[QUOTE = BTolputt; 2829256] Obrigado mods com a discussão no fórum, agora, tempo para abordar o absurdo … Em primeiro lugar, a questão não é apenas que há um punhado nua de usuários sérios BGE. Isso é parte dela, mas é um arenque vermelho / strawman para fingir que é o cerne do argumento. O problema é que é terrível, é lamentavelmente fora da data, a Fundação Blender não está interessado em mantê-lo, e como resultado de que quase não existem usuários sérios. Todos os argumentos para manter a BGE ignorar o fato de que os seus argumentos (integração Blender fora) se aplicam a outros motores que também acontecerá a ser melhores motores em geral. Quer um jogo FPS old-school - o fogo até um dos motores do GPL idSoftware. Quer algo com codificação visual, o fogo até Unity ou UE4. Quer rodar em hardware antigo - Ogre3D, amor, Sprint RTS, id Software novamente, etc. Quer algo com ferramentas impressionantes, imenso (e atual) suporte, tutoriais o ying-yang, suporta os mais recentes gráficos, e também passa a ser livre? Bem, por que não dar um tiro UE4 Se você quer um velho, de buggy, confuso e mal motor documentado que tem um punhado nua de usuários graves - por que não levar BGE para uma rodada. E adivinhem, ninguém irá impedi-lo de ser capaz de usá-lo quando ele é finalmente removido do Blender também. Essa é a vantagem de código-fonte aberto. Você ainda pode baixar o código e binários para o Blender para trás quando o que a BGE podia fazer era a pena o esforço [/ QUOTE]
Is not that the BF is not interested in the BGE, is because it seems that it is influenced by a handful of users who say hardcore users and gives no chance to Defeza of others. And it says free software community participation … So users who enjoy the BGE are not users of the suite? They do modeling in Blender, do not use the animation system, etc?
As to say that the last chance of BGE is the new devs group with shipments of law, that does not mean anything. How come? They are volunteering their free time, while the devs ‘official’ maintained by BF get to work fully in their duties. I would not say this is is fair comparison.
Now, if they want to cover the sun with a sieve, go ahead. After all (as was said by a moderator in response to a post of mine) the pet you are being fully powered.
It’s perfectly clear that BGE is not dead. The source of these discussions is, in my opinion, people who watch Blender as they watch a sports match. Rather than seeing what BGE does or doesn’t allow someone to create, it is seen how BGE is or isn’t the best thing out there. From this perspective it’s then only natural that every progress made by others must be regarded as a direct threat to BGE. It’s not very reasonable though.
[QUOTE = Lamoot; 2829426] E perfeitamente claro that BGE não está morto. A fonte dessas DISCUSSÕES E, na Opinião minha, a como PESSOAS Que assistem Blender Como enguias Assistir um hum Jogo de Esportes. Ao inves de ver O Que Faz BGE ou Não permitir that Alguém a Criar, E visto Como BGE E OU NAO E A Melhor Coisa Lá Fora. A Partir Desta Perspectiva, Que É natural, em SEGUIDA, Todos Os Progressos Realizados POR Outros devem Ser considerados Como Uma Ameaça Direta à BGE. Não É Muito embora Razoável. [/ QUOTE]
I fully agree with your remarks.
At last, an intelligent comment without being a "Shut up there, sucker! ’
I think what’s driving Blender users in appalling is the concrete idea of what is to be the one interactive mode. Everything we know about in the original roadmap 2013. For my part I consider that corrections have to be made primarily up to version 3.0, otherwise it will just waste of time and development.
It’s worth noting that viewport improvements don’t necessarily translate into BGE rendering improvements… as the reverse is also not the case. For instance, the BGE has had viewport compositing (DOF, etc.) and programmable GLSL shaders for quite some time and the standard viewport in Blender proper hasn’t. Unifying that is one of the stated targets of the interactive mode goal.
Well, modernizing the GSL pipeline in both the UI and the BGE
would mean a huge step to android compatibility as well as a
large step up in speed for modeling large scenes, and for playing them in the game engine.
