Suggestions for the next RPG Maker

[DS Piron]

...Prerendered backgrounds is parallax mapping.


The issue is that you would like it as a feature of 3D RPG Maker, and they* appear to have though you were suggesting a feature for the current RPG Maker.


(*along with myself. I originally was going to elaborate that you don't need 3D movement to use a 2D prerendered background, as the characters still walk on the ground. But it does allow the 3D models to be scaled accordingly. Then I checked. : P)


--------


When I think of it, aside from the mapping thing (I'd suggest a system like modern** RTS Map Editors), a 3D RPG Maker might be feasible.


But it would take a large amount of work.


A lot of visual systems would need to be revamped.


It probably would even more unacceptable to not show the characters actually fighting. Which would require coming up with an easy-to-use animation system.


One would still need to 3D model the events that aren't human, like Chests, Switches, Monsters and Etc.(plus things like crates, statues, and general terrain things that couldn't be simple flat shapes.)


...

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

The thread is clearly *FOR THE NEXT RPG MAKER*


We simply respond like it's for the current maker (or so it seems) when we think it's doable in the current one...

A lot of visual systems would need to be revamped.

I'd say everything will need to be revamped.


@hian - I think it's because most people who wants 3D wants it to be like the full higher-poly 3D style...

 

[DS Piron]

Not the Menu or Sta-
Oh, wait, everything visual.
Yeah, even the window boxes might need to changed to work in a 3D environment.
 

...for the record, by 'current RPG Maker' I meant more along the lines of "The next 2D RPG Maker" (Which is likely to be the next RPG Maker, period. )

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

I think so, which is why I say everything...


It might still work currently as it is, but that would mean that they won't be able to support anything 3D (like 3D rotations or movement of the menu), so it would probably be revamped anyways...

 

[Pugh95Bear]

If animated menues are possible via scripting, then we really wouldn't need a 3D Title/Start screen.

 

[hian]

Prerendered background is an official development term for a 3d environment that has been rendered and then made into a static backdrop. Parallax backgrounds, as far as I know, refers specifically to rpgmaker, and when it doesn't refer to the static background of the map, it refers to when the background when used as a replacement for the tile mapping.

Both is beside the point however, since I clearly state, twice, that I'm talking about replicating FF7-9 graphical design, which parallax mapping alone cannot do. I'm talking about adding a third axis for characters and events to move on, which would allow for the illusion of depth, and therefore allow users to simulate 3d on 2d backdrops.

The reason why this is relatively easy to do, is because it could even be done with 2d assets, by having the map maker operate as a "room" with one more axis(x,y,z) and having the z axis be connected to a zoom function(z 10 being close to the screen/zoom in, and z -10 being the opposite) that applies to the player, and events.

That's it - and now you could achieve star ocean 2 level graphics.

As for why people would assume I'm talking about tweaking the current rpgmaker is beyond me.

My point was simply that many of the features I would want for the next, are features we already have for this one with scripts.

I just think that having these features native in the next rpgmaker would solve a lot of issues pertaining to bugs and compatibility with future scripts, while making things easier for the userbase.

Edit :

No, menu windows and message boxes would not need a lot of changing for a 3d environment.

These graphics are typically 2d images displayed on top of the 3d environment, and are therefore completely irrelevant.

They would function just as before.

As for animations and assets - again, I'm not talking about FF10 level graphics here.

FF tactics, or breath of fire 3-4 would still be a huge upgrade from the current level of graphics.

a simple drag and drop 32x32 box system, with texture support for the evironment, and 2d sprites for characters, and maybe a 2x2 editor for drawing simple 3d assets, and that would be awesome.

Again, when people seem to be fine with the current graphics, why is an improvement bad simply because it doesn't take the 1000 mile leap into next gen console graphics?

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

If animated menues are possible via scripting, then we really wouldn't need a 3D Title/Start screen.

Depends on the animation... but in case we have a full 3D RM, then probably people will want to use models in the title screen too, so that means the title screen will need to support it too...


Now if we go with Hian's 2D on 3D space (I think people call it 2.5D), then yes we don't need to change the current set-up that much


Anyway, I think it was settled on the previous discussions that 3D would mean a full 3D environment using models and such...


a 2.5D style seems far more doable, and we'd be able to use the current assets toosince it's basically using 2D graphics in a seemingly 3D space creating the illusion of being 3D... and I think is basically what Hian suggests

The reason why this is relatively easy to do, is because it could even be done with 2d assets, by having the map maker operate as a "room" with one more axis(x,y,z) and having the z axis be connected to a zoom function(z 10 being close to the screen/zoom in, and z -10 being the opposite) that applies to the player, and events.

 

[Pugh95Bear]

Some of you may kill me for making this comparison, but by 2.5D, do you mean something like the layout of Paper Mario? Obviously our screens wouldnt have to be as cartoonish, and it was just a comparison to the idea anyway.

 

[DS Piron]

Basically, 2D sprites on a 3D background (pre-rendered or real time), I reckon.

Paper Mario might be a bit inaccurate, as the game didn't try to hide the fact that it

used 2D images.

--------

Both is beside the point however, since I clearly state, twice, that I'm talking about replicating FF7-9 graphical design, which parallax mapping alone cannot do. I'm talking about adding a third axis for characters and events to move on, which would allow for the illusion of depth, and therefore allow users to simulate 3d on 2d backdrops.

