RPG MAKER VX OR XP?

Posts

Pages: first 12 next last
Ok, so I've been using RPG Maker for YEARS, back to RM2K and I might of even played with 95, not sure. I've never done anything serious yet, although I have some ideas. Well about a year ago I bought RPG Maker VX and was happy with it until I started looking more into XP. I bought VX because it was the newest one and that's about the only reason, didn't really compare the two until recently.

So I know there are a lot of "which one is better" posts out on the web, which I know there's no one answer for, but mine is a little more specific than that. Going to do a numbered questions so that they're easy to answer..

1. I heard RPG Maker XP has more community support (scripts and graphics), is this true? If so, is there anything that VX can do that XP Cannot? How about the other way around?
2. What about the upcoming expansion/update to VX? Is it going to make it much better?
3. the main hindrance with VX is having to use Swap XT for tilesets, XP doesn't have to do this, is it worth it to get XP for this reason?
4. When it comes to making a game for profit, is there any major difference between the two? Not asking from the stand point of using graphics and scripts that are built in, I mean legality or how well the graphics actually look.
5. and finally, I plan on doing an episodic game. I know there is no built in way (or via script) to do this in VX. I THINK I've figured out how to do this on VX, at least in theory, but is there any built in way with XP?

These are mostly personal opinion questions, which is what i'm looking for, especially from those who have messed with both. Thanks for your replies!
1. XP has been around longer.... but everything XP is compatible with VX even if it needs to be resized.
2. VX is still being expanded... technically. But neither one is really updated.
3. 90% of people hate VX tilesets because they're too blocky... didn't seem to hurt Minecraft.
4. A lot of profit games do XP. Mostly because its been around longer and profit games take a while to make. Plus there is more graphical variety with less work.
5. Technically with an episodic game you can just have it leave off at a save point then continue from there.
Nightowl
Remember when I actually used to make games? Me neither.
1577
While I prefer neither at the moment, just preferring the older 2003 version, I'd still pick XP. Once again, the tileset system is too ridiculous, thus it's hard to find resources (especially when it has been around only for few years.)

And overall, more community support and graphics.

h0nk.
KingArthur
( ̄▽ ̄)ノ De-facto operator of the unofficial RMN IRC channel.
1217
1. I heard RPG Maker XP has more community support (scripts and graphics), is this true? If so, is there anything that VX can do that XP Cannot? How about the other way around?

Both are probably even for the most part, though I haven't been around the XP/VX scene long enough to say anything about it.

2. What about the upcoming expansion/update to VX? Is it going to make it much better?

Personally, I wouldn't look forward to it.

3. the main hindrance with VX is having to use Swap XT for tilesets, XP doesn't have to do this, is it worth it to get XP for this reason?

XP has a map editor lightyears ahead of VX. If the map editor is your only concern, then yes, get XP.

4. When it comes to making a game for profit, is there any major difference between the two? Not asking from the stand point of using graphics and scripts that are built in, I mean legality or how well the graphics actually look.

I'm not a legal expert, so take my words with a grain of salt, but there's nothing different between XP and VX in terms of producing commercial games. XP's map editor will clearly allow you to use a larger variety of chipsets, though.

5. and finally, I plan on doing an episodic game. I know there is no built in way (or via script) to do this in VX. I THINK I've figured out how to do this on VX, at least in theory, but is there any built in way with XP?

This is actually easier to do in RM2K(3). With XP/VX, you'll get game-crashing problems if there is a version discrepancy between the save files and the game's RGSS code, something that's hard to avoid with a game structured like The Way where you can carry saves over. Personally, I wouldn't bother and just connect the episodes outside the save file like Legion Saga did.
Sailerius
did someone say angels
3214
This is actually easier to do in RM2K(3). With XP/VX, you'll get game-crashing problems if there is a version discrepancy between the save files and the game's RGSS code

This is untrue. I almost completely rewrote the scripts in each episode of Vacant Sky and all saves are fully compatible between episodes.
KingArthur
( ̄▽ ̄)ノ De-facto operator of the unofficial RMN IRC channel.
1217
author=Sailerius
This is actually easier to do in RM2K(3). With XP/VX, you'll get game-crashing problems if there is a version discrepancy between the save files and the game's RGSS code
This is untrue. I almost completely rewrote the scripts in each episode of Vacant Sky and all saves are fully compatible between episodes.

