AGK Studio - Feature Requests..

[Rick Nasher]

I've just posted the following stuff on GitHub

Hi guys,

I know you have a lot on your hands already right now, but hopefully you'll take notice here.

We really need more extended physics:
I know it's been said before, but, this is a request that keeps coming back in the forums.
It's just a necessity if you want to stay even a little competitive with any other engines.

There is a reason why other engines include this in their software:
It will skyrocket new exiting developments and also makes great advertisement for the AppGameKit product line capabilities. Also I've done a very brief count and quickly went over 30+ interested people in this stuff. And that's just the current regular user base who are posting regularly.

Just take a look at the load of interest blink0k's and Fubarpk's car-physics attempt generated on the AGK-forum. And then bare in mind this was only for cars. What if we could have boats, planes and rockets going on, besides the character controller and other already included stuff?

If you just take a look at this latest thread for instance:
Car/boat/plane etc physics Request Discussion

The Engine:
The currently used Bullet Physics Engine is one of the best in the world and is even being used by Boston Dynamics to make our well known robotic little friend Atlas do all it's tricks.

It's also OpenSource and has plenty C++ examples readily available, just a matter of converting it to Tier1 commands if you ask me:
https://github.com/bulletphysics/bullet3/tree/master/examples

And here's the wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_(software)
Also available for python: https://pybullet.org/Bullet/BulletFull/files.html
And an interesting read: https://pybullet.org/wordpress/

The Competition:
However, I've found that Unreal Engine 4 and Unity are apparently both using the PhysX engine. e.g:
https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-us/Engine/Physics

And is also pretty impressive what they do with it. I've previously used it in Blitz3d for which some Russians created a wrapper, which worked pretty well also.

Bottom line:
However it's up to you guys, whatever suits you best, is quickest and easiest to implement.
But please do not ignore this, for we now have a half finished 3D physics system, which isn't in anyone's benefit, is bad advertisement and I want you guys to succeed for AGK's my favorite dev tool(and I'm not the only one feeling that way).

Other things currently missing in the 3D engine commands:
•spotlights.
•asynchronous loading.
•simple vertex commands (without the need to resort to memblocks).

Also nice to have:
•Easy multiplayer network features such as Unity Networking Portal.
•Perhaps sell as an add-on an optional hosting server subscription for massive multiplayer games.*
•A Terrain, 3D Scene and Character Editor (can be taken from GameGuru or AGE3D?). *
•A Shader Editor (can be taken from DarkBASIC - I've heard Paul did one there?). *
•Add C# and Python, which are very popular and seen as professional(important feat).*

*) These could be build-in by default, but also available as separate add-on's or included in an AppGameKit Studio Pro version for those who like that kind of thing.
Which means more revenue for future continued development of our dearly beloved.

Hope this contributes in a positive way to your product. Keep up the good work.

Kind regards,

Rick Nasher


Hope this helps. If any of you agree please post your +1 or comments there, for then we're more likely to be heard.
The more the merrier.   

[Pfaber11]

I've got a feature request and that's an AGK compiler that creates machine code instead of byte code even if it can only be done for the pc . I think a lot of people are turned off AGK because of this . Machine code is the Holy Grail. They could even sell it as an add on for an extra 20 quid .
Happy days .

[Rick Nasher]

It's not that much different from with some games that allow for a scripting language such as lua for their users to make mods.
Plus bytecode is hard to reverse engineer I've been told.

However, even though the bytecode system works fine and speedy enough, I too would prefer executables, so I totally agree.

Also I've posted a feature request today on Github for AGK S to have the toolbar and menu bar on the same line, similar to that of AGK2/Classic, for that would generate more room for the coding window, which is a precious commodity on smaller screens on devices such as laptops.

[Pfaber11]

Yes I code on a laptop and I like as much code on the screen as possible .

[Pakz]

If Vertex commands get added so I can procedurally generate 3d worlds then I would most likely buy agk studio.

[MikeHart]

Pakz, you can do that with the memblock commands already.

