VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Printable Version+- Save-Point (https://www.save-point.org)
+-- Forum: Games Development (https://www.save-point.org/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Development Discussion (https://www.save-point.org/forum-17.html)
+--- Thread:
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. (/thread-2930.html)VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - DerVVulfman - 11-28-2009
The RMVX mapping tools in my viewpoint were more a downgrade from XP's, though others may feel otherwise. I prefer more control on what I draw and yes... I tend to be meticulous. I want to be able to switch from one actual layer to another rather than having the map design engine 'autoadjust' for me.
Think they shoulda had a [beginner/advanced] button in the map design window somewhere?
I also miss good old terrain tags that have been around for a while, as well as a full blown 640X480 window. I know they scrunched the size down by a couple tiles wide and tall and removed some map features to speed up the frame rate, but I worked to re-install terrain tags (successfully) and got no speed degredation. I think they should have kept the map features that were in XP and just optimize the default scripts.
XP Kobold. For a looping map, I really... REALLY... recommend MGC's Mode7 scripts. Besides the Mode7, it has a great maploop system.
Oh, and the debate on the RTP Graphics? Big whoop. Don't we all try to find better graphics anyway??
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Rusty - 11-28-2009
Well, i like some feature in VX like double animation and Paralax, but for mapping and another thing i like it better in XP.
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Dark Santum - 11-28-2009
VX mapping system and tiles isn't that good but their scripting system is better than XP.
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - DerVVulfman - 11-28-2009
You mean apart from a few bugs that we immediately caught (The Interpreter fix & etc.) and the fact they took lessons from the RMXP SDK. Scene_Base, for example, was already in the SDK before RMVX was released. I can't really stop saying enterbrain owed Seph and Trickster royalties for that one.
But couldn't they have kept actor battlers AND have face graphics too? I mean... to update and improve a system, you don't remove features.
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Ramiro - 11-28-2009
Of course not DerVVulfman, just imagine if they make "the perfect rpg maker", they won't sell any other one, so they just make upgrades and downgrades because they loved to have people buying(well, i know... but don't talk about this here...) they "new maker"
RMVX and RMXP are almost the same, they had an rpg engine and the coomand windows(don't say than RM2k3, RMXP or RMVX or any maker had limitations, because i saw beatiful games in most of them)
Here all the people say: RMVX its for fun & short games, well i want a short fun game than a bored large game, you don't?
(and please if you HAVE a RMXP/RMVX long and fun, more than 30 hs, send to me, because i don't see anyone)
I choose VX, because it has a better style in the manage, the windows in VX are better than XP, and of course, databasing is better.
For the rest XP and VX are the same, maps are easier in VX, but more customizable in XP.
As i say: i choose VX just because VX is a good maker(i use rm95/2k/2k3/XP/VX and well, if they launcha an RMTS, or elsewhere, i'm sure than i will use it) and has a lot of features to help me making my game(blur :E)
Well that's my opinion :P
See ya!
EDIT: maybe they stole the Scene_Base DerVVulfman but you can't make anything about it(hehehe)
Don't worry i believe the same...
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - fallenravenlyn - 01-02-2010
Here's my bit of experience with the two makers.
When I first got XP, I loved it. I loved playing around with the mapping and stuff like that. It was fun making detailed (yet kinda small) maps.
Then I got VX. I started messing around with VX, getting used to the fact that it has that little event generator (the one that makes doors, chests and warps) and the mapping. Oh boy the mapping. The mapping in VX made it painful for me to go back to XP. I was looking at the layers and stuff like "WTF is this?"
But now, I'm getting used to XP again because it's the maker my friend uses and we are working on a game together and she doesn't want to get VX because of how the tiles look.
But in general, I like both makers a whole lot.
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Guest - 01-05-2010
I am a beginner at scripting
but I have an eye for nice graphics when I am playing a game. I think there are pro's and cons to both. Seems like the pro's for xp is that the number of resources are more abundant, the mapping to me is just better looking. I feel like more believable maps are achievable even though they decided to go without the parallax looping. 
Why? Oh why? VX seemed to want to take a lot of the tediousness that made xp cumbersome to new users. The quick events, facesets coming back, vehicles, a more organized scripting system. It seemed like vx was trying to capture those users that xp lost due to being to complicated. I liked that vx had the easy autotiles but i hated the auto shadowing. Some shadows weren't appropriate. I don't like the short wide character sets they implimented. I did like the quick events. I am currently using xp because of it's appeal to my eye. I don't know how to script either on vx or xp so scripting isnt the issue for me. I am clueless either way. I love the layers and actual roundness of xp tiles. Maybe i just don't know how to work vx yet. That's why i have serials for them both. You never know what the future will hold. 
VX versus XP. Your view upon the two engines. - Xathia Vastar - 02-17-2010
I love the Gameboy-ish graphics of VX, but I can't really say much more about the engine since i haven't delved into it fully (but I will, soon!). I've been working with XP for so long now, and I enjoy it.