I just wish I was a coder, rather then a scripter.
now that I have a fresh factory reset machine I will try and get Git working again, and pull down the source again… but I feel like I would be more productive finishing my game and raising some cash and paying for development instead, as I am still wearing my training wheels for any language beyond python.
why not unify A GSL realtime mode, that is designed to work in the bge and viewport as,the first step to interactive mode?
realtime materials and lighting, would mean no conversion for bge right?
this way bge users are happy, ton is happy, and blender modelers can see what they are working with, how it looks in that engine?
its a real shame, as that is stronger hardware then my computer for less then a new video card… also if it runs bleeding edge titles, its pretty beefy right?
Edit: it says it runs openGL 4.5 and openES, does that change anything?
it just seems like an amazing console for both selling titles, as well as potentially developing on.
[QUOTE = Fweeb; 2829628] É importante notar que as melhorias da janela de exibição, não necessariamente se traduzem em melhorias de renderização BGE … como o inverso também não é o caso. Por exemplo, a BGE teve composição viewport (DOF, etc.) e shaders GLSL programáveis para algum tempo e janela de exibição padrão em Blender adequada não tem. Unificador que é um dos alvos declarados da meta modo interativo. [/ QUOTE]
Good to know the positive results of this unification.
Thanks for the clarity of the information.
It is on this type of transparent communication I mentioned in another topic.
FWIW, all of that information is stuff I know as a user, using the channels that Lamoot listed earlier in this thread. The communication is there. You just need to look.
Just get rid of the ''insert race" they are using resources that could go to me.
In my hohnest opinion,
people need to be less black and white on issues.
We can have blender internal, cycles, and the game engine.
Those other engines becoming free does not damn the bge.
The game engine works as it is, and can be made to do better.
Also, people are getting greenlit on steam using the bge.
Our games will run on very old hardware.
durning the day I am working, so I cant really code, and then each night I work a little on my own game… I want to sell it, and try and get enough money around to see the engine get further developed into something great.
if 10 games did this, then those games could all capitilize on the upgrades within those titles, and future titles.
Now it needs VBO, instancing, quadtree terrain LOD, maybe differed rendering, cascading sun shadows…
it needs to be able to run a game about like GTA on a middle of the road computer.
You have them. In perpetuity. That’s pretty much what having access to the code under the GPL grants you. Just like the clunky UI of pre-2.5 days, we will always have the outdated, clunky, and hard-to-use Blender functionality of the past.
What you don’t have is the right to make the Blender Foundation include them in the official distribution until the end of time.
I agree. What damns the BGE is that it is terrible despite being free. It was already slated for “interactive mode” before the engines became free, it’s just that the AAA engines becoming free to use removed the last excuse proffered for why people might choose BGE over the alternatives.
Sure it works… badly. Which is why we know it can be made better. Kind of the point. No-one is saying the BGE simply doesn’t run. They’re saying, with a butt load of facts to back them up, that it is so outdated, buggy, and subpar compared to the alternatives it isn’t worth the effort of fixing up. Hell, even some of the BGE userbase is looking to complete reimplementations (e.g. BDX) instead.
Badly. So too do a lot of other free engines. The BGE doesn’t offer enough to make it a better choice over them.
laugh I love it when people argue that the BGE is good enough to keep and then make a (long) list of what needs to be done for it to be a reasonable choice.
Didn’t say otherwise. I said it would most likely run better in an alternate engine. No offense intended, but it’s not like what you’ve shown of your game is terribly complex.
That’s great. However, right now, the BGE is incredibly out of date, has woeful performance compared even to game engines from six years ago, has license restrictions preventing most game publishing platforms, and hasn’t got the backing of the Blender Foundation. Right now, it is dead regardless of whether the AAA engines were free or not. It is simply not capable of what we’re seeing from engines six years ago.
In case you missed it amongst the other discussion, getting Greenlit in Steam doesn’t mean what it used to. Also, Greenlit is not “finished, on sale, and well received”.
latex is a bad example, because it has a thriving community and its well maintained.
see: http://latex-project.org/latex3svn.rsshttp://tex.stackexchange.com
… of course its possible for software not to change much, and to serve its users well. (but this isn’t the BGE currently - check the BGE’s bug tracker).
re: “New users posting their work” - we have experienced users posting their work too (which is showcased), including high quality professional projects.
