[=;442474]
Not sure about the implementation details, although why would the static meshes be less optimised then as they are?
[/]
Hah.
As far as I know BSP tools originally were created out of need to have level represented as BSP Tree. Brush like structure is easier to turn into bsp trees than polygonal soup, due to the fact that brush often is convex object. The point of BSP trees is hidden surface removal and occlusion culling.
Scene constructed from static meshes will require something like Umbra to bake occlusion info and results will be worse compared to CSG scene where you can make it perfect. Currently used PVS removal technology in UE4 actually may be inferior to both Umbra and BSP trees because it relies on previous frame data, which results in flickering (reported in multiple threads). Unreal’s “solution” for is to create low-detail “filler” meshes within level, which is quite ridiculous, also built-in occlusion mechanism that can bake occlusion data essentially stores it in 2 dimensional form, making it useless for highly vertical scenes. Source engine does not have kind of flickering.
Regardless of original purpose of BSP trees it turned out that guys who made original bsp-based editors did a good job and came up with great tools. So people want CSG now, regardless bsp or not bsp being used for PVS removal. Occlusion shenanigans in UE4 is different sotry.
[=;442474]
I think that there should be better integration. So that I don’t need to edit in 3d package -> export from 3d package -> import to ue4 -> place in level. It should be edit in 3d package -> change windows to ue4 and see your change populated immediatelly.
[/]
I think direction is a dead end. Most of the 3d software is not geared towards level design.