Why does every 1 prefer RM2k3 over XP?

[Ace of Spades]

A larger amount of people will play your game if it's made with rm2k3 because:
1. A lot of communities don't allow rmxp games.
2. Some people may not be able to get rmxp.
3. Rm2k3 > Rmxp    >=P

[Zai Manui]

Originally posted by Enduo_Ril
1: Not everybody has a fast internet connection. Rm2k/2k3 can be downloaded in under 2 hours even with a modem, but I'm pretty sure XP's file is HUGE.
B]

True it took my 2 and a half hours to download XP. I like 2k3 better BECAUSE of the graphics. I like the look.

[danilynnarthur]

XP can't run on my regular computer, but it can on my laptop.  Just with everything else though, using the mouse on my laptop is next to impossible to do.

XP requires 256 MB of RAM to run properly (at least the version I tried, which was the trial version).

Beside that, though, I find XP to be more difficult than 2000/03.  But that's just me.  

For the record, I don't have XP on either computer.

[Ace of Spades]

I don't have rmxp either. Hey, what if this is all a trick thread, and dragon1137 actually works for the FBI and everybody here who said that they have rmxp is being tracked down right now and will be fined, prosecuted and then sent to jail. *gasp* o_O

[DragonBlaze]

 

1: Not everybody has a fast internet connection. Rm2k/2k3 can be downloaded in under 2 hours even with a modem, but I'm pretty sure XP's file is HUGE.

I have dial up and it didn't give me a problem  

 

2: Not everbody has a fast computer. Rm2k works on semi-old computers (though Rm2k3 doesn't quite work on them). XP most likely doesn't.

Thats true, but the requirements for it are for a standerd computer, if your computer has windows xp, it should be able to run it.

 

You don't need to learn a scripting language to make a game (even a pretty good game) in Rm2k/2k3.

The scripting language in rmxp is OPTIONAL, you don't even have to look at the system and you can make a game the same way as rm2k3. If you do wish to add scripts, all that is requred is copying the scipt, and pasting it into the script area. Anyone can do it.

 

4: There's bazillions of graphics and other stuff available for Rm2k/2k3. Not much for XP yet.

Theres quite a few graphics made for rmxp already, I already found enough to make a game without the rtp at all. Not as much as 2k3, but every day more graphics are being made. It is also possible to use 2k3 graphics in rmxp.


RMXP is basically rm2k3 with an aditional scripting system and better graphics. It has the same commands, same options, same way of setting up scripts, same way of building maps, ect ect...

[drenrin2120]

 

Hey, what if this is all a trick thread, and dragon1137 actually works for the FBI and everybody here who said that they have rmxp is being tracked down right now and will be fined, prosecuted and then sent to jail. *gasp* o_O

I knew it... all along, I knew it in my gut! It's our time!!

 [SHADOW]I CALL A REVOLUTION!!![/SHADOW] o_O

(that includes getting rid of Bush )

[Chaotic_Death]

For one, I HATE the graphics in RMXP.  Hate them, hate them, hate them.  I don't care if they're "higher resoultion," that doesn't mean they look good.  I personally think all of the RMXP charasets, tilesets, monsters, and everything else looks absolutley horrible.  I know many people are going to disagree with me there, but I don't care.

Second, you know how in RPG Maker 2000 how the event buttons were arranged, and they stayed the same way in 2003?  Well, XP rearragnes them all over the place, also "grouping" them and adding tons of new ones which makes it hard to find what you want.  I'm sure it's easy to get used too, but I'm not going to take the time to do that.

Third, RMXP charasets are animated WAY TOO SLOW.  You'll be walking over 2 and a half tiles before it's first frame of the walking animation kicks in.  Also, the controls seem a lot bulkier, but maybe that's just me.

Fourth, as everyone else said, there are almost no resources created for RMXP, besides the RTP.  You -can- use RM2K3's chipsets in XP, but you'll need to double their size, making them look very pixelated and messy.  Same with the charasets, title screens, and everything else.  I just hate the fact that everything in RMXP has to be so big.

Fifth, most of the RM2K3 tilesets that you see throughout the net are ripped from games, correct?  Well, usually they're ripped in 16x16 tiles, perfect for RM2K/3.  But, RMXP uses double that size, and as I said above, everything looks crappy when you resize it.

