I think the problem is you worry more for what will happen with BGE, than what you can do for your games until that time comes.
BGE is just a TOOL - you use it for what really matters and that is your games.
This has been the attitude on this forums for as long as I can remember.
BF do not need “nerds”(no offense guys) speaking endlessly about some freaking tool they are developing. BF needs people to USE it, so they can be proud, that this tool is helpful and can produce great things. They have been waiting for a long time for this to happen.
I’m using 2.49b and I still think, I don’t need anything else except for publishing.
Do you know this demo:
Now, do you think this is what BGE can do…noo, this is what, that man can do with this tool. Try to do something like that…yes it needs understanding and great experience of modeling,composing,lightning…etc. and those are not BGE related in any way.
I think if there were 10+ games on this forum with that quality, then BF will reconsider their statement, but instead of trying to help them and make something like that, we are giving up on BlenderGE.
The BGE needs rewrite on the 2D filters + offset rendering + android port. The BGE is quite easy to use, but it dont have an android port. That is if you want to use the engine, but the source is in a bad shape! And so you do need stuff like hardware instancing on the raster.
I find it curious as always ‘hear’ the main reason for not insisting on developing or improving what already exists in the BGE is the fact that no grand projects of games involving her.
As I recall (correct me if I’m wrong somewhere) there is not any major project involving the area of rendering both as BI Cycles, excluding short films produced by BF.
There’s something wrong with this argument, at least that’s how I see.
There is a fine line between gameplay and eye candy,
The blender game engine is ready to do both, however if you use all of it, you will find some things that would be useful crash the engine, some randomly , some instantly.
LibLoad
Constraints
Also the most recent version can’t play animations correctly, and sometimes not at all do to timing problems and something with restrict animations.
I love coding games, and have many systems that are ready to make a games, however they need a team or for me to switch back to art, which frankly is not as fun for me.
I can code anything I want almost, using not very much logic,
The Cycles source is modern, clean, and inviting for developers, the BGE source is not.
Don’t forget that people such as Agoose77 and Mahalin would gladly be helping to enhance the existing engine if only the code wasn’t such a mess, it’s not fun for them or for anyone to see a high risk breaking something because they have to work with shoddy code design.
Good point, AceDragon. I had forgotten this crucial detail confusing being code.
Anyway, I am also interested in Godot, especially when in fact implement 3D development. Also because I have tried several times to use 3D Unit but feel no attraction to C # and Java.
I think the ideal is a must-move game should in at least two different tools.
One of the worlds most realistic pachinko simulators is being developed utilizing the BGE and what it has to offer. How is it that the people who built the BGE cannot do much with it realistically? Are these limitations that have been perceived? If only I’d the ability!
This is crucial as well as any other core developers contributing but I thought we were in the midst of cleanup. The BGE deserves it period. The reason that some large, complex game hasn’t been completed in Blender yet is because the engine has never had proper documentation written for it. I can figure why that is but that always been what it could use.
Even in the forums a mess of valuable information that the manual could benefit from. I don’t know enough of the API to clean that up. I would be better suited to assisting in maintenance of the online game engine manual.
You can’t expect the BGE to be appealing to industry leading companies when it doesn’t attempt to tailor things to the developers needs like Unity and the likes. This is just an example and obviously you can say the development drive is different, because of funding. Cycles is a great example of that and amazing work has been done because of communication and tailoring/seeking to meet their own type of industry standard and that’s great.
Even AAA titles released this year are still either A. Enclosed map level with culling and some slightly open areas or B. A relatively large open area (that is still rather small) with culling and some actual game border. HD textures are in but they are just textures. You can’t even find a factual confirmation that BGE ever could support HD textures if you were looking for it. The hottest one out now shows its need for a performance budget in todays games because even as it shines in some areas in lacks in others, its a game.
Logic bricks are an amazing idea as well, they just need some touch up and better documentation on how to use them as well as in advanced situations, maybe examples of bad design as well. I recall some discussion around here where logic bricks were catching flak because they are sloppy for the people who have to code them in the UI? I didn’t know until about 6 months into game development that you could select two objects and interconnect their logic, incredibly useful, needs blatant documentation. New users wouldn’t think they need to use messages to talk between bricks, that’s what happens.
When Ton was sort of admitting what the BGE wasn’t, he forgot to understand that the BGE is so easy and fluent to use that most would be asking if it were really that easy over and over and over. I don’t know enough details to argue against watering down of the BGE but I think that’s a big waste. Obviously more than capable, BF.
