A7 vs A6
HY,
ich bin gerade beim überlegen ob ich von A6 Pro auf A/ upgraden.
Deshalb habe ich ein paar Fragen.
Ist der Netzwerkclient bei A7 wirklich so gut und tauglich für MMOG, oder habe ich das falsch übersetzt?
Und man kann auch in C++, und ähnlichen coden, oder?
A7 vs A6 = Tie , because it's besically the same crap, if you have A6 already there's no reason to buy A7.
C++ kannst oder musst Du nicht coden. Der neue Syntax wird Lite-C genannt und ist eine Sprache dem Standard C nachempfunden (die Generation vor C++). Das bedeutet, diese Sprache ist nicht objektorientiert, ist aber auch keine pure Skriptsprache mehr, da man mit Zeigern und Adressen arbeiten kann / muss, was für Anfänger einige Gefahren birgt.
Zum Multiplayer kann ich leider nichts sagen, da es keine Demos dazu gibt und ich auch keine Projekte kenne, die MMO erfolgreich umsetzen.
Der Renderer ist verändert wurden, es gibt ein neues Szenenmanagement, dass für Outdoor besser geeignet ist. Auch die Kollisionsabfrage wurde geändert.
Der Schattenkompiler hat noch Probleme, an denen gerade gearbeitet wird.
Am Ende kann man es so sehen: Die erwarteten Neuerungen für bessere Schatten, Shader, Ingame-Editor, neuer Schattenkompiler, neue Templates usw. sind alle noch in Arbeit. A7 ist in Sachen Programmierschnittstelle leistungsfähiger als A6. Wenn die anderen Funktionen für die Optik und das Toolset wichtig sind, dann ist es auch möglich zu warten.
Allerdings schadet es auch nicht, ein neues Projekt gleich auf A7 zu beginnen und auf Updates zu warten.
Die Entscheidung muss also jeder für sich treffen.
Quote:
A7 vs A6 = Tie , because it's besically the same crap, if you have A6 already there's no reason to buy A7.
like if you have Atari there is no reason to buy Nintendo..? come on...
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 09:54
Die Multiplayerfunktionen sind im Prinzip die gleichen wie bei A6, nur neue Befehle sind dazugekommen, man kann zur Laufzeit auf Multiplayer umschalten und es ist jetzt ein Netzwerkdemo dabei.
Mit C++ kannst du genauso arbeiten wie vorher in A6 und die Zeiger und Adressen in lite-C sind auch die gleichen wie vorher in C-Script. Die zwei Hauptvorteile von lite-C sind dass du jetzt eigene Structs definieren kannst, also mehr objektorientiert programmieren, und du kannst externe Libraries wie die Windows API und DirectX direkt ansprechen ohne dafür eine DLL programmieren zu müssen.
Der Hauptvorteil von A7 ist die neue Engine und der Shadow Map Compiler, die viel besser sind als in A6. Bei den Shadow Maps kann man jetzt die Auflösung einstellen und es gibt viel mehr dynamische Lichter die man auch im WED setzen kann, die A7 ist auch insgesamt schneller als die alte A6.
Posted By: aztec
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:01
Gibt es auch physik Objekte in Extra?
Ich wäre sehr entäuscht wenn es sie nicht gäber, dann hätte sich ein upgrade von A6 extra auf A7 extra gar nicht gelohnt.
Bitte sagt ja und wenn, dann wie?
Mfg
Aztec
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:05
Ob sich ein Upgrade auf Extra lohnt weiss ich nicht denn die Extra hat keine Shader, aber Physik gibt es in allen versionen und sieh doch einfach auf der Page nach, da stehen die Unterschiede aufgelistet,
"Gamestudio/A7 offers the following new features:
All editions: New lite-C programming language (compatible to C-Script), fast ABT renderer, atlas mapping, unlimited dynamic lights, unlimited physics engine, dynamic shadows, FBX import, levels-of-detail, unlimited screen resolution, bones animation, 3D line drawing and many more new engine functions.
Commercial: Render to texture, full scene antialiasing, 8 network players.
Pro: Multiple bones per vertex, automatic LOD generation, trial mode support."
Posted By: Slin
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:08
Physik gibt es sogar in der standart Version.
Edit: zu spät...
Posted By: aztec
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:12
kann es sein dass es in der Demo nicht so gut funktioniert
also das mit der Physik dieser code klappt irgendwie nicht
Code:
function main()
{
level_load(level);
ph_setgravity (vector(0,0,-100));
}
action ich_physik
{
phent_settype (me,PH_RIGID,PH_SPHERE);
phent_setmass (my, 3, PH_SPHERE);
phent_setfriction (my, 100);
phent_setdamping (my, 40, 40);
phent_setelasticity (my, 50, 20);
}
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:22
Das wird noch nicht mal compilieren denn bei deiner action fehlt praktisch alles angefangen mit der Klammer ().
Sieh dir einfach das Physikdemo mit dem Ball an, da ist alles mit Kommentaren erklärt, und zu Beginn solltest du vielleicht mit dem Tutorial anfangen.