The confusion was resulting because that point was missed.

Parallax Mapping can easily be done with a pre-rendered 3D backdrop, instead of a pre-assembled tile backdrop.

Another thing that's not readily apparent (at least to me) was how would the third axis be used?

To my knowledge, the worst issue one would have with using FF7 backgrounds in the current RPG Maker is that the sprites don't scale with background.

EDIT:And that's what you were proposing.

As for why people would assume I'm talking about tweaking the current rpgmaker is beyond me.

The 'Current' is my fault. I was using it to separate between A 2D over-the-perspective Next RPG Maker, and a 3D one.

I don't even know if my statement was right, but yeah, no one thought you were talking about tweaking VX Ace.

As for animations and assets - again, I'm not talking about FF10 level graphics here.
FF tactics, or breath of fire 3-4 would still be a huge upgrade from the current level of graphics.

I was more thinking along the lines of FF7 graphics.

Again, when people seem to be fine with the current graphics, why is an improvement bad simply because it doesn't take the 1000 mile leap into next gen console graphics?

It's less bad, and more "would Enterbrain do it?", and half the issue is that it would be the 1000 mile leap.

There also good old fashioned, devil's advocacy, to find out what the issues might be, and get a start on figuring them out, for the heck of it.

Of course, in some cases it would trump up somethings

For instance the menus, message windows, and etc.: Would they work without changes when there's a 3-Dimensional space behind it?

I don't know.

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

Basically 2.5 is using some techniques to make a game that uses 2D sprites look 3D...

Parallax Mapping can easily be done with a pre-rendered 3D backdrop, instead of a pre-assembled tile backdrop.

If you pre-render that 3D backdrop to use as a parallax then it simply becomes a 2D parallax...

Another thing that's not readily apparent (at least to me) was how would the third axis be used?


To my knowledge, the worst issue one would have with using FF7 backgrounds in the current RPG Maker is that the sprites don't scale with background.

That is why it was a "suggestion for the next maker", because of course the current maker doesn't support the necessary elements for a 2.5D style like scaling / zoom-in/out depending on your "depth"

The 'Current' is my fault. I was using it to separate between A 2D over-the-perspective Next RPG Maker, and a 3D one.

We don't even know if the next will be like that... so using current to say the next maker is really confusing... because after all, current is current

For instance the menus, message windows, and etc.: Would they work without changes when there's a 3-Dimensional space behind it?


I don't know.

If we go with 2.5D, I think they would work with minimal changes or nothing at all... but if we go full 3D, it probably won't...

 

[amerk]

The more I think about it, the more I begin to realize I'd just be happy if they made the next RM work on a tablet with a touch-screen interface. I love my laptop, which I prefer over any PC because of being able to port it all around my house, but going out it's still cumbersome.

Having RM designed to work on a tablet would make it a lot easier to work on a project or play a game while you are on the go. Plus, making the next RM editor touch-screen based may mean easier conversion for touch-screen games.

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

I would really love if we can resize the windows... and be able to keep the different managers open (database,script,etc) at the same time... and possibly, don't change too much the way RGSS3 works so that porting scripts will be much easier...


and of course, porting to other devices specially mobiles, so I guess that comes with mouse-click/touch support

 

[TheoAllen]

The next RPG Maker should more support on midi. I noticed that I can not import midis using Resource Manager. And play BGM at specified position using script isn't working either

 

[Andar]

The next RPG Maker should more support on midi. I noticed that I can not import midis using Resource Manager. And play BGM at specified position using script isn't working either

The problem with that idea is that MIDI is not an audio format - they would need to include an entire software synthesizer inside RM to make MIDI usable and convert the MIDI-data into an audio-output.

If that is an option then this support would be nice, but somehow I don't think that they're willing to put that into the engine instead of letting the sounddriver handle the audio-files...

 

[Tsukihime]

Don't they already support midi? Or...some form of midi?

 

[cabfe]

The problem with that idea is that MIDI is not an audio format - they would need to include an entire software synthesizer inside RM to make MIDI usable and convert the MIDI-data into an audio-output.

If that is an option then this support would be nice, but somehow I don't think that they're willing to put that into the engine instead of letting the sounddriver handle the audio-files...

Isn't that the job of the sound card ?

I do have an old computer so I don't know if modern sound cards no longer support midi.

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

I believe sound cards don't do anything than accept the input of whatever program accesses it's drivers... so if the program itself cannot read the MIDI, then the sound card won't have any input either...


Unlike audio formats which are actually records of sounds themselves, MIDI is like an instruction set used to produce sounds, which is why the program needs to have a MIDI synthesizer in order to change that into real audio which will then be sent to the sound card...


Plus I find midi files to have too large file sizes...

 

[Tsukihime]

Too large compared to what? Mp3? Wav? OGG?


There are standard sound formats SMALLER than midi's?


Am I strictly thinking of the old midi's that were like, 40 KB in size for a full 4 minute track.

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

The midi files I encountered on my comp are yes, larger than MP3... IDK why... and it's been long since I had them... maybe my memory is just wrong...

 

[cabfe]

I guess it's your memory playing you tricks. As you said, midi files only contain instructions, not the actual sound. There is no way it can be bigger than a regular mp3 file .