YF'S PROFILE

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.

Nice combination.

They decided Raichu wasn't a manly enough evolution so they decided to make use of the FIGHTING STONE!
Pikachu + Fighting Stone = PikaCHO
Type: Ghost

~?

Disgaea 1 and 2
Final Fantasy Tactics
Half-Minute Hero (I'm still playing this)
Mana Khemia
Persona 3 Portable
Yggdra Union

I found all those to be enjoyable.