Blender 2.8x new Game engine

General Forums Blender Development Discussion
42

there is no need for a new game engine since unreal engine 4 and unity 5

3 Likes
44

classic BPR

3 Likes
46

Now find someone who wants to play this instead of the games done in Unity, Unreal or even Godot.

47

this is a tool that was made in 2 days - itā€™s mean to be a drop in replacement for this

I actually get lets of requests to buy my game (a copy of the game or rights to it all)

itā€™s not finished enough yet though for me to feel comfortable in early access.
and I am not going ot sell out.

here is some of the game logic a while ago before a round of bug fixing + upgrades

48

Thatā€™s a perfect example of the potential quality of BGE games.

1 Like
49

itā€™s using planar reflect for the water atm

swapping to PBR w/SSR soon

this is using a realtime cubemap sample per object

however it will do SSR and if the SSR fails use the parralax corrected cubemap from prebaked static probes + update the closest probe

50

also my work in old UPBGE does not represent the work in eevee

youles branch I posted, is in EEVEE !!

most logic is possible w/BPY also

51

Video showing any of this?

52
53

The new developments would surely be a welcome sight to UPBGE users, but what aboutā€¦

  1. Custom shader uniforms that arenā€™t done using the hacky and limited Object Color workaround? I know Godot can define these using both its custom shader API and its new visual shader editor.
  2. Realtime or baked GI? Unity, Unreal, and Godot all have this in some form.
  3. The ability to duplicate a datablock into a unique one at runtime (so you can change a material attribute of one object without it affecting all of the others). I know thereā€™s the lib functions but even UPBGE seems to have a lot of reported bugs related to them.
  4. Visual UI building using real text and sprite rendering rather than a hack using screen-aligned planes.
  5. Visual-based features with their own graphical representation (path building ectā€¦) rather than building it in Python combined with mental guesswork.
  6. Reusable multi-object components that can be nested and inherited. Unity can now do nested prefabs and Godot goes even further with the scene-based design lending to being able to reuse anything and everything.
  7. Script-generated property fields that allow for the customization of logic without worrying about creating the needed properties manually.
  8. Speaking of materials, API access to all material and object properties for realtime manipulation and alteration.
  9. Various coding features, I know Godot now has optional static typing and match statements (which are similar to switch statements). Thereā€™s also enums, syntax checking, and errors that sound if you accidentally mistype the name of a function or variable. That would all be in the built-in editor, and I still recall the painful tracking of Python errors in Blenderā€™s text editor.
  10. One-click exporting of secure executables without the hoop jumping and complexity required because of the GPL.

Personally, I have skepticism as to the future of UPBGE unless you guys start giving reasons for users of other engines to switch (outside of just the workflow), the project will only go so far if it simply focuses on existing and former BGE fans.

2 Likes
54

Iā€™m not sure what Iā€™m looking at.

55

Which is a full day and 22 hours longer than it would have taken in a modern game engine.

1 Like
56

isnt armory the new game engine.

57

I personally donā€™t think Blender needs a game engine built-in. It shouldnā€™t be a swiss army knife and as already seen with the removal of the old engine in 2.8, complexity has a cost that can be far reaching. Armory also looks super awesome and Iā€™d rather see people support that.

5 Likes
58

Agree blender didnā€™t need game engine and if anyone wanted there is a armory engine as plugin

59

Try to do something like this in Blenderā€¦ or anything of the other demos and videos

1 Like
60

Why does every gameengine thread turn into a UPBGE vs the rest flamewar? Can we maybe stop this? Just asking.

2 Likes
61

The overall issue is that people are afraid of change. Moving from Windows 7, moving from blender 2.7xā€¦ Both end up with people who want something new but at the same time with all of the old features. And when it doesnā€™t agree with them they get angry.

Now in this case, just like with Blender Internal, both gut cut for few reasons.

  1. They were very old, and continuing to support them was not feasable for a team the size of Blender Institute.
  2. Newer replacements (Eevee, and new interactive engine that is being worked on) provide a lot of value, and again underlying the limited resourced Blender Institute has, the have to priorizize.
  3. Having every feature in the world implemented means blender would be : ā€œjack of all trades, master of noneā€. Iā€™d rather they concentrate on some and be better in these areas.

But again, people will be people and they want to keep what they know ignoring any cost associated with this. So I expect the ā€œflamewarā€ to pop up every single time (which is unfortunate) :frowning:

3 Likes
62

sure give me a AAA budget,

1 Like
63

To those looking for a modern open source 3d game engine with node-based logic, close integration with Blender, with a permissive license for distribution, and which supports all sorts of platforms other than just OpenGL, why not use Armory? It seems as if itā€™s better than the old BGE in every way.

  • Way faster and more modern graphics pipeline
  • Flexible output - doesnā€™t rely on OpenGL. You can make games for mobile, web, DirectX, Metal, anything
  • Node-based logic
  • Permissive license means you donā€™t have to redistribute the source code
  • Close integration with Blender 2.8

Honestly, whatā€™s not to like? If I was making games in Blender, and for some reason decided that I didnā€™t want to use Unity or Unreal, I would be all over Armory.

8 Likes