Development Blog

Sounds great Josh. Can't wait to hear about the coolest ones

It makes sense to have physics features available for entities, although I think they are really models then. Most objects you work with in game development are models; meshes are only used for programmatically animated or additionally constructed with physics elements (in ragdoll fashion), and entities are more like internal 3D objects like pivots and sources.

 

The high level 3D objects should be always called models, not entities. Else you confuse everyone without any logical reason, unless you find a good new name for the core entities.

I don't want a mouse only. I want shortcuts! Lots of shortcuts. Clicking with a mouse is ancient.

I want the editor to also tell me whether I have got email. "Welcome to Leadwerks, YOU'VE GOT MAIL"

 

Editor must talk. That would change everyone's perception of what a game engine is capable of.

Newbies don't make games, no matter how good the Editor is. I want more game engine features to the engine itself. Today I saw also a PhysX demo where the player model was a ragdoll and it combined bone animations and ragdolls seamlessly, even including joint stiffnesses:

Would be nice to have something a bit like the Quest3D Engine's editor where you can drag and drop the code and pretty much make your game from the editor without having to do much externally. I quite like the save to executable feature in Quest3D because it allows to output the work fairly quickly which is great for my 3d realtime visualization work that I show off at film studios and museums because it allows for very quick turnaround when all you're really doing is showing off visuals.

Newbies don't make games, no matter how good the Editor is. I want more game engine features to the engine itself. Today I saw also a PhysX demo where the player model was a ragdoll and it combined bone animations and ragdolls seamlessly, even including joint stiffnesses:

 

Yeah, it is important to not shift the emphasis away from the actual engine to just make it easier- but it is nice to have the option since some of my work needs split second turnarounds at times!

this looks really promising.

 

I especially like the prefabs and the script attachment.

 

What kind of term do we have think about? a year from now or longer/sooner?

What kind of term do we have think about? a year from now or longer/sooner?

Once we are able to start in earnest, I will have a better answer than that. There's a lot of groundwork to prepare.

As i read here we want a different engine to different users.. Could you do this Josh?

 

Seriously this is the direction of the engine who don't like it can always change his own direction.

I think we can satisfy both groups. By providing more high-level structure, we can help programmers to make scripts and programs that the rest of the community can use.

Keep in mind that everyone starts out a newbie. Making the GUI easier to work with without gimping it takes a lot of work and balance. We aren't planning to replace performance with ease-of-use. It's probably true that you aren't going to be able to make a AAA game without learning some code or getting some technical skills. You can't "mouse click your way to being a #1 game developer".

 

Hopefully newbies will stick around and get good enough to make really awesome games. Easing the barriers to entry for beginners and softening the learning curve to making something playable will only encourage more users.

However, if the game engine lacks advanced features, you can't do them with an easy-to-use Editor either You can do some of those with coding, but many of them need to be part of the engine.

Prefabs == Destructible Environments?