[Bf-gamedev] Proposal to (try to) get better FBX support

Wed Sep 17 19:28:49 CEST 2014

FBX -> unreal 4 / unity etc

AutoDesk changes FBX -> return -> drawing board

what about

ue4 + unity supporting .blend? something close?

*(just a thought)*

*anyone talked with them?[?]*

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The goal of this list is to help developers to do their work.
> It is not get into long winded discussions to sharpen your opinions.
>
> Stay on topic please.
>
> -Ton-
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
> Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
>
>
>
> On 17 Sep, 2014, at 18:51, Sam Brubaker wrote:
>
> > @Jacob, I'm all in favor continued BGE development, and I also have a
> stake in the BGE more than any other engine, but that's another, longer
> discussion. Maintaining interoperability between Blender and other game
> engines should be a priority in the short term, seeing as many artists and
> game studios are finding it useful as an asset creation tool, and we want
> them to keep finding it useful. As long as there is energy behind this
> particular task, I support setting aside the BGE for now if we have to (as
> long as we still keep it warm).
> >
> > @JCS, Your idea sounds sneaky. I like it. It would be so cool to "lock"
> everyone in to an open standard. For me, choosing an interchange format is
> like choosing whether to be shot in the hand or the foot, so I see plenty
> of room for improvement on this front.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Takanu <crocadillian at me.com> wrote:
> > BGE is cool for what it is, but even in spite of the licensing issues,
> firstly its nice to have the flexibility to use different engines, as
> people have different working styles and preferences.  CG artists also have
> their preferences, and can regularly use multiple programs in their own
> workflow, so asking Blender game developers and artists to focus on one
> engine seems unfair.  Plus, it would mean losing support from those who
> enjoy using Blender as a tool to develop game art, and I’m sure there’s
> quite a few small to medium sized development teams that rely on it due to
> its unique position in the market and pretty sweet modelling tools.
> >
> > Secondly however, BGE is lacking in many features the major 3 engines
> support, including console and tablet platform support.  I’m sure some
> programmers with the expertise and drive could make porting options and
> other features available in the future, but a good chunk of game designers
> and studios just want to focus on design as much as possible when choosing
> a game engine over an in-house solution.  Avoiding the big business waffle
> some peeps like to use when discussing Blender as much as possible, BGE
> just isn't an attractive offer like Blender is as a modelling and CG tool,
> as the game development market is very different from the CG one - there
> are many high quality, easily accessible and cheap options for game engines
> and development software, and most of them are better, if not to a
> significant degree, to BGE.
> >
> > I still think BGE is an awesome idea, but as it stands at the moment
> it’s not a viable option 😜
> >
> > Sent from Windows Mail
> >
> > From: Jacob Merrill
> > Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎17‎ ‎September‎ ‎2014 ‎16‎:‎57
> > To: bf-gamedev at blender.org
> >
> > Why not work on the bge?
> >
> > with the exception of screen space normals, and efficient draw call
> batching, I don't see any fatal flaws with it,
> >
> > What is stopping it from being great? it's not GPL, as far as I can
> tell, as most game developers are not writing anything that has not been
> done before, and if they are, it's not like someone can't copy the idea
> without access to the code.....
> >
> > here is my own work in the engine, (almost alone at this point)
> > this is a walking ragdoll, that supports both ik animation, and physical
> scene interaction,
> > when bullet 3 hits the main stage as people upgrade video cards, you
> should in theory be able to run 100's of walking ragdolls.
> >
> > why not a open project?
> > (I am biased) but my own project looks pretty good :D
> >
> > I have worked for a year on this for free.....:P
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Toni Alatalo <toni at playsign.net> wrote:
> > could Assimp help here? it has an internal format, and can read &
> > write many formats to / from it. i don't know the format / internal
> > structure but have understood that it's simple and straightforward and
> > suitable for games.
> >
> > afaik they have a json format now but are interested in a binary
> > format as well. i've used the json format succesfully with three.js in
> > a test (converted from fbx to assimp2json)
> >
> > regarding Collada, glTF may address some of the problems by being a
> > more restricted spec and by having an efficient binary format for the
> > geom arrays (and json for other stuff, no xml). it might be even nice
> > to just write glTF directly from Blender if the current solution of
> > going via collada2gltf is problematic. at least those Khronos
> > standards have open specs..
> >
> > 2cently yours,
> > ~Toni
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Sam Brubaker <sam at worldsday.org> wrote:
> > > @JCS, I really like your ideas here, but I still wonder if a "15th
> Standard"
> > > might be more strategically sound, even if it's totally insane.
> > >
> > > My biggest concern about spending so many resources on FBX is that
> B-devs
> > > would be working on something that does not belong to Blender or any
> > > equivalent NFP organization. It belongs to Autodesk. Autodesk is free
> to
> > > break its own format however it likes and nullify all the work we do
> > > catching up, which is kind of scary. All FBX development on our end
> > > indirectly helps a company that is not helping us at all.
> > >
> > > Of course, our goal should be utility for users, not vindictiveness;
> > > improving FBX support may be our best move in the short term. But what
> about
> > > the long term?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Jens Christian Restemeier
> > > <jens.restemeier at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Another thought:
> > >> What about porting Blender's FBX code into a clean C++ library,
> without
> > >> dependencies on Blender or the official SDK? Blender could then use it
> > >> through some Python bindings.
> > >> Basically just a loader/writer, and a high level interface to go
> through
> > >> the scenegraph or to build a scene graph. With an MIT or BSD style
> license
> > >> to encourage people to use it over the official SDK.
> > >>
> > >> That we we have guaranteed interoperability with anyone using the
> library,
> > >> and improvements benefit both Blender and applications using it.
> > >> And it would open a way to sneak in a better format at a later point.
> You
> > >> could define a clean legacy-free format, and any application that
> uses the
> > >> API just needs a recompile to use it.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20140917/6f3a2701/attachment.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 385 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-gamedev/attachments/20140917/6f3a2701/attachment.gif 