Sixth, I'm not seeing any *new* features in RMXP that weren't possible in RM2K3.  Maybe they're easier to implement, but that doesn't mean they were impossible in RM2K/3.  Somebody mentioned pixel movement.  That could easily be achieved in RM2K3, with some creative coding, pictures, and variables.  Somebody else mentioned there are only 3 layers of tiles in RM2K3.  Wrong.  There are actually 53, counting all of the different posibilities with pictures, and including the panorama, that makes 54.  Just because you're too lazy to put time into making your game, and would rather find a pre-made engine that can be inserted in the click of a mouse doesn't mean it's nesscarily better.  Easier, sure, but quickly and easily made games tend to completley and totally suck.

That is all.

[coasterkrazy]

Originally posted by drenrin2120

quote:

Hey, what if this is all a trick thread, and dragon1137 actually works for the FBI and everybody here who said that they have rmxp is being tracked down right now and will be fined, prosecuted and then sent to jail. *gasp* o_O

I knew it... all along, I knew it in my gut! It's our time!!

 I CALL A REVOLUTION!!! o_O

(that includes getting rid of Bush )

Agreed.  

[Rune_of_Punishment]

My 3.0 ghz CPU can run the thing like nothing.

[Linkmaster]

I have never tried RPG maker XP and Rpg Maker2k3 gives you side view battles (like Final Fantasy) so that's why I like 2k3

[Osmose]

Originally posted by Chaotic_Death
For one, I HATE the graphics in RMXP.  Hate them, hate them, hate them.  I don't care if they're "higher resoultion," that doesn't mean they look good.  I personally think all of the RMXP charasets, tilesets, monsters, and everything else looks absolutley horrible.  I know many people are going to disagree with me there, but I don't care.

Second, you know how in RPG Maker 2000 how the event buttons were arranged, and they stayed the same way in 2003?  Well, XP rearragnes them all over the place, also "grouping" them and adding tons of new ones which makes it hard to find what you want.  I'm sure it's easy to get used too, but I'm not going to take the time to do that.

Third, RMXP charasets are animated WAY TOO SLOW.  You'll be walking over 2 and a half tiles before it's first frame of the walking animation kicks in.  Also, the controls seem a lot bulkier, but maybe that's just me.

Fourth, as everyone else said, there are almost no resources created for RMXP, besides the RTP.  You -can- use RM2K3's chipsets in XP, but you'll need to double their size, making them look very pixelated and messy.  Same with the charasets, title screens, and everything else.  I just hate the fact that everything in RMXP has to be so big.

Fifth, most of the RM2K3 tilesets that you see throughout the net are ripped from games, correct?  Well, usually they're ripped in 16x16 tiles, perfect for RM2K/3.  But, RMXP uses double that size, and as I said above, everything looks crappy when you resize it.

Sixth, I'm not seeing any *new* features in RMXP that weren't possible in RM2K3.  Maybe they're easier to implement, but that doesn't mean they were impossible in RM2K/3.  Somebody mentioned pixel movement.  That could easily be achieved in RM2K3, with some creative coding, pictures, and variables.  Somebody else mentioned there are only 3 layers of tiles in RM2K3.  Wrong.  There are actually 53, counting all of the different posibilities with pictures, and including the panorama, that makes 54.  Just because you're too lazy to put time into making your game, and would rather find a pre-made engine that can be inserted in the click of a mouse doesn't mean it's nesscarily better.  Easier, sure, but quickly and easily made games tend to completley and totally suck.

That is all.

I agree with you on everything, except... RM2K3 and the other RPG Makers before XP doublesize everything when you're playing, so anything double sized in XP would look the same in actual play in the other ones. And just because of that doesn't meant they look bad.

[Sharu]

I'm used to using RM2K and RM2K3, and...

1. I DON'T like the graphics in XP.
2. The graphics in XP are way TOO BIG.
3. I've found resources for XP only in some Japanese sites.
[GLOW]4. I have NOT got RMXP yet.[/GLOW]

[dragon11137]

Originally posted by Ace of Spades
I don't have rmxp either. Hey, what if this is all a trick thread, and dragon1137 actually works for the FBI and everybody here who said that they have rmxp is being tracked down right now and will be fined, prosecuted and then sent to jail. *gasp* o_O

ahhh! you caught me=P anyways rm2k and rm2k3 r illegal 2

[DragonBlaze]

Originally posted by Chaotic_Death
For one, I HATE the graphics in RMXP.  Hate them, hate them, hate them.  I don't care if they're "higher resoultion," that doesn't mean they look good.  I personally think all of the RMXP charasets, tilesets, monsters, and everything else looks absolutley horrible.  I know many people are going to disagree with me there, but I don't care.

Second, you know how in RPG Maker 2000 how the event buttons were arranged, and they stayed the same way in 2003?  Well, XP rearragnes them all over the place, also "grouping" them and adding tons of new ones which makes it hard to find what you want.  I'm sure it's easy to get used too, but I'm not going to take the time to do that.

