RPG Maker Needs To Break Its' Limits

[Tsukihime]

I've seen a couple RM projects on some consoles (xbox maybe?). Kind of wondering how they did it when most of the posts here are saying it isn't possible.

Unfortunately there is no way that the editor could possibly know what state the game should be in when a map is entered for the first time.

Just feed that information to the engine and then it knows lol

 

[BigEd781]

I've seen a couple RM projects on some consoles (xbox maybe?). Kind of wondering how they did it when most of the posts here are saying it isn't possible.

Just feed that information to the engine and then it knows lol

You mean, like setting variables and switches manually (which is, of course, what we already do)? I fail to see how that improves anything.

Also note that you are probably just be seeing RM resources in use on a console game, not the engine. No one who has half a brain would say it is impossible, just very difficult and time consuming. Please see:

 

[Tsukihime]

You mean, like setting variables and switches manually (which is, of course, what we already do)? I fail to see how that improves anything.

What if you're testing the same situation several times using the exact same settings?

You're duplicating effort.

Plus if I'm working with variables, it's easier to type in 1283 than having to increment by 10 and 1.

Also note that you are probably just be seeing RM resources in use on a console game, not the engine. No one who has half a brain would say it is impossible, just very difficult and time consuming. Please see:

Oh, maybe they were just resources. I never actually looked into what the game was I just assumed it was made with RM and ported using some framework.

 

[amerk]

You can already do that by simply changing the player's start position. It seems to me though that what you really want is a way to start the game at any logical point, i.e., the state of various variables/switches/etc. would be modified to what they would logically be when the player first entered an arbitrary map. Unfortunately there is no way that the editor could possibly know what state the game should be in when a map is entered for the first time.

Going along with the previous poster, it'd be nice to play test the maps itself without having to start the game. Starting the game saves whatever changes you made, but if they could add a play-map-test function, we could simply upload the map as it would look like in game, similar to how we do battle testing. It could be made so that immediate events work within the map (like NPC movement, event interaction, etc), but keep it so the player cannot travel from one map to another. Instead, the moment they leave the map, the playtest would end. This way we get an idea of how the map would work in game without always having to save first.

 

[BigEd781]

What if you're testing the same situation several times using the exact same settings?

You're duplicating effort.

Plus if I'm working with variables, it's easier to type in 1283 than having to increment by 10 and 1.

Then you make an event to set them for you that runs when you enter the map (as we have been doing for years). Problem solved.

Going along with the previous poster, it'd be nice to play test the maps itself without having to start the game. Starting the game saves whatever changes you made, but if they could add a play-map-test function, we could simply upload the map as it would look like in game, similar to how we do battle testing. It could be made so that immediate events work within the map (like NPC movement, event interaction, etc), but keep it so the player cannot travel from one map to another. Instead, the moment they leave the map, the playtest would end. This way we get an idea of how the map would work in game without always having to save first.

I don't know, that's never been a problem for me. People often seem to be under the impression that, if an idea sounds like it might be useful, it should be implemented. Reality doesn't work that way unfortunately. Each feature must be designed, specified, implemented, tested, documented, and shipped. All six of those things are necessary to make a feature happen. All of them cost huge amounts of time, effort and money. All of them are a tradeoff as well; you can only implement N features in a given release, so if you add one you must remove another. I don't think these requests are invalid, I just don't think they're important enough to bother implementing.

 

[Tsukihime]

Then you make an event to set them for you that runs when you enter the map (as we have been doing for years). Problem solved.

That's like me asking "why use an ABS script when you could just event it?"

I'm sure there are use cases where the event solution is unfeasible.

But I guess in the case where someone did manage to port the default engine to some other platform and custom scripts didn't work...the event solution would be the only way around it.

 

[BigEd781]

That's like me asking "why use an ABS script when you could just event it?"

I'm sure there are use cases where the event solution is unfeasible.

But I guess in the case where someone did manage to port the default engine to some other platform and custom scripts didn't work...the event solution would be the only way around it.

Nope, it's not at all like that. I would also be interested in hearing the specifics of the cases where the event solution is "unfeasible".

You are asking for a feature which automates nothing.

