Languages & Coding > AGK

AGK Studio - Feature Requests..

(1/5) > >>

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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version