Third, RMXP charasets are animated WAY TOO SLOW.  You'll be walking over 2 and a half tiles before it's first frame of the walking animation kicks in.  Also, the controls seem a lot bulkier, but maybe that's just me.

Fourth, as everyone else said, there are almost no resources created for RMXP, besides the RTP.  You -can- use RM2K3's chipsets in XP, but you'll need to double their size, making them look very pixelated and messy.  Same with the charasets, title screens, and everything else.  I just hate the fact that everything in RMXP has to be so big.

Fifth, most of the RM2K3 tilesets that you see throughout the net are ripped from games, correct?  Well, usually they're ripped in 16x16 tiles, perfect for RM2K/3.  But, RMXP uses double that size, and as I said above, everything looks crappy when you resize it.

Sixth, I'm not seeing any *new* features in RMXP that weren't possible in RM2K3.  Maybe they're easier to implement, but that doesn't mean they were impossible in RM2K/3.  Somebody mentioned pixel movement.  That could easily be achieved in RM2K3, with some creative coding, pictures, and variables.  Somebody else mentioned there are only 3 layers of tiles in RM2K3.  Wrong.  There are actually 53, counting all of the different posibilities with pictures, and including the panorama, that makes 54.  Just because you're too lazy to put time into making your game, and would rather find a pre-made engine that can be inserted in the click of a mouse doesn't mean it's nesscarily better.  Easier, sure, but quickly and easily made games tend to completley and totally suck.

That is all.

I agree that the defult graphics are horrible, but rm2k3's defult graphics are even worse, heres a few examples from english sites of some graphics, there are a ton of them, and as you can see, they are much better than rm2k/3.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a45/zanyzora/potter.png
http://img280.imageshack.us/img280/8744/brando0xr.png

I guess pixal movement would be possible in rm2k3, but it can't work nearly as good as in rmxp, you'd have to use picture files, and they are desplayed above everything else, so every time you want the hero to move under something, you'd have to make that something a picture, plus you can't scroll the map one pizal at a time, so even if your character moved one pixal, the map wouldn't.

And theres a lot of stuff RMXP can do that isn't even possible in rm2k3, such as: Adding scenes before the title screen, in rmxp you can simply skip the title screen, you can't do that in 2k3. You can edit the location of windows in the title screen, and even add more options. You can set up an rmxp game to be an MMORPG, rmxp supports keyboard and mouse inputs, rm2k3 supports numbers and a few other keys, but thats about it, RMXP supports differant resolutions, the list goes on and on. Plus everythings easier, you could make a CBS and CMS with rm2k3, but it won't run as good as a cbs or cms made with ruby. Adding a feature that would take a week to make in rm2k3 can be done in under a minute in rmxp by pasting in a script. Some may not think its right to use other peoples work, but then you really shouldn't be using graphics or other stuff you find on the internet either.

If you resize 2k3 graphics and use them in rmxp, they'll look the same as in 2k3. Since XP has double the resolution, simply doubling the size will make it look the same. If you take a screenshot while playing 2k3 (fullscreen), and paste it into paint, guess what, it has a size of 640 x 480, all that happened was that each pixal became a block of 4 pixals. In short, using resized rm2k3 graphics wouldn't look crappy, unless you use rmxp graphics with them.


I've used rm2k and rm2k3 since they've come out, I know what they can do, and what they're capable of. RMXP is just a better system.

[Chaotic_Death]

I didn't mean the graphics actually already resized, I meant resizing them.  You'd have to do it all be hand if you were to import them into RMXP, and some graphics programs can do that very horribly, blending colors into the background and making it so that you'd have to edit it all out, while some do it perfectly.  Also, that's not all.  You'd have to place them in different templates, since RMXP and RM2K3 don't use the same.  You can't simply take a charaset from RM2K3, resize it by 200%, and use it in XP.  You'd have to recompile the entire thing, rearranging them in a way so that they work.  Forget those programs that do it automatically, they tend to screw everything up even worse.  

Also, I hate the fact that you can only put one character on each charaset.  That just makes everything more of a hassle and harder to find.  Take my Zelda game for example.  I have custom 10-frame movement, two types of shields, and a whole different set of clothes.  That results in 10 charasets, each one completley full with animations, poses, and the like.  Now, if I were to do that in RMXP, all of those frames would have to be a seperate animation, resulting in about 80 different files.  Now, I don't know about you, but I think having your resources organized by group in 10 files is easier than having them scattered all over in 80 different ones.

Also, if you play RM2K3 in fullscreen and take a screenshot, the resolution is indeed 320x240.  Try it, because obviously you haven't.