Gamestudios dead?

Hey,

I would like to start with game design again and
I would like to buy the newest Engine.
At the moment I have the A7 commercial edition, but I saw
that the A8 8.45 Version is at least 1 1/2 Years old!!!

No more updates?
Is this program dead?
Because I don't like to buy a dead program now
What about A9 ???
Any plans???

Greets

(You can also answer in german)

No.
Good question...waiting for updates ( bugfixes ) too.

But why there have been no updates since february 2014???
I don't want to waste my money, if there will be no more updates or new Versions of this engine.
I like 3DGS because of it's usability, but there are no information out there.

I saw that a few people have written in the forum, that Acknex is dead and this project is out of support.
Would be bad, if I buy A8 now and then I find out, it's outdated and there will be no more updates.

I wish the developers would give us some information on this project. :S

jcl mentioned that there will be an update soon...

Don't waste your money.
If you wanna get into game design again, I'd suggest you try out Unity or Unreal Engine, depending on your skill set, they are free, state of the art and actively maintained.

If, for some reason, you really want to use Acknex - do the same as above, as there's no money involved from your side you can still keep an eye on Acknex and if the miracly occurs and there's indeed an update, you can still invest.
But right now is really the worst time to put your money into Acknex.

So I should wait for A9 or use Unity?
The problem of Unity is, that there is no Model and no Skript editor, right?
So I just have a level editor and have do put in my own work with other programs.
Like Maya, 3DsMax and programs like that?
Would be a bit expensive for me, I guess.

You can use pretty much any popular modeling tool you wish with Unity. Using MED for modeling never was a good idea anyway - it was made for importing and conversion, which Unity does via a wide range of import settings.
Scripts are edited with Mono Develop. Good enough if you were able to get along with SED before.

Yes but modeling tools are expensive.
I just know one free program. Blender.
But I have no clue, how to model in Blender and how big the models must be.
I think, that it will take years to create a small indie game with unity.
To bad there is no Java Engine, because I know how to program with Java,
but I have a quite small experience with C.

Creating a game (often) takes years. Doesnt matter which engine.

Yeah that's right, but I guess it will be much easier with 3DGS, as with Unity :S
Well Unity is so much more complex than 3DGS.
If I see all those tools and stuff you can edit and program.
Well here you also have templates and much stuff like Shade-C.
I watched a Youtube tutorial for unity and after 30 Minutes of programming,
he was able to punch with a little stick......Imagine how much time a beginner would need for that.
I mean at 3DGS I have all needed tools at one place and they work easy together.
But if I have to use external programs like Blender, to create Models....Blender is very complex!
Maybe I'll take a look at it, but for me it would be better, if A9 would be released.
I hope it is coming
But who knows IF it's coming and when it's coming.

By the way.
I starred at Unreal Engine 4.
It is amazing how it looks and the youtube videos are fantastic, BUT....
it looks easier, than it is!
Placing some Assets here and there, and it's done.
No it's not o_Ô
Sure you can use finished Assets from other people, but if you want to sell a game later, you have to use your own Assets and THIS is the real challenge.
Not placing Assets around a map, but creating them.
I believe I would never be able to create Assets like shown in all those Unreal 4 videos and this is the problem.

Yes. The only thing limiting me now are animations.
If i had an 3d artist (trapped in my basement^^)...that would be great!

Yes well this is the point, why I don't want to start with such complex programs like unity or Unreal engine.
You will be never able, to create a real game and sell it, if you are not able
to use the program, creating 3D assets, textures, skripts and stuff.
It comes all together! ^^
So...without a real team with people who have different skills...forget it.

It's fine, when you are able to use the Unreal 4 Engine.
But a game needs assets and textures and I think this is the real challenge!
Your game looks ugly, when your assets and textures looks ugly.
Doesn't matter how complex and professional the engine is. ^^

And this is why I like 3DGS.
It is simple to use and there is no need to create a game with high end graphics.
As an Indie artist, there is no need for such a good graphic.


I really hope, that A9 is coming.

In my point of view, one life isnt enough to become a coder AND a (good!) 3d model / animation / design artist. Maybe that was possible in days of Doom or even QuakeI + II but not now a days.

Time will come, ill search an modeler to "break" that "last border"

One side right one not. Best script n gameplay is "useless" if the project looks like s* ...and of course it depends on what genre / style u aiming at.

I would be happy with regular updates first

Just don't try to emulate current AAA graphics standards and techniques, most likely you will fail miserably.
I don't find it advisable to base your concept on "buying art assets" either.

Instead, I say (you have to) try and find your own style, in terms both of a visual style and content creation (!). Even and especially as a lone wolf programmer. My personal advice is to NOT use normal maps, they suck when they are not generated from high poly assets (do you really have the time to create them?) and the result in general looks terrible when it's not coming from AAA studios.
When it comes to animations, the part which I hate the most, you can save a lot of work when you don't use one continuous mesh but separate parts (still one model) for legs, arms and so on, like in N64 times. They are much quicker to animate, no distortions and you can do much of the animations with code, too.

When you want to create a game on your own you have to find such time and effort saving details, and when you do so, even the A8 editors can be enough to make it happen in a reasonable amount of time. Although my models and art assets in general suck I can create them in a very quick fashion using MED, much quicker than with any other program, and mostly SED to do shading - instead of real textures - and animations via shaders.