Posted By: aztec
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:27
Ach das hab als die demo von lite c kam durchgemacht
Mann natürlich wie konnte mir das nur passieren vielen Dank ;-)
Äh war das mein einziges Problem?
weil irgendwie klappt immer noch nicht und die Demo mit dem ball sagt ja nicht viel über ne action aus oder?
Posted By: dblade
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/03/07 10:31
There is also a new Multiplayer example in the new A7.05 called pong
I`m an owner of A7 Extra and it's GREAT
Just try the good looking draw_line3d function
@ Tobias:
Ever tried the Physics Demo from the C-Script or LiteC workshops ?
Looks great
Something more is the Bones Animation also supported in A7 Extra
BUY!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
A7 vs A6 = Tie , because it's besically the same crap, if you have A6 already there's no reason to buy A7.
Don't be ridiculous. There are so many differences between the two (that have already been well documented) they aren't even the same thing......and you know it.
Oh they are the same thing , the differences are so minute and pointless they dont count. Atari to Nintendo ? A6 to A7 is nowhere near that , it's the same garbage. Well A6 is not garbage, i'm quite happy with A6 , but A7 is garbage as an engine upgrade if you already have A6 , if on the other hand , you dont have gamestudio , then it's still a decent engine , but still , no where near where it should be , I mean , this people are suppossed to have a staff working on the engine full time , and this is all they could achieve in the yrs A7 was in development ? C'mon , Matt achieved more with Sphere and in less time , Sphere plugin would be a better upgrade as an engine than A7 , what a pile of turds.
A6
A7
A7 actually has an uglier gui , and doesnt even include a Techdemo to show off the "suppossedly new" features it has. A7 is just a big pile of crap , what a horrible piece of s***. HORRIBLE , all I see different is .c files , wow , like having the engine be more complex is really what we were after. Look at how popular all the plugins people are doing are , thats what the new A7 shouldda been , this is juts garbage. A7 IS GARBAGE , PURE 100% GARBAGE , and no one with A6 should even consider upgrading , unless your retarded that is.
Edit: Well , I actually wanna retract what I said about A6and A7 being the same , I was wrong , A7 is actually worst than A6 , it's more confusing and with the same old problems of always , your walking backwards Conitec.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 04:51
oh hey! it's "why do i die" again! i thought you would've been banned by now
you're very quick to form an opinion about something you know nothing about.
lite-C significantly expands horizons for programmers who'd rather not write plugins. on its own, lite-C is an enormous upgrade from C-script. don't be scared of it; it's as easy as C-script. it's almost exactly the same until you start making real good use of it.
there are a fair bunch of other changes -- commercial now has render-to-texture. this isn't much of an engine upgrade but makes it hugely advantageous for a6 comm owners to upgrade to a7 comm. bones and unlimited physics are in lower editions as well. the renderer is improved.
most of the updates haven't been released yet.
WED will soon be able to bake radiosity, for example.
even if it's not as much yet as you were expecting, it's not at all the same thing and they're definitely not backpedaling.
julz
Quote:
A7 is actually worst than A6
In what aspect A7 is worst then A6??? I convert my wdl to lite-c almost no effort, and I am a newbie
Posted By: zazang
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 05:45
Some people fail to see the generosity of Conitec here.
Conitec could have easily made a lot
of upgrades of A6 as an A7 engine feature,but they didn't.
Besides that,they are surely going to release a lot of cool updates
from time to time for A7.
Posted By: adoado
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 06:40
Why_Do_I_Die: Yep - thats how you judge how powerful a game engine is, by its editor's GUI....
The new programming language, Lite-C, but itself opens up so many new programming options....that by itself is awesome.
Adoado.
You all would have to be really stupid to actually belive what you put. Yes , lite-C is one of the biggest new features , which to me , and most non programmers is useless ,
"there are a fair bunch of other changes -- commercial now has render-to-texture. this isn't much of an engine upgrade but makes it hugely advantageous for a6 comm owners to upgrade to a7 comm"
Wow , like they couldnt have just upgraded to A6 Pro if they really needed those extra pro features ? Now , what if you have A6 Pro ? Even if you love gamestudio , you have to feel let down by A7 , I've seen other people's posts who were waiting for A7 , and their expections were like mine , a whole new engine overhaul , which is what it should have been , and I'm very dissapointed. Why are you all trying to defend conitec for their lousy effort.
"Some people fail to see the generosity of Conitec here.
Conitec could have easily made a lot
of upgrades of A6 as an A7 engine feature,but they didn't."
Really ? Because A6 is A6 , A7 wasnt suppossed to be an upgraded A6 from what I understand , Jutst like Unreal Engine 3 is not an upgraded Unreal Engine 2 , look at the big giant massive difference in the engines. Now i'm not expecting gamestudio to make such a big jump , but I wasnt expecting the new A7's new and cool features to pretty much all boil down to the lame Lite-C addition. And yes , I understand there is other things , but , here are the new upgrades
"Gamestudio's A7 virtual reality engine was developed in 2007. Its new Adaptive Binary Tree scene manager switches seamlessly from indoor to outdoor sceneries. The brand new lighting engine overcomes the 8 lights limit of today's 3D hardware and supports an unlimited number of static and dynamic shadow-throwing light sources.Programmers can use plugins for adding new effects and features. The simple and straigthforward C-style DLL interface allows painless access to the engine from all programming languages."