And I have witnessed just the opposite on numerous occasions; one of them was even a support topic someone made here with the solution being "play a new game and make a new save file" because he had modified his scripts.

To be fair, it depends partly on what kind of scripts you have and what/how you exactly modify, but the general rule of thumb with XP/VX is that any time you modify the scripts any and all save files up until that time are outdated and prone to severe problems.

The problem is still present even in RM2K(3), but with only the database being the potential source of version discrepancies it is much easier to manage things and perform damage control there as opposed to the no-holds-barred environment of RGSS.
VX has a patcher. No need to redownload a whole thing for bug fixes etc.
VX also has stronger database support than XP, editor wise.
XP is slower, you can technically change the FPS rate but there are still barring problems with it. Just look around the Bug fixes section for it.
VX has a larger community than XP right now. Check rpgmakervx.net for that.
VX also has a lot of resources but most rely on panorama mapping. Curves are possible though.
From what I saw when using XP and VX, XP scripts have tons of bugs and most of the time, people that made these are inactive now while VX's support section is more active plus look at the amount of Yanfly Scripts, Modern Algebra, etc.

This begs the question if you're focused on the graphical side of things or the technical side of things. But any decent artist can work around VX's limitations, really.
Thanks for the replies everyone! I downloaded the trial of XP and while I do like the map editor, it also has it's limitations (although not nearly as much as VX). With Swap XT, tilesets are still a little annoying, but not a problem with design. I think I'll stick with VX since I already own it, unless i mess with the trial of XP and end up really liking it. I also have a lot of experience with VX now, so I wouldn't have to relearn the program. The only thing I do like XP for over VX is how the graphics look. The taller characters, the nicer looking buildings and such, that's something that I don't like about VX, but not a major issue. I'm just happy to see that there is still such a active community for this product! When I started VX last year, I thought the community was dying, but turns out it was just starting!

Two followup questions.

First, for XV resources/getting people to help, what's the best place to go? I know when I was looking last year, there were so many different pages and some people didn't like one or the other, so it was more a matter of having 5 or 6 pages to look through, is there any one or two centralized place now?

Secondly, I couldn't figure out how to change tilesets on a single map in XP, is this possible or is this just a limitation? I mean I know I can go into the map properties and change it there, but I mean say I want to use two different tilesets on the same map, how do I do that?

Thanks again everyone! You all helped a lot!
Sailerius
did someone say angels
3214
author=KingArthur
author=Sailerius
This is actually easier to do in RM2K(3). With XP/VX, you'll get game-crashing problems if there is a version discrepancy between the save files and the game's RGSS code
This is untrue. I almost completely rewrote the scripts in each episode of Vacant Sky and all saves are fully compatible between episodes.
And I have witnessed just the opposite on numerous occasions; one of them was even a support topic someone made here with the solution being "play a new game and make a new save file" because he had modified his scripts.

To be fair, it depends partly on what kind of scripts you have and what/how you exactly modify, but the general rule of thumb with XP/VX is that any time you modify the scripts any and all save files up until that time are outdated and prone to severe problems.

The problem is still present even in RM2K(3), but with only the database being the potential source of version discrepancies it is much easier to manage things and perform damage control there as opposed to the no-holds-barred environment of RGSS.

If you want to be technical, the problem is if you change methods or member variables in Game_(type) objects. Edits to Scene classes will cause no problems. It's also very easy to futureproof your edits to Game objects if you know that you're going to be making your game episodically (thanks to Ruby's wonderful reflection capabilities). The problem is when people with no scripting knowhow start changing things willy-nilly without knowing what they're doing.

Secondly, I couldn't figure out how to change tilesets on a single map in XP, is this possible or is this just a limitation? I mean I know I can go into the map properties and change it there, but I mean say I want to use two different tilesets on the same map, how do I do that?

