Game Engine Status Thread

Game Engine, Players & Web Plug-in, Virtual Reality, support for other engines

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

esuvs
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 2:03 am

Post by esuvs » Mon Dec 01, 2003 11:52 am

I'm not sure it would be sensible to replace the existing engine with crystal space, these things require a surprising amount of work. I'm not convinced we'd end up with a particularly clean and elegant result, and crystal space is already several times the size of blender. I believe it's also considered a bit old and unwieldy in terms of 3D engines, and something like OGRE or Nebula Project might be better.

The advantage of our own engine is the features and capabilities map directly to what the editor is capable of. SOLID will be back (hopefully soon) and, although it's not the only area which needs work (the renderer could use some polish), when it is i'm sure it will bring back some interest in the game engine which until now seems stuck. I for one am interested in developing it.

That said, there is always scope for other solutions. I believe the best approach for people for want to use crytal space would be to start as a set of python scripts, in much the same way as was done for Yafray. If this proves successful it could become more official., however it would be a misake at this stage to drop something we know can work for something which might not.

Prehaps more than Crystal Space support, such a project could look at 'external game engine support'. There is probably sufficent common ground between engine to allow a set of python classes which can be subclassed for a particular engine.

David.

andriy
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 12:18 pm

Post by andriy » Mon Dec 01, 2003 1:05 pm

nay wrote:that sounds fantastic although i think it might still be good idea to have a simple engine built in to blender.
Thanks for understanding, nay. About simpler engine - this is good longterm idea.
please correct me if i'm wrong - but crystal space is the only open advanced engine that uses python as opposed to c right?
No. CS, Ogre, Nebula trying to use python, but CS is the leader IMHO.
From CS features: "Python and LUA scripting plugins are already included.
Several Blender scripts (Python) are included to export models and levels from within Blender. CrystalSpace has support for the ode library. Speed: CrystalSpace can't compare with Quake-engine in case of speed. First you have to note that the quake engine is designed for 1 type of game: First person shooters. It has alot more limits than CS but on the other side quake engine is alot more optimized. Still CrystalSpace isn't slow..."
You can find out the CS in the 3DGS comparison table
http://conitec.net/a4faq.htm

would i be wrong in assuming that we could get much more form crystal space than SOLID?
Yes, we could get full-featured engine 0.96 version for now.
http://crystal.sourceforge.net/tikiwiki ... e=Features
http://crystal.sourceforge.net/tikiwiki ... gWithQuake

andriy
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 12:18 pm

Post by andriy » Mon Dec 01, 2003 2:42 pm

esuvs wrote: something like OGRE or Nebula Project might be better.
Yes these are interesting. But for now: Ogre is the early rendering engine and has very poor features( need to add ODE, sound etc). Workable Nebula2 will be availible in future when Radonlabs release next game. If you want lightweight CS simple delete unused dlls like ogg.dll, fire.dll and resources.
SOLID will be back (hopefully soon)
I am not sure but SOLID isn't LGPL licensed, and blender engine as well.
I want a ability for producing LGPL code in Blender. Question to Blender fundation - it is possible or all code from blender must be GPLed? What is your plan for future?
I believe the best approach for people for want to use crytal space would be to start as a set of python scripts, in much the same way as was done for Yafray. If this proves successful it could become more official., however it would be a misake at this stage to drop something we know can work for something which might not.
OK, it's seems right. If anybody interesed to.
andriy

xhyldazhk
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 3:25 am

Post by xhyldazhk » Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:24 pm

What if instead of embedding the game engine into Blender, in order to keep it lightweight, convert Blender into a content/logic generator to another engines? Some kind of API to access all properties of all Blender objects, game objects, scripts and actions, to allow third parties to write plugins for converting all the Blender game logic and content to (but not limited to):
  • -C++ code + Cal3d skeletal models + CS models for Crystal Space
    -Python CS pythmod code + Cal3d skeletal models + CS models for -Python Crystal Space bindings
    -Quake 1 map files + mdl files + quake C code
    -Nebula objects + Tcl code + C++ code
    -Milkshape3d skeletal models + Quake 3 maps + C++ code for Irrlicht -Engine
...And the list goes on...