Wir können uns im übrigen auch in deutsch unterhalten, sehe ich gerade.
Ich denke ebend nicht, dass es sich als Einzelperson wirklich lohnt, mit Unity oder Unreal anzufangen. ^^
mMn. ist das einfach kontraproduktiv, da man niemals die Kapazitäten und die Fähigkeiten haben wird, um ALLES zu realisieren.
Irgendwo wird man festhängen.
Ich habe z.B. viele Ideen, kann diese aber schlecht umsetzen.
Ich weiß, welche Modelle und Texturen ich will, aber ich kann sie nicht produzieren.
Und daher würde mir ja die beste Engine nichts bringen, wenn das Spiel am Ende leer ist.
Viele leute reden ja immer von diesen "Assets", die sie im Markt einfach kaufen ode rkostenlos nutzen.
Das halte ich für absoluten Humbug....denn ich möchte doch ein eigenes Spiel erstellen und mich nicht mit fremden Federn schmücken.
Zumal das dann mit dem Verkaufen so eine Sache ist.
Man kommt also nicht drum herum, im Endeffekt alles selbst zu erstellen.
Egal ob Unity, oder Unreal.
Es dauert ja schon, bis man mit 3DGS was brauchbares erstellt hat.
Bei Unity etc. dauert es aber noch länger, weil es einfach viel komplexer ist.
Klar, sieht es am Ende wundervoll aus, aber wenn ich nach 5 Jahren so weit bin,
dass ich 1 Level eines Spiels erzeugt habe, bringt mir das ja auch nichts.

Und umso länger ich darüber nachdenke, umso mehr wird mir klar,
dass im Endeffekt niemand von uns wirklich in der Lage sein wird, als Einzelgänger
mit Unity oder Unreal ein richtiges Spiel zu programmieren, was man am Ende auch verkaufen kann.
Es sei denn man hat kein Leben mehr und sitzt jeden Tag von morgens bis Abends davor, was aber im Arbeitsleben schwierig wird ^^

Und deswegen hänge ich irgendwo an 3DGS.
Es ist halt einfach "simpler" gestaltet.
mMn. muss 3DGS nicht mit Unity mithalten können um gut zu sein.
Das musste es nie.
Wenn ich mir die Bilder hier in der Gallerie ansehe und die Grafik mit Shadern wie Shade-C, dann muss ich sagen, dass das doch völlig ausreicht.
Wenn man dann endlich mal ein A9 Update oder so auf die Beine stellt
und alles noch etwas anpasst, dann wäre das ja super.
Für einen einzelnen Indie Entwickler ist das dann wohl das sinnvollste.


Ich weiß nur nicht, ob sich ein Upgrade auf A8 lohnt.
Habe halt A7 Commercial.
Wenn jetzt natürlich A9 kommen würde, wäre der Kauf total sinnlos.



//// For english people:
I just mentioned, that it is nearly impossible to create a real game as a one man indie developer with professional engines like unity or unreal, because of its complex structure.
And that I like 3DGS because it is easy to use and enough for one person...AND I look forward for A9 ;-)

Kann vieles von den Gedanken nach voll ziehen. Aus Ku's sowie Deinem letzten Post. Denke wir meinen eigentlich alle so ziemlich das gleiche, bricht man es mal auf das mindeste herunter.

Ich z.B. will überhaupt kein Spiel verkaufen oder damit Geld verdienen. Wollte ich auch noch nie.
Seit ich als Kind Sachen wie Wolfenstein, Doom usw spielte, will ich auch meine Idee verwirklichen, kann da gar nicht anders.
Glaubt mir oder nicht, als ich mit Zombieshootern begann, gab es nur alte Filme von George A Romero, kein(!) Zombiespiel (außer Dinger wie "ZombiesAteMyNeighbours" usw)
Alles in allem hat mich das nun weit über 10 Jahre "gekostet" einen Stand der "Zufriedenheit" zu erlangen.

Die Erfüllung für mich wäre ein Modeldesigner der meine (bzw. unsere) Monster Ideen / Zeichnungen in 3d umsetzt. Als Bezahlung bekommt er seine Kreaturen in einem Spiel "zum Leben erweckt". Naja. Bin im Moment (zum Glück) mit Design und Resourcen ganz zu frieden, ein Designer mit Langeweile wäre halt das Optimum. Ich muss vom Glück reden, das mir Leveldesign liegt. Ich will halt einfach nie

Das sehe ich eigentlich genau anders herum. Man sollte sich halt nicht genötigt fühlen nur weil man z.B. die UE4 benutzt dann auch die grafische Qualität der Elemental Demo zu erreichen. Die Engines bieten so viele nette Tools die von Blueprints über out of the box Shader bis hin zu WYSIWYG Editoren reicht, dass 3DGS dagegen einfach alt aussieht und das meine ich nicht in visueller Hinsicht. In 3DGS mit dem altbackenen Editor war es in meinen Augen immer eine Qual komplexere Szenen zusammenzubauen - zumindest im Vergleich zu den modernen Editoren mit ihren WYSIWYG Fähigkeiten wo man Click Click Click macht und das Objekt ist in der gewünschten Form an der gewünschten Position mit den gewünschten Materialeigentschaften da. Soll dann noch eine Normal Map oder gar ein Toon Shader dazu? Kein Problem - Click Click Material und Textur zugewiesen und fertig. In 3DGS ist ja alleine schon die Shader-Abteilung ein Fass, das man lieber gar nicht aufmachen will. Ein anderes Beispiel sind ja Partikeleffekte - in den Editoren heutzutage mit Live-Vorschau, Reglern und diversen Aktoren relativ simpel zusammenzustricken, während man in 3DGS da primär in abstraktem Code feststeckt...

