Game Dev software recommendation?

[OnlineRender]

Just ask Andrew nicely ,im sure he could probably write a game engine in about a day (",)

[Tinker]

If you are around 3d engines, maybe you will find interesting my 3D-Coat -> Unity3D model export test:

http://www.3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?sho...ost&p=29484

[geo_n]

If you are around 3d engines, maybe you will find interesting my 3D-Coat -> Unity3D model export test:

http://www.3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?sho...ost&p=29484

Ok I'm interested. But I can't read russian

The other post I can understand. What's the workflow from 3dc->unity.

[Ratchet]

I own Unity 3D , and can say it has a great workflow for 3D artists !

You can import your model and diff,spec,normal maps as a breeze, and apply shaders , just by choosen it on a list.

The indie edition at some 150$ or 180$ don't remenber is incredibly complete.

The pro edition have shadows(lot fo FPS eating thing) and ful screen effects, and some things , but even with indie you can produce big things

3D game studio A7 , is a cool one also, lot more less advanced than Unity , is interface is outdated like the world editor

and it is difficult to put some shaders wihtout code or without to ask for help.

Well an engine to try deeply before purchasing.

In Unity , you just choose the shaders import and assign textures in the panel of object and that's run's directly!

Well i really recommend Unity for 3D artist, it have good tutorials , a very advanced , easy ot use world editor.

It have a trial edition , so test it and see by yourself if it suits your needs !

[Reactor]

I'm a Shiva user. It has its weak points currently, but where it's strong, it's very strong as a middleware solution. The low-end version really packs a punch for the money, and the devs are always on the forums listening to what people need. The coming versions (free, until 2.0) are going to be pretty impressive if the 1.8 beta is any indication.

It's fantastic. Free. And you can alter source code or scipt with python - do whatever you want. It has parallax occlusion maps, ambient occlusion, occclusion culling, etc etc etc

And has a workflow from hell. There's a good reason the 'net isn't flooded with Blender games.

On a side note, did anyone mention 3DRad, which is free?

[kay_Eva]

And has a workflow from hell. There's a good reason the 'net isn't flooded with Blender games.

Escuse me, but you have no idea what you are talking about. Where is this myth coming from that blender is hard to use? I've tried ShiVa and I'd say the workflows are only different on a superficial level. The big big difference is that blender allows you to edit your assets on a vertex, edge, face, level. It let's you paint textures and vertex colors and animate and rig and script and all sorts of things while ShiVa doesn't. The reason you see all those buttons in blender is because it has so much power that it is literally bursting at the seams.

Ton - the head honcho of blender says it best, if you don't know how to play a piano that doesn't mean that you should say there are too many keys on the instrument. Once you learn blender the effeciency is incredible, almost immaculate even.

For a blender user other programs seem clunky because... it's difficult to explain. And I'd say programs such as ShiVa and Unity are no different. They are more focused in their design and they are easier to read right off the bat, but the sacrafice is the little bit of extra clunkiness that doesn't exist when you know your way around blender. The fact you can switch between scripting your game and editing a character animation with as little as 2-3 quick key strokes. You can't do that anywhere else that I know of.

A few more key strokes later you are editing your physics meshes and then splatting your terrain map. You just can't do that anywhere else. And yes there is a learning curve.

This myth has got to end.

[philnolan3d]

It's hardly a myth. There are LOTS of people who dislike the way blender works, myself being one of them. The thing about the piano analogy is that one piano shouldn't be vastly more complicated than another piano. I have two in my house actually, an up-right and a baby grand. If I know how to play one then I know how to play the other without too much difficulty. Don't get me wrong I would love to be able to use it. I have a friend who does a lot of work with Real Flow (she did the water effects for the movie The Guardian) and she said she tried blenders fluids. While she still liked Real Flow much better, I believe she said Blender would do in a pinch.

[Reactor]

The 'Blender is hard to use' issue aside, that's not what I'm talking about.

Escuse me, but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Really? I'm an indie game dev. Who are you? How many games have you shipped, and what experience do you have which gives you the ability to declare it a good game development tool? You're at adds with every game dev I know. If you don't believe me, pop on over to the indiegamer forums and ask how many successful developers have chosen to work with the Blender game engine over the other alternatives (which obviously cost money). Last count I think it was... zero.

Once you learn blender the effeciency is incredible, almost immaculate even.

You know, the people who are saying it's bad aren't software always n00bs- a lot of them are the guys who founded the entire CG industry. You sound like a n00b, trying to portray them as people who don't know what it is they're doing. But, I'm not going to argue this point with you. You're obviously a fanboy who has gotten used to the UI and enjoys it. That's fine in itself- just try and resist the urge to look like an idiot and declare it as the most amazing thing in the universe. It's not.

[Ghostdog]

GUYS. Tone it down please & think once or twice before tossing around statements like some above.

We know we are capable of discussing other softwares Pro's and Con's without resorting to childish behaviour.

There is a good feeling about the community here, but lately we have started to bicker about other software in a way that ain't so good.

(disclaimer. I'm no moderator and have no right to tell you what to do. I CAN ask however)

[Reactor]

That's a decent enough request Ghostdog... I'll try and restrain myself in future

[kay_Eva]

The 'Blender is hard to use' issue aside, that's not what I'm talking about.

Really? I'm an indie game dev. Who are you? How many games have you shipped, and what experience do you have which gives you the ability to declare it a good game development tool? You're at adds with every game dev I know. If you don't believe me, pop on over to the indiegamer forums and ask how many successful developers have chosen to work with the Blender game engine over the other alternatives (which obviously cost money). Last count I think it was... zero.