Switching seamlessly from indoor to outdoor has always been possible , I dont see why an adaptive binary tree scene manager is needed , or why this would be such a priority.
8 light limit is gone , but , we get the same discusting , blocky , and downright hideous dynamic lights we already had , why would anyone need more shitty looking lights , I'd rather have 8 good looking ones. And then the C-Style Lite-C , well we all know what I think of this , if I wanted to program in C-Style I would program in C++ and go look for a better engine to program in. I dont see how anyone could defend this , it was made in 2007 : \ It really looks like it was made in 1995.
Again , I dont know , me , as a gamestudio user , who's been using gamestudio since A5 , this time arround , am very very dissapointed with the new engine , and will not be buying it unless I see some real improvements , like I said before , I think I'd rather get the money and purchase
Sphere 2, intense X , Seed_IT, Dyna_Lights, and Ice_X editor , then I would at least have something that resembles an engine from this generation. I think I might just do that , the thing is , I really would have prefered all these were just integrated into GameStudio itself , which is what I was hoping Conitec was going to do with A7. Conitec should definately make a deal with all this guys who made this plugins , and integrate them seamlessly into gamestudio , and cut them a slice of the pie , seriously , you should really do that conitec , make gamestudio look like a half decent engine for once.
Quote:
Matt achieved more with Sphere and in less time , Sphere plugin would be a better upgrade as an engine than A7
Thanks for the compliment, but I think you are missing the point. Sphere isnt a complete game engine, just a rendering add-on. An engine is much more than a renderer.
Also, why are you so vehement? it sound like you are taking this all personally..
Adoado , you fail to see my point , A7 itself is not much more powerfull than A6 , And lite-C itself is worthless to me because C-Script was good enough to get the job done , the reason I liked gamestudio from the beggining was ease of use , and it's nice simple scripting. Why not instead of giving us Lite-C , give us a full and complete AI solution integrated into the new engine ? There is many many betteer upgrades that could have been added to A7 that werent , which is the point of my post. All this new engines are seeing how usefull this things can be and are implementing them into their engines , while gamestudio spends it's time adding a new scripting language ? C'mon , even a blind man can see what i'm talking about.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 07:31
Quote:
Jutst like Unreal Engine 3 is not an upgraded Unreal Engine 2 , look at the big giant massive difference in the engines.
i hope you're not talking about graphics, because then you'd have to be stupid. that's shaders mate, and all the underlying non-graphical differences are things that most of us can't compare because many of us have never used either engine.
Quote:
8 light limit is gone , but , we get the same discusting , blocky , and downright hideous dynamic lights we already had , why would anyone need more shitty looking lights , I'd rather have 8 good looking ones.
that's directX for you mate. you want better? use a shader. people have contributed dozens.
that not good enough for you? the interactive shader editor is in alpha at the moment.
you want an AI solution? AUM covers many basics, or you can buy intense X. and the fact that you need to do that is by no means wrong, because a7 is a generalised game engine, while AI solutions are usually quite specific to certain types of games.
Quote:
And then the C-Style Lite-C , well we all know what I think of this , if I wanted to program in C-Style I would program in C++ and go look for a better engine to program in. I dont see how anyone could defend this , it was made in 2007
you've been using mostly C-style syntax for as long as you've been using C-script. seriously, take a good look at Lite-C. there's almost no difference to current C-script projects.
Quote:
You all would have to be really stupid to actually belive what you put. Yes , lite-C is one of the biggest new features , which to me , and most non programmers is useless
that first bit doesn't even make sense. lite-C is good. if it isn't much use to you, too bad. but that doesn't stop it from being good and if those who can use it are stupid, what does that make you?
Quote:
Wow , like they couldnt have just upgraded to A6 Pro if they really needed those extra pro features ?
pro's way more expensive than A7 comm. some of us can't afford it.
things like "Sphere 2, intense X , Seed_IT, Dyna_Lights, and Ice_X editor" specifically cater to certain needs which many users don't require. while some people don't use all the engine's features it already has, the fact that these plugins/editors are more than worth their prices is indicative of how well they cover thier particular specialty. no one wants to pay for specialist software they aren't going to use.
and don't say lite-C is specialist software you don't want to pay for -- it's free. the A7 upgrade cost covers the other features it has now and will have for the rest of its lifetime.
Quote:
I dont see how anyone could defend this , it was made in 2007 : \ It really looks like it was made in 1995.
that's brilliant because C++ first appeared in 1985. what exactly looks like it was made in 1995? the paragraph it's in implies you're talking about the script language, but the most popular one used today is older. if you're talking about your game's visuals, that's your own fault. if you're talking about the editors, they cover your basic needs but you're mainly paying for the engine. go download blender.
julz
"Thanks for the compliment, but I think you are missing the point. Sphere isnt a complete game engine, just a rendering add-on. An engine is much more than a renderer. "
Yes , but A6 was already an engine , wouldnt it be nice to have A7 have a Sphere like rendering addon already implemented , and maybe even better ,with fallbacks and better compatibility ? I'm not taking it personally , I just really feel the time spent on A7's features coulda been much better spent on other more usefull features to the average gamestudio developer.
