next »

[GameEngineer]

BEWARE : After having read this thread, few days ago I installed the last stable version of Panda3D on Wind 7 64bits. I discovered today that it removed all previous entries in my Path environnement variable. 

The bug have been reported and filed for some time but not fixed yet. The problem is that not everyone gets it. So if your read this thread, you might want to save your path infos somewhere before installing Panda3D.

If someone is interested, this bug has been fixed.

Thank you for this info!  I just registered here after indiegamer forums completely ignored my attempts to register.  As a coder who likes to get his hands dirty in the code I have been leaning toward the C4 engine despite its cost.  I looked at Panda3D but didn't really give it an honest stare.  I will initially install Panda3D to an old WinXP laptop but eventually it will find a place on my home desktop, Win7 64. 

[junx]

Just thought id add a note, CONSTRUCT have now released Construct 2, which seems great so far and is constantly being updated, codes in html 5 but gives multiple export options for multiple platforms.

[Roskaa]

Am I the only one that would rather just create there own? I understand fully that it takes time but i'm, just jeez. Would rather create my own and fully understand the concept of the engine. Sorry if this offended anyone!! 

[eigenbom]

@Roskaa, why would that offend anyone? Of course, you could also say the same thing about using the standard libraries of a language and build your own list classes, maths functions, etc. The level you choose is up to you. :D

[Falmil]

Am I the only one that would rather just create there own? I understand fully that it takes time but i'm, just jeez. Would rather create my own and fully understand the concept of the engine.

The thing is, writing an engine takes A LOT of time. If you just want to make games, it isn't really worth it to reinvent the wheel. Even if you understand the engine you make, it still will need a ton of tweaks and additional modules and such to bring it up to the level of an existing engine. You could understand an engine better simply by using it and playing around with it.

(not offended)

[rivon]

Do you guys know of any editor-based engine like Unity but where scripting is not component-based?

UPDATE: I've taken a look at some of the engines and it looks like Maratis, C4 Engine and Shiva would be suitable. Maybe even NeoAxis.

By the way, C4 Engine should be updated. Standard Version which supports commercial games now costs $250 and the Pro version $800. It also supports Linux now (and it looks like everything is supported, all the editor stuff and code development).

[SolarLune]

Do you guys know of any editor-based engine like Unity but where scripting is not component-based?

Blender's an editor-based engine, and the scripting is object-based (each object can run scripts, though you can write a script to loop through a set of objects and execute logic for them to some extent).

[moi]

UDK ?

[rivon]

I found one big disadvantage of C4 engine. Before you can start developing, you have to buy the engine which is bad for most of indie developers as they might not have money.
With most of the other commercial engines it's much better because you can download them freely, develop your entire game and when you're finished, just buy the license and publish your game.
That is very important because unless you're experienced developer who finished some 3D games, you don't know if you'll finish the game and the fact is that you might not be able to finish it because of some factors you may not be able to influence. Therefore you would waste $250...

[eyeliner]

DXStudio?

[rivon]

DXStudio?

No, that's Windows only. But yeah don't worry about me anymore. The problem is solved for now.

[nklsrh]

Dunno if i missed it, but what about the Source SDK? could someone elaborate on it like it was done for all the other engines?

im a big fan of valve and like the look of their tools, but i need to know if im sticking myself in a corner

[dgough]

Mikademus, can you add gameplay3d to the open source engine list? Thank you.

Name	Licence	Supported Platforms	Scope, Intent and useage	Pros	Cons
gameplay3d	Open Source (Apache 2.0)	Win/OSX/BlackBerry 10/PlayBook 2.0/ Android/iOS	Complete game solution.	C++ API Lua scripting bullet physics COLLADA and FBX support animation system with vertex skinning Shader-based material system Declarative UI 3D audio	No linux support (yet) No integrated networking No console support

[Richard Kain]

Dunno if i missed it, but what about the Source SDK?

Ugh. The Source SDK is an option, certainly. And the tools integrated into Source are quite capable. It isn't exactly the most user-friendly engine to work with, though. And it is known for having a very awkward asset pipeline. If you don't have a copy of SoftImage, it will be very difficult for you to get custom model assets into a Source game. This is especially true now that the learning edition of SoftImage has been discontinued.

The Source engine is designed for a very specific set of graphical and coding tools. Not having copies of these commercial software packages makes it much harder to work with. This is part of the reason why a lot of smaller studios have avoided tying themselves to the Source engine. It really is a shame, as Source still has some of the best lip-syncing and scripting tools of any engine.

[_Madk]

I just wanted to drop this here. It should be able to compile to windows, mac, and linux, and run on archaic hardware. And I mean c'mon, it's ANSI. What more could you possibly ask for?