Without a script, there's no way to do this. However, you can make tilesets as large as you want.
KingArthur
( ̄▽ ̄)ノ De-facto operator of the unofficial RMN IRC channel.
1217
The problem is when people with no scripting knowhow start changing things willy-nilly without knowing what they're doing.

And the problem is that a lot of XP/VX users do start changing things willy-nilly without knowing what they're doing. =P

I believe we're basically arguing the same thing, though. Yes, it's possible to have episodic games with save carry overs in XP/VX, but one needs to know what they're doing in RGSS in order for the saves to carry over properly. In lieu of not knowing what they're doing, it's simply easier to go a different path.
author=Archeia_Nessiah
VX has a patcher. No need to redownload a whole thing for bug fixes etc.
VX also has stronger database support than XP, editor wise.
XP is slower, you can technically change the FPS rate but there are still barring problems with it. Just look around the Bug fixes section for it.
VX has a larger community than XP right now. Check rpgmakervx.net for that.
VX also has a lot of resources but most rely on panorama mapping. Curves are possible though.
From what I saw when using XP and VX, XP scripts have tons of bugs and most of the time, people that made these are inactive now while VX's support section is more active plus look at the amount of Yanfly Scripts, Modern Algebra, etc.

This begs the question if you're focused on the graphical side of things or the technical side of things. But any decent artist can work around VX's limitations, really.

This is an incredibly biased response and should be taken with a grain of salt by JLCollier or anyone else reading this thread. Every single point made by Arc is either speculation or opinion.

XP has the same 'Patcher' as VX, it's simply a 3rd Party product and would take a small amount of searching to find (it was made by Dubealex of Creation Asylum although I don't know what moniker he goes by now.)

The point of VX/XP's databases is moot because both software have the same capability. VX is just easier to see with the untrained eye. Every last bit of VX and XP can be stripped away and rebuilt. The advantages between the two lie entirely in their map editors. To strip away the map editor would result in a very difficult map making process. You'd either need to make one from scratch or program maps with code which would make them exceptionally simple or require an unnecessary amount of work. XP's map editor is vastly superior to VX's. This point has been reiterated ad infinum within the RM* Community.

VX has a more active community, perhaps. Obviously rpgmakervx.net is going to have a large bias towards RMVX. It's in the name, it's what it was designed for. This community tends to favor 2k/3 in total; XP for fuller projects; and VX for contest projects. hbgames.org and RPG RPG Revolution are a mixed bag as well. I'm sure if there was an rpgmakerxp.net, it's bias would be towards RMXP.

If this is a point that you stand behind, allow me to point out that 'bypassing' the horrid map editor is a good way of doing it, but XP can do the exact same thing. Resource wise, both XP and VX come into almost a dead tie, with XP being ahead due to the flexibility of the tile editor and the amount of tilesets it allows you to use.

VX scripts may be less buggy (although I would like to see statistics on this, seeing as I was one of the more prominent scripters during the height of XP's popularity and found this not to be the case) but even so, that is because we had time to learn how to use Ruby, and how to use it within the RM* RGSS Environment with XP. Although I will wholeheartedly admit that Enterbrain took the appropriate approach with RMVX/RGSS2 as it highly simplified a lot of code and made it more accessible for coders. However, in my opinion (and this is OPINION and not to be taken as fact) that Enterbrain made the code this way after seeing the RMXP SDK/MACL developed by Near Fantastica, DubeAlex, SephirothSpawn, Trickster, and with some minor input by myself. The code structure used in RGSS2 is almost exactly the same as the code structure developed for the RMXP SDK.

The nitty gritty of it is depends entirely on your ability as a developer and what you want to do with the software. If you are using the software stock, without adding or utilizing the scripting or resource system, it is down to whichever software fits your tastes and needs best (which is exactly what JLCollier was asking in the first place and I praise him for that.) If you are capable of tearing the software down and using it from there, RMXP is vastly superior if you need the map editor. RMVX is far superior if you plan to bypass the map editor (as RGSS2 functions much better than RGSS1.1)
prexus thank you! Great answer to my questions! What did you mean by "bypass the map editor" though?

