Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Kayzee

  1. Onesy said it was looking for events in map ID 4 to load in right? That's not that weird, I actually do that in my game! Well, I use map ID 1 not 4, but still. The basic idea is I put a lot of my events that I want to use in more then one place in an otherwise empty map and I can load event data from that map and make a clone of whatever event I want.

  2. On 11/16/2019 at 10:43 PM, PhoenixSoul said:

    I only saw where it looks for a variable string as far as map data is related. (Map%03d.rvdata) I know that %03d is related to numbering, so whatever it is it seeks, I could not tell, at all, and since Dropbox has since killed the link...the demo is out of reach.


    BTW %03d in Map%03d.rvdata is formatting code for sprintf, which is used to create strings with special rules. I think it means to print a number using 3 digits with trailing 0s, like 001, 002, ect. The sprintf method is sort of tricky because the number of arguments you use depends on the formatting code.


    For example: In "map = load_data(sprintf("Data/Map%03d.rvdata2", $game_map.map_id))" the "sprintf("Data/Map%03d.rvdata2", $game_map.map_id)" tells the game to create a string using a number, so you need to put a number after the formating code string. In this case the map id! That way it knows what the proper file to load is. So when the map id is 1, it will load Map001.rvdata2 for you! It's a pretty simple idea, but the downside is that sprintf requires you to make a format code string and make sure anything you replace in the format string is put after it, and in the exact same order.

  3. Twine huh? And you decided to develop in RPG Maker? Hmmm.... Any particular reason? I mean, beyond them both being used to make games, I wonder if there is any overlap in the type of you want to make? Hehe... I can think of one type of game that is fairly popular to make in twine while having quite a few made in RPG Maker also... I might be off the mark, but I always find those types of games interesting... ❤️

  4. Technically it's a bit more complex then that because of the way D&D uses multiple dice. Dice rolls in D&D and other such games are usually notated in XdY form, where x is the number of die and y is the max value of the die. Maybe this might help:


    class Game_Battler < Game_BattlerBase
      def dice(num, max)
        result = 0
        num.times do
          result += 1+rand(max)
        return result


    if you add that as a script then you can put "a.dice(X, Y)" to roll XdY dice. If I wanted to get fancy, I could probobly make something that uses string replacement to translate dice notation into a function call or something. Of course this ignores things like 'advantage' right now, but it's possible to do. You can add stuff to dice rolls so 'a.dice(2, 4)+2' or 'a.dice(1, 20)+a.agi' will work.

  5. Eh personally I am not a fan of ABS scripts, they all feel rather clunkly to me. Though the tool system might be helpful yeah. I think there are other scripts that might do a better job at tools, but I am not sure.


    Also, if you are a fan of really old school D&D, you might like Dungeon Craft. It's basically a modern open source version of Forgotten Realms: Unlimited Adventures, which was a construction kit to make games in the style of some of the official AD&D PC games. Probably not at all the kind of thing you are looking for, but I thought I would mention it just because Unlimited Adventures has a kind of special place in my heart. I think it was the first RPG creation tool I ever used!

  6. Well, D&D has a much different kind of 'ruleset' then VX Ace does. I mean, RPG Maker doesn't really have a concept like feats or the kinds of skills a rogue is likely to use. You might be able to find scripts for some things like that, but a one to one translation of the D&D rules to RPG Maker would be a lot of work I think. Plus their are slightly different rules depending on the addition of D&D you are using.

  7. 7 hours ago, PhoenixSoul said:

    It's not that media is segregated due to preference, but rather, the lamestream media brainwashes us into that preference.
    I watch non-lamestream videos on YouTube for a reason. I avoid TV pretty much altogether, short of a few shows I watch because I find them to have some sort of creative value, but that's it really. I'd rather watch old movies than the latest 'happening new show', lololololololol


    It's both really. It's a feedback loop: People create and watch media based on their own preferences, which are influenced by the media they are exposed to. Don't think you are immune to this just because you don't watch TV much, this is true with all media, including Youtube. This is just how culture works in general. Cultural information spreads in forms that are mimicked and spread by people exposed to them, and cultures evolve naturally from the information that is passed from person to person.


    I probobly already told you this, but for the sake of anyone who I haven't told this to: We have a name for these units of information ya know. You might have heard it before even. They are called 'memes'. :P The word meme was actually created as a sort of play on the words 'gene' and 'mimic' to describe how cultures sorta evolve through the coping of cultural information the same way genes do with genetic information.


