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
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsTRAVIO'S PROFILE
Travio
149
Close
I make and play games - playing games I use as a reward for reaching specific milestones within my various development projects. I've played a wide variety of games, having started at the tender age of three and worked my way up over the years so that, at one point, I was actually going out of my way to find the original games (cartridges, CDs, whatever) to play.
All games I elect to review must be 'Complete' status (though games still in the process of clearing out bugs are fine and will be noted in the review itself). These games must have a download on RMN (as I pass them to my Dropbox queue) and need to be self contained - everything I need to play should be in the download, without needing to install anything (including RTPs; we aren't living in the days of slow connections anymore, people). You should also have any fixes in the download, not something I have to look through the comments for - I'm going to be avoiding them like the plague until I've finished the review.
When I review a game, I try to play as much of it as I can possibly stand before posting the review - I make notes/write part of the review as I'm playing, so a lot of what goes into the review is first impressions of sections. I'm also not a stickler - things don't have to be perfect - but I've seen many examples of things not done perfectly but, at the same time, not done horribly. I rate five categories on a scale from 1 to 10: Story, Graphics, Sound, Gameplay & Pacing, and Mapping & Design. 5 is average to me, so it's not necessarily saying that category is bad - it's saying it's middle of the road. Games within the same editor are compared to one another, not games across editors (I'm not going to hold an RM2k game to the same standards as a VX Ace game due to system limitations, but I won't let it hold back the RM2k game's rating) - unless the game is part of a series across multiple editors.
All games I elect to review must be 'Complete' status (though games still in the process of clearing out bugs are fine and will be noted in the review itself). These games must have a download on RMN (as I pass them to my Dropbox queue) and need to be self contained - everything I need to play should be in the download, without needing to install anything (including RTPs; we aren't living in the days of slow connections anymore, people). You should also have any fixes in the download, not something I have to look through the comments for - I'm going to be avoiding them like the plague until I've finished the review.
When I review a game, I try to play as much of it as I can possibly stand before posting the review - I make notes/write part of the review as I'm playing, so a lot of what goes into the review is first impressions of sections. I'm also not a stickler - things don't have to be perfect - but I've seen many examples of things not done perfectly but, at the same time, not done horribly. I rate five categories on a scale from 1 to 10: Story, Graphics, Sound, Gameplay & Pacing, and Mapping & Design. 5 is average to me, so it's not necessarily saying that category is bad - it's saying it's middle of the road. Games within the same editor are compared to one another, not games across editors (I'm not going to hold an RM2k game to the same standards as a VX Ace game due to system limitations, but I won't let it hold back the RM2k game's rating) - unless the game is part of a series across multiple editors.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
[VX Ace] Regain MP on Guard.
author=pete_mw
I'm pretty sure you can make the guard skill recover MP by changing Type to MP Recover in the frame just above the Effects frame, then use a custom formula to get the results you want.
If you're comfortable implementing your own damage reduction state that doesn't rely on the guard flag, you could repurpose guard effectiveness to be your "how much MP do I recover on guard?" stat.
In the formula box, a.grd and b.grd reference the guard effectiveness of the skill user and the target respectively.
The standard damage formula isn't robust enough to do what he wanted. He wanted to be able to, based on the equipped gear, alter the percentage of MP that they regenerate. The damage formula box doesn't allow for things like that without scripting, at which point you might as well just do it the easier way.
Games Using Victor Sant's Scripts
I'll be honest - I much prefer working with Victor's scripts as they allow a lot more customization and advanced use without needing to script more myself; Victor's gone into some great depths of code with his scripting. So if I need a function he doesn't have, I either a) write it myself or b) patch another's script to work with Victor's scripts.
Despite a lot of people's complaints, compatibility on his scripts isn't really any worse than other scripter's, thanks to the aliasing, it's just the stuff he does tends to tread on the feet of other scripts ("Mode 7" Airship? Not if you're using his smooth turning script unless you want to write an exception for the airship...).
Despite a lot of people's complaints, compatibility on his scripts isn't really any worse than other scripter's, thanks to the aliasing, it's just the stuff he does tends to tread on the feet of other scripts ("Mode 7" Airship? Not if you're using his smooth turning script unless you want to write an exception for the airship...).
Windows XP users, looks like we just got tossed into the sea.
author=TehGuyauthor=Link_2112TBH, Vista was kind of horrid
What about the misguided hate from XP users who go out of their way to tell other people how bad V, 7 and 8 are.
I've kinda blanked out the era I used it. It was Windows ME to XP's 98.
Windows XP users, looks like we just got tossed into the sea.
There's a specific error code that pops up, it reads similar to a memory location: 0x and followed by a bunch in parentheses as well. The first error, the one in all caps that looks like a constant (which, in truth, it is - it's just spitting out in a legible way), refers to the general error and those strings of numbers and letters the specific issues. There is a lot of stuff to pay attention to in those strings, and they can change from crash to crash - which is, in itself, telling.
If it is MEMORY_MANAGEMENT, the Stop code should ends in 1A - the exact error is based on the first 0x number in parentheses (at least the exact error that's of any importance for a MEMORY_MANAGEMENT fault).