All in all, I noticed that the map editor in XP would help with a lot of the layering problems I've ran into with VX, but using Swap XT and tweaking the bypass system(I think is what it's called, how you set it to go over, under or on the same level as your hero, maybe pass through?) seems to make this less of a hindrance. You can even do real time switching, so you can make a tile passable only in certain locations or at certain events.

On the scripting end, I don't plan on writing any of my own anymore. I tried that, but I don't know enough programming and don't have the time to learn it. I did make a cool "PDA" menu when I was learning (click a menu item called PDA or Notebook or whatever and then it opens a window where you can add links to script stuff like achievements, side quests, etc.), but that's about all I could do. I DO plan on using community scripts and community (or self made) tilesets/characters, not just stock.

As for doing an episodic game, I have some ideas on how to do it with limited work, which would essentially be a patching system instead of actual episodic content, but I could see how scripts could mess with it and corrupt saves. I'm good at figuring out things like this, so I'm hoping I could make it work. I have some experimenting to do to determine if it works. If it does, I know a lot of people are looking for a good method, so I'll write a tutorial.

Thanks again for all your replies!
XP has the same 'Patcher' as VX, it's simply a 3rd Party product and would take a small amount of searching to find (it was made by Dubealex of Creation Asylum although I don't know what moniker he goes by now.)

From how I go to most communities, this patcher wasn't described ONCE and Yeyinde gets a lot of requests to also port his Patcher script to XP. Which he never did. Considering how everyone kept talking it would be awesome if XP has this then I would assume that it NEVER happened or Dubealex kept it CA exclusive

stuff

Before I go on, I used XP for 3 years, maybe even longer. Whenever it was released I grabbed my hands on it and made crappy RTP games using postality knights version, then the official XP, then moved back to 2k3 THEN moved back to XP. SO I'm going to say this now:

Database != Mapping Editor. I wasn't talking about that one at all. also VX's event editor is superior than XP. Just saying.

I was talking about the noteboxes and the whole you don't have to copy a new skill in order to make a stronger version of it. And yes even with scripting, elite scripters like Cogwheel do it for Nocturne (I am translating his game and I had to learn how he had to do his menus AND his message system to understand how to do the text insertion.) AND YES I also asked Yanfly about this. I'm pretty sure that this is not a standard, but I'm talking about EASE of use. Not how which one is superior, but how you can use the engine based on your laziness.

I also looked for scripts where to find fixes for what and if the people like:

CCOA and I forgot this guy's name but he had this cool menu that is buggy as hell, Sephiroth Spawn*('s SDK has issues with other scripts but it is the base for VX's RGSS2), SomethingFantastcia's scripts is still active (only found Ccoa in Spongen). There are people like Atoa, GuibD, CharlieFeed, etc. but my whole experience with XP WASN'T fun in terms of support because it felt that the userbase was uncoordinated? not really that unified? Creation Asylum still feels like it's going strong though, I visit that site still from time to time. I just think, the best way to do an XP game-- it is to get a scripter and pray to god it won't be a total mess (hello advent cirno).

Oh wait you did describe them, but that was my point, I was following the XP-user base for a while now and the scripts just weren't working right. Also Zeriab's fixes for XP default fixes were very disheartening by the amount, AND the fact that there are groups of people out there trying to rewrite the default scripts (an example would be in freebird forums) says a lot, if making a game in XP is as EASY as it should be.

This is just really my GRIPE in terms of XP's database (or should I say the whole GAMEPLAY making aspect of it?) I always thought XP was very graphical but also limited (like not being able to see the panorama in the editor). I tried making Evented Battle Systems with it, the script support was ....not good -in my experience- than VX's support, where things get delivered faster than the speed of light, just because it's CLEANER.

Never did I once said that XP's map editor is horrible. I just stated that if you miss the XP map editor and if that's your gripe with VX, you have to do Panorama Mapping.