    It's worth thinking about what makes up your 'cultural DNA' so to speak and what differs about other people's. And it's good to remember that unlike your genes, you can always be exposed to different memes and have your cultural outlook changed. The good thing about that is, you aren't stuck with the same memes as soon as you are born. The bad thing about it is that memes have a nasty habit of sneaking up on people and worming into their head and can be very destructive. Hehe, even the idea of memes it's self is a meme, so be careful when taking it too seriously too. :3

  8. 11 hours ago, FranklinX said:


    I disagree with you on your point of we all know the main protagonist is almost always white. There is enough media with the main protagonist with a ethnic background of African American, Mexican, Japanese, etc. I think a person's exposure or lack of exposure is due to a person's culture and their personal interests.


    Some people just do not want to watch other races in media.There is a guy from a different forum who said he would feel weird if he saw a African American in a RPG game from the RPG Maker. His comment screams volumes about his lack of exposure to media with different ethic and racial groups.


    I am only speaking for myself. I have seen protagonists from many different backgrounds. My first favorite white protagonist was Tommy Oliver from Power Rangers. Then, we had TJ, a black guy as the Red Turbo Ranger and leader of the Turbo rangers.


    I was kinda saying something similar in my own response. Like I said, there is a lot of media out there and a lot of it is created by and/or targeted to different cultural groups. However I don't really think he was entirely wrong. Consider this: How much media is there that actually has a broad cross-cultural appeal, and of that how much of that tends to primarily created by, marketed to, and staring white people? I am pretty sure that's mostly because there are (or were) more white people making and/or buying more stuff, but still! Come to think of it though, I think a lot of media today is way more diverse in it's casting then it was in the past few decades, so that's probobly a good trend... but on the other hand we now have hoards of angry people ranting about how SJWs ruined Star Wars and Ghostbusters and such (and maybe they even did, I donno movies aren't my thing) so... yeah.


    Point is, I can see where he is coming from. I think it's more the case that people in any given group will tend to be drawn more to characters within that group, but I think a side effect of that is that media kinda becomes segregated into lots of little cultural niches that don't tend to overlap much, and when they do it's mostly the people with the most population/money/power/whatever who get the most exposure. But hey, China is trying to kinda take over Hollywood so maybe in a few decades white people will stop being in everything and be replaced by Chinese people. It could happen!

  9. 6 hours ago, That One NPC said:

    To me skin color doesn't really matter in that way. It's not as if I have anything against white characters or value them any less, it's just that pop culture has warped most people's subconscious to the point when we create a character, we generally think of them as white, unless the concept was some form of niche like an Afro archytype, an asian assassin, samurai, etc. On role playing boards this has been discussed and analysed relentlessly, and it seems to be a case of subconscious comfort created by the content we've been exposed to our entire lives (and I think that's the entire agenda there).


    When I create a lead male protag, he's almost always white. I mean, 99.9% of the time. I don't value ethnic individuals any less, I play many of them, but my main is almost always white. It's what we all know.


    This is pretty much true, but you gotta remember that 'niche' is often in the eye of the beholder. I mean, there is a lot of pop culture out there that seems mostly made by and/or targeted at particular demographics and as a result anyone outside that demographic often ends up finding it niche regardless of how overwhelmingly popular it might be with that demographic. And if the demographic is a minority group in the first place it's going to often be doubly niche to anyone outside that group. So I am willing to bet there are people out there who have been mostly exposed to things that cause them to generally think of characters as some other race by default. But you don't tend to see them because the stuff you are interested in tends to be 'niche' to them, so they don't hang out in the same places. Really 'pop culture' is more like a bunch of segregate sub-cultures then anything else. Every once and a while something will break out and become popular with a lot of different people true, but I think the only reason white people seem to be over represented is just because there kinda are more of them around making stuff.

  10. 1 hour ago, That One NPC said:


    I think making one dark and the rest light might unintentionally make her feel like a minority among fairies. You may have already been planning something this based on how you continued on and mention blue or green skin, but I would recommend giving every major fairy character a unique skin ton to represent like a tribe or alignment or type of fairie. Making any "white" or caucasian fairy a minority in the group as well. That would create a sense of diversity and equality within their society and function.