Blender could have a code/model generation API tailored for such purposes. And in this way, no matter than the CS engine compiled it's big in size, Blender could still be small and still be kinda of integrated with all those engines, maybe with kind of a plugin architechture and menu commands generate/compile/run game....

levon
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:06 am
Location: adelaide

Post by levon » Wed Dec 03, 2003 3:27 am

What if instead of embedding the game engine into Blender, in order to keep it lightweight, convert Blender into a content/logic generator to another engines? Some kind of API to access all properties of all Blender objects, game objects, scripts and actions, to allow third parties to write plugins for converting all the Blender game logic and content to (but not limited to):


-C++ code + Cal3d skeletal models + CS models for Crystal Space
-Python CS pythmod code + Cal3d skeletal models + CS models for -Python Crystal Space bindings
-Quake 1 map files + mdl files + quake C code
-Nebula objects + Tcl code + C++ code
-Milkshape3d skeletal models + Quake 3 maps + C++ code for Irrlicht -Engine
i think that would be a lot oof work, all we realy want is our old engine back

esuvs
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 2:03 am

Post by esuvs » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:46 pm

i think that would be a lot of work, all we realy want is our old engine back
Yes, I agree. However there is no reason why we can't have both the old engine and provide the ability to export for other engines, provided we find the development manpower.

I assume that when the SOLID library comes along it will be a fairly straight forward task to bring the old engine back to the state of 2.25? If so then I see no reason to drop the existing engine. Am I correct in thinking the physics engine is of use to the artists for animation, so it would be integrated back in regardless of what the game engine did?
to allow third parties to write plugins for converting all the Blender game logic and content
Interesting point, it's quite possible that if we wrote the framework the developers of for example, crystal space would take it upon themselves to actually write the export scripts, saving us the work. After all, they need ways to generate thier content.

xhyldazhk
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 3:25 am

Post by xhyldazhk » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:20 pm

There is a Blend2CS converter here in the projects section. And Jiba from Soya3D project wrote an Cal3d skeletal model exporter, that worls quite well.

ilac
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 8:24 am

Post by ilac » Sat Dec 06, 2003 9:38 pm

Drum roll.....

:P

(Well, Anytime soon I think :? :wink: )

IngieBee
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by IngieBee » Mon Dec 08, 2003 9:54 pm

xhyldazhk wrote:There is a Blend2CS converter here in the projects section. And Jiba from Soya3D project wrote an Cal3d skeletal model exporter, that worls quite well.
Problem is, it ports only some information for only the models. Just think, if we could create content, in Blender, with its non-programming interface, then exported all of that,

the controls
the animations
the AI
the physics settings
etc....

Using a py script or some kind of plug-in, and put that information into CS as a ... well, as a thingamagigger file that can be compiled in CS to create a whole , a very modern, very functional, (actually very fast too) game.

Oh my, I can't even get my vocabulary up to par, I'll never learn to program :( ! Well, anyway, I can see Blender being the way to create content and whole games, but using something like the CS engine to optimize the game for speed and possibly other functionality (more complex AI, etc...)and expandability.

Man, I got the flu, I bet I sound like I'm rambling... wait, I'm rambling even when well... oh well, wanted to put in my 2 cents :lol:

Love Ingie

teachtech
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:58 am

Post by teachtech » Wed Dec 10, 2003 4:21 pm

Well, I don't know if anyone's been keeping up with the dtecta.com website, but now it says that Solids will be up and running by Dec. 22. It did say Dec 8th until today. I'm beginning to lose hope on the game engine.

d0pamine
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 9:47 pm

don't lose hope

Post by d0pamine » Wed Dec 10, 2003 4:23 pm

Don't lose hope! Developers are working on it, as they got the new solid by buying the book!

http://projects.blender.org/viewcvs/vie ... bf-blender

teachtech
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:58 am

Post by teachtech » Wed Dec 10, 2003 9:28 pm

Great to hear it! It's been quiet again for a while so I thought I'd check. I know there's been a lot of chatter about porting to other game engines, but the best of course is Blender's (especially for non-programmers). I use the engine in a high school setting to enhance our computer-aided drafting program for my students. With the time we have available to work, learning and teaching programming is out of the question. I have a lot of students that benefit from the current game engine. It's a nice tie-in to our 3D and architectural applications and the students love it. My deepest thanks to the programmers working on the re-integration! :D

Doogs
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:16 am

Post by Doogs » Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:41 am

word out on the street is that solid is almost completely reintegrated, at least to the point of how it used to be. Im almost positive it will be soon integrated into BF blender!

Doogs

teachtech
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:58 am

Post by teachtech » Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:04 pm

That would be a great thing! It will be nice not to have to switch between versions any more. Right now my students seem to be working between 3 different versions right now. With some using the new interface, it make it a challenge when I go to help them with something. I've got to remember where to look for stuff! :D

Doogs
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:16 am

Post by Doogs » Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:39 pm

hey - why dont you invite your students, if they wish for online help or just to hang out with us on irc?

server:
irc.freenode.net

Channel:
#gameblender

we're always up for more people!

-Doogs

Post Reply