You know, the people who are saying it's bad aren't software always n00bs- a lot of them are the guys who founded the entire CG industry. You sound like a n00b, trying to portray them as people who don't know what it is they're doing. But, I'm not going to argue this point with you. You're obviously a fanboy who has gotten used to the UI and enjoys it. That's fine in itself- just try and resist the urge to look like an idiot and declare it as the most amazing thing in the universe. It's not.

What is this a personal shot? Are you an expert in blender game engine? Doesn't seem like it but correct me if you are. But if you're not, how can you comment on a workflow you don't even understand. I understand a good bit of the blender game engine workflow and from my experience the difference between it's workflow and other engines' is superficial. I'm not going to comment on which is better or worse, I'm only going to say that makes no sense to say that ShiVa's workflow is great and blender's is crap, when as I've said the difference is superficial.

So when I say you don't know what you are talking about, I mean you don't know about blender. And it just so happens that you were talking about blender? Get it?

My first impulse is to say that 3dsMax interface is crap but I'll be the first to hold my tongue because I know that I don't know enough about Max to make any kind of value judgement on it's workflow. If I were to say, "Max sucks" I'd hope someone would call me on the fact that I don't know enough about Max to make that sort of statement. If I hang out on Blender forums long enough I could cite a thousand people who would agree with my statement and claim that it lends me legitmacy even when it doesn't.

So to be honest with you, I don't care if you dislike blender. My only annoyance is when people who admittedly know very little of the program berate because "Other guys berate it too".

Well anyway, the real reason I looked into this thread again was to state the fact that this coming Sunday is scheduled to be the last day that Visual3d.NET is accepting Early Adopters to their engine. I've tried it out and I have to say that in my mind Visual3d.NET is the best indie game engine out there. Agree or disagree... that's your right. But the latest Beta that was released by them has really improved upon the engine a lot. If you haven't checked them out in a little while now might be a good time. And here is an interesting comment from one of the developers.

[Reactor]

Sorry, late reply- email notifications don't seem to get sent to me.

But if you're not, how can you comment on a workflow you don't even understand.

I understand it fairly well, but I'm no expert. But hey, as happy as I am to admit that, it doesn't matter if I am or not. As I said, the professional side of the indie game dev community don't consider it a viable option. That speaks volumes in itself. Maybe kids like mucking around with it, but guys working hard on commercial games know there's better out there. Plus, it doesn't matter if they're not experts at the Blender engine either (before you bring that argument up) because as expert coders and game designers, they can easily adapt to and identify the best tools. These guys, unlike me, have been coding games for a huge number of years. To my knowledge, all of them have taken a look and said, "No, this won't do." As I said, if you think I'm wrong, go and post over there and see what they say. Maybe you'll find some guys who do like it! I don't know- I just know every comment I've seen (from the knowledgeable guys, not those just getting started) hasn't been positive towards it.

My overall point is this (which answers your other questions/comments)- people who don't make games don't understand what tools are best for making games. You can claim that Blender is a great game making tool, and that the difference between one tool and another is superficial. However, the guys out there starting and finishing games that people want to pay for (ie: high quality, well put together games, containing every aspect that constitutes a full game) wouldn't take your comments seriously. Their statement to you would be- "First make a game and then come say something." Armchair experts are all over the place these days. And, that'd be a fair comment. Who would listen to a mechanic who has never fixed a car? Obviously no one.

And look, let me just say- I have no issue when someone is passionate about something like the Blender game engine, or about something like Visual3d.NET. That's cool. No worries at all. But, it does seem strange to me when certain people run around with a megaphone proclaiming one thing about game development tools, when the guys who really are out there producing the games are saying very different things. I hope all of that makes sense. If it doesn't, I guess there's nothing else I can to get my point across.

Peace. Out.

[philnolan3d]

I had an idea related to this thread. I have some game models I'd like to show off in an engine, but it's boring to just have the model in an empty room. So if I could get a game engine that came with an FPS preset or something, so that you just drop the models in and go, I could make a simple level, like an art gallery. So the "player" could walk around the place and look at my models and the gallery itself would of course also be something to see. Maybe I could even have some of my photography and such in frames on the walls. Of course It would probably need to be a downloadable .EXE. I don't think Flash would work out since it would eat up all the bandwidth on my site. and the models textures would probably be too big.

So I laid out the floor plan for a number of different sections I would need with LWCad. Here you can see the different areas, a room, hall, T intersection, + intersection, and a dead end.

With different sections made it means that I could continue expanding the gallery as I get more and more stuff made for it.

[geo_n]

doing some tests for putting in content. so far its smooth sailing with 3dmax as it can read .max directly.

trying to import lwo data is as usual troublesome. the fbx export is iffy. anyone know a lw>unity3d workflow?

[Ghostdog]

Phil - great idea with the gallery, do keep at it as I wanna see screenies

Geo_n I believe I used wavefront .obj in my short test with Unity. Would try that if possible.

[Andrew Shpagin]

Btw, we are considering "Room-galery" idea that Phil told.

It really could be cool if user will be able to construct his room in voxels or polygones, place sculptures there, will be able to communicate.

[philnolan3d]

That would be very cool. I'd imagine you'd need a set of rules that has to be followed, like a polygon limit and texture size limit. If each user creates their own room certain other rules would be needed like the scale of the room and the size of the entrance to that room.