I don't use Blender much and not I'm sure if this is helpful? I made the crappiest cup as a test, and I got that to work in 2. This post was last modified: , PM by Rapture. Yes, just getting it to work in model viewer is enough, it does not have to work in amnesia. Only using the default box, adding a texture to it and exporting to collada would suffice.
So if you could do a step by step walkthrough of how you did it that would be great! Are you sure it was 2. This post was last modified: , PM by jens. Every single entity and object shown here has been made in either Blender 2. Having a Game Engine for them in Blender would naturally draw more users to Blender for modeling.
I understand it would be difficult to contact all those required to change the license, but IMO it would be worth it. If we are being humble about the ability of the engine, then we should also be humble about this GPL issue…. I am really not sure what the changes of BGE means. Will it be possible to make a game with blender or will the standalone player and logic vanish or not be developed.
For my part I liked BGE. Sure here and there could be some more features. But after all there can be made nice results in a super fast way. Now the BGE or at least the way to make a game becomes removed? Are you sure that this is not an idea of a developer for other commercial game engines? My greatest concern regarding the BGE is game logic path finding, logic bricks, python scripts.
Will game logic still exist in future blender releases? I have no problem with off-loading rendering to something like Ogre, indeed those projects probably do a better job. But BGE is more than just a render engine, its a render engine with logic, and that is what makes a game engine.
What other opesource game engines are available right now? If there are no good opensource game engines out there that can be integrated with blender then by dropping BGE as a game engine something valuable would be missing from the opensource world.
So my suggestion is to move game rendering out of blender and into something like Gamekit while keeping the logic. Indie devs works now with other tools. But Blender do need a interaction mode, event for simple demos and to test some behaviours. They offer no patent, copyright withdrawal and copyleft protection. Blender should become gaming engine and GPL is not hindering it. The only one questioning this are proprietary developers. The majority of top commentors criticizing gpl hardly ever read the license.
GPL is applied only to source code and specifically insists on free speech, not free beer aspect. Is it hard to write GPL code of a game and distribute it for money? I have a tons of games done via Unity on Android, all loaded with Ads and crap. Blender can easily reach cryengine levels, but if it refuses in the first place, he will not, never.
They make me remember the snake from the bible, and the punishment is a sure way if one hears to them. We have to defend our freedom. It is not a good idea to drop BGE. Most people do not use blender to make high-end fotorealistic pictures, most people comming from their game-console and wonna create their own game charakter and super-duper-hero. And then they wonna see the new hero runnig. No joy, no fun. If you remove BGE, you remove fun from blender, things going bored.
This is surley the wrong way. Nobody has said, that BGE has to be as good as Cryengine3, but it could be a little bit better. As example: If i export the standard-scene cube as exe, then i get a 74BM exe folder. This is a little bit much for 8 Vertices. So my suggestion for the next numbers ist: from 2. There is no other Tool who can do the same. I know it is a lot of work to create a game engine, but why not integrate ogre or irrlicht in blender? BGE give great possibilities!
This is unique offer of Blender! About GPL. There is a good example QT library. But if developer want write commercial program for sell, he buy commercial QT library licence One product — qt libary has two licence one GPL and one Commercial.
It was uniqe offer from Blender standalone I think that if BGE support Pyside or PyQt embeding and embeding popular python libaries it were great tool for scientist and tool for Fast implementation of science work in real life! Bullet 3. Add in a ability to attempt to match a actions animations, using force and torque, and everything could be done in engine,. Ouu and i forgot about something very important — volumetric lights…why ONLY spot light has option to render volumetric light and volumetric shadow?
I want to use other lights point, parallel spot, rectangle emitter or area light to make some volumetric effect. I believe that so many amazing people are still working to develop blender, and some group of people will find time in next half year or one year, to try put blender to the same level basic features available in other 3d soft like C4D was in year. Thanks for all open movie projects which are milestones for blender.
Thanks for all great features like fluids, smoke, compositing, cycles,uv mapping, sculpting, bmesh, great armature and animation system. And now — i want to a bit more industry standards in features which are stable, ready to use and no more scripts needed from internet for basic functionality. User in C4D and 3D Max can make model precise for example fillet for curves — i can use 5 cm in spline corners.
For example gradients. And many, many others…We are in year, and so many basic features are not working good or are missing. Get this stuff working good in 2. But i promise myself to not give up. I hope for a christmass easteregg, to turn a series of photos of an object into 3D blender object. So we can more easily adjust reality. As an amateur artist and game developer, I can tell you that Blender is much, much nicer to use than most game engines, but it lacks a lot of their functionality.
Even so, it would need a major project dedicated to it in order to get up to speed before a new game engine release outstripped it. Due to the nature of the industry, it is likely that BGE would be playing almost continuous catch-up for an indefinate period that could last years or even as much as a decade — all the while never gaining traction.
As an alternative, I propose that we attempt to integrate the good parts of the game engine into Blender, like many others have proposed, and then drop support for it, allowing it to fall into the dustbin of first drafts.
