would it possible to create a videogame
similar to nomans sky?
in nomans sky you can land on planets in a spaceship.it has procedural generated life form.a player can hunt,mine,build things.you can also land on spacestations.
are you implimenting hardware skinning.
does sabge have dynamic terrain loading?
i really like dynamic terrain loading.i like to make videgames where me and a npc can explore that utilises dynamic terrain loading.
it would great if your game engine worked great on low end computers.
maybe you could make it work on a laptop.
what i am looking for is game engine where it would be easy to impliment a very good chatbot for npcâs.
will sabge be cable of this?
2 Likes
yes, obviously the game developer will implement the specific systems that characterize their game, sabge allows you to do about the same things you can do with bge / upbge and in a certain sense it is also more oriented in a procedural vision. I take this opportunity to tell you something about the new KX_GameObject class ⌠In sabge we would have two different functions called âaddObjectâ and âspawnAssetâ. âaddObjectâ in sabge is a much coarser function than the one we know in bge / upbge; this function adds an empty object entity (no mesh, no shadowMesh no collisionMesh, no logic). To define the object added in a more specific way, we will have to assign a series of parameters to it: do I want the object to have a visible mesh? do I want the object to have collision and / or physical? is it dynamic? cast shadows? want to attach some pythonComponent (logic) to it? for the added object we must specify all these things !! Extremely flexible but if every time in our script we have to add an object we have to waste a lot of time and lines of code and thatâs why I created the âspawnAssetâ function. Generally in the game we work with objects that repeat themselves (a bullet is always the same and I propose it to you every time the shot occurs) so, in Sabge I inserted the possibility of creating asset libraries in which we specify all the necessary information for an asset to define our object in every possible aspect. So to add an already defined object to the scene we will use the spawnAsset function! The informations that realizes the âassetâ are defined by a script so unlike bge / upbge our script can also take informations and process them in order to return also different assets (procedurality). This, in my view of things, is a great advantage compared to bge / upbge, it may seem complex but it is not! Often it simplifies game-devâ life in many situations. When you load a library that contains assets into the scene3D, automatically Sabge goes to load all the assets contained in so they will be available to be spawned in the scene.
yep! gpu skinning! âŚmeshesâ vertices are moved only by gpu (cpu only calculates the bonesâ matrices passed to the gpu)
this is an extra feature that will probably be added later. in any case, a game-dev can build it as it wants, also taking advantage of the possibility given by pybullet to create collision meshes form heightMaps textures
As âbare boneâ ,sabge is able to run on low-end computers, in that case you have to build your own material shaders and tweak or reset the rendering pipeline. If instead you want to use the modern rendering system that I am writing you need a graphics card that supports openGL 4.5. However the render pipeline is configurable or even replaceable (PS: iâm on a laptop with 1050Ti and this super mario demo atm goes 120-140 fps âŚwithout particular optimizations)
working with text is easier in sabge (procedural texts). You have scene2D.draw.text (âyourTextâ, pos, ori, size, alignment, color, tickness ⌠ect). It is not persistent so you need to call it every frame.
In addition I am preparing a loadable library useful for GUIs where you can instead spawn persistent objects like labels, buttons, listView, etc.
So thatâs why i think in sabge making GUIs will be a lot easier
1 Like
WOOW This is the Best answer ive ever recieved so far thanks @Lostscience for your Wondeful Question and thanks @lopas for stating the Facts!
I am happy about this this is Great Man! 
Fred/K.S
take a peek at unity3D 
It can even compile towards targets youâll never have here ^^
( note i have no interrests in U3D but i think the more we are developping on this, the better, as U3D has future because itâs open to legion of targets ( except maybe webGL 
)
the dynamic terrain loading does not work anymore for the basic version.
1 Like
hi @Lostscience 
are you talkin about U3D ? x))
U3D terrain is a big joke !
Only shaders can be kept. You want terrain ? do it yourself !
And dynamic time-stretched terrain loading, from file or web ( for avoiding 0.1sec freeze ) is quite easy to achieve.
Believe me, U3D is far from perfect and i often get mad on simple stoopid things butâŚ
- legion of targets
- quick run on simple things
- a damn huge API doc
- designed for dumbasses ( like me )
Itâs nothin but perfect ! and i use the basic version !
As i do less than 100K$/yearâŚ
wanna me taunt you ?
gimme a droid apk that i can run on my samsung J5, of your blender app
hehehe 
nah definitely U3D terrain is a big bunch of useless cr.p⌠donât stick on thisâŚ
Happy blending !