Overall, I wasn't saying VX is superior to XP but I am talking about the "community support" and it's database editor (NOT LEVEL EDITOR). Making XP's Database to work with Scripts? hahaha... I mean sure, XP has tons of support out there, but I have yet to encounter an XP game that is not Japanese, Hima or Anaryu's games, or something that doesn't crash on me or lag like a slug. I'm just saying this for people who have no script experience whatsoever.

I am aware XP has something better in VX , scripting wise ( I remember Anaryu saying that after customizing XP heavily, it was way faster than VX and smoother. You can actually do a solid Bullet Hell in it. But note the customization part.)

But if the OP is going to learn scripting, then this discussion is moot. Since if you know how RGSS works then you should be able to work on it regardless of the engine.

P.s. By Larger community, I was talking about the amount of people being Active in VX userbase Vs. the XP userbase. I might have not been in tune with XP that much though---but I always see the VX user base being more vocal and supportive.

Save-point, the person I saw being active most of the time is Charlie Feed with his CTB.
Gubid does both. But I remember he's heavily on XP.
Dervvulfman is active in both, he also has nice support for his script modifications?/translations?/rehash?
Hbgames felt more XP but I saw them having an equal amount of VX support in it.
RRR is a mixed bag. But people like Woratana hasn't been active for VX, the most script requests I saw is mostly for VX, specially in RMRK where I mod. And even then, Modern Algebra still keeps up with his support streak for VX.
There's this Chaos...something. I remember they were making their own XP-based engine so I'm not counting on that one!

Yanfly...just...yanfly. I have yet to see a scripter that can do the same thing as he did for XP in terms of solid, customizeable scripts and userbase support. Just saying. He's also still active, he's just not open-open. (SephSpawn probably, but even then...the drama surrounding SDK vs. normal XP scripts...)

XRXS used to make XP scripts, one of the biggest out there, then they moved to VX.
Paradog used to make XP scripts and games, then moved to VX.

It might've looked biased but I'm stating this based on my experience. Unless you have scripter/programmer friends, (Linkz0r for XP when I got lucky) it feels like a huge shot in the dark. I used to ask for compatibility (don't ask how since I prefer privacy. thanks.)-- but how some XP scripters I encountered doesn't seem to like to work with other XP scripts feels saddening. Unlike the VX scripters I encountered like MA, Wij, YF etc. are very supportive and doesn't view each other as competition. They actually go in their way to make their stuff compatible with one another.

So why am I talking about scripts too much? You have to admit, doing things you want to do in both engines still need a script, I had been extensively making evented systems for both engines, and one of things I noticed that the only way to avoid the ungodly lag (which shouldn't happen considering rects are just 4 points) or how some event code that should be working properly, suddenly not working properly (as experienced in BBI remake and how these bugs appeared when I started distributing a 2nd test demo to private testers, first one was working properly, EVEN video'd), in the end, making simple systems felt like it had to be scripted. I miss rm2k3 =_=

A friend makes a good point though:

What do you want, user friendly and more support with a bad mapping engine or good mapping engine and no events and a smaller community and 5 FPS

or a very user friendly with a nice map system and simple with wide variety of resources available, except you can't script and has 256 color limit

I base my opinion in my experience. So if I'm still unexperienced with this then I apologize for "not trying" at all to get into the XP community--since I try to get in the general rm community.
It's been a while since I've last posted anything. I felt the need to.

author=prexus
This is an incredibly biased response and should be taken with a grain of salt by JLCollier or anyone else reading this thread. Every single point made by Arc is either speculation or opinion.


Her post is actually quite objective, with neither biases in-line. Or if she does have biases, they do seem justified and explained for the most part.

Now, I'd like to correct a few things.

author=prexus
The point of VX/XP's databases is moot because both software have the same capability. VX is just easier to see with the untrained eye. Every last bit of VX and XP can be stripped away and rebuilt. The advantages between the two lie entirely in their map editors. To strip away the map editor would result in a very difficult map making process. You'd either need to make one from scratch or program maps with code which would make them exceptionally simple or require an unnecessary amount of work. XP's map editor is vastly superior to VX's. This point has been reiterated ad infinum within the RM* Community.


