I fully agree with you, ratchet.

However, I really like 3DGS and I don't think I'll stop using it in near future.

agree, please do not drop it until completed, you would also gain some further motivation from it! and later you can present it as part of your portfolio.
sometimes I'm also fed up with 3dgs, but finally I can see there is no perfect engine to check other engines can be fun, also good as refreshment, so try them, and select the most suitable for your preferences, and decide what is the max money you want to spend. but it is practical to define some stages of develpment you want to reach, and when it is time to think of moving to another engine, which is not so easy. I also have a strategy like this.
but if you finally give it up, I would be interested in the sources, as I'm really interested in different pathfinders. but maybe I would not really understand it

always reinstalling a pc is too crazy, I hate installation so much why don't you make a full backup of your PC before 3DGS installation, and recover it? I think it should work.

Hmm yes i agree with you all on the points you made they are totaly valid ,
I do like gs enough to perhaps buy it but i think i should look at what
its future brings ... Yes no perpect engine for every project and i guess we
have to jump around per certain project between engines ..well
this project of mine was intended so i could learn about pathfinding and a bit of ai and
gs aswell but i am not done yet and i have not quit in my life before so
i shall continue ..better to take a little break .. Sivan basicly this detour pathfinding
is a* ontop of a navmesh produced by recast (not so difficult to learn) its actualy very fun to
get into and very intresting .. Guys i think i will keep going with gs and just add to my list
some of the other engines i admire so much ,theres no reason to abondone gs it has many uses and i love the simplicity of it ..

Yes a good choice to continue using 3DGS
It is very easy i agree, but there is more easy !

Why caus after using C script i find it hard to manipulate and initialize simple objects (that should be initialized by default no ? )

It is lot lot mor eeasy to use C# indeed, specially when the 3D engine gives you function like :

Entity myPlayer = new Entity("mymodel.fbx", 0);
myPlayer.setPosition(10,10,10);

It's so much natural and easy , that's why i asked in future for 3DGS some full C# suppport (even it could leave CSript!)

Same thing for 3D Assets, it's so much easy to make a scene, adjust materials and properties in some other engines !

--------------

So yes 3DGS is capable (Battle For Forgol, SuperCan, SuperKu ...) But you must put hard work , or be a big talented team !

For simple indie loneWolves , C# full support, better workflow, real time editing, complete terrain editor would put 3DGS on tracks, even without latest 3D features, it would become lot lot more friendly like some others ....

Well it was just a reminder about 3DGS future asks

--------------

Good luck to you, but PathFinding is already available on some 3D engines, or will be very soon on others( LE3D for example) , so why putting all your efforts and all your time on such feature ?


If it's needed for making a game, i would advice you to choose another 3D solution , and make your game instead !

If it's coding pleasure , continue it

good to hear you stay

imo each game category has its pathfinder and ai requirements. some of them can be get in some game engines, but they are not definitely a good choice in all cases, and sometimes they do not support complex pathfinding and collision avoidance, or does not work effectively.

for a simple stupid shooter a node based can be enough.

but in case of a squad based action game a navmesh is needed, as it can handle much more characters with high level area pathfinding and low level dynamic obstacle avoidance.

in case of a RTS where complex ai decision making system is required, and hundreds of characters should move in groups together, and handle also the environment changes dynamically (new buildings), a hierarchical area + tile based is better, which theory is not far from navmesh.

for open field RTS battles, potential field pathfinder also can be a good choice, it has some good features for ai decision making, but has significant limitations in complex environments.

so it is really practical to have an own pathfinder, to have full control over the base of your game ai, as it is heavily related to npc ai behaviour. and game making is not only 3d art, a good and flexible ai can result in long and interesting playing experience.

Is the plugin dead?

And does anybody have a download link for the newest version?

Its aliiiiiive mhoehaha ... Hey man no not dead stil in developement
its going at a slow rate i have to devide my time a little to be able
to work on my projects , but it wil come ...sometime ..
What did you need ?

Nice to hear that you continue working on it

I wanted to finally download and test navmesh...
but it looks like you've deleted all download links for the plugin

Yes i deleted them , i want to stop releasing
small versions with small changes and push
it up to beta/release versions , so i thought
I would stop the current incomplete version
dead in its tracks , releasing small updates
shows progress but it also drops intrest and
shows failure to commitment when bugs
are found shortly after the small update..

i would like to have something much cooler
the next time i upload again ..
Until then...

When is that until??? any hints?