Is Geometry 2.0 Still a Possibility?

I haven’t heard anything about it on the forums for quite some time now. I was just wondering if Epic was still planning to implement it.

~ Jason

What is it supposed to be? Can you link me some information about it?

I don’t think we will see it anytime soon.
It was moved to 2016 and 2017 backlog.
I guess team will work on Sequencer improvements and Niagara development in 2016

For simplicity’s sake:

Here are the threads in case you’re interested (they’re a pretty good read; I suggest you go through them):

  1. Geometry Editor 2.0 suggestion thread - Feedback & Requests - Epic Developer Community Forums

  2. (VIDEO) UE4's Geometry Mode is inadequate when compared with that of Quake 1 - Feedback & Requests - Epic Developer Community Forums

~ Jason

Shame. I’ve been looking forward to it for quite a few years now…

Sequencer improvements and Niagara are welcome, but I’d being lying if I said I wasn’t a bit disappointed.

Thanks for the link by the way, I’ll have to keep my eye on that.

~ Jason

Geo 2.0 would make much better to build world objects than BSP. Keep thumbs up for Epic plans about Geometry 2.0

I know!

I’m holding out hope!

~ Jason

So basically a more advanced 3D editor within UE4?

I don’t understand why anyone would want to reinvent the wheel inside UE4?

Why wouldn’t you just learn Blender or Max or Maya?

Iteration speed. I know how to use Maya, but no matter how fast I get at it, it’ll always be faster to use BSP tools for blocking in a level and iterating on it, as opposed to worrying about the tedium of exporting/importing every mesh, setting up collision, and then finally being able to run around in-engine to properly judge something as simple as scale. An improvement to the usability and speed of those tools would go a long way to helping the workflow of the initial map design.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

~ Jason

Just to add onto what @Daniel.Wenograd said,

The last thing I want to do is create everything in an external 3D program to prototype a level, and then have to go back into that program if something doesn’t work.

It’s all about ease-of-use and having one program (UE4) instead of two to block out levels would be great.

That’s the reason maps in Source can be incredibly easy to make.

~ Jason

In a sense; not on par with MAX, but something that can parallel Source engine tools would be great.

~ Jason

You may want to send two envelopes…just in case.

~ Jason

P.S. I had no idea their backlog was so large…

I haven’t really played around with Lumberyard (or Cryengine for that matter): What is their level editor like?

Is it similar to Hammer?

~ Jason

Dude, you know you can multi-quote instead of making five posts in a row, right? Just hit the button on the right of ‘Reply with Quote’ to add anything to your quickly reply box.

…That’s a joke, right?

~ Jason

I would prefer something like Unity AssetPostprocessor implemented in UE4. You could then script everything to automate all that stuff, how it should be imported, how it should be instatiated etc.

UE4 would be so amazing with Geo 2.0 similar like this and ideas from Quake.

Currently i very slowly build my favorite game multiplayer map example back from 2003 or so but Geo 2.0 would make things lot easier, i hate external 3d software use. It is just my personal project currently just for reminder.

Thats you could try probuilder when it comes to UE4