JulzMighty , well mate , if you could take your head out of ur ass for one second you would see what i'm talking about. None of your answers are relevant ,
"that's directX for you mate. you want better? use a shader. people have contributed dozens." True , and i can do this with A6 ,
"you've been using mostly C-style syntax for as long as you've been using C-script. seriously, take a good look at Lite-C. there's almost no difference to current C-script projects." So i can do without Lite-C
"that first bit doesn't even make sense. lite-C is good. if it isn't much use to you, too bad. but that doesn't stop it from being good and if those who can use it are stupid, what does that make you?"
Sure , it's good , but so is C-Script
"pro's way more expensive than A7 comm. some of us can't afford it."
Still dont see how thats an actual upgrade to the engine , other than a licensing change.
"things like "Sphere 2, intense X , Seed_IT, Dyna_Lights, and Ice_X editor" specifically cater to certain needs which many users don't require."
I can assure you most people would benefit a lot more from those plugins than from Lite-C. I can assure you everyone would vote on having a gamestudio with all those plugins integrated is way way better than what A7 is now , and if you dont agree , then your a complete mongol. This things should already be implemented in gamestudio , we arer paying more for the suite with tools than just the engine , how many free engines are out there right now ? If we are going to have to make all this plugins ourselves we might was well just get a free engine , and develop all the tools for it. Thats the point , gamestudio has always been this cool easy to use engine , I just A7 was going to be way way more user friendly and upgraded , both engine and user interface. I mean , we've all complaied about all this things before , but no one seems to listen.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 08:15
Quote:
JulzMighty , well mate , if you could take your head out of ur ass for one second you would see what i'm talking about. None of your answers are relevant
that's more than a tad hypocritical, hence my need to point you in the right direction where you've misunderstood me:
Quote:
"that's directX for you mate. you want better? use a shader. people have contributed dozens." True , and i can do this with A6
and you do this with any other engine too. some have shader libraries built in; there's one in forecast, with some of its components already released.
Quote:
"you've been using mostly C-style syntax for as long as you've been using C-script. seriously, take a good look at Lite-C. there's almost no difference to current C-script projects." So i can do without Lite-C
if you were a programmer you might understand what difference structs make, among other lite-C changes. that's not intended as an insult; i know there are many non-programmer users here. still, my point was that there's almost no difference if you're converting. if you make use of lite-C's advantages, however, you'll never be able to go back.
Quote:
"things like "Sphere 2, intense X , Seed_IT, Dyna_Lights, and Ice_X editor" specifically cater to certain needs which many users don't require."
I can assure you most people would benefit a lot more from those plugins than from Lite-C. I can assure you everyone would vote on having a gamestudio with all those plugins integrated is way way better than what A7 is now , and if you dont agree , then your a complete mongol. This things should already be implemented in gamestudio , we arer paying more for the suite with tools than just the engine , how many free engines are out there right now ? If we are going to have to make all this plugins ourselves we might was well just get a free engine , and develop all the tools for it. Thats the point , gamestudio has always been this cool easy to use engine , I just A7 was going to be way way more user friendly and upgraded , both engine and user interface. I mean , we've all complaied about all this things before , but no one seems to listen.
first: i made the point already that lite-C is free, so there's no need to compare it with these plugins.
secondly: of course heaps of people would want this integrated. i never disagreed with this. but that would probably affect the pricing. people want lots of things; if you look at the forecast page conitec's making some alternatives.
thirdly: i don't know what it takes to make an engine, but conitec's doing a great job. they can't cater for the programmers and non-programmers at the same time. they started with programmers (lite-C) and now they're working on non-programmer's (interactive shader editor, interactive level editor, soft-shadows, decal management, shader library). if you don't think A7 is worth it until they've done both, then wait. but you have contributed nothing of worth to this topic, which began in german anyway. what on earth are you even doing here?
julz
Quote:
...wouldnt it be nice to have A7 have a Sphere like rendering addon
already implemented , and maybe even better ,with fallbacks and better
compatibility?
Oh, yes. Absolutely! I would love it: A Sphere renderer with fallbacks, better
dynamic shadows, scene-management and directional lightmapping for additional
use of static shadows.
I also understand the discussion of lighting: per-vertex-lighting is ugly
indeed. Per pixel-lighting should be standard today.
I always wondered why Lite-C got so much priority. If I give a game demo to my
friend, to a publisher or anyone else then nobody will ask what language I use.
They will look how good shines and how good it plays.
WhyDoIDie is a bit harsh to you but in some points I have to agree with him
(and this is the first time I do so ). He judges the engine on their tools.
But there is nothing wrong since it is called Gamestudio (STUDIO, remember).
The tools are a big point for this package.
But at the other hand you all are right, when you hope to get a better studio
after getting GameEdit, a fixed shadow compiler, shader editor. If that happens
then we really get a promising A7. At the moment I understand some people
waiting.