Not sure how you jumped from database to map editor but I'll expand on both. The database for VX actually is superior to the XP database. While the XP Database seems to have more entries, it also lacks noteboxes, which eases up tying scripts to various database objects such as skills, items, enemies, and states. Adding new effects to those said database objects is so much easier than "binding" effects to those said items done in XP (much less to say, more customizable in VX, too).

Map editing is inferior in VX to XP. However, this can be made up through Swap TX, better map editing usage, and otherwise. What can't be made up for is the limited number of tiles per tileset onscreen at a time, but there's rarely a time where you'll have more than 2000+ different tiles onscreen at once. However, what you did fail to mention is that the event editor tied to the map editor in VX is superior to XP's.

VX's event editor has height priorities, which XP lacks. Though it can be reproduced via scripts, the effort is seldom worth it. VX also has more event commands than XP. Once again, they can be reproduced via scripts but seldom worthwhile. There's a few other quirks, too, but they don't come to me off the top of my head so they're not as important.

author=prexus
VX scripts may be less buggy (although I would like to see statistics on this, seeing as I was one of the more prominent scripters during the height of XP's popularity and found this not to be the case) but even so, that is because we had time to learn how to use Ruby, and how to use it within the RM* RGSS Environment with XP. Although I will wholeheartedly admit that Enterbrain took the appropriate approach with RMVX/RGSS2 as it highly simplified a lot of code and made it more accessible for coders. However, in my opinion (and this is OPINION and not to be taken as fact) that Enterbrain made the code this way after seeing the RMXP SDK/MACL developed by Near Fantastica, DubeAlex, SephirothSpawn, Trickster, and with some minor input by myself. The code structure used in RGSS2 is almost exactly the same as the code structure developed for the RMXP SDK.

VX Scripts and XP Scripts are interchangeable with a few modifications. In fact, I've completely converted RGSS2 into XP, made it run like RMVX with 60 FPS, too. Likewise the same with RGSS1 to VX. How practical this can be is another question though. The point I'm trying to make is that scripts for VX and XP aren't superior to each other. And should you claim to be a prominent scripter for XP, you should also know that through simply looking at the scripts for VX that they're not much different at all.

None of the code was simplified much from the transition of XP to VX either. Instead, the case is the RMXP community overexaggerated the necessity of SDK (which could have easily been remedied with an $imported hash). The code structure between XP and VX are hardly different. I can say this as I've scripted for both engines.
You both make fairly valid points and I like that you went into detail explaining them; although you also miss a few of my points which I will summarize briefly:

The Databases in XP and VX are the same, if you look deep enough. Noteboxes exist in XP through the use of Scripts, and through clever use of the existing fields. Noteboxes themselves even seemed to exist after having taken clues from scripters such as myself creatively using the Description field and Name field of entries in the XP Database (parsing out information using Regular Expressions to add additional fields and such.)

This is the reason I simply ignored talking about the databases and went onto the Map Editor since that is the key difference between the two. The Map Editor (which is inferior by far) and RGSS2 (which is superior by far) which you mentioned yourself can be ported backwards to RMXP (I believe Dargor and Yeyinde both did this as well as you and I and I am sure many more.)

Due to the existence of the RGSS Editor, RMXP and RMVX are essentially the same. They can both be ported backwards and forwards, they can both be stripped down and recoded (although certain aspects of their respective RGSS dll's are hard to overcome,) and their capabilities in all aspects short of the existing map editor, whether they are innate in the editor or need to be added through RGSS, are the same. The primary difference is the Map Editor, and VX's Map Editor is worse. Hands down. Yes, you can use SwapTX and Panorama mapping, but SwapTX doesn't get rid of the way the layer system works (as far as I know) and the over reliance on Auto-Tiles; and Panorama mapping can be considered more labor-intensive although can also offer much better effects than either map editor is capable of by default.