    Yeah, that's one of the reasons I haven't done it, because I am not sure if it would make her stand out in a way that really wouldn't add anything. I kinda like the idea of every fairy having their own skin tone, but at the same time... Well, historically fairy culture is deeply entangled with human Celtic and Nordic cultures and a lot of fairies do have sorta have light skin. May or may not be the 'majority', but still a sizable chunk. However, here is the real point I want to make: For fairies, skin color is more or less completely unrelated to race. Regardless of what skin tone may be more popular, to call anyone with a different skin color a 'minority' would be like calling anyone with a different hair color a 'minority'. Especially in a culture where using hair dye is common. I mean, do you treat humans who dye their hair blue as their own racial group? That sounds kinda silly to me! Same with fairies and skin color. Sure, some social groups might prefer a different style of fashion, but it's not related to race.


    It's not that fae beings don't have their own racial groups of sorts mind you, they are just not marked by skin color. I mean, I may have said it before, but a good way to annoy a fairy is to mistake them for a pixie and visa versa. I mean, fairies and pixies get along okay sometimes, but they have a history ya know? It doesn't help that humans mix them up all the time.

  11. Regarding stereotypes, I think the big question is this: What marks the difference between a 'stereotype' and an 'archetype'?


    Broadly speaking most stories are kinda built on the back of archetypes, that is to say basic foundational character types that are used again and again throughout history as part of the collective culture of all people. There is really nothing wrong with using archetypes in this way. In fact, It might be impossible not to. No matter what character you think of it most likely can be traced back to a basic archetype. Even going out of your way to defy an archetype is still using the archetype to define the character by way of contrast. There can be simple purely archetypal characters that while sometimes a bit boring can be used to comment on and dissect archetypes, or there can be more complex characters often mix and match foundational archetypes to build something that if not unique is at least interesting. It goes beyond fiction too, but I will refrain from my usual philosophical/religious wanking this time. Lucky you! :3


    Stereotypes aren't the same thing though. I guess maybe the best way to explain it is that you could say stereotypes are like what happens when you take an archetype and kinda suck all the life out of it till it's nothing but a ridged walking corpse and throw it out into the world with no context or subtlety. It's become a shambling zombie of an idea without purpose or understanding, only existing to spread it's self and uncaring about the damage it causes. Archetypes don't need to become stereotypes for them to be useful. Like say you want to have a 'greedy merchant' character. There are plenty of ways to express the archetype without making it into a harmful stereotype. You don't need to make them have a hook nose, or have them be fat, or whatever else. They can take many many other forms. You can mix other ideas in to make the character more interesting without sacrificing the core archetypal ideas. You don't need to crush all of the expressive spirit out of an archetype and render it in it's most base stereotypical form.


    So basically: An archetype's lifeblood is it's ability to express things across different cultures and incarnations. Stereotypes are zombified husks created when an archetype is rigidly locked into a set from where their freedom of expression is taken away. So, experiment I say! Mix and match, create atypical forms, do something interesting with your archetypes! Don't just blindly rely on set patterns! Also, remember that even if stereotypes are bad, inside every stereotype is a poor abused archetype that needs some love too! Letting them be expressed in a new way can give them a new life!


  12. Well, like I said, I am pretty sure there is no hard limit on the number of events in game, the only limit is with the editor. Best bet I think would be a script that would clone a basic event a bunch of times using regions or something. Or maybe one that loads events from a copy of the map. I would be able to code it myself, but I am having a looooot of trouble focusing on anything lately because of this annoying buzzing going on in my ears all the time. Plus I am pretty lazy anyway.

  13. This is probobly a limit of the editor and not the game, since I am pretty sure there is no hard limit on the number of events in-game. It's impossible for scripts to change anything in the editor, so any events beyond 999 will probobly need to be added with scripting.


    Also, you do realize how insane a 500x500 map is right? Honestly even if you have an anti-lag for insane numbers of events, just having a map that big might be laggy enough on it's own. I don't know how splitting the map would 'completely break' your game's gameplay system, but really dude? I approve of using events for trees and stuff though! See that's how you make details on a large map people, not making insanely large images to use as map backgrounds. Seriously, if you have to use super large maps don't use parallax mapping. Imagine if this 500x500 map used it? It would need a 16,000 x 16,000 image. That would need at least 768,000,000 bytes or so of ram to even load wouldn't it?


    I swear every time I hear of someone using these monster sized maps I want to code a seamless chunk loader thing. Too bad I am so darn lazy.

