As the title suggests, RGSS seems to be ever evolving. The next RPG Maker could be written in a new form called RGSS4 or something. I noticed that most scripters and masters of the software here are on RPG Maker XP.
May I ask, is RPG Maker XP still much better than Ace (as it is today)?
I noticed that there are many scripts written for XP which are really unique and there are no script counterparts in Ace. One for example is Blizzard's Blizz-ABS.
So the following questions I want to hear your opinions are:
1. Is RMXP still better than Ace?
2. Are there software specifications (such for example as graphics handling, rendering, sprite / graphics handling, API) from XP that differs to Ace, or vice versa?
There was actually a great topic about this a little while ago, but I can't find it. I'll try to dig it up.
The consensus seemed to be that VX Ace has a much more modern engine with better conveniences (like a higher frame rate and generally better performance,) but that the actual editor and editor features of XP are better, particularly when the vast library of available scripts is taken into account. With this in mind, the best solution is to have the best of both worlds by using the VX Ace engine to run games created in XP. Here (http://forum.chaos-project.com/index.php/topic,12899.0.html)is a great thread with instructions on how this can be done - it's simpler than it sounds.
That is actually awesome. I also noticed how many good RMXP scripts are being created from time to time (actually, I still see new RMXP scripts) and are not being converted to ace. When I asked some of them what's their reason of not converting it to Ace, it is the reason being they didn't like Ace's performance. So I was wondering as to what could be the cause.
I'll look this topic out and see what I may have in mind about it. Thank you.
Personally, I just dislike ACE because of the editor. It makes mapping so difficult and I don't understand how to use tilesets. With XP I didn't need to read manuals or anything to be able to use it. It was very straight forward and that's why I stick with it.
I see. The tilesets so far, as I've seen and been using in Ace is quite based off RMXP, however, I still love how RMXP uses a better style of tilesets and that it doesn't use that boxy type...not to mention those small sprites...
This topic comes up all the time. But really, one editor being "better" than another is a very subjective conclusion.
XP has more scripts available than newer editors. Newer versions also include many features that Scripts for older versions lack. Caterpillars for example, built right in to VX Ace with no additional Scripts required. The complaints that many people have is the removal of many features. The editor for example in its simplified Tilesets. VX completely lacked Fogs.
XP vs VX are relatively different, so scripts in one wont work in another due to the differences. There are things that stayed the same.
All in all, it depends on how much support you think you need, style youre going after, and resources available. You can probably make anything do anything, but each way to accomplish is going to have a different set of limitations. Its just a matter of choosing which set of complications youre prepared to deal with.
I see, I do understand. This topic probably came up when I was talking to a friend and he said why XP scripts are easier to understand and can be ported out to Ace easily, and that he sees XP much better than the newer version.
That is where I was wondering what could have been the cause.
Does this mean that RGSS1 API is in equal to of which RGSS3 API is? If there were upgrades, is it by any chance achievable on the lower version?