Feature requester:

"Make the maker intelligent enough to know that, when I start my character on map M, variables X, Y, and Z should be set to N"

E!:

"That is impossible. The maker cannot determine the state that your game should be in when the player first enters map M. Any number of things may or may not happen between the beginning of the game and that point and there is simply no way the editor can predict which will and will not occur."

Feature requester:

But right now I have to manually change each variable and switch to get the game into the state that I want. This stinks when I need to perform the test more than once.

E!:

That's a valid concern. I suggest you create an event on this map to set them for you when the game begins.

Feature requester:

But... but... I want a new dialog window! It will make my life so much easier! And oh yeah, there are times when the event solution won't work, but I'm not going into specifics.

E!:

....yeah ok it's on the list. Have a good day!

----------

It simply makes no sense. *This cannot be automated*. The computer cannot read your mind.

Really, this is what I do for a living. I have developed some amount of skill in weeding out the good feature requests from the bad. Users are terrible at proposing good, workable solutions. The new "feature" wouldn't save you any work, that is why your analogy is erroneous.

 

[Shaz]

I agree. It is impossible for the engine to know what the game status should be at the beginning of each map, without you playing through the game up to that point.

Honestly, if I want to test a certain map and make sure all variables/switches/player data are set as they would when the player first enters this map, I will play the game up to that point and save it. Then I can load that save file as many times as I want to test the map. It's fairly easy for me, because I create maps/events in about the same order the player will encounter them, so my first test will be for the first map, then when I'm happy that map is good, I'll save at the end, so it's where I need to be to test the next one.

If that's too hard, set your start position on the map, go in and make all the changes you need to, to switches and variables, and then make a save.

As long as you have a save file, you can test from that same point over and over.

 

[Mr. Bubble]

I've seen a couple RM projects on some consoles (xbox maybe?). Kind of wondering how they did it when most of the posts here are saying it isn't possible.

I'm only aware of one RM project on XBLIG right now:



The YT video's description says:

The game is built as an interpreter to Enterbrain's RPG-Maker VX, the visuals are powered by an internally developed lighting and battle system, bloom and post production effects from Microsoft XNA samples and royalty free music from http://incompetech.com

And from the comments:

how u guys acquired the rights to use rpgmaker vx sprites in a commercial game?EvilNando

@EvilNando well, we received their approval but right now, we can't disclose any detail as we are under NDA...theBenjaminFicus

 

[Shaz]

That sounds promising. Maybe EB will allow you to use RM resources in other makers under certain conditions, by prior arrangement. This might be as simple as an additional fee, or could be something more complicated.

 

[sabao]

So far from what I've discussed with Mitchell on IRC, Enterbrain never gives permission to anyone using RM's RTP on different engines. Anyone who's claimed as much is either lying or our resident EB! Rep is severely misinformed (I subscribe more to the former than the latter).

I'm down for an exporter plugin, but seeing as I don't own an XBox, I'll probably sit this one out. Again, I'd vote for something on a mobile platform. Personal preference, more than anything. I find myself more likely to play an RM game while on a train or slacking off at work.

 

[Necromus]

Because the xbox doesn't run ruby but it can run c# and xna. What this means is that NO existing script will work on the xbox. I know I'm going to have fun tracking down every single instance of the script call event I used. Anyway I'm quite likely to port most of my scripts, I already have experience using C# and XNA. Biggest concern for me is that C# is no where near as flexible as ruby, as such I can't imagine any way where we can just release scripts in a copy paste format.

Edit:

Optimistic me would love to see rpg maker on the Ouya if it delivers.

I know that other platforms won't understand Ruby.

However, i thought the goal here is to create an interpreter, that translates the makers ruby code into whatever language needed, not completely rewriting everything in that language from the getgo.

Hence why i thought addidng to existing commands and the like would need to work too, alsong it doesn't expand outswide the original language.

Seems that isn't the case however.

 

[amerk]

I agree. It is impossible for the engine to know what the game status should be at the beginning of each map, without you playing through the game up to that point.

Honestly, if I want to test a certain map and make sure all variables/switches/player data are set as they would when the player first enters this map, I will play the game up to that point and save it. Then I can load that save file as many times as I want to test the map. It's fairly easy for me, because I create maps/events in about the same order the player will encounter them, so my first test will be for the first map, then when I'm happy that map is good, I'll save at the end, so it's where I need to be to test the next one.