Most artists dont use Gamestudio because it is moving more and more to an
engine developed for programmers. Most updates are made for new Lite-C
commands, variables, flags, structures, whatever. Just look at the beta-list
and you will realize it. Changings regarding tools are very seldom.
But this is the way. I do not complain. I just want to be objective and show a
clear picture. You will have the same problems with other tools. TGEA took much
time and is still not finished (but they called it early adopter a long time,
this is more honest against the customers). Beyond Virtual takes much time for
new shaders, Unigine is still not finished and the Windows-port of Unity3d is
just in the beginning.
So this is the way and we have to accept it.
But yes, why not paying Matt to extend the renderer in a Sphere-style?
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 08:35
you're right, the tools it comes with aren't great. i think MED is particularly bad, but i don't have WED-like experience with other tools to say how bad it is.
i think little updates to lite-C are easier to add than features in the editors or other stuff.
i'm sure any non-programmer can appreciate the forecasted addition of radiosity. and i know soft-shadows has been there for ages, but it will happen sooner or later. Sphere is great, but i think conitec is going for a different approach to the same easy-results -- hence the shader editor and interactive level editor.
i think some built-in post-processing effects would make a lot of artists happier.
as much as Why Do I Die has some valid points, they're put across poorly and aren't helpful. the later posts were more intelligent and more relevant, but his first two or three posts were of no use to anyone.
Why Do I Die: if you just want to express your opinion and seek arguments, the Morbius forum is more suited to that.
julz
Yes. I agree with that. The approach of Conitec might differ from Sphere. But I still do not see how I can achieve something like that with A7:
A level with static lights and shadows plus normal-mapping applied using 2 uv-sets. The only idea I get is to make the level with models, use the plug-in from Ventilator to access the second uv-map via a second model and write a shader to multiply the shadowmap on top of a normal map.
But to be honest: Isn't this a bit hard for every newcomer? It is even hard for me or most of you.
Do you see any chance of rendering your level with static lighting (you mentioned radiosity) plus current shaders to bring metal to shine, to get per-pixel-lighting, to have specularity, to light little bumps realistically?
I personally would like to have this and I am still waiting.
And you all know that every decent game uses those techniques since every cheap graphic card supports it.
"Why Do I Die: if you just want to express your opinion and seek arguments, the Morbius forum is more suited to that."
The topic's name is A6 VS A7 , and it's in the Engine forum , can you explain how my opinions were not relevant to the subject ?
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 08:57
that's the subject of the topic. on-topic or off-topic is determined by what the starter of this thread first posted. how good is your german?
Legolas250 was probably seeking a feature comparison, not "A7 vs A6 = Tie , because it's besically the same crap, if you have A6 already there's no reason to buy A7."
on this forum you usually are expected to support your ideas with facts. even the most respected members of this forum are expected to.
some might say that your opinion hasn't earned any weight lately.
julz
EDIT:
Quote:
Do you see any chance of rendering your level with static lighting (you mentioned radiosity) plus current shaders to bring metal to shine, to get per-pixel-lighting, to have specularity, to light little bumps realistically?
that's a good point. perhaps the new render and culling system has solved some of the level-shader speed issues? that's just hoping though.
Thats exactly what I'm talking about Frank , I really thought A7 was going to have all this new features ready to use out of the box , just being able to add a dynamic light and have it be a good per pixel lighting light , have good working dynamic soft shadows , shader editor (preferably ingame) , ingame level editor , ingame terrain editor , ingame light editor (like dynalights) , Sphere like rendering , much better templates that could actually be used in a commercial game , I mean , there's just too many cool things the engine could have to list them all , and I dont see any of them in A7 , hence my dissapointment , I really do feel this type of features are what the average gamestudio user is looking for and would benefit from the most , rather than the Lite-C implementation , and the other behind the scenes stuff that has been added.
"on this forum you usually are expected to support your ideas with facts. even the most respected members of this forum are expected to."
Thats only your opinion , and you didnt include any facts in there to back it up.
Posted By: adoado
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:11
Quote:
You all would have to be really stupid to actually belive what you put. Yes , lite-C is one of the biggest new features , which to me , and most non programmers is useless
Without programmers there could not be a game. A game is limited to the features of the language in which it is written in. An extremely dodgy language could not make the next Half-life killer, for example. A better language can open possibilities to better games. That in itself, I think, is worth the upgrade.
Thanks,
Adoado.
Well you are completely wrong Adoado , lol. Just like withoguht programmers you cant make a game you cant make it withought artists either , and if u pay even a tiny bit of attention to the commercial games you would see how important art is considerd by publishers and game audience.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:17
Quote:
"on this forum you usually are expected to support your ideas with facts. even the most respected members of this forum are expected to."
Thats only your opinion , and you didnt include any facts in there to back it up.
who's head's up their arse again? you argued that A7 is no improvement over A6, and i responded by listing actual improvements in A7 over A6 -- those are factual. i also pointed out features that are being made right now for A7 and not A6 -- unless Conitec is lying, those are factual.
and adoado makes a good point.
