2 registered members (VoroneTZ, TipmyPip),
1,333
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: Why_Do_I_Die]
#160890
11/11/07 08:46
11/11/07 08:46
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
AlbertoT
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
|
I quote from Beyond Virtual web page quote
True WYSIWYG World Editing & Object placement One-button game launching / testing; One-button Game export! No level compiles, instant game previewing Auto-reloading of modified Content (3d geometry, 2d textures) Interactive Camera Path Editor complete with VCR-style controls, path smoothing (adjust bias for keyframe transitions), time controls, independent camera targeting control, and much more
In-game debugging tools for Collision Meshes, Occlusion, Pathfinding, Object Interaction Zones (triggers, mission scripting, character/object interaction) Object Previewer Preview models, animations & textures how they will appear in-game Edit materials Apply normal / specular maps Preview objects with per-pixel realtime shadows
unquote
I remain of the opinion that this is the correct approach A game engine should provide just an "INTERFACE" with 3dthird party tools as well as to take care of " on the fly" graphic issues such as dynamic lighting and shadowing You can not expect to have built_in advanced graphic features ,not at least for 200 usd A game engine top priority must be the engine, sorry for the tautology
Anyway I agree that I did not see so many porogress from A6 to A7 as far as workflow is concerned
Last edited by AlbertoT; 11/11/07 09:13.
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: AlbertoT]
#160891
11/11/07 10:13
11/11/07 10:13
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,121 Potsdam, Brandenburg, Germany
Machinery_Frank
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,121
Potsdam, Brandenburg, Germany
|
Absolutely. I can fully agree with that. The most important part of a game engine is the ... you might expect it ... the game engine, the render kernel, scene management, lights and shadows, handling of models, animations, im- and export, sound handling, particles, execution of scripts.
So there is really no problem if MED is not as good as blender, Lightwave, XSI or Silo. We can live with that and just get another tool. More important is the render kernel.
But I wonder why I see in every new beta release only improvements of Lite-C. Did you see that Lite-C gets classes in the future? Let us think about it: Lite-C uses pointers, structs, C-syntax and soon it supports classes. Do I smell C++ here? Why should one research and develop several years to make a C++ clone? Why not improving the renderer in this time and just provide a C++, C# and Java SDK plus a LUA scripting port?
Gamestudio becomes a multimedia-programming-language.
As a programmer familiar with Delphi, C#, Java and many script languages I learned C++ this year to better understand engines like Irrlicht, Ogre and C4. And I realized that Lite-C just becomes something like that. At the end I am able to use all the other engines but with faster rendering, second uv-set, static and dynamic shadows and modern shaders.
I think this is dangerous for Gamestudio. It starts to compete with those free and cheap engines. You need the same amount of programming knowledge. Scripting is not easy anymore. But the renderer is not really better. The advantage of gamestudio to deliver all tools and provide a very easy scripting port vanishes and thus it should at least outperform the competition in rendering capabilities.
As a resume we see that workflow did not become better it could even become more complicated for scripting newbies. MED became more difficult in terms of texturing and uv-mapping, the compiling options for WED became more difficult and Lite-C offers way more traps for newbies in terms of memory leaks, wrong pointer usage, lowercase vs. uppercase and much more.
All this can be accepted if you get more performance and more options at the end. Ask yourself if that is the case.
Models, Textures and Games from Dexsoft
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: Machinery_Frank]
#160892
11/11/07 11:19
11/11/07 11:19
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
AlbertoT
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
|
I have nothing to add to what you said I was just answering to some professional complainers in this forum Usesless to say that costructive critics are positive
Blatt salat said that Conitec shoud be forced to finish at least a small game from the scratch
You agreed I agree
However also end users should be forced to do it before writing a review about the last game engine in town
How many times we have read something like
" Fantastic...it can make this...and...this...why that bloody 3dgs .." and some monthes later " Forget it , it so buggy that you can not even finish a small game "
Last edited by AlbertoT; 11/11/07 11:22.
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: AlbertoT]
#160893
11/14/07 13:00
11/14/07 13:00
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 71 central US
yung
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 71
central US
|
I dont want to start another jaded debate, Im only posting to help 'workflow issues' become solved in areas that, whether or not every individual is familiar with or accustomed to, are infact relevant issues that need addressing and have for years. I keep going back to the cutscene thing only because it, like all other workflow increasing tools, to be really good and useful it requires: #1: fully encompassing range of options definable, and #2: an easy in-out method of usage. Its true that no one can forsee every type of project another user might be trying to create, but its also true that with only so many properties exsisting for each type of element (camera, entities, panel, particles), what CAN be forseen are all the properties the user can possibly manipulate, therefore a univeral interface can be created. Therefore, certain tools address certain issues, like the seeding thing, for worlds that the engine cannot render all at once, it is a real solution. Therefore, I think our best option for actually 'moving forward and not backward' is: create a list of game design aspects that need camp-able solutions, then work from this list to develop a set of master tools. If people could just see what they have in common instead of what they don't, I think this forum and its user could become much more coherent and productive. [ie: Why worry about every other game engine out there when A5/A6/A7 people use it because what they want to create can be achieved, with some effort.] PS: I havent released CS-Tools yet because Im waiting to see where this thread is going, while putting the finishing touches on it.
' The One '
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: yung]
#160894
11/14/07 16:08
11/14/07 16:08
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 980 Aue, Sachsen, Germany
Wicht
User
|
User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 980
Aue, Sachsen, Germany
|
The term "next gen workflow" is a little bit confusing. The better term is "user friendly". What do we really need? A All-In-One-Package !!! - Start WED - the A7-Renderer is now active - select the 3D-Brush and paint/texture your terrain - place your models or... - paint your models like grass, plants and trees - you should now see shaders in action - place static and dynamic lights and see the results in Realtime (with Shadows) - if you want: create your own cutscenes with an integrated editor - same with Particles (no external application) These points have nothing to do with "Next gen". Only with "user friendly". GameEdit is good but far away from a All-In-One-Package. The current price of the Pro-Edition is a joke. Nothing more. You don't believe me? See Unity Engine 2
|
|
|
Re: A7 next gen workflow :
[Re: D3D]
#160898
11/15/07 00:23
11/15/07 00:23
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134 Netherlands
Joozey
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134
Netherlands
|
Quote:
Why should one research and develop several years to make a C++ clone? Why not improving the renderer in this time and just provide a C++, C# and Java SDK plus a LUA scripting port?
Cause not all employees at conitec (can) work on the engine? Obviously the lite-c development team have faster results than the engine development team, which is not really that odd. And the reason that we don't have next-gen workflow is because Wladimir is a little lazy .
Click and join the 3dgs irc community! Room: #3dgs
|
|
|
|