@Ashouse:
At the current moment, with the bitmap loading memory leak issue, using parallaxes as maps would be like gambling. In my experiments (RMMV caching disabled), the memory leak appeared, at most, once for each bitmap. For example, at the start, my RAM usage was 4 GB. After loading some big images, the RAM usage peaked to 5,5 GB and then fell to 4,7 GB, although it should have fallen to 4 GB. But when I loaded the same images again, it again peaks at 5,5 GB and then drops to 4,7 GB (by the way, without disabling the RMMV caching, it would peak at 5,5 GB and stay there). So, if you use big parallaxes plus my plugin, in the worst case when the force is not with you, the player's computer would need enough RAM to store all parallaxes at the same time in it due to the memory leak - so the parallax approach would only be viable at the current RMMV state when you know that the player has tons of RAM or if you only use a few parallaxes, the smaller, the better. Thus I strongly advise against it at the current state //rmwforums.s3.amazonaws.com/emoticons/default_biggrin.gif
A parallax for each map means loading time at the start of each new map, the bigger the parallax, the longer the loading time. And every image needs space which makes your game bigger. Furthermore, you'd need pictures for the upper layers - if you want to walk behind the tree, this tree can not be on the parallax image. Again, more space and loading time.
The tileset approach does not have these disadvantages. The map drawing works in a way that the visible tiles are copied from the tileset bitmaps onto the screen. These bitmaps are kept in memory with caching, so they need to be loaded only once (when the player steps onto a map, its respective tilesets are loaded if they are not cached yet). Furthermore, the storage space needed is only that of the tilesets.