Quote:
Just like withoguht programmers you cant make a game you cant make it withought artists either
yeh u can. procedural stuff. usually not on a professional scale, but adoado's point is more valid than yours.
julz
Hiya.
Well, after playing with the A7 demo (WED; didn't bother with MED or SED), I have to say...I agree about 75% with WhyDID. I was expecting A7 to at *least* move up to having what we already have in A6 via 'common' plugins. I would consider the following to be "common" (re: most useful) to A6;
Sphere 2
IceX
EasyParticles 3 (is it up to 3? I think it is)
To that, though I haven't used them, Dyna-Lights, IntenseX AI (?) and Seed-It should be added.
I am, frankly, stunned that A7 basically has, well, "nothing new" other than Lite-C and ABT. I know there are probably a lot of overall improvements, this is good, but as primarily an artist-type, I want to be able to model my character, texture it with normal maps, animate it with bones and be able to import that into A7 with a few clicks of the mouse. I want to hit Build then Run and see something at *least* the equivalent of Sphere2.
A7 may be a large leap ahead with regards to folks who really delve into the nitty-gritty of the engine (re: Lite-C and full C++ .dll's), but the other 80% of the 3DGS customers are gonna be scratching their heads going "Uh...ok...so where's all the cool stuff for me?"
What I do like about WED is the "Properties" of anything you click being 'right there'. Well, with the exception that there isn't a nice color-swatch to click on when I want to change the color of a light...what's up with that? I also like the default "Vert/Face/Edge" manipulator (the blue thing with white dots of V/F/E's). But still no textured model viewer? No ability to move the texture viewer to the bottom of the screen?
Well, put me in the "wait until 7.5 or 8 to see what happens" camp...:(
Posted By: adoado
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:27
Quote:
Well you are completely wrong Adoado , lol. Just like withoguht programmers you cant make a game you cant make it withought artists either , and if u pay even a tiny bit of attention to the commercial games you would see how important art is considerd by publishers and game audience.
I know - programmers and artists both make a game. I am just saying that just because some of the improvements may not be in your area, does not make it a crappy engine.
Quote:
shader editor , ingame level editor , ingame terrain editor much better templates that could actually be used in a commercial game
Look in the forecast, they are on their way.
Lol , sure Julz , you can also make games with just art and no programming , so whats the point of his statement , and yours , why dont you 2 just get a C++ compiler and go code from scratch , it's the best way to achieve exactly what you want , and C++ is way more powerfull than gamestudio or lite-C , if your big into programming , your using the wrong engine for you , gamestudio is suppossed to be the opppossite , you've seen their advertising right ? Gamestudio has always been a game development suite which eases the process of game creation by offering everything you need to make a game in one package , including premade scrips to put together a game without even needing to know how to program anything. That is it's point , ease of use , if thats not what your after , then what are you doing here , you know you can program an engine from scratch right ? Your comments are obviously biased Julz , just so you wont admit that you were and are completely wrong.
Edit: LOL , no wonder Julz is so defensive of A7 , he already bought it , lol , just looked at his info.
Posted By: adoado
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:41
Ar!, so Why_Do_I_Die, you are looking for ease of use, rather that a huge amount of features?
Maybe Flash is a better option for you to use then?
P.S. I have nothing against Flash
Julz probably bought it because he knew how much better it is than A7
And realized the advantages of it.
Huge amounts of features ? Where , where are all this features you speak of adoado ?
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:45
Quote:
Your comments are obviously biased Julz , just so you wont admit that you were and are completely wrong.
settle down mate. i've never seen a bigger hypocrite.
the point isn't what you can make without one element. the point is that advances in programming are vital to advances in the engine as a whole.
Quote:
why dont you 2 just get a C++ compiler and go code from scratch , it's the best way to achieve exactly what you want , and C++ is way more powerfull than gamestudio or lite-C , if your big into programming , your using the wrong engine for you
i'm a learning programmer. i guess i was on the verge of out-growing C-script, but lite-C means there's no need for me to move elsewhere. using it i made my own physics engine. from scratch.
yes, i like programming, but i'm not quite at the end of the scale -- i have no desire to program an engine from scratch just yet, because i enjoy being able to spend time on art as well and see it all shaded beautifully with only a few lines of code.
yes, i've seen gamestudio's advertising. it advertises itself as being good for everyone -- the experienced programmer or the beginner. as far as i'm concerned it is. it could improve in the beginner area atm but it actually does cater for programmers. this makes it good for me.
to admit i'm completely wrong would be to step down when i'm ahead. it's even gotten to the point where all you can do is try and attack me and my motives for using 3DGS. i'm using the wrong engine? you've been complaining about the engine being too focused on catering for people like me and not you.
you just dug yourself into a hole mate. you're less suited to this engine than i am.
julz
Julz , HAHAHAHA , ur a complete moron. Look at the thread , it's A6 vs A7 , can you get that in your head , I'm not compaining about Gamestudio itself , I'm merely stating the massive lack of features A7 has. I'm more of a developer and an artist , but I program in C-Scipt as well , what I am saying here is , for most of the gamestudio users (not just programming geeks) A7 is really not offering much as an upgrade , thats the whole point of my post, but since u've already bought it , it really shows how much your opinion is worth.