So gesehen ist denke ich der Trick der, dass man am Anfang zunächst einmal ganz klar absteckt, was man überhaupt braucht. Die Engines sind heute halt ziemliche Schweizer Taschenmesser mit allem möglichen Krimskrams wo es einem in den Fingern juckt das auch zu benutzen. Im Extremfall macht man es dann sogar wie etwa Shovel Knight und erzeugt etwas, wo niemand auf den ersten Blick je die Unity Engine hinter vermutet hätte. Da wurde dann eben nur das benutzt was man brauchte um die Spielidee umzusetzen...

Von daher - ich würde schon alleine wegen der Editoren nicht mehr zu 3DGS zurückwollen. Die Spiellogiken als Code zu schreiben dürfte generell dann überall gleichschwer sein vorausgesetzt man beherrscht die jeweilige Sprache und hat bei der Engine API ein wenig Durchblick. Ansonsten sind dann Dinge wie der Unity Marketplace naütrlich auch sehr verlockend, etwa wenn man sich relativ simpel ein Pathfinding einkaufen kann (selbst wenn man es dann nur zum Lernen benutzt anstatt das 1:1 so einzubauen). So gesehen finde ich auch das Einkaufen von Assets nicht weiter schlimm bzw. ich sehe das Problem wenige in der Asseterstellung, sondern dass ein konsistenter Look gewahrt werden muss und das ist beim Assetkauf schon extrem schwierig. Von daher finde ich die meisten Modelle und Texturen die man so kaufen kann arg spezifisch, wohingegen ich es bei Unity extrem nett finde sich Partikeleffekte kaufen zu können - da ist der Look in der Regel dann auch kein großes Problem, das es grob gesagt entweder realstisch oder cartoonisch aussehen muss...

So gesehen trauere ich 3DGS nicht wirklich nach - dazu gab es von Entwicklerseite zum Einen zu viele "Fehlentscheidungen" die stets in die Richtung gingen 3DGS als eine Suite beizubehalten mit der man alles machen kann und zum Anderen wurde ja leider die Manpower hinter dem Projekt Schritt für Schritt abgebaut, bis aus dem Projekt nichts mehr werden konnte selbst wenn man wollte. Irgendwo schade, aber irgendwo auch keine Überraschung...

Mit Unity ist man an einigen Stellen sehr viel schneller als mit A8. Wenn man natürlich die Lernphase als Entwicklungszeit rechnet dann ist klar dass die Rechnung gegen ein A8, das man schon kennt, nicht aufgehen kann.

Letzten Endes muss man selber wissen, was man nutzen will, und ob man gewillt ist, auch die Lernphase durchzuziehen.

Dass man mit Unity viel langsamer unterwegs ist als mit A8 kann ich so jedenfalls abslut nicht bestätigen. Gerade wenn es mit Dingen wie komplexer gelayerter Animation los geht... da willst du A8 am liebsten einfach nur von der Platte löschen...

German to spanish google translator is a pain near the black hole

Ist zwar nur begrenzt dem Thema zuträglich, aber die Info ist falsch!


https://yachtclubgames.com/about/

Hatte das vor ner Weile schonmal nachgeschaut

So viel dazu ^^
Für mich sieht Unity und Unreal einfach so komplex aus....
Klar kann man sich einarbeiten, aber ich bin mir da einfach unsicher.
Bei 3DGS hat ebend alles die selbe Struktur.
Wenn ich Unity nutze, muss ich mir erstmal externe Programme ranholen, wie z.B. Blender und dann muss ich mit Blender Models erstellen!
Na schönen Dank
Das Programm ist derartig komplex, dass ich vermutlich eine Woche brauche
um einen Fernseher zu modellieren.
Privat zum rumspielen sicherlich eine nette Sache, aber ein Indie Game erstellen,
was man auch verkaufen kann?
Ich traue mir das irgendwie nicht zu, auch wenn ich schon ein wenig mit C++ programmiert habe und derzeit mit JAVA programmiere. (Bin Fachinformatiker)
Ich habe weniger Angst vor der Handhabung mit dem Programmcode und dem Editor selbst, als mit der Erstellung der Assets und Texturen.

Das liegt nur an Dir, egal welche Engine.^^
Letztendlich ist es die Kunst "Feeling" bzw "Seele" in ein Spiel zu bekommen, unabhängig der Assets.

Wenn ich sehe, was bei Steam z.T. für Indie Spiele verkauft werden ^^
Für so eine Grafik ist nun wirklich kein Unity notwendig.
Da kann 3DGS locker mithalten.
Steam hat ja die Indie Game Liste.
Da findet man alle Indie Games und da gibts doch, wenn wir mal ehrlich sind, kaum Spiele, die man nicht auch mit 3DGS problemlos realisieren kann ^^
Bin momentan sehr unentschlossen.

Du argumentierst frei nach "Was der Bauer nicht kennt... frisst er nicht"
Wenn du nichts neues lernen willst, dann benutz das was du kennst. Aber dann hättest du dir eigentlich den ganzen Thread auch sparen können.

@all: It's common practice to keep OP's language in a thread, even if it's your own and all of you share the same mother tongue.

As a conclusion for me and from me, if you actually want to develop games and not always try new editors and engines - don't get me wrong, learning new things is great but for the moment it sets you back and keeps you from working on your game in your precious spare time - just stay with a set of tools you are familiar with. If you are missing features or feel that you waste too much time on simple or certain tasks, look for alternatives.

@Edit: Sorry. I'll write in english from now on.


Nein, das ist eine Verdrehung der Tatsachen.
Ich habe weder geschrieben, dass ich nichts neues probieren möchte, noch dass ich nichts neues lernen möchte.
Ich interessiere mich ja z.B. für A9 (sofern es denn mal erscheint) und kenne es auch nicht
Wenn man abwägt, ob etwas sinnvoll für einen ist, oder nicht,
dann heißt das ja nicht, dass man generell nicht bereit ist, etwas neues zu probieren.
Wenn ich aber feststelle, dass eine professionelle Engine wie Unity oder Unreal eventuell eine Nummer zu groß für mich ist und es sich daher eher weniger lohnt,
seine Zeit nun in solch eine Engine zu stecken, dann muss man es ja nicht benutzen, nur damit man mal was "neues" benutzt hat.

