Leadwerks needs tools like this...

[Pancakes]

1. Being able to drag many different model formats into the editor and having it automatically convert to gmf behind the scenes would be nice.

 

2. Being able to create prefabs.

 

3. Being able to have multiple scripts attached to game objects.

 

4. Not having to shut down the editor to see new things.

 

 

This is basically what I want too. Just also add flowgraphs and it will be GREAT.

 

I also like solids modeling like in Cryengine 2. Where you can put down some cubes to sketch things out even before you actually model them. Also built in material editor like Arbuz said.

[Michael Betke]

1. Dragging models into the editor from file explorer. Not neccesary having them converted behind the scenes from .fbx to .gmf but would be cool.

 

2. Asset explorer. A bit like Adobe Bridge. With adjustable preview pictures.

 

3. In editor model filter with layers and prefab support. Filters for entities, models and so on with multi-select

 

4. Instant feedback. No "Apply" button any more.

 

5. No restart if I change assets. Just a "reload model" button or so.

 

6. Brushes for basic sketching of geometry and beeing able to export to my 3d app.

 

7. Material editor within the main editor to set up materials in an easy way.

 

So far for the rought stuff hehe.

[Pancakes]

Michael Betke says it best

[Rick]

I really think they have to convert. I can't count how many hours I've spent converting models manually from whatever format to gmf. It's such a pain in the work flow. You'd still have the ability to do it manually if you liked, but when I buy my models from Dexsoft that aren't/weren't convert to gmf already I would have to manually do that and it was a process that could have been automated already in LE editor. I did nothing special when converting. Note, that I'm just talking about the model and not materials. LE could make default material files that we can alter if need be after the fact.

[Pixel Perfect]

even after all of what you guys have said, i still believe that the features in the video would be a great addition to the editor. however the statement about modelers and level designers having very different jobs makes sense.

 

Looks around him for his modelers and level designers Most of us small Indie outfits dont have that luxury! Anything that helps and makes the flow more productive has to be a good thing.

[Marleys Ghost]

Looks around him for his modelers and level designers

 

 

Did you leave the door unlocked again ?

[Rick]

Looks around him for his modelers and level designers Most of us small Indie outfits dont have that luxury! Anything that helps and makes the flow more productive has to be a good thing.

 

I think the problem that faces this is making the software be easy and functional at the same time for everyone. Adding all features into one exe is great, but if it's complicated to use, like I would argue Blender is, then it defeats the purpose of making the flow more productive. That may seem obvious but getting a good interface to do all of this in a manner that is natural for most people is tough. Again, Blender is a good example. It's clearly aimed at modelers, but over the years level designers have grown to expect something different.

 

Some problems that arise is that from my understanding Blender started out as a modeling tool. Because of that the mentality of modelers and what they like in an interface generally isn't the same as level designers and what they like. Because of this, Blender's interface is more geared towards modelers than level designers. So if you are more comfortable with level design in tools like Leadwerks editor, Hammer, or 3DWS, you look at Blender and just think it makes no sense. The reverse is true also.

 

Because these roles were separated out for so long, the tools built around the roles have taken different paths with common different interfaces. Most people lean towards one common interface than another, and when they need to change, it's hard to want to do that. Especially if you aren't getting paid to, ie indie/hobby game devs.

 

So I shy away from Blender because it doesn't work like a normal level editing program but more like a 3D modeling program. Don't get me wrong, if I was getting paid I'd be all over learning it

[Josh]

Converting models is a such specific process. If you want to get really nice quality you have to work on each asset you want to see in the scene. Adjust materials number of surfaces, animations etc. I wouldnt leave this to default scene converter. But this is my opinion

I agree that the quality of the conversion and features may suffer, but this is something the overwhelming majority want, not just Rick. So the trick is to give the public what they want, without letting them hurt themselves.

 

The best way to think of it is to assume the user does not have a keyboard, and can not run Windows Explorer. Then you understand what they generally want, in terms of ease of use. This isn't so much the current user base, but the "designers" and beginners that we expect to join later on.

 

If we can also streamline the workflow for the professionals and save them time, then that's great.

[Pancakes]

To be perfectly honest, converting the models was the WORST thing about Leadwerks back when I first got it. And that was before scripting. I honestly preferred bumbling around in Visual C++ to all the model conversions I had to do. But the materials system is even worse - figuring out what was constantly going wrong felt like being a forensics agent examining the crime scene of a cold case... at first. But then again I had already been so spoiled.

 

Eventually I got used to it. Thanks to my Favorites Windows 7 Explorer folders it's not nearly as painful as it was in XP with all the folder navigation it takes to make materials and model conversions.

[ConradAlistair]

wow i didn't think this post of mine would grow into what it is now AND be at the top of the Feature Request catagory

 

anyways...i think a feature id like in 3.0 is simply a stand alone 3ds to gmf converter rather than usind uu3d or 3ds max. i dont know if thats what id want the most though

[Rick]

The best way to think of it is to assume the user does not have a keyboard, and can not run Windows Explorer. Then you understand what they generally want, in terms of ease of use. This isn't so much the current user base, but the "designers" and beginners that we expect to join later on.

