[Bf-gamedev] Features list revisited - projects for 2015

[Sam Brubaker]

Hello, all-- I noticed in this thread that baking is one of the current
priorities for game development, and if that is the case then this bug
ought to be addressed as well:

https://developer.blender.org/T33730

It is not uncommon to bake textures using one UV map and use another UV map
for diffuse, etc. However, if a user wishes to use these maps in a material
node tree in the BGE, it fails at runtime. This is a serious hindrance.
Sorry if this reminder is obnoxious.

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 4:15 AM, Nahuel Belich <casillapforos at yahoo.com.ar>
wrote:

> Hi:
> I agree with most of the items listed, besides that, uv editing it self
> could get a bit more love, for example
> -islands groups
> several times game models use overlaps uvs to save space, but operatos
> like   average islands or pack islands moves every island independent witch
> could be annoying most of the times if there are many overlapped chunks.
> -Concave packing
> Atm blender packs based on a square shape around the uv island, its
> efficient and quick but many times waste space, especially if there are big
> circular shapes.
>
> This two items would help with uv editing a lot, especially after getting
> (^-^) multi uv editing, that could be a mess with out a few administrative
> tools inside the uv editor.
>
> ----
>
> Big pluses to:
>
> -bake, its nice but having to buy an addon to get multi bake doesn't sound
> nice, maybe not the extreame bake tool but at least set a few objects to
> several outputs and the possibility to bake one object or texture at a
> time, in order to avoid Ao or unwanted shadows, and also an important one
> antialising for Cycles Bake
>
> -Exporting sistems conectivity. ..  yes fbx, i dont like it much due to
> its nature to change every year and waste time in development and twiking,
> but its important to have a way to get skinned meshes or if it posible also
> shape keys or vertex animation to other softwares,
>
> -View-port
>
> Nahuel Belich
>
>
>   El Miércoles, 5 de noviembre, 2014 17:26:18, Takanu Kyriako <
> crocadillian at me.com> escribió:
>
>
>   @Timur Ariman - Well FBX I/O to my knowledge is still being worked on,
> but I personally use Blender exclusively for my modelling workflow, and
> never need to switch or depend on FBX heavy features apart from exporting
> to a game engine.  I guess it depends on how many people use other 3D
> modelling packages that require FBX import, and it would be good for other
> peeps on the mailing list to chime in on that 😜
>
> Personally id want Multi-Object UV editing first, as complicated assets
> like characters rely on inter-dependant components and this feature would
> remove some of the technical workarounds required to unwrap them nicely.
>
> Having a way to manage game assets within a scene in a way that is
> non-destructive is my second requested feature.  The grouping features
> inside Blender are nice as a semantic, organising feature, but game assets
> and I’m sure other complex CG assets too are a complex collection of items
> with modifiers and other operations that you might not necessarily
> just want to merge together just to keep them together and perform further
> operations on like UV editing.  I’ve been working on an addon for a while
> that utilises grouping, parenting and other constraints to do this (
> https://github.com/Takanu/Capsule , currently redesigning it to make it
> much more user-friendly), but enabling some sort of ‘composite object’ type
> with a hierarchy of separate objects would help organise and construct
> detailed objects, but recognise them as one object.
>
> PBR would be my third request, as designing textures in Blender apart from
> the base colour channel is a bit difficult and irrelevant.  Although I’m
> using Substance Designer 4 atm for most of my texture building, it would
> still be nice when building scenes to be able to preview basic PBR
> materials to get a feel for what I'm making and how it will look.
>
> *From:* Timur Ariman <timur_ariman at yahoo.de>
> *Sent:* ‎Wednesday‎, ‎5‎ ‎November‎ ‎2014 ‎11‎:‎35
> *To:* bf-gamedev at blender.org
>
> Hi all,
>
> referencing to the Gamedev list and the points which were written there, a
> slight change in prioritisation could be like this;
>
> number 1
> OBJ/FBX import/export native to c++
>
> number 2
> "Bake by Material ID"
>
> number 3
> PBR viewer (with metalness/specular workflow)
>
>
>
> the prioritising is because many game artists already use various tools
> together and have to rely on fast I/O of meshes.
>
> Bake by Material ID is important because the tools from Quixel and
> Allegorithmic and various other tools use this to quickly assign materials
> onto areas.
>
> PBR viewer inside of Blender can be a nice eye candy but integrating it at
> this stage is kind of a moot point while ignoring the abviously unsexy but
> necceary underlying parts like a fast I/O or Material Id baking etc
> so that an integrated PBR viewer could really start to shine.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-gamedev mailing list
> Bf-gamedev at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-gamedev mailing list
> Bf-gamedev at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-gamedev/attachments/20141106/e3f4caa2/attachment.htm