Es geht darum, dass ich bei Steam so gut wie kein Indie Game finde,
was den Einsatz einer Unity oder Unreal Engine notwendig macht,
oder irre ich mich da etwa?
Vielleicht sehen die ganzen Indie Games aus gutem Grund nicht so aus,
wie es z.B. in den Unreal Trailern immer dargestellt wird, weil es für eine Person eventuel schlichtweg unmöglich ist, soetwas alleine zu produzieren,
ohne dabei alt und grau zu werden.
Ist ebend eine Vermutung meinerseits, wenn ich mir anschaue, wie lange ganze Studios für ein Spiel benötigen, was mehrere Jahre dauert.

Grundsätzlich probiere ich gerne neues aus, aber wenn sich mit der Sinn darin nicht ergibt und ich eventuell Stunden, Wochen, Monate an Lebenszeit investiere, um dann festzustellen, dass es ebend doch zu groß für eine Person ist, dann schaue ich auch doof aus der Wäsche

Mein Fokus liegt eigentlich auf "Horror" Spielen.
Gibt im Internet so viele Horror Indie Games wie z.B. diese SCP Games.
Sowas könnte man durchaus verkaufen, wenn man es etwas als längeres spiel hochzieht.
Und nach Unity Grafik sieht das ja eigentlich nicht aus.
Ich möchte ebend mein Spiel auch verkaufen.
Wenn es nicht klappt, dann ist es halt so, aber ich suche natürlich einen Weg um es möglichst einfach zu realisieren.
Ich werde das Thema wohl noch mehr verinnerlichen müssen.
Gamedesign ist ebend doch ziemlich komplex und sehr zeitaufwendig.

When I try to translate into Russian, it doesn't help either

Edit:

to Argon@
I see no problem with than, cause it's almost the same as C#, isn't it? Or if you where talking about javascript? If yes, it's actually as far as I know, default language for Unity.

If you are just toying around and not planning to create anything, you can still do that with A7 I guess. Buying A8 right now will be a waste of money, better use free version, or your A7 one till A9 comes out (if it's ever going to). But if you are planing to create and publish some games (and not only on PC), then you better don't waste your time and start working with Unity. 3DGS is not easier than Unity, in fact it's even much harder to work with it, unless you have decent knowledge about the engine and programming. With Unity you have tons of ready to use tools, which you'll have to create by your own with 3DGS (even good game editor). F.e. when I just registered on unity webpage and got license for free version of unity5, they sent me an email with links to dozen of tutorials and lessons and they also invited me to take one free webinar tutorial per week. So after that when I see how some users over the forum say that this engine isn't dead yet, it makes me wanna cry and laugh at the same time.

All-in-all I love Acknex, but I've made a decision for myself, there is no future behind this engine, unless miracle happens (as some other users already said). It's going to be a waste of your money and time if you are going to make and publish games.

For more info you can also check this thread:
I am retired now and..............

Edit2: if you are looking for a simple but yet good tutorial to get you familiar with unity and it's workflow, try this one:
https://www.3dbuzz.com/training/view/unity-standard/simple-2d-shooter/01-introduction

"Simpler" ist aber nicht unbedingt besser. Du darfst nicht vergessen, dass Du selbst im Laufe der Zeit dazulernst, und immer besser wirst. Irgendwann beherrschst Du all die simplen Funktionen im Schlaf, und dann wünschst Du Dir komplexere Funktionen, die Dir eine "simple" Engine dann gar nicht bieten kann. Vor allem dann nicht, wenn diese Engine nicht mehr, oder nur sehr langsam, weiterentwickelt wird.

Also es ist meiner Meinung nach sinnvoller, mit einer möglichst modernen und komplexen Engine anzufangen (bei der auch gewährleistet ist, dass sie in den nächsten Jahren weiterentwickelt wird), und am Anfang dann halt nur die einfachen (simplen) Funktionen zu benutzen. Später kann man sich dann nach und nach an die komplexeren Funktionen heranwagen.

Ich bin vor ca. einem Jahr auf Unity umgestiegen, nachdem ich zuvor ca. 12 bis 13 Jahre lang Gamestudio benutzt hatte. Damals war ich anfangs auch noch etwas skeptisch und besorgt, weil ich erstens nicht alles neu lernen wollte, und weil ich zweitens Angst hatte, dass die Unity vielleicht für mein Projekt nicht so gut geeignet sein könnte.
Aber heute bin ich froh, dass ich umgestiegen bin. Mir kommt die Unity heute so vor, wie eine weiterentwickelte Gamestudio-Engine A8, A9, A10. Vieles kommt mir vertraut vor, vieles ist ähnlich gelöst wie bei Gamestudio, nur halt eben viel besser und "moderner". Da hat die A8 halt leider die letzten Jahre verschlafen.

Auch die Programmiersprache bei der Unity (C#) kommt mir einfacher, logischer, durchdachter und intuitiver vor. Mir ist schon oft positiv aufgefallen, dass ich neue Befehle/Funktionen benutzen konnte, ohne vorher in irgendeinem Handbuch nachschauen zu müssen. Ich dachte mir schon oft "so müsste es eigentlich funktionieren, oder?!", und voilà, es hatte dann tatsächlich auf Anhieb so funktioniert, wie ich es erhofft hatte. Früher in C-Script oder Lite-C hatte ich viel öfter Syntaxfehler, die ich mir nicht erklären konnte.