Furthermore, the integration of an advanced physics system into Blender seems to me as though it would perfectly complement the integration of the Cycles rendering engine — physics-based rendering improved realism immensely, and so will physics-based materials and simulations.
By my estimate, based upon the way in which Blender is currently progressing, it would not be overly optimistic to say that such a state of unified cohesion could be reached in roughly six months. Such an improvement would serve as a launching-pad for future improvements, which I can see including things such as PhysX optimization and game-engine like features such as building and baking parts of scenes to speed up render times and iteration.
The following text is taken from the license agreement. Based on the above excerpt of the agreement, it is very clear to me that it is the Stichting Blender Foundation that is granting me rights to use the software, and not the original contributors. This seems sensible because, just as Microsoft Word belongs to no one author, but to Microsoft itself, Blender should likewise belong to no one individual, but to the Blender Foundation which commissioned the project to begin with.
This is as it should be: no one individual should exert the control of ownership over the software or any part of it. It is my understanding that the project that is Blender did originally belong, does still belong, and never stopped belonging for any period, indisputably to the Blender Foundation, which licenses it under the GNU GPL to the Blender Community. The code belonged originally to the Blender foundation; this is certain.
Subsequently, it was revised, updated, improved upon, and added to by members of the community to whom it was licensed by the Blender Foundation under the GNU GPL; however, while the Blender Foundation licensed Blender to the Community, the process was never completed in reverse. At no point was it specified by the individual contributors that the Blender Foundation was the recipient of a similar license granting it the right to use any version of the software belonging to any of said contributors.
Rather, all such contributions to the Blender project appear to have been freely given, with no expectation of retaining the copyright on said contributions.
Just as a gift freely given no longer belongs to the giver but to the recipient, so these contributions to the Blender source code belong no longer to their authors but to the Blender Foundation.
Once property is transferred, it belongs exclusively to the new owner. CAD functionalities for precision modelling and Architectural Visualization, snapping edge, centre , rulers along axis, polylines…etc. I assume these functionalities are minor. There is a huge community out there who do and wants to do Architectural Visualization, but are not using Blender because of the lack of these basic functionalities.
GPUs are powerful and are always becoming more-so. I want to do this without being constrained to do the whole finished-image that way. It would benefit BGE as an end solution, and benefit blender itself, integrating Interactive and Real Time use cases with the power of a dedicated 3d tool. What i like to add to the discussion however is next to RealTime or Interactive is also the upcoming paradigma of Immersive…. That is VR is coming back quickly, and this time it works…! I would appriciate the nodification of more parts of blender.
Maybe also animation and modelling, while there could be both systems at one time. And also to keep this library synced with each release. Perhaps it can also be used internally by blender. Obviously one can write an exporter for a custom format or use existing formats. But then it has to be maintained constantly and, lets face it, Python is not the ideal tool to preprocess even the tiniest amount of data, thus requiring another intermediate format.
With a library to parse. Maya is kicking your ass on that front. Also f-curves die too much. I would like to thank everybody who works in Blender and makes it possible. As a newbie game developer and also newbie in Blender I feel that Blender need to focus more in 3D production, game asset production, etc.
If I have to choose I hope that the developers will focus their efforts in making Blender a better 3D assets production tool than improving the internal Game Engine. Their engine is not expensive and is being ported to linux. Another approach with BGE could be the same way as of cycles: make blender open with there node system for other game engines, like octane render embedded his engine now in blender, but keep developing GE.
Then GE is only one of other game engines. Advantages: — you keep the blender design flow to create your game content and game logic — offer an additional node system for GE: for logic parts etc. This would be the system what now exists for renderers in blender octane is now embedded! The data format should be a standard if something already exists world wide.
First step would be to transfer current GE to an open node system. Therefore other game engines can create there own nodes to be flexible but fully integrated in the game creation process. This would be a dream. So the interactive approach could be developed for this. Then you have one face to many games engines!!! I could imagine that then other game engines would be integrated in blender. Next advantage is that GE developer can focus there effort on game engine performance aspect because they get a nice tool to integrate it.
If i would be a GE developer i would be happy about it. Otherwise why not use Max or Maya that are more standard? While games stress on real-time and lean deployment. So making BGE multi-threaded, higher real-time performance and cross platform deployable is the right direction to go. Abandoning the current BGE runtime as an easy delivery option is a bad news to game developers. The only choice left for those who like BGE then is to branch or help alternative game engine GameKit to mature.
Maybe it can be the most easy to use GE to use for publishing on smaller devices and html5? Specialized tools, workarounds and hacks are slowly fading away and being replaced by pure simulation as computing power increases. The whole industry is shifting towards this direction, not only the movie production industry but also the gaming industry.
Real-time path-tracing game engines like Brigade are without a doubt the future for the years to come ref. Heck there is even a post on how to do it at blenderartists.
I have learned Python 3 because of BGE. There are a lot of people putting a lot of hard work into the BGE. Ton: Thanks so much for your work on Blender. MIT License. I think the blender GE has a brilliant future. I think Blender needs a full rewrite, and code reorganization. Perhaps to be funded on something like Kickstarter or Indiegogo. Allowing more developers to be hired on and work on this rewrite, while some developers remain on the 2.