If it is MEMORY_MANAGEMENT, the Stop code should ends in 1A - the exact error is based on the first 0x number in parentheses (at least the exact error that's of any importance for a MEMORY_MANAGEMENT fault).
Windows XP users, looks like we just got tossed into the sea.
author=pianotm
I only use this computer to surf the net.
Then you definitely need to be running something newer than XP or else have a hell of a protection suite on it. XP hasn't technically been internet safe for a couple years now without a protection suite behind it (when the mainstream support for it ended, so did it's safety).
Two years old with 2 gigs of memory, sounds like a potential memory fault (seriously, to know exactly what's going on, I'd have to see the entire error code, and there's two of them that pop up on a Windows 7 blue screen). As it's a laptop, even more likely - I just looked up the specs on what the machine, but I can't find one that fits the specs you gave, a 4530s should have 4 gigs of RAM by factory specs and didn't come with a 100gb drive standard (smallest ever jammed into a 4530s that I can find recorded is a 120, which, including overhead, does fit the 100 number roughly).
If you think the OS was installed wrong, it's not the OS' fault you're experiencing errors. Also, running the install program to "repair" an install shouldn't require a reformat.
If it is a 32-bit/64-bit issue, the only solutions are either a) change the processor to a 64-bit processor or b) change the operating system to a 32-bit OS. But given the model number you've given, you're running a 64-bit processor; errors are extremely hard to diagnose given so very little information with a bias for a dislike of the system. =P
Windows XP users, looks like we just got tossed into the sea.
As a constant user of both Windows XP (the laptop I'm currently using) and Windows 7 (both desktops I own), Windows 7 just... feels better. Like, way way better. It's a UX thing.
On top of that, Windows 7 is, on the same system capable of supporting it, more stable. If you're getting errors, it's because a) you don't have enough memory in your computer (and thus you're way behind the computing curve cause Windows 7 really doesn't require much of anything) or b) there's a fault in your RAM (this is fairly common on older computers and even newer prebuilts). What most people don't realize is that the hardware breaks down with use - if you have a computer that came with XP installed (which hasn't happened in seven or eight years), chances are your hardware is starting to fail.
The cult around an inferior product is people still clinging to Windows XP on the view you've just argued. "Oh, it's the same so why would I upgrade?" It's not the same. It's... just better.
1) It has emulation for other Windows OSes built in. Windows XP can't support things that require a newer operating system (and they exist; if you haven't run into them, you're either extremely lucky or don't use your computer more than lightly)
2) Encryption is built into Windows 7. It doesn't exist without using third party software in Windows XP.
3) Built in VPN support. Holy shit, this was a nice feature.
4) Chances are if you're still using Windows XP, you have a 32-bit system. 64-bit was introduced late into XP's life cycle. If you want a computer that's still capable of properly running modern software, you need a 64-bit processor and operating system. While you're updating to a 64-bit OS, Windows 7 is a good step.
5) The Start Menu. Holy crap, so much easier to use on Windows 7, and it doesn't take up ten miles of screen space.
6) The Ribbon interface. Again, UI not taking up ten miles of screen space.
7) Built in DirectX11 support.
8) A taskbar that intelligently groups similar windows instead of turning them into tiny tabs. Beautiful if you have more than a half dozen programs running at once.
PS: If you're really having memory trouble with Windows 7, turn off Aero. It's the major hog of memory on the system. The system requirements plummet without it. Either that, or you're running a 64-bit Windows 7 on a 32-bit system (holy shit - fix that now) - in fact, given your description, this is the most likely scenario: a processor/OS mismatch; 32-bit can run on a 64-bit processor, but 64-bit cannot run on a 32-bit processor.
Windows 8 isn't missing the Start Menu anymore. It was. Users complained. They put it back in. Problem solved and need for reading comprehension proven. =P
e: 9) Windows XP's Extended Support period just ended (unless you're a corporate user with XP Embedded, which most users are not). Standard support for Windows 7 continues until January of next year, with Extended Support lasting until 2020.
On top of that, Windows 7 is, on the same system capable of supporting it, more stable. If you're getting errors, it's because a) you don't have enough memory in your computer (and thus you're way behind the computing curve cause Windows 7 really doesn't require much of anything) or b) there's a fault in your RAM (this is fairly common on older computers and even newer prebuilts). What most people don't realize is that the hardware breaks down with use - if you have a computer that came with XP installed (which hasn't happened in seven or eight years), chances are your hardware is starting to fail.
The cult around an inferior product is people still clinging to Windows XP on the view you've just argued. "Oh, it's the same so why would I upgrade?" It's not the same. It's... just better.
1) It has emulation for other Windows OSes built in. Windows XP can't support things that require a newer operating system (and they exist; if you haven't run into them, you're either extremely lucky or don't use your computer more than lightly)
2) Encryption is built into Windows 7. It doesn't exist without using third party software in Windows XP.
3) Built in VPN support. Holy shit, this was a nice feature.
4) Chances are if you're still using Windows XP, you have a 32-bit system. 64-bit was introduced late into XP's life cycle. If you want a computer that's still capable of properly running modern software, you need a 64-bit processor and operating system. While you're updating to a 64-bit OS, Windows 7 is a good step.