 

Think of the programmers who just want to make a game too. We don't care about nitpicking the models. We want them to look somewhat decent, but we just want them in a format that we can use. I don't want to spend hours over conversions and screwing around with mat files. I'd rather spend my hours over making the logic of the game, because in my programmer mind, that's more important. From an artist stand point I can see where they might want to make sure everything looks absolutely perfect though.

[wailingmonkey]

Looks around him for his modelers and level designers Most of us small Indie outfits dont have that luxury!

Anything that helps and makes the flow more productive has to be a good thing.

I think they went out for beers with my programmers and never came back!

 

(and I definitely agree with you, Pixel Perfect...not sure about the demographics of who's buying LW,

but if I had to wager I'd say the bulk of purchases go to single-man 'shops', and that's why I find

it odd to think that building in 'toolsets' to optionally manage engine features--instead of purely

self-coded--tends to help the majority of the consumer base to use LW to it's fullest. Which in turn,

will allow for more games being released, instead of just screenshots.)

[AndyGFX]

 

4. Instant feedback. No "Apply" button any more.

 

 

 

"Apply" button and checkbox [x] Autoupdate

[flachdrache]

I do have my workflow sorted, "minus" animated objects > but not much i can bring to the tabel or just throw in atm.

However, i use all the programs i became attached to, over the years, which means iam best at unrealEd/Radiant (which are kind of "out of question") for level design and

Silo/Zbrush3 for characters.

If i want to draw a "dirt" decal, ill do it in zbrush and use it as "lightmap" in the second texture channel - since zBrush (or unrealEd/Radiant) might be not an option for some of us (even if i suggest to at least learn these) i suggest to take a look into the blender thing - its the best option imho.

 

tbh i cant write it down like a game concept just yet (see my sig to get an idea of more usefull tools) but iam working on a prototype/pipeline concept atm. So, the 2.5x version of blender seams pretty stable and is very configurable - it is maybe an option to incorporate something for LE which was gMax`s tempest for quake3.

 

[edit] What "scenefile" would be feasible ? Iam using dae and fbx as container but some of LE`s conversion tools dont like.

[Guest Red Ocktober]

here's the thing, I'm not even sure why Leadwerks is developing it's own editor and hiring lots of people to do that when you can plug the SDK into blender, change blender's interface to be whatever you want, and take advantage of all that wonderful beatufiful code and constant development because Blender game engine is OPEN SOURCE

 

sorry to be playing the devil's advocate again... but i have to agree 200% with the above quoted viewpoint...

 

 

LW is not a team on the same scale as the team that created the work you've just seen...

 

you guys are just gonna bog josh down for the next 2 years, fullfilling the request you're all making for an editor with all the features that you've just seen... and it will be at the expense of getting a decent, stable, feature complete game "engine" finished up to the point where you can call it game maker ready...

 

... which was, after all, what i thought that most of us were here for

 

 

but maybe i be mistaken... B)

 

I would like to hear more about specific features and workflow you guys want

 

1. a feature complete, stable, working "engine"...

 

2. with decent looking ocean water...

 

3. and a macintosh version...

 

4. and a linux version...

 

5. with integrated networking functionality...

 

6. and with integrated ai (pathfinding)...

 

 

freeze the specs... reach that goal... then consider additional features and direction... draw up new specs and project goals... aim for em...

 

ya gotta reach one set of goals before you start off on another set... and right now there is no one set in mind...

 

continuing like this sorta garauntees that LW will forever wonder into nowhere land... never reaching any plateau...

 

 

 

 

--Mike

[Rick]

Creating new things is what makes the world exciting. What Josh makes might end up being better than what is out there. That's the best part about software. Innovation can/will happen and it doesn't always require a large staff. Sometimes it just needs a new amazing design.

 

The amount of change that Josh would need to do to Blender to make it the way he wants would basically be not much different than coding one himself. At least with coding there would never be any restrictions that always comes when editing another piece of software to be the way you want it.

[Guest Red Ocktober]

Creating new things is what makes the world exciting.

 

yes... like creating new games... with a feature complete Leadwerks...

 

how exciting that would be... indeed...

 

 

you're absolutely right

 

 

--Mike

[Rick]

We already know where this road goes so let's not go down it again.

[Guest Red Ocktober]

We already know where this road goes

 

i really don't think you do...

 

sorry Rick... but you keep saying the same things over and over again... and they still don't make much sense...

 

Blender... heck, if you're gonna use Blender, then why not go all the way with Blender and use their game "engine"...

 

a Blender plugin for LW... c'mon now... lets get real...

 

what say we keep focused on what this thing started out being... a game engine...

 

 

lets finish Leadwerks first... so some of us can make games...

 

then... if you want... you can talk josh into going off on some other tangent...

 

 

--Mike

[cocopino]

Since this has turned out to be a feature request thread

 

I'd really, really like an export function of the terrain composite image to a large (4096x4096) DDS.

Terrain menu button -> Edit -> Tab composite -> File -> Export should then have a DDS option.

 

Using this image one could effectively mimic having unlimited terrain textures. Thanks!

[Rick]

Blender... heck, if you're gonna use Blender, then why not go all the way with Blender and use their game "engine"...

