I told that because I didn’t understand that you’re talking about the whole engine
And then I mentioned Yul Brynner’s video (that is Youle, I didn’t know that :P)
I think we should relax and wait for the time to come, and use this thread to (I don’t know) be some light about this or even help (of course “only who can” on this task), and also “fill” this topic with news (just a humble thought )
Their channel is good (the one of the livestream), they’re constantly making videos about the new engine.
Yes, and there are no words to describe my thanks to you…for the love of coding…I honestly have moved back and forth to bge and upbge to find things I need to change…my plan is to move 100% to upbge once I am more inclined to start putting the actual world together(I am running a temp world atm)getting the effects lined out and watching my vert counts and shader optimization etc…I do not think I could make the game I want to make without upbge…geometry instancing alone is worth it…I would love cascaded shadows, but I think that is coming anyway with eevee.
This is a great news, a seamless workflow between the viewport and game engine will make bge eeveer more attractive lol
The custom shader setup was a huge bottleneck in bge with the lack of render passes and especially when it can’t be optimized/instanced for each object sharing the material, oh the pain
Thanks and keep up the good work team upbge, you guys rock!
Will there be improved logic nodes in 2.8 also will the game engine finally load seamlessly in between scenes. The game freezing when you switch scenes is not a good look at all…unreal and unity have so many features that I’ve tried to wrap my head around but the amount of windows and stuff to keep track of drives me insane. A 3 hour tutorial on how to make a character run around, in blender’s current engine it’s as simple as putting a cube down, tell him to move this amount if you push this button and then parent an animated character to the cylinder. Now unreal and untity obviously have better management of assets but personally I’m a big fan of how quickly you can set something up in blender’s game engine. If only it was capable of creating quality games and had proper base features that even the simpliest engines got. Hope to see that in blender 2.8.
There already is improved logic, we call it python :)…true in any game engine the best way to improve your experience is with code…Not saying that the ‘everything nodes’ concept will not work…and eventually I imagine the bricks will land there + more, but still code is simpler to read than a complex brick/node system.
as far as the other game engines, people forget about the expoting + importing + setup of said assets inside Unity or Unreal in blender it is seamless.
I just saw this video from 2 days ago I guess…not much, but it shows physics working in upeeveege(yes, I made that stupid acronym up)? anyway the 2.8 game engine…
I am not really sure how to feel about all of this…I tend to feel like the BF is ok with killing the game engine…maybe it is just my fears taking over my brain…in any case, they do bring up a valid point…it is a good time to make it ‘more’…but by more I mean a more competent game engine…I actually feel it is competent already, but the player could be redone with a better license…instead of player it would be nicer to have a ‘blender scene viewer’ that could still be interactive like the game engine but also used for architectural walk through’s or animation playback for realtime movies…but again, with a more permissible license.
No its a wip and not a final version. So you cant compaire 2.7x vs 2.8.
Thats new and very interesting. So yeah, looks like in the end they want an interactive mode. lets see whats gonna be the responce from the main upbge devs.
Guys do you think eevee will be on par with UE4 for real time viewing and also export rendering speed?
i did a test in UE4 yesterday and the scene was only 20 secs long but very detailed and it exported almost real time. It was very very fast.
@BluePrintRandom: Just saw your post on the committers boards…I sure hope they are able to come to some agreement on the direction to take…if not I’m sure the guys will still continue to fork…but I am uncertain.
Not sure whether we read the same one. In the one I read, all previous posts from actual developers were about Eevee and how it can be used for the game engine.
The post you mention is not from a developer and about a different topic. This is also known as noise, because this kind of post does not belong there.
Just because I don’t code C or back end does not mean I don’t develop bge.
I develop games, and applications using bge, and flexbile resources and demonstrations.
The pgi logic nodes are feature complete but a bit slow.
in the end thd pgi nodes write python instead of invoke compiled commands,
this would give flexibility and speed, but node trees can be very complex,
users need to be able to fold complexity.
also with folders that can change states, we fold and hide this complexity.
also there is a opportunity to use a apache licence eh?
Hi Tristan,
Thanks for writing this. Sergey and I just finished looking at it.
The proposal is missing a big picture. What is it trying to achieve?
It seems to simply try to bring Eevee materials into BGE, without any
extra benefit.
If that’s the only goal of this project, I would at least expect it to
not interfere with the rest of Blender. For example, the idea of
changing Eevee to accommodate to a common API seems not ideal.
That said, we have an opportunity to do something bigger. Which would
be to integrate interactivity with the rest of Blender. That’s a
bigger undertake for sure, but I was under the impression that this
was the original idea for after 2.7. It’s not clear if this was
considered, or why was it dismissed.
The list is basically for people who have the right to commit to Blender’s repository or people who intend to do so. There are very few exceptions where people post who are neither of them.
This is a feature request. If you intend to implement it in C, then this list is one of the places where you can get help and feedback. But that is obviously not your goal. You are asking others to do work and that is not the purpose of this list. And as such, this is noise and nothing else.
Might be interesting, but is not relevant at all. It is not necessary to suggest additional features or licenses for something no one plans to implement.
@Dantus: Why so agressive? BPR was joining in on a discussion that was already taking place…he did not start the discussion…and, in no way, was he out of line.
I feel like you are just making negative comments here …or as you call it “noise”. Please be more constructive and less troll-like
I don’t recall any commits from Pablo Vazquez…but he is a valuable member and his opinions matter…so…according to your perspective he should also not be able to post on the mailing list???
on a side not…if you can code in python, you can code in c…they are not that dissimilar…aside from the initiating variables and defining them…So again…why so negative…
I wish I could help in the development too but coding in C is much harder, pointers and manual memory management aside, you have no access to functional features like first class function, closure etc which I’ve come to heavily rely on