Think iâll go nuts with this! And iâll get this straight cause seems we playing dumb right here ! CAN WE GET A GAME ENGINE INTEGRATED INTO BLENDER DONE ? SPEAK ENGLISH ? Got it deleted, now any other excuses for not get it ready and all the alternatives start to appear! I even deleted all my work because of this community discussion about how NOT to make a Blender game engine! When will it be ready? When can we start making games in Blender? I want to finish my project! Why is it taking so long ? Why it was deleted anyway? And why is this so irritating about about a tool toy not to be made? Why is this so important not to have game engine integrated into Blender? And why there is always something itâs missing? Especially basic functions! Why there are not enough tutorials? Why there are only 2 devs working on industrial scale program? Why this canât get no funding and donations? Why is this taking FOREVER? Why itâs never stable? Will it be ever get done?
because this stuff hard. and if you deleted your stuff bases on teh timez and interwebz speak, then thats on you.
ive been happily working with 2.74 for my whole bge career mostly, and i still will be for the foreseeable future.
blender is a software that receives funding / donations from animation/ non_realtime_rendering studios mainly therefore its development continues in that direction. If a software has to go well for different purposes it is more difficult to work on it, changes on one aspect can negatively affect the other. Blender evolves and not in in the game-dev direction, so why keep wasting time and resources keeping the bge compatible with the new version of blender modeler? Letâs separate the game engine from our favorite modeler and start again! With Blender we can export in various formats, everything we need inside an engine (mesh, skeletons, animations, textures); exporting would cost you just one click! âŚnice EEVEE anf his new SSR fx, however it takes some frames to be completed (temporal refinement). The results are ok and this is ok as a preview in a modeler but for a game engine is this a good choice ?
It is not a criticism to Blender! I love it! But it seems that upbge, as integrated engine, finds itself absorbing also choices that go in a different direction
1 Like
Lol idk maybe the âPOWER OF 2â far exceeds the expectations of what a fully blown team can do ⌠
And now the Power of 1 which @lopas is adhering to can far exceed the power of 2 that of which UPBGE is being worked on by the 2 individuals that seem to care about it!
Power of 2 = Rule of 2
Power of 1 = Rule of 1
Fred/K.S
Thatâs the question that will never be answered directly regarding our current circumstances!!!
Fred/K.S
Man you sound very very professional, i like your reply this is the most neatest reply i have ever read in a long long time here on the Forums! (I agree to this statement and it makes sense not to keep something that will be a burden to them in the End)
My take would be to reintroduce the Game Engine in a future version of blender something that will just be a bonus like the Interactive Mode they were talking about a few years ago at a Blender Conference!
Something that wont butcher the purpose of blenders intended goal, if blenderâs goal is to remain the best modeler then so shall it be, interactivity can come in Blender 2.90; i wouldnât mind.
By then the Engine and Blender Software would have amalgamated into something more than what it is today.
Youâre right in saying that @lopas and i humbly agree to your statement, but you see ⌠i think that UPBGE is doing that for the sake of retaining its large populated user base, just think about how many projects have been stopped after the announcement that the BGE will no longer make it in to newer builds of Blender? Or let alone the fact that the BGE didinât make it in to the 1st Build of 2.80+?
Many projects either got shelved or migrated to GODOT, look at where those projects are today!
Personally, i see no completion at all (NO MAN HAS EVER REACHED THE END OF DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR MIGRATED BGE PROJECT IN GODOT!) people are struggling alot and also the large user base that BGE had has been reduced to ash and now BGE means nothing to newbies wanting to go in to Game Design. (People Treat it as a JeRK off Engine that makes Crappy looking ps1 graphic Level Games not even games unfinished tech demos even )
The fact that UPBGE exists is the reason why BGE did exist and still does today in older builds and is still being used by passionate artists and devâs, one would think why wouldnât BF consider returning something that could be a bonus to the Package?
for example: im saying a possibility that an Interactive Mode could make it in a 2.90 build chances are High that it could be a possibility, but judging from the current interests of today it is mostly highly unlikely that that would happen so quickly!
UPBGE - And the Future of the Game Engine Integrated in the Blender Software!
My take on UPBGE is that it will bridge the Gap between Game Creation and Blender modeling still keeping that unification in 1 package though the future and newer builds of Blender as those continue to adopt new ways and new directions of doing things, UPBGE will adopt the same, but it will still allow for the creation of Games on a software that truly unified everything and presented a Workflow that will never ever be surpassed by any other Commercial Game Engine in the Market despite the fact that this is free and open source!
personally, im at peace with the switch since iam making my game but not only that, i can testify to that statement by saying that my workflow hasnât been shaken since the start of my most recent project TBW .
So yeah UPBGE still provides me with a Healthy territory environment to experiment and to test my skills and knowledge when it comes to Creating a Game.
And in the process my experience is growing and my confidence is booming and i get to create great content, inevitably the goal is not to please or boast or anything; for me in making such a game implies a point being made out there to BF, and i believe that the UPBGE user base needs to grow that way should the BF introduce the interactive engine inside of blender the masses will flock over without a doubt.