[Pfaber11]

I don't even know what a memblock is but will find out today . so far just used height maps and getting bored of them now . 3D worlds sounds great. Memblocks you say that points me hopefully in the right direction.

[Pfaber11]

To save me a lot of time and research could somebody please explain what a memblock is what it does and how to use it . Thanks . I really need the AGK tutorials but they are just so expensive . Might come down in price when AGK studio is released but I doubt it .

[plenatus]

You can buy it directly too.
http://www.digital-skills.co.uk/buyebook.html

[Derron]

You had the chance to use free software - with free libraries - and even free tutorials. Now you've choosen a paid product which ... seems to not provide examples for it's functionality.
https://www.appgamekit.com/documentation/Reference/Memblock.htm
-> no basic examples given (for the commands I checked)

I mean - they ask for your money but provide no (beginner friendly) documentation?


Check out FOSS software - or use commercial software which is not coming from "indies" (small teams). Each bigger software has commercial training tutorials/course/books but of course also a lot of video tutorials by trainees who want to advertise their own product (themself!).
FOSS software has the benefit of people trying to make an economic system around the free software - so this creates also a lot of tutorials for the same reasons (to sell their own stuff). Plus they get the awareness of people who just like to help and to create stuff: even more tutorials. For FOSS the size and popularity of the product is of course also direct proportional to the amount of guides and tutorials.


PS: It is legit to ask for money for products you spend a lot of time into. But today's user's expect way more than a "just working product". They want to get taken by the hand - full guides, tutorials for your first "First person shooter" or complete examples on how to create a fully rigged and animated character. If these tutorials are made by the creators of the product then it's ok to ask for money for this kind of tutorials - as long as the basic documentation already provides basic examples or a descriptive text explaining how to use it properly.
This gets even more important for "beginner languages" (like the languages we discuss here in the forums).



Ron

[Pfaber11]

yes hands on agk2 volume 2 is only 16.95 on there . Thinking I'll only need the volume 2 as I probably know most the stuff in volume 1 even though I've only been at this a year or so . can't find any discounted steam keys for it .Shame it's not included with AGK2 . Had a look at the part of free book that comes with AGK2 just a shame that most of it's missing .  Might buy the tutorial vol 2 tomorrow . I still think 17 quid is a lot but it could prove invaluable to me . Or now I'm thinking wait to see if a new one comes out for AGKstudio it's bound to have some new commands and I think I will be upgrading to it . I think the graphics editor won't be much use to me but I guess it's to compete with Unity.

[Pfaber11]

Yes beginners languages aka " beginners all purpose symbolic instruction code " To be honest I think Basic has come on a huge amount since the days of the zx81 which I bought when I was 15 . Paid  50 quid for it . A lot of money back then . Got myself a BBC model B in 1985 second hand for 250 quid . This I wrote my first game on . Didn't write anything again until 1991 on the Atari STe . And now I'm going at it like no body's business and I think that's down to AGK2 and it's user friendliness . Stos was excellent in it's day but still too slow to be of any real use . But the basic languages of now are really quite advanced and apps and games can now be programmed quite profesionally in it. This is why I started getting into programming again and I wish I had done it earlier at the start of AGK2 . Any views on this?
sorry for going off topic.

[Steve Elliott]

Stos was excellent in it's day but still too slow to be of any real use . But the basic languages of now are really quite advanced and apps and games can now be programmed quite profesionally in it.

Agreed.  STOS was good, but the add-on compiler was a necessity to help speed things up.  Computers are so fast now that even an interpreted language like AGK or other BASIC's are more than capable of producing some good games.

[plenatus]

[offtopic]
@pfaber: First of all I have to say that I like basic languages ​​totally.
But I made a big mistake. I waited too long to learn C ++. More than 20 years ago i first saw it and it was too much for me.
But over 2 years I've finally decided to learn C ++ properly. And if I can give you a recommendation, learn C ++. No matter what language you use afterwards, you do not have to decide because a language may be "easier".
Certainly the learning curve is higher but it's really worth it.
[/offtopic]

[blinkok]

I would add that i think c# then c++ would be a good path. c# is a little easier on memory management