RGSS 3 & RMXP

[Rogue Knight]

Reader,

Out of the three releases in the US RPG Maker XP has and still is my favorite out of the 3 engines. VX and Ace just lack GOOD mapping and in no way compares to RMXP mapping ability. I have been here in the shadows watching and seeing polls on "what you want to see next" (mostly resources and RPG 2003). However, if Enterabrain released even a PAID update for RMXP to advance it to RGSS 3 that would be cool. I was just curious if any such thing is in the works or could be possible?

v/Respectfully,

Rogue Knight

 

[Majirefy]

Seems no possible...

I like Map Style in XP very much, too.

But XP cannot deal with RGSS3 and Other Language such as Chinese...

:wacko: <_<

 

[Mihel]

How about a paid update for XP mapping system in Ace.

I'd rather have old features in new makers than new features in old makers.

 

[amerk]

I personally like the style of RM2K/3, and VX/Ace. I never could get into XP, but that's primarily based upon my style of preference. That's not to say I haven't seen a decent games come out of XP, but not really my thing to make a game with. However, I'm all for Degica updating XP, and any other maker for that matter, especially if catering to the preference of the user means keeping the RM community alive for many years to come.

 

[PK8]

I've done it. It's pretty similar to how Dargor achieved having RGSS2 capabilities in RMXP, but this one's a bit different. I will be writing a tutorial on it in just a moment.

 

[Victor Sant]

In fact there's no huge advantage in using RGSS3 on XP, in fact it's a disvantage. You may gain some new methods, but theres a HUGE loss in perfomance since you need to use a Tilemap rewrite, and there's no reliable tilemap rewrite.

What makes RGSS3 great is the default VXa Script, with it's new structure. And that isn't usable on XP.

 

[Rafael_Sol_Maker]

In fact there's no huge advantage in using RGSS3 on XP, in fact it's a disvantage. You may gain some new methods, but theres a HUGE loss in perfomance since you need to use a Tilemap rewrite, and there's no reliable tilemap rewrite.

What makes RGSS3 great is the default VXa Script, with it's new structure. And that isn't usable on XP.

Heheh, Victor, in VX the history was other, the conversion was rather good...Back to topic: Seriously, an updated RMXP would be sooo cool! We got a updated VX, why not a RPG Maker XP Ace?

Personally I love most of the RTP style and the mapping is arguably better with 3 layers and unlimited tileset size (well, it's more complex and maybe not performance-wise, but I like it)

 

[Levi]

It would make more sense (and be easier, all around) to simulate/port an XP style mapping system into Ace. Why transfer the entire Script to the old engine? It'll be messy as hell.

As opposed to bringing EVERYTHING from Ace into XP... why not bring ONE things from XP into Ace?

Plus, it doesn't make sense for EB to do this.

Let's take all the features that people pay $90 for in Ace, and put them into XP... which is only$30!! That's such a good idea!

EB would have to re-price XP. It would at least have to be the same price as Ace.

At that point, you're just paying for Ace with XP's mapping... the same result as just putting XP's mapping into Ace in the first place.

tldr

It makes more sense to just release an "upgrade" [paid or not] for Ace. It just makes sense. Why do more work, when you can do less and get the exact same result?

I admit... It'd be awesome. I love XP's style.

 

[Rafael_Sol_Maker]

Just port some features? Nah, it's inneficient, and will not replace the map editor, as it’s the main problem. Layers we still have 3, but the map editor doen't allows full access to them.

I would like to see a complete overhaul in XP, a complete revision like VX was received. That map editor is really good. Well, maybe bringing some capabilities of actual Ace (or VX) too (faces, vehicles, musics in .OGG, etc.), to add something more in the package.

It would worth full $60 or $90, as it would be like a Ace with a different map editor, and RTP style, among other new features to XP "series", maybe. It's why I always refused to say that VX is a XP upgrade, VX is completely different RPG Maker and it received a upgrade, like RM2k/2k3.

Now I wonder… When XP will receive its upgrade?

 

[Tsukihime]

If XP gets an upgrade, it will likely be the same case as VX: your old projects won't work and your scripts won't work either.

 

[Rafael_Sol_Maker]

If XP gets an upgrade, it will likely be the same case as VX: your old projects won't work and your scripts won't work either.

Maybe, who knows. Anyway it will worth the upgrade. (=

 

[Touchfuzzy]

I wish it wasn't named VX Ace, so people would stop assuming its just "an upgrade" of vx.

Seriously, if you remove the whole RTP style thing (which jesus guys you can make different style tiles/sprites), the difference between VX and Ace is just as large if not larger than XP to VX. If Ace is "Just an Upgrade of VX" then VX is "Just an Upgrade of XP".