Mainly because everyone wantâs something that is well unified and has 1 uninterrupted workflow, Where there are thousands of resources and tuts for BGE and i believe none of that should be thrown down the drain at all whatsoeverâŚ
The Games that have been made on this Engine for the Past Decade are quite impressive to tell you the truth despite the technical and graphical limitations of its time BGE still holds up and stands up for what it is today and what it once was.
UPBGE will continue to carry the greatness of what BGE had and as for SaBGE i believe its a Bonus that will enable developers to continue the great legacy that BGE had in the past. (Afterall its not about the Engine for the engine is merely just a tool to get work done, my take is that weâll see what these Engines can produces and the types of games that will be made with them)
My wish is to localize everything BGE that being the WIKI, the GAMES from the past decade and now from UPBGE , Tutorials , Resources and lastly all the builds of BGE/ UPBGE that way we can continue growing our community of BGE/UPBGE users and also noobâs and newbies.
The Goal is to give the true experience to newcomers to Game Development a TRUE Feel of what it is to Create a Game From the Ground Up with TOTAL CONTROL. (And i believe that this Engine has provided that over the years and still is till this day!)
That is all i have to say for now but the topics being rolled on this thread continue to stir the vision despite peoples opinions. (All what i have said here is Fact not my own made up feeling based opinion!)
Fred/K.S
2 Likes
My own opinion is that (SA)(UP)BGE-Armory , call it whatever u want , should rather work on some solid game template and make a brain work on the way most of games work (by type) in order to theorize some systemic rules to answer questions like : what is a 3th person view game is about in 95% of cases ? What are the usual actions the player can do? What are the usual controllers? In order to optimize and compile a C++ rock-solid game system. In other words, make a game with all the assets left to be moddable. That could spare 20-30% of CPU ressources (well, i have no idea lol )
I say that, because one have seen some magnificent screenshot of games showing 100âs of shaders in a sunset ⌠but doing nothig else (ok itâs a tech demo)⌠and some other games running at 20fps simply by moving cubes. People are doing games over and over from scratch and most of time never finish them.
If the popularity of the (SA)(UP)BGE-Armory is the main concern, working downstream should be seen as a pragmatic approach. ( At least, some non-programmers , instead of crying , could make that work)
I say that because, iâve read above that some people are fighting how the things have to be done upstream : @anon14599097 , the thing is , at some point, itâs easier and faster to work alone than collaborate with other people (for example, you sent me an email about my game, i answered you ⌠you never replied) . On the other hand, itâs true that those few people working on UPBGE donât advertise much about the help they need.
Maybe if more money was involved, it could help to organize things⌠Blender has itâs foundation and donation system after all.
3 Likes
@sabge, congrats for the work, itâs impressive. Are you planning to create improved logics for the camera system ?
thank you , there is already a function that takes care of managing the camera for the third person there are some methods to control position, orientation of the camera using parameters like the distance from the target, elevation and angleZ(angle around global Z axis)
No man donât say this, Iâm not competing with the upbge developer, there are many factors at stake, including the free time. Indeed, as you say, I am also happy that they continue to work and integrate upbge in blender, it is nice to have an integrated game engine to experiment on and maybe even some games and it is an excellent launching pad for newbies. From my point of view so it is therefore a good that it exists ⌠even if I am no longer using itâŚ
1 Like
Those users who like BGE why not migrate to UPBGE? I canât find any other better choice in that respect. Bringing the BGE into blender as of now is now impossible. And if someone really wants to spend time and attempt it will be unavoidable a new FORK, so in essence competes again with the mindset of UPBGE.
Another alternative choice is to just go straight to Panda3D or some other capable choice. The good thing by choosing your own engine is like choosing your own menu. As for example Bullet physics sucks, so you can use Newton instead. Or if for example asset management in BGE sucks, so you can use your own internal design (just create a global list of loaded assets and access them by enum index). This gives you much more power than anything else.
2 Likes
this guy gets it.
2 Likes
i understand buddy , but id would like to find out truly whats the END GAME for SaBGE?
SINCE upbge already exists whats the intended purpose of its existence is it to preserve BGE because UPBGE is basically BGE Rebooted lol
i still dont see why or how SaBGE could top out UPBGE if UPBGE is going to be getting everything new Updates from 2.80+
Last quick question @lopas is Sa-BGE targeting small scaled 3D Games like GODOT does or is it going to top out 3D like UPBGE is currently beefing out at the moment?
(Im just curious with what you say is going to be possible on SaBGE because id like to try it out and be a contributor but as a developer making games.)
Its not to say that what im doing is perfect but results are promising! : )
Fred/K.S
lol i wish they could be another way around that truly 
Fred/K.S