Lastly, it's ignorant to say that the code wasn't simplified from XP to VX. The addition of the base Scene class, the visibility of the Cache, Audio, and Vocab modules, the accessibility of the Sprite Base and Window Base classes, and the removal of multiple headlines for the same script (Game_Battler 1/2/3, Scene_Battle 1/2/3/4) were all attempts to streamline and increase the efficiency of the code.

Not to mention all of the methods they added to cover duplicate code.
author=prexus
The Databases in XP and VX are the same, if you look deep enough. Noteboxes exist in XP through the use of Scripts, and through clever use of the existing fields. Noteboxes themselves even seemed to exist after having taken clues from scripters such as myself creatively using the Description field and Name field of entries in the XP Database (parsing out information using Regular Expressions to add additional fields and such.)

In short, they don't exist. They only "exist" by abusing pre-existing fields, to which, I ask where is the practicality in that? Name fields and description fields both have limited typing space, which generally isn't sufficient enough for the more heavier and complex skills that a single notebox of VX's database can provide. For this event, it's better that you recognize VX's database is superior to XP's.

author=prexus
This is the reason I simply ignored talking about the databases and went onto the Map Editor since that is the key difference between the two. The Map Editor (which is inferior by far) and RGSS2 (which is superior by far) which you mentioned yourself can be ported backwards to RMXP (I believe Dargor and Yeyinde both did this as well as you and I and I am sure many more.)

Due to the existence of the RGSS Editor, RMXP and RMVX are essentially the same. They can both be ported backwards and forwards, they can both be stripped down and recoded (although certain aspects of their respective RGSS dll's are hard to overcome,) and their capabilities in all aspects short of the existing map editor, whether they are innate in the editor or need to be added through RGSS, are the same. The primary difference is the Map Editor, and VX's Map Editor is worse. Hands down. Yes, you can use SwapTX and Panorama mapping, but SwapTX doesn't get rid of the way the layer system works (as far as I know) and the over reliance on Auto-Tiles; and Panorama mapping can be considered more labor-intensive although can also offer much better effects than either map editor is capable of by default.

From my porting of RMVX to RMXP, there's nothing the RMXP DLL's couldn't handle. The audio actually played a bit faster by a couple of nanoseconds, while the graphics loaded a few nanoseconds later. However, the differences there are so minute that they don't warrant going into much detail for.

Also, RMVX's and RMXP's layer system works the same. The only difference is that XP has one extra layer. Auto-tiles aren't a big issue for VX either. They can be turned off completely or not used at all through a few key-shortcuts in VX.

author=prexus
Lastly, it's ignorant to say that the code wasn't simplified from XP to VX. The addition of the base Scene class, the visibility of the Cache, Audio, and Vocab modules, the accessibility of the Sprite Base and Window Base classes, and the removal of multiple headlines for the same script (Game_Battler 1/2/3, Scene_Battle 1/2/3/4) were all attempts to streamline and increase the efficiency of the code.

Cache, Audio, and Vocab were visible from the helpfile (though I don't know if that was the case for the EN version of RMXP).

Sprite_Base, Window_Base, and Scene_Base only made template methods for child classes. The coding structure in it is exactly the same. In fact, the most important of the classes: Scene_Base has little bearing on the child Scene classes since the majority of them would have functioned the same otherwise. This is not ignorance. This is merely observation from what my experiences as a scripter for both engines can say.

Game_Battler 1/2/3 and Scene_Battle 1/2/3/4 when pasted together yield nearly the same structure as the VX counterparts mechanically. Visually they're different obviously. However, little was done in actually streamlining the code.
KingArthur
( ̄▽ ̄)ノ De-facto operator of the unofficial RMN IRC channel.
1217
In short, they don't exist. They only "exist" by abusing pre-existing fields, to which, I ask where is the practicality in that? Name fields and description fields both have limited typing space, which generally isn't sufficient enough for the more heavier and complex skills that a single notebox of VX's database can provide. For this event, it's better that you recognize VX's database is superior to XP's.
"Abusing" Name and Description fields aren't all that different from "abusing" Noteboxes since Noteboxes were primarily intended as a way to keep literal notes that the developer could refer to later ("Who was going to use Iron Sword... Oh right, Alex!"). Input limit on text (or the lack thereof) also consequently plays no part in determining which database "is better" as it is merely a byproduct of the initial design (space-constrained notes?!).