Generell, also unabhängig von der Engine, würde ich Dir folgende Tipps geben:

1.) Überlege Dir zuerst einmal, was Du wirklich willst. Warum willst Du ein Spiel entwickeln?
Willst Du es tun, um damit Geld zu verdienen?
Oder willst Du es tun, weil Dein Gehirn voll mit kreativen Spiele-Ideen ist, die Du unbedingt in die Realität umsetzen willst. Also weil so viel Kreativität in Dir steckt, dass sie einfach raus muss.

Falls Du nur deshalb Spiele entwickeln willst, um damit Geld zu verdienen, dann würde ich Dir raten: lass es bleiben. Suche Dir lieber einen anderen Beruf in der IT-Branche, bei dem Du mehr verdienst.
Ich selbst bin SAP/ABAP-Programmierer und SAP-Consultant, und verdiene nach 25 Jahren Berufserfahrung fast 6.000 Euro im Monat. So viel wird man in der Spielebranche niemals verdienen.

Wenn aber die Kreativität in Dir schlummert, und raus will, dann solltest Du unbedingt Spiele entwickeln. Viele Spieler werden es Dir danken. Und ich finde, es gibt kaum etwas schöneres, als Menschen mit seinen eigenen Ideen und kreativen Werken glücklich zu machen.


2.) Falls Du Dich dann doch entscheiden solltest, ein Spiel entwickeln zu wollen, dann vergiss zunächst einmal Deine Spiele-Ideen, die in Deinem Kopf schlummern.
Warum? Ganz einfach, weil Du davon ausgehen musst, dass Deine ersten Projekte eine Enttäuschung werden. Weil niemand schon am Anfang so gut ist, dass er gleich von Beginn an ein perfektes Spiel entwickeln kann.

Stattdessen probier lieber erstmal irgendwelche kleineren Projekte aus. Einfach nur deshalb, um die Engine besser kennen zu lernen.

Beim Umstieg auf die Unity habe ich jetzt ca. ein Jahr lang nichts anderes gemacht, als sämtliche Befehle und Funktionen, die es in der Unity so gibt, auszuprobieren. Habe mich einfach mit sämtlichen Parametern "herumgespielt", ausprobiert welche Auswirkungen diese haben, was sie können, und wo ihre Limits sind. Nur so wird man am Ende ein Gefühl dafür bekommen können, was technisch alles möglich ist, und was nicht möglich ist. Und erst dann, wenn Du das weißt, solltest Du Dich an Dein Spiel heranwagen.


3.) Vergiss MED. MED ist ganz gut geeignet zum Importieren und Konvertieren von Models, die in anderen Programmen erstellt wurden. Aber zum Modellieren ist es nicht wirklich gut geeignet
MED zu benutzen ist so ähnlich, wie wenn Du mit einem kleinen leichten Hammer ein Loch in eine 3 Meter dicke Steinmauer schlagen willst. Okay, es wird früher oder später damit vielleicht sogar funktionieren. Aber besser wäre es, Du verwendest von Anfang an das richtige Werkzeug dafür. Tu Dir die Mühe mit dem kleinen Hammer gar nicht erst an. Weil es ist reine Zeitverschwendung.

Und gute 3D-Werkzeuge gibt es auch für wenig Geld. Aber Du solltest auch dabei bedenken: Nur Übung macht den Meister. Du solltest damit rechnen, dass Du mindestens 3 Jahre Übung brauchst, um so ein Programm halbwegs perfekt zu beherrschen.

Wenn Du dann aber gut darin bist, dann geht das Erstellen von 3D-Modellen sehr schnell. Und da die Technik ja auch immer schneller voranschreitet (ich denke da z.B. an Photogrammetrie oder 3D-Scanner), wird das Erstellen von 3D-Modellen in Zukunft sogar noch viel schneller und einfacher möglich sein als bisher.

Also ich denke, auch eine Einzelperson kann ein Spiel in guter Qualität alleine erstellen. Wichtig ist aber, dass man dieses Handwerk erst mal erlernt, und perfekt darin wird. Und das dauert viele Jahre, wenn nicht sogar Jahrzehnte. Viel Geduld zu haben, ist eine Grundvoraussetzung.

Grüße,
Thomas

Ah ok, so it must have been Broforce which was made in Unity. But nevertheless what I wanted to say is this: Adapt your art to the game and not the possibilities an engine has. One even can make retro looking 8bit style games in Unity...


Well to say the truth you'll also have to do that with 3DGS. You do not want to use MED for modelling - not at all! Keeping things like that alive is one of my greatest criticism concerning 3DGS although to be true in the last few years of actual development it for the most part just did get some (crude) animation capabilities. You'll always want to use a proper tool for creating your 3D geometries - you will never come around this part (unless you're totally going for 2D sprites like in Shovel Knight or Broforce). If you feel intimidated by Blender just try another tool which just focuses on modelling like for example Wings3D...

In the end learning Blender might not be a bad idea though as you also can do your animation work in there and also can use its renderer to e.g. create ambient occlusion maps...

To say the truth though if learning a tool for creating geometries is too complicated / too much you might have the wrong idea of game development. As a matter of fact if you're not very fond of doing this you should abandon 3DGS immediately and head for Unity with its quite vast Marketplace with lost of stuff to start with. There you could just buy your art assets and focus on the game creation progress itself...

There is no such thing as "Unity Graphics"
The engine is not making the graphics, you are. Or better your artist.

Unity only appears to be complex because when you open the editor and look at it, you see a terrifying amount of sliders, buttons, checkboxes and drop down menus.