If that's too hard, set your start position on the map, go in and make all the changes you need to, to switches and variables, and then make a save.

As long as you have a save file, you can test from that same point over and over.

I don't need to test how a map works with events, but it would be nice to see how the mapping looks in game (using just the graphical events as a 3rd layer) in case something is off, but yeah, it's not a big deal, just something that would be quick and nice from a user perspective, but probably not worth the time from a coding perspective.

Beyond that, there's always going to be a wish list for a better maker, and there's plenty of topics in that regards. EB always manages to come out with something special, and even when features get removed, scripts are usually available to add certain features back in, so not a big deal for me.

Exporting seems to be the next big thing, and hopefully it'll satisfy a good many people once implemented.

 

[deilin]

From the survey, it warned that porting to xbox, and apps, will cot YOU money, even if you dont sell the game. There individual program fees and monthly/yearly comercissl fees.

Not to mention local taxes on all this, and any fees to go international in some areas.

 

[BigEd781]

...I will play the game up to that point and save it. Then I can load that save file as many times as I want to test the map.

Be careful though; that method can lead to problems as certain data is stored in save files that will not be updated when you make changes in the editor. Best to stick with the "create an event to set variables and/or switches X, Y, and Z" method.

 

[Levi]

Yeah. Just have a blank map, with events (label them "Map1 start" "Map2 start" etc) that autorun and change the necessary switches/variables. When you need to test, copy them into their respective map. Voila.

The biggest issue is with "optional" switches (that provide secret, bonus, varied content) and variables (since they aren't as simple as "on and off".)

Look at it this way. I'm on Map1 fishing... I catch 4/10 fish before the timer is out. When I go to Map2 to talk to the fisherman, he has two possible reactions [branches]. One for 5 or more fish and one for 5 or less fish. The game isn't gonna guess how many fish I caught.

It's never going to happen. Either make the "start events" as you make the maps, and save them in an empty map/project... or make the events as you go. Or use the console.

 

[sabao]

From the survey, it warned that porting to xbox, and apps, will cot YOU money, even if you dont sell the game. There individual program fees and monthly/yearly comercissl fees.

Not to mention local taxes on all this, and any fees to go international in some areas.

Local taxes only come up once you start distribution if I'm not mistaken, but you're right about the other costs. For the iOS, you'll need an Apple Developer license for distribution rights and even just testing on your device and it costs around 100 USD a year. There's a workaround, of course. You could test on the Mac's built-in iOS emulator that comes with Xcode (which sucks horribly, but beggars can't be choosers), or you go the illegal way and jailbreak your device.

 

[BigEd781]

I don't know... I think RPG Maker on Xbox (or something similar) is a bit silly. Look, if you want to develop "real" games on relatively exotic platforms then you need to learn how to program. I would be willing to wager that the number of people who would actually publish decent games made with RM on Xbox arcade (or whatever it's called) would be so laughably low that it would be a completely wasted feature. Want to make an Xbox game? Go learn C++ or C# and do it the way everyone else does. RM is great, don't get me wrong, but it's a toy.

 

[sabao]

That's pretty much how I feel, plus consider the competition. I'd stick to smartphones and portables. The latter might actually still be a tough sell.

 

[Indinera]

I would be willing to wager that the number of people who would actually publish decent games made with RM on Xbox arcade (or whatever it's called) would be so laughably low that it would be a completely wasted feature.

I'm willing to bet RM games could do very well on Xbox. If you look at the top-sellers in the indie RPG genre, most of the games are hardly better than RM games, quite the contrary. I wouldn't qualify them as "impressive" or anything. Last time I checked, the graphics were very retro, the art was subpar compared to what the best RM games deliver, the games themselves were short... nothing particularly ground-breaking or that a RM game can't do.

The feature would serve people who want to go commercial and are interested porting their games to new platforms. Again, it depends on the meaning you give to "wasted". It may be used only by a small percentage of makers, but for these, it would make a big difference.

RM is great, don't get me wrong, but it's a toy.

Not everybody treats it as a toy.