Posted By: adoado
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 09:52
Where are the features? Right here:
http://www.conitec.net/forecast.htmhttp://www.3dgamestudio.com/litec.htmOh, and here aswell,
http://www.3dgamestudio.com/I guess you were expecting a type of in-built 3ds max or photoshop in A7, then? Seriously, A7 is such a step up from A6.
Posted By: JibbSmart
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 10:01
the "A7 vs A6" is a small taster of what he's asking. this is Legolas250's thread, specifically asking if the changes in A7 make the engine more suitable for making an MMOG, and if he can use C++ with it. look at the first post. did you help with that question at all?
no.
keep digging WDID.
julz
Posted By: Inestical
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 10:10
Why_Do_I_Die: please behave, calling someone a moron, or flaming, is against the rules of the forums. This is warning by the way, keep flaming and you're banned.
Posted By: Wicht
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 10:18
A7 is definitely not a major release. It is A6 + Lite-C & ABT. Nothing more.
@adoado: On forecast are planned features and not EXISTING features.
A real A7 is: The current A7-Version + IngameEditor, ShaderEditor, Decal Management. All in one Box.
A7 is currently a joke.
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 10:37
Yes wicht I just waited for your appearance, you made my day!! Now all the trolls are again together in one thread, could be a good occasion to lock it.
Threads like this attract trolls like flies going for a pile of (you know). Its obvious that you never did anything with A7 or any other engine, so why dont you just go away because nobody here cares about what is coming out of your mouth. Or better, first get some knowledge of engines, and then buy maybe the standard edition, and then start game development, this could give you a chance to learn a little about engines and to know what youre talking about.
I think this thread can now be locked.
Posted By: Doug
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 10:51
Please note the forum rules:
Quote:
- Do not attack, insult, or provoke other members. Always keep your
messages to the topic, and refrain from personal remarks about
other members.
Personal attacks against the product are fine, but don't insult other members.
Posted By: Doug
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 11:01
Post deleted by Doug
Quote:
Or better, first get some knowledge of engines, and then buy maybe the standard edition, and then start game development, this could give you a chance to learn a little about engines and to know what youre talking about.
Tobias: You are very far from topic. You accuse people and you make assumptions without any knowledge about those people. I think you regarded this to Wicht and you are very wrong. He is a long-time user of Gamestudio. He participated in many contests and made complete game-systems, levels with his own scripts, moving doors, animated objects working weapon-systems and much more. There were even a few plug-ins lately from Wicht available for A6.
Even if he wrote a short message you should not assume that he is an un-skilled user. Just think about trolls and touch your own nose
I guess all there is to say is , I'm personally not purchasing A7 untill the new forecaast features get implemented into the engine. Me as a developer dont consider A7 is worth upgrading to from A6 at this time , maybe in the future like Doug said , A7 will be more powerfull and have a lot of more features implemented , I just thought A7 was going to have there from it's release date.
"A6.6 is actual the core of the new A7"
That right there is yet another reason why I wouldn't update.
And about the troll comment , whether I am or not , I've always been for gamestudio , and have always said it's a great engine for a great price , and consider it the best of it's kind. So keep that in mind while you read my comments.
Absolutely. I remember you very often defending Gamestudio against critics. So I take this seriously as well as I take JulzMighty seriously. I think every side made good points.
Damn Doug's post got deleted by JCL , I dont think i've ever seen that happen before.
Posted By: Wicht
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 12:35
@Tobias: Ja, Du hast recht. Ich werde Deinen Ratschlag beherzigen und mir die kleinste A7 Version kaufen. Hoffentlich lerne ich dadurch, was eine 3D-Engine ist und wie diese funktioniert.
Zuvor muss ich aber noch meine Torque Game Engine löschen, da diese ja kein Dev.-Tool ist, sondern eine Kaffeemaschine. Wie konnte ich das nur übersehen.
Wenn ich Fragen zu meiner neuen A7 habe, kann ich mich doch vertrauensvoll an Dich wenden, oder?
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 13:53
@Wicht, du kannst dich mit Fragen immer an mich wenden, obwohl wenn ichs mir recht überlege wäre es mir noch lieber wenn du dich trollen würdest. Aber wenn du hier schon auf dem Forum leben und immer wieder die gleichen Kommentare von dir geben musst dann bin ich gern bereit wenigstens zur Qualität deiner Kommentare beizutragen indem ich dir etwas über Engines erkläre.
Posted By: Wicht
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 14:07
@Tobias: Friendly_Frank schrieb in diesem Thread:
Quote:
Tobias: You are very far from topic. You accuse people and you make assumptions without any knowledge about those people. I think you regarded this to Wicht and you are very wrong. He is a long-time user of Gamestudio. He participated in many contests and made complete game-systems, levels with his own scripts, moving doors, animated objects working weapon-systems and much more. There were even a few plug-ins lately from Wicht available for A6.
Even if he wrote a short message you should not assume that he is an un-skilled user. Just think about trolls and touch your own nose. ;-)
Er kennt mich etwas besser als Du.
