FIFE forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

FIFE 0.4.0 has been released on 15th of January, 2017!

Author Topic: FIFE compared to Xconq  (Read 3937 times)

SharkD

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
FIFE compared to Xconq
« on: March 09, 2009, 05:51:18 pm »

I was wondering how FIFE is compared to Xconq. I don't want to do a whole lot of programming; I just want to create the scripts, insert the artwork and be ready to go. Xconq seems very well suited in this regard: little or no programming is required, and all the core functions are already completed.

Of course FIFE looks 100% nicer and will feature more RPG-oriented stuff that I'd like to make use of.

Thanks.

-Mike
Logged

mvBarracuda

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 411
    • View Profile
Re: FIFE compared to Xconq
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2009, 05:55:55 pm »

Hmm little to no programming is not really covered well by FIFE. It really comes down to what kind of game you're trying to create. FIFE is no game maker tool but rather a complex isometric 2d game framework. You might get better feedback by elaborating on your game idea.
Logged

SharkD

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: FIFE compared to Xconq
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2009, 06:16:02 pm »

The game idea is (roughly) to create a SRPG like Front Mission or Shining Force. I.e. a fairly simple game focused on tactical battles.

Xconq is very well suited to this from a backend standpoint. There are literally dozens of existing modules of varying scope and complexity, and they're relatively easy to set up. All you need to do is edit a bunch of text files describing the units and terrain, insert some sprites, and the game does the rest for you. The only problem (IMO) is that the frontend UI is ugly and cumbersome. There's no means of "skinning" it that I am aware of. Also, I would like to use 32-bit sprites, and I'm not sure the game supports them.

So, basically the problem is that Xconq *does* what I want it to, but is ugly; and, FIFE is the exact opposite.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2009, 06:17:53 pm by SharkD »
Logged

SharkD

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: FIFE compared to Xconq
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2009, 06:23:36 pm »

Here's a better description of Xconq: "Xconq is a general strategy game system. It is a complete system that includes all the components: a portable engine, graphical interfaces for Unix/Linux/X11, Macintosh, and Windows, multiple AIs, networking for multi-player games, and an extensive game library."

So, you can see that everything is ready-made for you.
Logged

mvBarracuda

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 411
    • View Profile
Re: FIFE compared to Xconq
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2009, 08:12:09 pm »

I guess the only option is to evaluate both engines. You could start with xconq and in case you find out that the GUI is too limited / ugly, you could always reconsider using FIFE.
Logged

SharkD

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: FIFE compared to Xconq
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2009, 06:39:36 pm »

Right. Thanks!
Logged