Seriously, ignore the graphics format. Forget that one thing. And examine everything else. And you will see exactly what I'm saying. And let's be honest here, in the grand total of the entire program, the graphics formats are A REALLY SMALL THING. And keeping the graphics format was so that everyone had huge backlogs of fan made graphical materials to work with.

The ONLY thing XP has going for it over Ace is the maps. And if you know what you are doing in Ace, that is not a problem at all. The idea that XP needs an "upgrade" (which isn't even what Ace WAS) is really just not true.

 

[prexus]

Touchfuzzy: While I agree with you on almost every point, the one thing I don't agree on is that XP's mapping can be done in VX "if you know what you are doing." There is no way to add a third layer, unlimited tileset sizes, and 96x96 Autotiles into VX/Ace without heavy scripting, which isn't a matter of just "knowing what you are doing."

The only option to get mapping as close to XP, or with even better results is to use what people here call "Parallax Mapping" which really should be renamed to Pre-Rendered Mapping, where you create the entire map in a graphics editor like Photoshop and export it as a large image, and use it as a background. There are several problems with this: As a result, you can't use actual Parallax backgrounds like scrolling clouds or stars without large amounts of messing around and use of Scripts, mapping the collision can be a HUGE chore (particularly if you don't think about your grid when you are making the map outside the editor, and it forces you OUTSIDE the editor.

If making Pre-Rendered Maps is what you expect people to do to achieve a level of mapping quality consistent or greater than XP (a far superior map editor by leaps and bounds) then why even have a map editor to begin with? Why not just have a really awesome way of placing objects and creating Pre-Rendered "style" maps WITHIN the RPG Maker software, very similar to the way you can create maps with the editor Tiled? (Which is a fantastic editor to achieve the XP/Pre-Rendered map style without using Photoshop and with keeping the Grid in mind!)

 

[Touchfuzzy]

Touchfuzzy: While I agree with you on almost every point, the one thing I don't agree on is that XP's mapping can be done in VX "if you know what you are doing." There is no way to add a third layer, unlimited tileset sizes, and 96x96 Autotiles into VX/Ace without heavy scripting, which isn't a matter of just "knowing what you are doing."

Second and third layer can be done with events and scripts that let you use the region layer to give you an extra layer. Honestly though, I don't think really going to the region layer is even necessary. People exaggerate the need to stack things on top of each other to that degree. And Ace makes cosmetic eventing much more viable as it cuts lag down so much its a nonissue. Unlimited tilesets is really a red herring, because I can't think of a legitimate case anyone would have for using the full A-E tileset in ONE MAP. Also XP lagged when you tried to use "unlimited tilesets" so really there was a practical limitation there anyway.

The autotile format of XP is the one thing I think you have a good point with, but even in that case, I think people stress how necessary it really is. And even with that, I can get around some of the limitations with tileb-e layer tricks combined with shift clicking.

EDIT: I'm not denying that XP has a better autotile format, and that the layer control isn't awesome. IT REALLY IS, I'm just saying that Ace outdoes it so much in every other area, that layer control+autotile format are the only two things I see XP as really better at, so IF we were going to do an update (which I'm not speaking as a rep here, so don't try to make something of this more than a fan rambling) it would be better to give Ace layer control and better autotiles than to try to bring XP up to Ace.

 

[Tsukihime]

Yes, ace does outperform XP in many areas.

Except mapping, which is quite a large component of game design.

I guess people complained that mapping is too much manual labor and wanted more automated stuff, and so EB responded by giving more auto-tiles and less need to think about layers yourself (it's built into autotiles)

Naturally, having full control over a map means a lot of manual labor.

 

[prexus]

Second and third layer can be done with events and scripts that let you use the region layer to give you an extra layer. Honestly though, I don't think really going to the region layer is even necessary. People exaggerate the need to stack things on top of each other to that degree. And Ace makes cosmetic eventing much more viable as it cuts lag down so much its a nonissue. Unlimited tilesets is really a red herring, because I can't think of a legitimate case anyone would have for using the full A-E tileset in ONE MAP. Also XP lagged when you tried to use "unlimited tilesets" so really there was a practical limitation there anyway.

The autotile format of XP is the one thing I think you have a good point with, but even in that case, I think people stress how necessary it really is. And even with that, I can get around some of the limitations with tileb-e layer tricks combined with shift clicking.

EDIT: I'm not denying that XP has a better autotile format, and that the layer control isn't awesome. IT REALLY IS, I'm just saying that Ace outdoes it so much in every other area, that layer control+autotile format are the only two things I see XP as really better at, so IF we were going to do an update (which I'm not speaking as a rep here, so don't try to make something of this more than a fan rambling) it would be better to give Ace layer control and better autotiles than to try to bring XP up to Ace.