Posted By: Tobias
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 14:14
@Wicht, ich mache keine Recherchen wie lange jemand schon hier ist, ich beurteile dich nur nach dem was ich von dir auf dem Forum sehe und das ist: nie ein eigenes Projekt, nie Hilfe oder Tipps für irgendjemandem, nie irgendeine konkrete Frage oder Antwort zu irgendeinen Befehl von Gamestudio sondern immer nur das gleiche Gesabbel wie furchtbar schlecht Gamestudio ist und dass du dir morgen Torque kaufts. Machs doch endlich und geh weg.
Posted By: Memphis
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/04/07 20:01
Why_Do_I_Die: you say you are a non programmer?, then why even try develope games, i personally think, that anyone even considering writing or developing a game, should have mid to pro knowledge of programming, if not then it should be more of a hobby, if it is a hobby, then why dont you go make your hobby game, and leave the forumers alone with your self centered attitude, the developers do not work for you, if you do not like a7 and you like a6, then instead of bitching, why dont you make a request thread, request new features....
if you are not going to upgrade to a7 anyways, then why did you post in this thread.... because you have no knowledge of the actual features, if you don't use it....
-/Meka][Meka
"if you are not going to upgrade to a7 anyways, then why did you start the thread...."
Hmmm, I didnt start the thread , lol , maybe you shouldl read it from the begining. It's funny to see all the programmers defend their "programming" , lol , I know how to script , pretty good to , but I also know how to model, texture , map , and design , so I dont look at gamestudio as a sole programming application , in fact , it's the complete opposite. Now I see ur a noob who probably doesnt have any idea of what he's doing or talking about , or the purpose of the tool he speaks of is , so why dont you get better informed before makingn senseless and irrelevant posts.
Posted By: Memphis
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/05/07 00:11
ive worked on many engines in the past, and many commercial applications, i guaruntee i know a heck of alot more then you'll ever know...you sound very childish...and i did not say it was a sole development tool, i said if you do not know how to program ( refering to an earlier post ) then why try to develope a game unless it was a hobby, in which case you dont need to be arsey about the tool you are using... the developers of the software will be spending alot of time and putting alot of effort into the application, if you think you can do better, why dont you try for yourself... if not then like i said, request features, dont try to put them down on what they've developed for the public, if one day they got sick of .... like you, they may stop developing for the public and sell only too large companies. (i cant imagine this, but its a possibilty) if they had more money then brains im sure they would of banned you already, but i think they are smart enough to ignore an idiot like yourself.
Quote:
A7 itself is not much more powerfull than A6 , And lite-C itself is worthless to me because C-Script was good enough to get the job done
...
I just really feel the time spent on A7's features coulda been much better spent on other more usefull features to the average gamestudio developer.
...
I really thought A7 was going to have all this new features ready to use out of the box , just being able to add a dynamic light and have it be a good per pixel lighting light , have good working dynamic soft shadows , shader editor (preferably ingame) , ingame level editor , ingame terrain editor , ingame light editor (like dynalights) , Sphere like rendering , much better templates that could actually be used in a commercial game
...
And he already made his conclusion:
Quote:
I'm personally not purchasing A7 untill the new forecaast features get implemented into the engine.
I agree with Why_Do_I_Die, A7 should have more easy eye candy features, for average developer. In fact I want those too. I believe Conitec's developers will work hard to achieve those things.
Although at this moment, lite-C does not made a distinct different between A6 and A7, especially the new light mapper and template system are not finish. But A7 is no way worst then A6.
Posted By: Darkyyes
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/05/07 02:21
Ok.. I started reading this topic from page 7 and went to page 6 then 5 and then I started from 1 to get the hold of this discussion.
at page 7 and 6 I thought 'why do i die' was just a trouble maker but then I realized that actually he's completly right in many aspects.
I would expect conitec to add more rendering features than what's currently right now I don't see diffrences between except render2texture and unlimited physics but this is not engine changes as its only lisencing changes.
but with all the features adding that A7 is going to get is looking alot better I think but it's still not there,
right now A7 is alittle worse in condition than A7
thanks to
-worse GUI
-still menu disapearance's when entity properties is open or still open under game runtime
-still same problem when aligning object through the z,x,y lines as when the mouse gets close to current selected window edge the objects starts going wild in aligning and ends up far away from current position.
more examples on programming,artpipeline and such would'nt hurt
like how many poly's for a fps player model
how much poly for 3rd person player models
like Dx10 feature would be a more significiant engine upgrade.
Posted By: jcl
Re: A7 vs A6 - 09/05/07 08:30
This thread went off topic and became emotional -> closed. Please refrain from personal attacks and from spamming useful threads with emotional or nonsensical posts. Trolls will be banned in the future when they disturb the communication on the forum.
A7 is a different engine and thus naturally has it's pros and cons compared to A6. However it's finished, meaning that it won't get any better and there's nothing to develop any further with it, aside from possible bug fixes. The next engine to develop will be A8 and that's far in the future
.
As you can see on the forecast page, the development focus in the next time is indeed 'eye candy', like shaders, shadowmapping etc, and the editors.