The easy way is: invest like 30 Euro in a Unity learning book (there are plenty) and before even having the book finished you'll get an idea on how the interface works. From then on you'll learn easy. Once you've done that (can be done in two weeks!) you possibly understand why so many people are using Unity nowadays.
If you don't want to invest 30 Euros, take one of the online tutorials. There's are vast choice, includign video tutorials.
If you're able to use Lite-C you won't have many problems using C# either.

I'm also very used to A8, and I know many things out of mind or at least where I roughly have to look it up. But I find myself repeatedly programming things which Unity simply offer out of the box.

So: try before you complain, or just don't complain and use A8. Either engine can produce the game you want.

Okay thank you guys.
The last posts of you were very informative.
So thanks for the extensive explanation!

I think you persuaded me to test unity. ^^
Wings3D looks interesting.
Not that complex building like Blender at all, but a simple Model designer.
I think that I can handle this.

Regarding the point with earning money.
I don't want to be a game designer as Job!
I am a IT specialist for system integration, so I don't want to work as game designer
It's just a outside activity and I want to create a game, which I can sell some day.
There is no time frame for me.
If it's done in 1 year....fine.
If it's done in 4 years....fine.
The important thing, that it CAN be finished one day.
And I talk about quite simple games, like "Slender" in comparison to huge games like Fallout/GTA and so on

So I just need Unity and a modelling design program like 3DWings?
Which one is easier to learn? Unity or Unreal engine 4?

From my little experience with Unity, it is easier than it looks. It tooks me few afternoons to learn (Unity 3 xP). The great things are the market and the large community. You can find tons of ready to use addons to work with.

But I would say that the most important thing is not the tool but the understanding of how the tool works internally and that is not easy to research. It is hardly explained.

Learning to draw properly drawn models is not an easy task too. From my experience there is no way to build a consistent looking game with bought assets. You need a solid knowledge of the rendering pipeline to be able to glue the assets from different artists. Same as for drawing.

Acknex is cool but it is hard to build a modern looking game with it. Needlees to say that you need to learn tons of things to control the rendering, but it is same with Unity. Once you know all this stuff it is far easier to swap from one engine to an other.

Salud!

pd: Thank you @all for your consideration towards non-German speakers.

I think Unity is definitely easier. UE4 is not a good choose for a lonewolf, as many users around the forum said.

I'm 100% sure 3dgs is still the easiest engine for beginners. I believe that many will disagree with me, but they have migrated to unity after years of collecting experience with 3dgs, and of course with this knowledge is much easier to adapt to another engine. For someone who has never indulged in programming video games, 3dgs is certainly the easiest engine for learn.

I think there is no easy answer to this. The reason is that there are a lot of "buts" and "ands"...

In general both have nice WYSIWYG editors where you pretty much can just hit "Play" at any time and e.g. see your particle effects running and things like that so there in general there's no slow build process like it's the case for 3DGS...

If you want to talk about maximum control & performance it's all about the language. Unity uses C# while UE4 uses C++. You also have full source access in UE4 which can be an extremely powerful feature (I think Unity also grants C++ source access nowadays but at a price). So if you really want to not only write very efficient code but also want to have in depth access to the engine itself UE4 is outright fantastic. We're talking about C++ here though so it's not always as easy as C#. I had to dive into some C++ code written as templates in a totally different kind of software and I hated it...
So while C++ in general is very nice it's up to you what suits you best. You seem to be an IT professional so you already might be very skilled in C++. Then this might be a big plus for UE4. For most users I'd say though that C# is easier to handle while you of course sacrifice some power, performance and possibilities. In my opinion that won't be a problem though unless you try to squeeze the very last bit out of your software to e.g. get to the needed framerate for your console game. So unless you feel perfectly at home in C++ Unity should be the choice for more easy learning...

Don't make up your mind right now though as here comes one of those big "buts"...

UE4 delivers blueprints out of the box. If you don't know what this means have a look at this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mzz6Ihivc8

It's a built-in visual scripting solution which enables you to easily and quickly create logics for your game like doors, elevators, animations for your characters or even rather complex AIs. This way you don't need to touch any C++ code at all but can click your functionalities together (and test them) right in the editor. I think for the type of game you're planning to do this would be perfectly sufficient. The only real downside of using blueprints is that those things don't nearly run as fast as code written in C++ or C# would. Its performance isn't total crap either though and for e.g. a horror game where you don't have very complex tasks running all the time (in contrast to e.g. a real time strategy game like C&C or Starcraft where you wouldn't want to do the pathfinding algorithms for the hundreds of units via blueprints) they provide you with the needed functionalities while being created in very little time and without extensive learning of the engine's API and stuff like that. This really is a huge advantage of UE4 - you can buy similar things in the Unity marketplace as 3rd party tools but to my knowledge the UE4 integration is far better and gets constantly improved as it's a general engine feature...

This of course doesn't make one's choice easier...

Thanks
Now I don't know if UE4 or Unity lol.
Well thats really hard to decide :I
Blueprint sounds very interesting!

But if unity is "in general" way easier to understand, this might be my choice!
Because I am just one person and like I said.
I don't plan such a big game.
It would be cool, if the game takes about 2-3 hours to finish (When you play it)
For the first game (after playing around with small testgames), that would be enough.
And it seems, that I can get a nice graphics with Unity, too.

I'll give a try!
But still looking forward to an A9

You fortunately can try both as both nowadays are completely free to use (while the Unity Free version has a watermark afaik). That's why I'd give both of them a try...

I did and while I liked UE4 more at first (it feels more powerful and developing some advanced C++ skills always is nice). With Unity 5 Free now having access to all features I'm sort of thinking of going back to Unity as I didn't start with anything serious yet. For me the marketplace is a very nice thing to have as it has become quite extensive over the years. As I also would work as a lone wolf it would save me lots of time using e.g. premade particle effects...

