[Bf-committers] BGE Future

Gavin Howard gavin.d.howard at gmail.com
Mon Jun 17 16:30:26 CEST 2013


All,

I'm starting a new thread because it looks like the previous thread
got mixed in with another thread.

I never thought that I would write a post like this, but quite
frankly, I was surprised by how quickly user opposition cropped up
from Ton's proposed changes to the BGE. At this point, I feel that I
need to speak frankly. I hope that I don't step on anyone's toes, and
I also hope that I don't offend anyone. I will be writing down the
situation as I understand it (so I will be repeating things everyone
already knows), and I will be offering my commentary and opinion. That
said, here goes.

I started using Blender regularly about a year and a half ago. From
the beginning, I started regularly observing the BlenderNation forums,
as well as other gathering places for users and devs. Even at the
start, I saw a little bit of tension between BGE users and Blender
devs. The users LOVE their engine, maybe more so than regular Blender
users love Blender. They desperately want some dev time put in the
BGE, and the devs just haven't had time or interest.

Obviously, a change has been needed. And then, Ton makes proposed
changes that sound as though the BGE is going away as BGE, even if
there is no loss of functionality. Now, I want it understood that I
have never been a BGE user. I don't have any use for it because I
don't make, or even play, video games, but there are quite a few BGE
users that want to keep the engine an engine. So they toss around the
option of creating a fork from an existing build that has many
user-submitted patches applied.

To complicate things, Daniel Stokes has a BGE project. He is now
working on an engine that may not be an engine in a year or two.
(Sorry, Daniel!) Nevertheless, it was time for Ton to put out the
roadmap. I believe the only mistake he made was that he didn't
anticipate how much the BGE means to its users. But it was definitely
time. Version 2.68 is more than halfway done, and 2.69 is just around
the corner. We need to plan for 2.7x, and we need to do it soon.

As an up-and-coming animator, being able to apply logic nodes to
animations sounds incredibly good. Having an interactive mode that is
not a game engine sounds incredibly good. Being able to do rule-based
animation (for crowds and things like that) sounds AWESOMELY good. I
LIKE the direction that Ton wants to go. Blender's main purpose is to
produce images and animations, so it fits with the philosophy as well.
However, I also understand that many people see the game engine for
what it is: a game engine.

So, here's MY proposal, if it even matters. I propose that Daniel keep
his project. Yes, I know, it may not matter in the long run. But wait
a second! His project is to add level-of-detail support to the BGE. As
an animator, if my software can automatically adjust the level of
detail for objects based on distance from the camera, I would be very
happy, so even if BGE disappears, that code won't, which means that
mainstream Blender would get that capability. That is VERY cool. And
then, his project is to do a lot of refactoring, bug fixing, and so
on. Well, the BGE apparently needs it, and even if a fork happens, I'm
sure the Blender Foundation would love to start working on interactive
mode with a codebase that has been cleaned up. Plus, a lot of that
fixing can be investigating the patches that were applied in the HG1
Build and seeing if the official BGE could use them.

So let Daniel keep the same project. At the end of the summer, when
2.69 is about to come out, let's all sit down and figure out what we
are going to do. I have no doubt that Ton will continue to want to
create interactive mode from the BGE, and I have no doubt that users
will want to fork it. So I propose this: users, spend the summer to
find someone who knows the BGE codebase that also knows Ton personally
and is willing to head up the project. (Make sure Ton knows him/her
personally as well.) Then, after the summer, they should sit down and
figure out how to make two projects out of one. If a new project were
to be made, I would want everyone to part on good terms, and since the
new project (GameBlender probably) would use a lot of Blender trunk,
there is no reason to split the two projects completely. We can be
like Krita and MyPaint, two similar open source projects with
different philosophies that coordinate with each other. It would be
great if someone can be found that can work with Ton, so the
GameBlender project could keep up-to-date with Blender trunk, which
would allow them to focus on the game engine itself. Oh, and since Ton
has run an open source project for over a decade now, he could help
the new project lead to learn the ropes.

IMO, this solution, actually splitting the projects, just might get
rid of the tension that has existed between BGE users and Blender
devs. It will allow Blender to keep its core philosophy, as well as
allow BGE users to keep their engine.

Again, I hope this email has not offended anyone or stepped on
anyone's toes. If it has, I am sorry.

God Bless,
Gavin Howard


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list