LOL brucegregor thats the best sales technique I’ve heard in a long time! Asking me to categorically justify why i’m not using the product. Nice! %|
Seriously though, I don’t have any objections to this engine at all. So far you haven’t convinced me to stop using GameBlender, but that doesn’t mean I object to your engine. Don’t take it personally. There is also the issue that it’s considered rude to advertise a product on a competing product’s website. Maybe you’d get a better response on a more neutral forum. :-?
don’t get me wrong. i’m not looking for a fight. it’s just as keith says, when it comes to large projects, it doesn’t seem to be able to handle nearly what blender can. the framerates drop too low also. we should benchmark framerates and opengl render times with the same exact mesh object in both apps. i’m almost positive blender will win by far because of the way it handles rendering compared to the hardware rendering of the other prog.
boy, for just wanting to get a general feel for how we feel about it and you not selling anything, you sure are getting mighty defensive. we’re not trying to personally attack you. we’re simply giving you our opinions. this is what you originally asked for, is it not? if you’re not selling anything, then you shouldn’t feel personally offended - you would be neutral. i used to work in sales and even if you’re not associated with the company, it seems as though you really want people to buy this product so there will be support for it. indirectly, that is sales. i’m sorry if i’ve offended you and the product. i was simply trying to give what you asked for, our opions of interest in this product. i’m not speaking for anyone else but myself. you asked, “would you be interested in this.” i am saying, “not really. it wouldn’t benefit me to switch from blender to axel. Thank you.” Have a wonderful day…
Heh, if any of you notice. Both sides are getting pretty defensive…
%| Gregor, lol, these were the kinds of hardcore blenderheads I was talking about. Just like any other program, I think both the one you’re pitching and blender has great potential. It’s just that blender is free and it’s been tested in the past and more recently on what it can achieve. Unfortunately for the one you’re pitching, if there was more content on what it could do (bigger projects), it’ll convince skeptics.
Hmm, we’d just be more helpful instead of voicing our opinions and trying to tell Gregor that blender is better, should just give him a head count of whose interested in purchasing the GE. Since he’s already showed us the product already, just raise your hand if you’d think about buying it.
:-? Sorry Gregor, although the physics there is currently a lot better than blenders, I’m still sticking with Blender. Heh, I didn’t shell out the money for Torque and they do an extremely good job at selling stuff… it’s just that even the current Blender GE is good enough for my needs.
Really, I’m not offended at all. But specific comparisons would be better for everyone. I really do appreciate your input.
Of course, I would also rather develop using free tools, but Blender’s tools don’t work in the release that has the rest of the features I need for modeling, animation and texturing. And, its existing “physics” are inferior to those in the product I have mentioned, in addition to the visual logic system.
So, until the free tools are ready and really polished, as are the tools in AxelEdge, I’m not tempted to waste too much time. As for CrystalSpace, it has been in development for an awfully long time and still is functioning on a very minimal level. So, hope is what you have in that case
I’m glad to know that you aren’t interested in AxelEdge. It gives me part of the necessary perspective I need to determine whether it is even worth pursuing distributing and supporting it. And, its not a competing product because it isn’t even available, at this point. But, it could be if enough interest existed. Otherwise it will die the death of many a good software solution. May it rest in peace.
which features do you need in blender and what version are they present in? The animation speed and quality and the physics for the demo I tried of axel was really poor quality and frame rate.
Asside from a spring constraint I didn’t really notice anything that was available in axel that wasn’t available in Blender but I admit that I’m not overly familar with the game engine nor axel.
It would probably be a good idea to go through the exact list of things that you find that are available in axel that are useful that blender lacks. Then the feasibility of these additions can be evaluated. Ie how are axel logic bricks superior to blenders? Also it might help you to make the case of why someone would be interested in the commercial product axel versus funding some development effort for blender.
Good point. Maybe, for Blender users, a much more direct approach to getting a game making environment that works for them, in the shortest time and for the least “contribution” would be to start an official funding campaign for these features in the Blender game authoring environment.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the CrystalSpace integration into the Blender environment, as a “no-coding” solution is a long way off. I’d like to hear some concrete projection figures regarding the completion of this project, based on developer support as it stands today.
If CrystalSpace integration is a long way off, it would make more sense to direct all available resources into the Game Engine with bullet physics added, and any additional, easy to integrate features, that people are voicing requests for in an overwhelming way.
We can forget about AxelEdge, for now, in the Blender-user context. I can see it is a vain attempt, on my part, to garner support among the Blenderheads.
Asking me to categorically justify why i’m not using the product. Nice! 
Heh, if any of you notice. Both sides are getting pretty defensive…