@Argon: You could take a look on the Unity Asset Store. There you can find thousands of assets (models/meshes, source code, shaders, music, sound, and also complete projects). Most of them offer a demo video, or even a playable demo.

Search for 'horror' and you will find many assets for your game project. e.g. this one:
Unity Asset Store - First Person Adventure/Horror Kit

I think this is a good horror starter kit and a good way to learn how Unity works.

Unity 5 is free and you can use ALL FEATURES(!) of the engine. The only difference between the free 'Personal Edition' and the 'Professional Edition' is the splash screen (Unity logo when starting your game). When you buy the 'Professional Edition' then you have access to beta versions of Unity, and your bug reports will be verified with a higher priority. So I think there is no need to buy the PRO version. You can develop and sell your games also with the free version of Unity.

Yes the Assests looks good, but with them I can't sell my game right?
And even if so.
How does it look, if everyone would use the same Assets for a new game
Then they say...oh look... this game looks the same as XYZ.
This is the main problem of buyable Assets, I think.
Maybe it is good for playing around and learning, but I don't think it will be useful, when you want to sell the game later.

The free edition of unity is okay.
If I really going to sell something one day, the price for the PRO Version is no problem.
At UE4 you pay 5% of your earnings, which might be much more, when the game sells good.

@Argon I recruited a 3d artist and a 2d artist (5 years ago) from other forums (3dsmax forums) and we had some accelerated dev time by modifying bought assets. They of course could also create fitting original content. The licences allowed us to both use the assets in game and modify them. The limit was we could not resell the assets or the modified versions. I do not know if this is the Unity licence and limits. However bought assets should not ever be a stop to selling a game. There is no point in owning assets that you can not use in a production game.

I suggest you do as I did and recruit artist from places they visit. Expand beyond the Engine forums and do not be afraid to look into students that are happy for portfolio work.

Or you create a game like this
http://store.steampowered.com/app/265690/
Hehe, then you don't need anything.


By the way!
I got an Email from Conitec today!
They said, that there are NO PLANS for A9.
But they still support und update A8.
But only god knows, why the 8.45 is at least 1 1/2 years old without any update.
So I think we should forget it....A9 is not even in planning.

as we, sad people in this forum call, the 3DGS is undead.

it really depends on you what you want to do, 3dgs might be okay, but do not invest in it. I expect only rare minor updates, mainly bug-fixes, nothing more, ever... it is okay for low system requirement pc only little fun games, or for toying, but Unity can do that too, or even better visual quality more easily, for free, where you have the option to move further, dig deeper, without an engine switching.

I am currently porting my stuff to UE4 (but doing some prototyping still with 3DGS), which has also some beginner friendly parts (visual scripting, visual custom "entity" creation , free assets, thousands of detailed tutorials, several game templates to start with, example games), but its C++ programming side is harder than Lite-c or Unity Javascript/C#, but it might not nedd you at all. Personally I need it, beside access to engine source, and after some experience UE4 C++ becomes a clever friend. Maybe UE4 system requirements are higher than Unity, but significant performance optimizations have been done recently, mainly affecting complex scenes.

moreover, the game you linked would be not easy to make with 3DGS.

@sivan, any chance you are willing to write that migration guide we all so badly want?

it would be not an easy job at all, but not impossible... I could use the migrate from Unity page as a guide, but I don't know WED at all, since I only use MapBuilder (which is sometimes closer to UE4 editor than WED in concept). Maybe I can create a Wiki page at UE4, and an UE4 forum thread where you can ask things to cover (e.g. under "Community Content, ŰTools and Tutorials"), and you could join there to share our experiences.

lite-c to UE4 would be a difficult thing, where to split Blueprint and C++ parts, because it is really up to you... I can only suggest what I did for the easier lite-c to C++ conversion:
last year when UE4 was fresh I knew it is my way, because UE4 has the same logic what I also started to implement in my RTS project within MapBuilder. so I redesigned a bit my RTS code in that manner that can help this transition (nothing magic, simply class-like script files utilizing structs and creating object-like structs, and array of structs, encapsulating entities, by fake constructors/destructors/gets/sets etc., separating things into distinct "modules", e.g. totally separating UI handling from entity actions). but I don't want to go into details here. and in case of small projects this reorganization is not really needed.

"WHEN THERE IS NO MORE ROOM IN HELL 3DGS WILL WALK THE EARTH!"
...so 3dgs is 1st choice4 Zombie shooters

Sad, that there is no A9 in planning.
Maybe one day, maybe not.
I'll start with unity in the meantime ^^

, you can say what you want about gamestudio but it does lend itself for good jokes

You can use them in your game and sell the game without royalties or other problems.

It's sad that unreal and unity use such a weird scripting process. Like... I have no idea how to explain it. Scripting in 3DGS is straight forward. Mono development? I don't know. Unity is like one giant cluster fudge. Crammed everything into one window. No more good old fashioned BSP style level editing. No... Model your levels. Bah. What the hell happened? I know JCL is getting old grumpy and decrepit but god... Acknex must live on! Someway!

Totally agree. Way of writing code in Unity or Unreal is really weird, it is difficult to explain why. Only what I know is that LiteC is natural, pleasant and very readable for peoples who are not professional programmers. The real shame is that Gamestudio development has suddenly slowed in the last few years, but in this state Gamestudio it is still very usable for many indie developers. With some cosmetic changes, new editor and Android port Gamestudio may long to live.

Writing code in those engines is not exactly "weird", it's just object oriented.

