithms and then turn Agility into a hit/evasion/criti-determining stat in less than ten minutes.
<Dude> Nope I'm an idiot.
(I have actually had this conservation sooo many times.)
<Dude> But VX costs money!
<Craze> RM2k3 costs money.
<Dude> I don't want to learn how to script.
<Craze> I can teach people who can read how to change the battle algorithms and then turn Agility into a hit/evasion/criti-determining stat in less than ten minutes.
<Dude> Nope I'm an idiot.
(I have actually had this conservation sooo many times.)
Darken
3952
post=105999
<Craze> I can teach people who can read how to change the battle algorithms and then turn Agility into a hit/evasion/criti-determining stat in less than ten minutes.
I am one of those people <3.
Kaempfer
1932
Yes, but VX looks like someone took a bag of poop and dropped it onto a computer monitor. It isn't even a matter of a lack of good resources, either, it is an inherent problem with the resolution and the way the tiles are set up.
People use RM2k3 because they like the era it emulates, and they like the 16x16 tiles for aesthetic reasons, as well. At least RMXP allowed unlimited chipsets of unlimited sizes and added a large number of other useful things for the epic-RPGMaker, as well as being new-graphics friendly. RMVX has its uses, but it really in no way even directly competes with Rm2k3, since they produce vastly different end products. I am going to raise this argument in every thread I see where people are arguing the different between the two programs, by Jove!
"I really want to make a game that resembles the graphical style of my favourite SNES RPG."
"Oh, use RMVX! Although it will produce something that in no way resembles what you are aiming for."
"Well that's good and all but I don't really think..."
"YOU ARE STUPID, LOOK AT THESE ALGORITHMS!!! FEEL THE POWER!!!"
People use RM2k3 because they like the era it emulates, and they like the 16x16 tiles for aesthetic reasons, as well. At least RMXP allowed unlimited chipsets of unlimited sizes and added a large number of other useful things for the epic-RPGMaker, as well as being new-graphics friendly. RMVX has its uses, but it really in no way even directly competes with Rm2k3, since they produce vastly different end products. I am going to raise this argument in every thread I see where people are arguing the different between the two programs, by Jove!
"I really want to make a game that resembles the graphical style of my favourite SNES RPG."
"Oh, use RMVX! Although it will produce something that in no way resembles what you are aiming for."
"Well that's good and all but I don't really think..."
"YOU ARE STUPID, LOOK AT THESE ALGORITHMS!!! FEEL THE POWER!!!"
What about the whole "only 1 chipset for the whole game" thing? Isn't that limiting?
(Personally, for me, it wouldn't be. But other people might think so.)
(Personally, for me, it wouldn't be. But other people might think so.)
(but there are other issues with doing so, like editing maps since the editor itself is stuck with one and there's no good way of avoiding that)
kentona: Visions & Voices takes you to a detailed town, hell and several other dimensions and has room left over.
Kaempfer
1932
post=106083
Whooooops
This is really good looking, and I was unawares of it, however,
post=106093
What about the whole "only 1 chipset for the whole game" thing? Isn't that limiting?
This is more what I was talking about. I don't necessarily think it's impossible to make good graphics for RMVX, I just think it's limited in ridiculous ways that make it seem like it'd be better to just use another engine altogether (like GM) if you are that willing to bypass its weaknesses. I feel the same way entirely about RM2k3, though (i.e. don't make a fighting game in RM2k3). I just feel that Rm2k3 is better suited to what I (and some/many others) want in a maker.
So while I admit was definitely wrong about my first point, I think my second point still remains true, in that you should use whatever you feel most comfortable with. Personally, I have a raging eternal boner for 16x16 tiles and the majesty held within, and thus, I use RM2k3. Maybe once more games that look that that one Darken posted show up on the scene I will be persuaded otherwise.
lolzallen
337
post=106095SCRIPTScan bypass that
(but there are other issues with doing so, like editing maps since the editor itself is stuck with one and there's no good way of avoiding that)
Create a new project, use the alternate chapset to map, copy & paste said map.
Until you want to make edits to the map/passability or place events. Even not considering that it still isn't a good way of making maps; You shouldn't need a seperate project just to make map with a different tileset. It's an annoying workaround or a retarded restriction
Silviera
2891
post=106093
What about the whole "only 1 chipset for the whole game" thing? Isn't that limiting?
(Personally, for me, it wouldn't be. But other people might think so.)
Just to clarify, VX actually lets you 5 chipsets simultaneously (by default the RTP uses 4 of these), and they're quite a bit larger than their rm2k/2k3 counterparts. Since the whole system is designed around using multiple chipsets they're organized a bit differently. For example the first tab is nothing but terrain tiles of everything imaginable, while the second tab contains bushes/trees/shop signs and all manner of other objects that would fit well in many environments.
So despite the fact that the overall number of chipsets is limited you can create a variety of elemental caves, a forest dungeon, the obligatory organic dungeon, and several different town designs all from the same set of chipsets with a whole lot of room left over for other things.
Personally though I use XP (which not only allows chipsets to have limitless size but lets me use as many as I want), but I figured I'd at least clarify that the 'single chipset' thing is infinitely less limiting than it actually sounds and only requires workarounds on large projects that require an extreme variety of locations.
Darken
3952
I think silv's post pretty much proves just how exaggerated this '1 chipset' is. Keep in mind you can use any graphic from all '5 chipsets' at once. Oddly enough I have not heard of a single person who has "run out of" graphics for VX (mainly because no one bothers going outside RTP, but hey it's a good point!). But still, I can see this as a flaw in VX.
I just wish people actually tried VX instead of spending hours bashing it.
I just wish people actually tried VX instead of spending hours bashing it.