If you want to get into Events being a third layer, then RMXP has 4 Layers. If you use the default VX/Ace tilesets, you don't need more layers or tiles than what is given. When you start moving onto different tilesets that use different proportions, you start to run into a problem. For example, without 2+ upper layers, you can't have trees that are 5 tiles wide and 6 tiles tall overlap in any particularly interesting way. You could make more tiles, and more tiles, and more tiles for all the different combinations but you eventually run out of tiles. You can only add so much more from events. Then you are left with Pre-Rendered Mapping.

Also, while Cosmetic Eventing is great in small doses, when you start covering half to two thirds of your map in events just to achieve a certain level of aesthetic, you are now running into serious lag problems just from events. Not to mention that is significantly less room on your map to place events that actually add to gameplay.

Yes, XP lagged when you used massive tilesets. Pretty horrendously actually, but I have overextended the A1-5BCDE tiles many times in trying to achieve an effect I wanted. I also don't consider A1-4 to be usable since the 64x64 autotiles are almost too small to even make useful autotiles out of. The problem isn't with shift clicking and "tricks", it's that the corners of the tiles are 16x16 tiles. You probably understand this since it's a point you agreed with me on but in a system of 32x32 tiles, why would any one tile be less than that? The corners are 16x16, the edges are 16x32 (and 32x16 respectively.) This not only creates an unattractive block-y effect (which works fine with the default tiles, I guess.) but it makes the autotiles almost impossible to create new tiles with in any style other than the Dragon Warrior-esque style that Enterbrain has attempted to force feed us through the RTP and mapping system. This is a MAJOR issue for anyone trying to use the software as it was intended but still utilize a different style.

There is only so much space on A5 you can use to create non-autotile ground tiles, and then you are forced onto B-E which eliminates your ability to layer tiles, except with events which is not an option I agree with.

Edit: Since I was oblivious to your last line and now realize you didn't need further persuasion, I'll add that I also agree that VX Ace does everything better than XP except mapping. Yet, Mapping is one of the most important things in a 2D RPG. It's not something that can just be worse because everything else is better. Enterbrain had a chance already to fix the huge step backwards they made with VX, with Ace. They chose to focus on one small thing (tilesets) and not take the effort to remake the mapping system or implement XP's mapping system. This was a huge oversight.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

Yet, Mapping is one of the most important things in a 2D RPG.

I strongly disagree. Mapping just seems important in RM communities because people would have to actually finish games to show off anything else.

Seriously, writing is more important, the mechanics are more important, and most of the important parts of mapping are in practical use (do I have clear pathways, can people tell what is going on, can people tell what they need to examine and what is background noise) and have nothing to do with layers or autotiles.

(Not saying having better mapping wouldn't be awesome, IT WOULD BE, its just that I don't see it as an absolute necessity, and even without XP style mapping, I see no reason to personally use XP over Ace.)

 

[Peltron]

I would totally pay for an upgrade/whatnot to be able to get an XP style of mapping or something far better than it. Everything is just way too squared for my tastes, and the autoshadows. Ugh. T.T

Mapping may not be the most important step in game making, but it certainly is important. Enterbrain should have changed the mapping system with ACE, instead of keeping a GBC like style for mapping.

 

[prexus]

I strongly disagree. Mapping just seems important in RM communities because people would have to actually finish games to show off anything else.

Seriously, writing is more important, the mechanics are more important, and most of the important parts of mapping are in practical use (do I have clear pathways, can people tell what is going on, can people tell what they need to examine and what is background noise) and have nothing to do with layers or autotiles.

(Not saying having better mapping wouldn't be awesome, IT WOULD BE, its just that I don't see it as an absolute necessity, and even without XP style mapping, I see no reason to personally use XP over Ace.)

Mapping dictates the entire flow of the game and gameplay. It is of the few visual ways we can demonstrate mood and theme to our players. It is a key element in gameplay in a 2D RPG because we can't rely on oddly placed obstacles to direct the player, such as a Platformer would. Many RPGs stem from that their worlds, while often ripe with fantasy and myth, are real places and follow many of the rules that keep our world grounded. A platform can't float in an abyss, without a player going "Huh?" even if they can see past it for it's gameplay use.

We create pathways to guide our players, we create mazes to confuse them. We split screens to create a division of idea much like a writer uses a period to end a thought. We craft worlds so that our players can become lost in them. Writing is a key element in character development, and driving story in most traditional games but when faced with a wall of text, players often feel disjointed and find that artificial barrier hard to overcome.

How we choose for the player to see the world we have crafted for them is by all means of the utmost importance.

(disclaimer: I'm not saying graphics are everything, Graphics != Map Creation. Earthbound has done a better job at creating an enjoyable, lovable world than any Final Fantasy game since lolgraphics became the mindset of the Triple A industry)

 

[Mako]

Yeah... I'm working with a very small map 21x21 and to achieve the effect native to XP causes massive lag in Ace. The way I see it is aether way I'm gonna get lag, might as well use Ace. =/