Also, just so there is no question to my statement that the Noteboxes were intended for actual notes used by the developer:
RMVX Database GUI Help Popup
A memo area where you can freely add notes.
This implies that Noteboxes were meant to be used similarly to Post-Its. And no, text strings meant to be regex'd later for use by RGSS are not notes.

Useful as RMVX's Noteboxes are for RGSS, Prexus's argument makes a better case as it is clear cut and does not delve into double standards.
---------------
Also, RMVX's and RMXP's layer system works the same. The only difference is that XP has one extra layer.
RMXP has a Base layer plus two Upper layers and an Event layer all separated and able to be handled independently at all times.

By comparison, RMVX has a Base layer and one Upper layer with the catch that these two layers are combined, resulting in a stacking and handling nightmare not present in RMXP nor RM2K(3). Thankfully though, VX's Event layer is still separate.

For reference, RM2K(3) has a Base layer plus one Upper layer and an Event layer all separated and handled independently at all times. Just the layering system alone states outright that RMXP's map editor made a huge leap and RMVX's map editor took back that huge leap and walked a few steps back just because it could.

Auto-tiles aren't a big issue for VX either. They can be turned off completely or not used at all through a few key-shortcuts in VX.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at chipset files for RMVX and realize there's ten-fold more auto-tiles compared to chipsets for RM2K(3) and RMXP.

The problem is that this over-reliance on auto-tiles limits actual chipset design for the artist, forces auto-tile use on the developer (which as you said is optional, but is arguably tedious), and as a result greatly limits ways in how a map can be designed and built.

Both RM2K(3) and RMXP have auto-tiles within their chipset specifications, but never have we actually had a need to actively fight against auto-tiles in either of the engines like we do with RMVX. For lack of any good explanation, there's something clearly wrong here.
Fair enough on the abuse part. However, that still doesn't place away the character limit with the entry fields for XP over VX. Noteboxes still maintain the unlimited typing space, which XP lacks, which in turn, despite the initial intentions of the GUI, still plays a major role in determining the accessibility of an engine to resources over another.

And perhaps it's miscommunication, but I thought Prexus was talking about the layer system of VX mechanically considering he put in Swap TX. In your regards, yes, VX does have an "inferior" method than XP. However, it's still not a mile difference that other people suggest to get the similar results in VX that people suggest in XP.

However, the "battles" that people have with the autotiles are often times exaggerations by people who refuse to use the engine and accept it. In fact, of what I've used of VX to make and assist others in several games with, rarely did I have to fight against autotiles. Often times, the auto-tiles are used for ceilings, grass, dirt, and water. Nothing else that would warrant much combat-ing with since the autotiles flow in nicely. But maybe this is because I've come to accept the tools I've been given for what they are and actually work with them.
As a person who only tried VX, which program is far more user friendly?
Say for instance I want a larger character sprite say from Chrono trigger in my game. I can't to my knowledge use anything other than square characters in VX. Does Xp offer more support for such things?
XP and VX are both high resolution, to use chrono trigger sprites on their original size, either you double scale them or resprite them to higher resolution or make the resolution of the game itself smaller but still work with 32x32 tiles or panorama them, and use either a 16x16 movement script or Pixel movement.

As for the conversion, what you should do is get the widthxheight and multiply those by the amount of frames they have. For example, 24x32

24*3(Frames) = 72
32*3 = 96

then grid them out by 24x32 and set the sprites there.
Then in VX, according to the helpfile:
If you put a "$" at the beginning of the file name, only one character per file will be used. In this case, the character size is 1/3 the width and 1/4 the height of the file. It is possible to use this in conjunction with the special symbol "!".

Put them at the beginning of the filename of the character sprite. Check the RTP VX files (the game ones) to see. It also works for the small sprites.

User friendly wise, I found VX to be easier. But that's debatable on each person and it's better if you try it out yourself.
Pages: first 12 next last