  14. Personally I am kinda more worried about all the graphics fitting together in a consistent style then I am making them all extra unique. Unless that style is purposefully a mishmash, but at least that is consistently inconsistent. Though part of me kinda likes the idea of going ultra minimalist like in this screen shot I have shown off before of a RPG Maker game I found:






    I would probobly not go to quite that level of abstraction if I did it,  maybe something more like Nethack's tiles:





    For now though I am just using the VX Ace RTP and some similar style graphics I found online. Maybe a bit boring but it works.

  15. On 10/29/2019 at 4:21 PM, That One NPC said:

    We have been down that road. You think science is about "ANYTHING being possible and is real until we can prove otherwise!"


    The science I know is about, "We know fuck all, so let's figure it out step by step, test by test until every angle shows the same result. Then, and only then, is something real."


    That's not an accurate description of what I think though. In fact I am almost saying the exact opposite: Not that anything is real, but that nothing is. At least by your definition. I don't believe it's really possible to really prove that 'every angle shows the same result' as you put it. But that's not really the point in the first place if you ask me. Science is best looked at not as an attempt to find reality, but an attempt to build the best approximation of reality possible.


    A lot of what I say may or may not be something I strongly believe in. Not that I intend to deceive or troll, I just like to play with ideas. There is at least one thing I do strongly believe in though: That strongly believing in things can be incredibly dangerous. Yes including strongly believing that strongly believing in things can be incredibly dangerous. I mean, look how much I get in trouble with people over it? :3 Incredibly dangerous doesn't mean it's bad. Just dangerous. I won't say anyone is wrong to do so, just that it's risky.



  16. Not every old RPG has an A to B structure, but most of the popular ones do I guess, for better or for worst. Also, if you ask me, Earthbound's take on the A to B structure also made it kind of a slog. One of the reasons I never finished it. Not that I can't appreciate it's own special way of doing stuff, but it wasn't the best RPG in the universe to me like it is for some people. Personally I think that for the purpose of developing characters I rather have the game only have a single large town that acts as a hub rather then traveling from town to town to town. Though really the point of an A to B structure isn't really to develop characters as much as it is to develop the plot.


    Personally I like Kefka. He is basically a fantasy version of The Joker, and who doesn't like The Joker? But seriously, Kefka was so much more interesting of a villain then the emperor to me, because the emperor was basically your typical final fantasy villain up to that point who wanted power and to be worshiped as a god. Kefka on the other hand just didn't care. Even when he goes all god-like in the final battle, the subtext implies not that he thinks he is god, but he is basically mocking the very idea of a god. In fact I kind of subscribe to the theory that in the end Kefka basically let the heros win, because in the end he just didn't care anymore. About anything. Because for all his random acts of destruction and talk of "creating a monument to nonexistence", not even that really ended up mattering to him. He just locked himself at the top of a big tower of junk, god of a world of ruin, and basically waited to die. Because nothing mattered to him. Nothing ever mattered to him. He was in the end nothing more then he had ever been: A fucking jester. I kinda like to think that in the end his "monument to nonexistence" was really himself. And yeah, that sort of makes him more like an angsty edgey teenager then anything else, but isn't that the true face of evil? :P


    Also: Leo wasn't a villain. He was barely even an antagonist really. I don't think there was ever really a point in time where he was ever really in conflict with your party at all in fact.

  17. On 10/25/2019 at 8:33 AM, That One NPC said:

    It's good to put a lot of detail and development into every character. And I think it has a lot to do with the writing and development style of the game as well. Many games, even great ones, had a very point A to B structure. FF6, despite being amazing in so many different ways, had a very A to B style. I forget a lot of the side villains and bosses, but one that always resonates with everyone is Ultros. He's not particularly developed and has no real impact on the story line, but through his comedic relief and recurring appearances, he becomes one of the most memorable, well known bosses of the entire game.


    Then you look at a game like Earthbound which feels much less A to B. When you land in a town, they didn't want it to be a quick stop to buy armor, talk to a few key NPCs, and go off to battle. This allowed them to flesh out entire towns, and the bosses like Frank, the leader of the Street Shark gang in the first town. Most of them aren't extremely developed, but you still remember every one of them because of the way the game is structured and paced.


    So I think it depends on how A to B the pace is, and how much development they have vs how often they actually appear in the plot, not even just battle.