5) The Start Menu. Holy crap, so much easier to use on Windows 7, and it doesn't take up ten miles of screen space.
6) The Ribbon interface. Again, UI not taking up ten miles of screen space.
7) Built in DirectX11 support.
8) A taskbar that intelligently groups similar windows instead of turning them into tiny tabs. Beautiful if you have more than a half dozen programs running at once.
PS: If you're really having memory trouble with Windows 7, turn off Aero. It's the major hog of memory on the system. The system requirements plummet without it. Either that, or you're running a 64-bit Windows 7 on a 32-bit system (holy shit - fix that now) - in fact, given your description, this is the most likely scenario: a processor/OS mismatch; 32-bit can run on a 64-bit processor, but 64-bit cannot run on a 32-bit processor.
Windows 8 isn't missing the Start Menu anymore. It was. Users complained. They put it back in. Problem solved and need for reading comprehension proven. =P
e: 9) Windows XP's Extended Support period just ended (unless you're a corporate user with XP Embedded, which most users are not). Standard support for Windows 7 continues until January of next year, with Extended Support lasting until 2020.
Windows XP users, looks like we just got tossed into the sea.
author=Raveauthor=Link_2112I bet it work great for people with Windows in English. But how about Greek/Japanese/Russian/Polish systems? Do I really have to put up with start menu IN ENGLISH on my Polish machine? Does Ivan has to deal with start menu in ENGLISH on his Russian machine? Does Hiro have to deal with start menu IN ENGLISH on his Japanese machine?
I bet the biggest issue Win8 haters will bring up is lack of start menu. There has been a solution to that since the very beginning, I posted it on page 1 of this topic. I've had it for a full year now. Windows 8 can have FULL START MENU FUNCTIONALITY AND THEN SOME. It's third party software, but has no issues or bugs that I've seen.
If a localization existed before, then they have a localized version of the Start Menu. That's about the long and short of it.
What are you thinking about right now?
author=GreatRedSpirit
e: Square sunk a massive amount of time and capital making FF14 a not-awful game and it turned out pretty well! That and Bravely Default have done wonders for reinspiring faith in them again (although I hope they edge away from AAA game development because it hasn't been working well with them so far)
That would be what comments re: Yoshida were referring to. ;) Have you read the transcripts of his presentation at the GDC recently? He ripped into Square Enix pretty heavily for their methodology since the PS2 era in his explanation of how they managed to save FF14 (and keep the company afloat in doing so).
And Liberty, expect something closer to that - that's part of what Yoshida ripped into them for: his example was the prettiest little flowerpot ever made.
He bit into them fairly heavily about having a very focused frame of mind that, to most of their customers, didn't work and in fact lead to troubles - insane graphics that pressed the system they were on, but, in fact, didn't provide much to the overall gameplay.
The way he phrased this final slide seemed like he was talking about not just the FF14 team, but Square Enix has a whole:
What are you thinking about right now?
author=Liberty
No, you're right. Square tried to take the idea and make it inaccessible to anyone else but they were overruled. Thus, only the code itself is theirs, not the actual idea. I like to think there was a lot of hair-pulling and mouth-frothing when the next RPG came out that used the same system. XD
Don't get me wrong, Square is a company I've loved during my youth, but they have kinda slipped a bit and it is nice to see them frothing at the mouth a little, eating that ol' humble pie. They could do with a few more chomps and then, hopefully, rise from the ashes as a better company.
Square Enix as a company is, at least, starting to come to it's senses. Between the view from Bravely Default's massive success and Yoshida actively speaking out about them being a decade behind the times and doing it wrong (and being able to get away with it because hey, he saved the company from bankruptcy), I think the company as a whole is finally realizing it needs to go back to doing things how it used to do it.
author=GreatRedSpirit
Or patent the most exalted video game idea of all time.
PLAYER quotes MARX
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
WORLD is inflicted with SERFDOM
I just read through all the flow charts in there and I'm laughing. Thank you - my last few hours of planned work time today will now have to be postponed until I can get back on track. ;)
What are you thinking about right now?
The actual code itself is part of proprietary presentation. ;) If the outcome is the same mechanics wise but different on the code side, it's not an infringement of the proprietary... thing (oh god, words escaping).
Then again, I'm not a lawyer and the practice is only from legal advice from a Canadian stand point - the company I work for last year had a subtask assigned to us to examine a potential copyright infringement by an open source project. After three days spent examining the two sets of code, legal advice came down that it would be impossible to press the case because, while the end result played the same, the process of getting to that end result was vastly different (and, in fact and very amusingly, the open source version was the better way to get to the end result).
Then again, I'm not a lawyer and the practice is only from legal advice from a Canadian stand point - the company I work for last year had a subtask assigned to us to examine a potential copyright infringement by an open source project. After three days spent examining the two sets of code, legal advice came down that it would be impossible to press the case because, while the end result played the same, the process of getting to that end result was vastly different (and, in fact and very amusingly, the open source version was the better way to get to the end result).
Games - Tester
Games - Other