 

a Blender plugin for LW... c'mon now... lets get real...

 

I never said to use Blender. I'm 100% against using Blender in any way actually. You must be mistaking me with Pancakes. Please don't talk about me not making sense when you haven't read the posts in this thread to see who stands where.

 

but you keep saying the same things over and over again

 

"Hello kettle, this is pot, yeah you're black." Well at least we both are consistent with our views even if they are different.

 

 

lets finish Leadwerks first... so some of us can make games...

 

Is it really that hard to see that we have the same end goal, but we want to reach that goal in different ways? You think your way is right and I think mine is right. At least let's respect the fact that we both want the same thing. We just think differently on how to get that. I think it's about building better tools to surround/complement the existing API. You think the existing API isn't sufficient enough and tools should be considered after changes to the API. I feel like it's OK that we have different views, but we should probably try to stick to the views only.

[flachdrache]

Hmmmm, since i might was somewhat not considering all sane facts while doing my statement in the "porting to xbox360" discussion (e.g. engine features V.s. timeframe) - i think the same applies here. It of course would be great to have the capabilities of unrealEd/Radiant in LE`s editor but (for me) i better like to have a physic`s editor within the modelviewer rather than a "simple" plane based worldbuilder. Simple worldbuilder means w/o curves, copy&paste&mirroring for surfaceTexture`s, decal spawning (like in the vid). For what i would use blender i already use silo & giles (i bought those programs) but blender is free (and its gameEngine does have many flaws imo). I guess what i wanted to express is > if someone comes up with a blender setup + introduction video, optimised for "leveledition" i might even download it.

 

PS: Any thoughts on this one.

PPS : I might sound strange or even domineering sometimes - my apologise.

[Guest Red Ocktober]

I never said to use Blender. I'm 100% against using Blender in any way actually. You must be mistaking me with Pancakes

noone said you in particular was a proponent of using Blender... and i'm not mistaking you for anyone else but Rick...

 

Well at least we both are consistent with our views even if they are different.

that's not the only difference Rick... my view has a bit of logical sensibility to it... yours on the other hand, well... read it for yourself, don't let me put words in your mouth...

 

Creating new things is what makes the world exciting. What Josh makes might end up being better than what is out there. That's the best part about software. Innovation can/will happen and it doesn't always require a large staff. Sometimes it just needs a new amazing design.

i was waiting for the part where you would start talking about unicorns... and rainbows... and brightly colored flowers...

 

sure creating new things makes the world exciting... but ya gotta start somewhere... ya gotta put a solid foundation somewhere before you can start building your stairway to heaven...

 

those videos above... have ya looked at em... i mean, do ya think that that app was slapped together in a month or two by two guys and a case of cold coke in a basement...

 

or, do ya think that the people who did this were many... and that they focused on a set goal... do ya think that they worked towards acheiving that goal... do you think that they set their immediate sights on making the entire world a more exciting place... do you think they had their sights focused on a clear and concise set of specs...

 

what say we just get the "engine" done first... i mean, that's the reason i suspect that both you and i have licensed LW for, a game engine...

 

 

in order to get somewhere, you've gotta have a destination... and then aim for it... ya can't just start running in every direction at once... i'm sure if you do, you'll wind up going nowhere fast...

 

is that so hard a concept for you to grasp...

 

 

sure i'd like all the things i've seen in the vids above... i'd like a lot of the things the devs have mentioned above... a lot of them are really good suggestions... and while i hate to burst your dream bubble, this is Leadwerks... not Intel... it's not even Unity... it's just Josh, and a couple of clones... and maybe another coder and artist or two... the respective staffs and budgets are like from two different parts of the universe...

 

now based on these real world facts... realistically now, do you think you're gonna see any of that stuff that you're proposing in the next two months... what about the next three months... half a year from now, maybe B) ...

 

or, maybe by next year if we're lucky...

 

that is... unless you find some more new and exciting rainbow stuff to divert josh's attention with...

 

 

--Mike

[ConradAlistair]

i found a really cool GUI system. UDK is using it now and i think it looks really easy and advanced.

 

here is the link: Scaleform GFX

[Pixel Perfect]

I am naturally very interested in seeing the engine moving forwards and believe that Josh has some great innovative ideas. However, what I also see is we still have basic bugs in the existing tools and people who are really trying to write and produce games with this engine have outstanding functionality requests, some of which have been outstanding for over a year often with no positive 'yes we will implement this or no we won't for this reason' response. So in that respect I tend to agree with Mike and I feel sufficient attention should be given to ensuring the existing tools are fully functional and bug free and that game developers should be given a somewhat better deal on the requests for specific functionality before tackling the more esoteric stuff.

 

Why take it to the point where its 99% there and then leave the last 1%. Because it's the last missing or broken 1% which will prevent real game realisation from taking place and will see the better designers eventually abandoning the engine for something else!

 

I do think its time to come clean as to whether the intension is to really have some serious games made with this engine or to pander to a market place that is driven more by a desire for simple drag and drop game functionality and produce endless conceptual artwork (as beautiful as it may be) with nothing more substantial behind it.