    Everyone loves Ultros! He can use tentacle on me any time. ❤️


    Also, I kind of disagree about Earthbound. It also had almost as much of a A to B structure if you ask me. The real difference between FF6 and Earthbound is that FF6 followed a formula where 'dungeon' areas and town areas were usually distinctly segregated, while towns in Earthbound more or less always also functioned as dungeons of a sort. Earthbound's minor bosses weren't really more memorable to me, but I can see how they might be to others. Because FF6 tended to segregate it's gameplay and story a lot more, a lot of the bosses were just kind of disposable and not important. Earthbound at least tried to integrate them together somewhat I think, which is why I think you found Earthbound's bosses more memorable. Though really I haven't played Earthbound for a while and never played it all the way though, so I might be wrong.


    There aren't a lot of JRPG-style games that don't have a strong A to B structure really. Most of them rely on the plot pushing the player forward from area to area. Heck maybe most games in general do that. There are really four main "plot integration" structures that most games tend to take I think.  In addition to the A to B structure, there are the Open World structure (where the player explores a large area and finds stuff mostly on their own with minimal plot pushing them forward), the Hub structure (where there are areas the player keeps coming back to between more episodic segments), or the event driven structure (where plot progression is mostly a matter of triggering the right event flags). These structures can often be mixed up and combined, but I can't think of very many games that don't use at least one of them (FF6 might actually use all four at various points, but it's mostly A to B).


    I think the main strategy to create memorial side villains (or any character really) really does depend on what plot integration structure a game is doing. For the more episodic A to B structure most JRPG-style games have (as well as games that use the Hub structure for similar reasons), I think that usually is taken to mean either a villain who is an important central character to the 'episode' in question (but only if the episode it's self is done well), and/or an "Arc Villain" that shows up time and time again who might not be that important to the over all episode but has more to do with the story over all (but only if the over all story is done well). But it's also possible to have a good villain who is kinda somewhere in between.


    Ultros is actually a pretty good example of that. If he had shown up only once when encountered during the river raft ride, he would probobly be sort of forgettable. He is passable as far as forgettable episodic filler villains go I suppose, but he really doesn't have much character except for being the obligatory boss fight and some comedic relief. That didn't really matter at the time, because he was entertaining enough. Still if that was the only time he showed up, he probobly would have been forgotten. But he didn't show up just once. He came back just around the time some players might have started to forget about him and was just as if not more entertaining. And then after a bit he did it again!


    In some ways it's kind of a cheap writing trick. Ultros became memorable not because he was a deep and compelling character, but because he was just entertaining enough and showed up just often enough to endear himself to players anyway. It's possible that if he had shown up any more people would have thought he was somewhat annoying, as people often do when a joke is repeated too much. If he had shown up that much less a lot of players might have completely forgotten about him. So even if he wasn't really that memorable as a pure episodic villain or as a pure arc villain, he still worked as a quirky miniboss villain.

  18. There is always mkxp for running XP, VX, and VX Ace games on other platforms. Doesn't really help the editor side of things though. In theory all the formats are well known so a full editor replacement is probobly possible, but not sure anyone cares enough to really make one and I wouldn't be sure of the legal issues.


    Edit: Oh! Also there are compatibility settings you can set for programs in windows isn't there?

  19. This is probobly one of the few times I will disagree with someone on making a script being the better option. Scripts that involve timing stuff can kind of be a pain to wdeal with, plus it's much easier to tweak the exact timing and effects on a event or move route. And events and move routes can call scripts anyway, so if you want random sounds for example it's much easier to call a script to play a random sound from a move route then making a whole new scheduling system just for sounds.

  20. I wasn't thinking of using a SE for an exact replacement of a BGS like that really... I was thinking more about creating an effect that's like a BGS but isn't. To be more exact, I was kinda thinking about creating continuous sounds from small non-continuous segments. For example to make a fire crackle I could make a few different short crackle and pop sounds and play them so they can overlap, maybe even randomly if I wanted to get fancy with scripting. Theoretically crowd murmurs could work basically the same, a bunch of short clips played so they fade and overlap with each other a little. Hehe, technically I could probobly pitch shift a SE and use it to play a tune if I felt like bothering to figure out the math.

  21. That will work, though depending on how many possible combinations you use it might get to be a pain. Personally I still really like the idea of sequencing sound effects using event move routes... I never realized before today that you could do that! I just now tried out the ticking clock idea I had and it's pretty neat! Only problem is events stop when off screen but I already have ways to prevent that.