I'm not the biggest friend of wait() and some other lite-C/ Gamestudio peculiarities anymore but I still (in general) love the way you code and make games in A8. I like (real) C as a programming language a lot, too.

It's still viable. It's not being developed at any measured pace. Lite-c is Better than the unreal blueprints system, because it is as easy to learn and use for the most part, It teaches real programming that transfers to learning Java,ect..(Well it did for me), It's way faster to work in and revise.

Sure the tools need a work over. And no doubt that port-exports for mobile and now possible linux are needed.

I think this engine can get new life if there was a chuck of game releases by us and more community effort. Fact is no one knows what it is and why to use it. Unity and Unreal have massive market presence. But true be told Unreal is very heavy for lower level users. Unity also lacks the low-level learn and use curve of 3dgs. But both have flashy UI's and Great graphics displaying. However, there are games genres in the indie world that fit best here and can be made quicker with 3dgs.

-- I recently read about the death and rebirth of the game woolfe - the red hood dairies, The team lead believed that a indie team could make a AAA looking game. He didn't want geared down graphics and movements. He admits he fully failed and that it couldn't be done so. Studio Rebellion, bought out the game, is fulling the broken kickstarter rewards and retooling the game.

However a team of 6 could do a lot with this engine. Both still the core engine needs reworking. I'd keep WED MED if they reworked the core. We know it's slow and inefficient.

Ok
Mal

Partly.
I don't know about Unreal Engine, but Unity is not really hard to learn. There are very good free tutorials and well written books available. It's all about basic understanding how the system works - from then on you find your way. Being at that stage, it is by far more easy to get the desired information as many users will produce many search results

Indeed C is easier to learn, but once you get past that point, the procedural programming style may get in your way where an object oriented language will support your needs better later on.
It's a different way of thinking, and when you're at that point where you think in objects and members automatically, (Lite-)C can really get annoying, as it's not made for that.
For anything not too far away from hacking (gamejams :D) procedural language is nice, as usually the architecture builds up on the fly

WED MED are a bigger problem than the engine itself, imho.

I agree with Firoball.

3dgs is definitely a very easy start, you can go forward in tiny steps, gives you a simple insight into programming, 3d graphics asset creation, and also to shader programming (the latter is a great help if you want to move on to professional engines where material/shader programming is done in a visual editor).
it is also described in an old Game Programming Gems book article, that for beginners a non object oriented script language is easier, especially because they can work in an experimental way, i.e. in fast coding-compiling-testing loops.
this is how I had worked with 3dgs. but when my project became large and complex I sucked a lot because of it, I had to re-plan and rework totally my code structure and all my scipts. twice at least, each costing 2-3 months. so now I do more careful planning, similarly to object oriented programming, but fortunately 3dgs offers the fast testing of the little new script additions. I really like it.
but 3dgs badly lacks a lot of tools today expected by artists and designers. without a good WYSIWYG all in one editor it is hard to test visually in real time a lot of things e.g. particle effects. my little sweet child MapBuilder is not a solution for all the problems stopping the development of new WED dug 3dgs under the ground (beside stopping the android port). sad that 3dgs developers had seen the right direction but were unable to complete the targets.
the rendering system of 3dgs is simplistic, you have to create your own or use 3rd party solutions (shade-c), lacks advanced optimizations, what you get by default with other engines.

I had good experiences with Unity (version 3), but only after I had some experience with 3dgs. the editor is a bit complex for the 1st sight, if you are inexperienced with 3d game development you can get lost, but there are plenty of good tutorials and nice free stuff. after lite-c, it was easy to program, you just need to separate the initialization and loop parts of your "actions", the documentation was also good enough. and today its licensing system is much more competitive than it was.

UE4 is a strange hybrid. It needs a good hardware to develop, but you can target a bit lower end machines too. it offers a lot, really helps artists, but requires a lot from the programmer, needs careful game design.
its C++ programming section is hard to start and badly documented. the game architecture you get is for one character controlled games (FPS, RPG etc.), but in most cases it results in benefits, well designed, somewhat flexible, and you can possibly develop faster a game than with 3dgs. and it features a lot of great subsystems you had to create with 3dgs by your own e.g. pathfinding, AI, character control, animation control, cheat unfriendly multiplayer system etc.
they focus rather to make blueprint programming easy, but without some programming knowledge it is not so easy to make those wire diagrams working. and when games become complex, blueprints can lead to hard to track bugs...
but because the community is huge, if you are a programmer, you have great chance to find good artists there to your team.
not to mention huge amount of free or very cheap graphics assets to use with an advanced/optimized renderer. and community is definitely a great help.

, that is what I had experienced too. In the beginning it went quite well, doing the tutorials etc. Experimenting with AI and the legendary Acknex characters, like: wizard.mdl, sf_women.mdl and enemy.mdl (with the green hair ). Than I tried to do big projects like Diablo clones etc. and it became a complete mess. Now I do more careful planning & especially better/cleaner code writing and it goes quite well again.

, yes completely agree (especially WED) and lack of linux & android support (which will force quite alot to use an other engine).

When i see how many times my workshops and tutorials are downloaded there
are still a lot of people out there working with 3dgs the main problem of
3dgs is the lack of simple and clear examples it's a good thing we have
a nice forum still.

it's the creative artist that makes a game it does not have to be made
with a great super engine as gameplay is important.

I tried unity but i still can't get used to that stuffed work area with so
many buttons and functions that you simply get lost in it. I like working with 3dgs and although it should use a major update the working enviroment feels good to me

I do remember the old days when i bought 3dgs as it stated no programming was needed well boy were they wrong

, well technically it is possible with the templates, you will just get your average half-assed game coming out of 2001