Hi, as I am working in a studio people talk more and more about Blender. Still I cannot tell them when it will be possible to export and import with Alembic. Does anyone know when 2. To me this is the only point holding Blender backward. And what kind of flexibility particle nodes and the depsgraph refactoring will give to the artist? Will it affect the control we have on any data in the scene like we would have in Houdini yes i like it, still less than i like Blender even if we cannot use nodes but still use python maybe?
At the end what tool Blender is going to be? I understand the philosophy of making tools whose purpose is not to offer a delivery platform but to give artists tools to play with acording to their creativity. Still it would be good to know the shape, the personality — the power? This is slightly off topic but I use blender for video editing. I like it better than anything adobe has but I think it would be really use full to integrate the compositor into the vse and also more audio editing tool so one does not have to do audio editing out side of blender.
I am talking about fairly simple audio editing such as separating stereo into two mono tracks and a real pitch control and speed that does not change the pitch. If those things could be added I would be very happy and would make editing easier. Until then I will continue to use blender. Do you want proprietary solutions? Go out and find some. Do you want to use Free dom software as a free no cost starting point for your proprietari code? Do you want to earn money with Free GPL code?
We will use different game engines until you complete the BGE. But when we see BGE is enough for us, we will come back to home. However, this is scheduled for the 2. Until then the rasterizer will be hopelessly outdated. The downside by now is the requirement of a recent high end graphics card to run it smoothly, but by the time we can expect a stable 2. Maybe the Cylces Engine, which is an almost real time path tracer too, if I am not mistaken, can be used as the base for a new, path tracing based Blender Game Engine, to replace the old OpenGL Engine?
I like the new concept of future of Blender. Blender game can be a great for game for kind of improvement like I said. GE is a really important thing in Blender for all who use all day. Please sort out the X,Y and Z coordinate system so that I matches that of everyone else. It is a disconnect when you get used to an x,y,z system but find that Blender wants to make you use something completely different.
If I can suggest something, I will ask you to open blender to other softwares Realflow, Rayfire, External Render Engines, etc , I mean, give a chance to blender to enter in the production world by making it more compatible with other production-ready softwares. Focusing on blender first is important. Blender should focus on the tools that people keep complaining about, such as the weight painting etc.
And playing nice with industry formats. Also, with the BGE, coding deployment is way out of the question. Adding PS4, iphone etc support as if. Just use Unity. If you are making a game, make a good one.
Unity is better than the BGE. But will try to reach to minds behind Blender. I am a 3d artist with main interest in animation. Up to the point that i want to dump all paid apps and focus on Blender only. BUT, there are clients out there, and even though i create in whatever package i want I NEED to deliver final file into a format compatible with client format.
But for import??? This is the best chance Blender will ever have to integrate into pipelines. If i where near developers of Blender i will tell them nigh and day: alembic, alembic, alembic, until they get it…. Wright the best alembic import export plugin to work with skeletons, skin envelopes and all types of animations including particles and you just give the Blender a bright future. Sorry for my long post, but i am a practical guy. You need to jump all over collada and alembic if you want this brilliant app to have a future.
Thank you, Constantin. Blender is a very interesting part of workflow to make games. I use it all days! By a fork, one could literally gut Blender out of all the art tools — and concentrate on a Game Engine solely.
The main selling point would be that the GE tool would be link to blender itself. For me a good fork idea would be a tool like the Construction Kits used for the Elderscrolls games. The tool does no modeling, but runs the games. Lets get simple. Does raise question what license should it be. But this is not the big issue. Nodal Logic would be great for non coders as a fully functional thing.
Big issue is you have game in BGE and you want it in some other game engine. There is no direct transformation path. Would blender GPL license be a bother if the games for final commerical release could change engines most likely no. Please be aware Nodal Logic has been look at as just game developers thing. Could Nodal logic also been good for people who cannot code in python very well to get stuff done like model transformation tools.
Yes it could be. Maybe the way forwards is a programable complier that takes. Advantage of this solution blender can safely remain GPL.
Just like blender having plugable rendering engines because each engine has different advantages. Plugable game engines is also required.
This is long-standing break in compatibility. Improve this question. Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. The Python API has changed a fair bit since 2.
So scripts, addons and python tutorials will most likely be incompatible. Many of the buttons may have sightly different places: example in 2.
In general anything written for 2. Improve this answer. Community Bot 1. David David The character behavior can be similar but is more generic as it interacts with several different objects incl. It does not use that much logic bricks either. Changes from 2. Hi, Trying to adjust my game for 2. Does anyone know about that change? Thanks in advance for some hints. Hey thanks Monster for that information. LogicBricks State 2. Here a screenshot from the Gtown game Boy.
You see there are more action actuators. Wow, that is … much! I think I should finish my character tutorial to show how to reduce the amount of logic bricks per state That would be nice. My characters separate character animation from character behavior.
0コメント