[=;442199]
If only!Here’s you rudely throwing around baseless insults again. How do you be a moderator and think is the way to behave? is a game development community. Stop calling people’s experience and expertise into question because you’re having trouble understanding what they’re talking about.
[/]
Thanks for completely ignoring what I said and some how pulling an insult out of that. There’s definitely people who are asking for because they lack the skills or experience to use the current workflow. Being an experienced developer asking for a new is one thing, but that’s not the case for here.
[=;442232]
People are free to give their opinion on engine developments–for example, there were people wanting less new features and more performance improvements.
There’s no reason to think that people will be hostile to posting about an–having an opposite opinion isn’t hostility, it’s simply the other side of the discussion. The forums have rules to avoid hostility, notice I’m not insulting anyone or doing something against the rules.
[/]
Would you kindly just leave the thread?
There’s nothing to discuss.
Your arguments can be interpreted “I think that anyone who would want bsp tools is a noob and should not be taking seriously, therefore I will oppose the bsp for all eternity”. I can’t read minds over tcp/ip, so I don’t know if that’s what you MEANT to say. But that’s what it LOOKS like you’re saying. At the same time you do not appear to understand WHAT people want, HOW they would use those tools and WHY. As far as I can tell you just don’t get it.
Thanks for lowering my opinion about UE4 community and forums. is supposed to be the place where people help each other, instead we waste time pointlessly arguing about OBVIOUS things with a MODERATOR of all people!
I understand what people want, but given that it’s a bigger to work on and it wouldn’t benefit all that many people I’ve suggested an alternative that would benefit pretty much . is something that would be much better: m2u UE4 wip3 on Vimeo
Being able to do faster updates between the apps would allow you to much more quickly use the extensive modeling tools available in 3D software while still allowing you the benefit of having things in the editor.
That’s a cool thing, and should defs be explored more, but in another thread, 'cause it doesn’t serve the need we’re talking about, which would also benefit many, many people.
It’s like the guy says, ya don’t get it. You can get it! It’s all here in the thread, you just gotta reach out and get it. It wants to get got!
Being able to do faster updates between the apps would allow you to much more quickly use the extensive modeling tools available in 3D software while still allowing you the benefit of having things in the editor.
[/]
The you suggested actually may have higher ongoing development/maintenance costs than fixing bsp, AND it will only help people who use very specific software packages.
Either way, please submit that as separate request in different thread, because it has nothing to do with BSP tools.
Also, it’ll be greatly appreciated if you just leave thread alone and stop arguing with people about BSP. All the necessary info was provided to you already.
[]
Also, I disagree that 3D tools can’t be used to design a level, the only thing they lack is the functionality (mainly things like collision being included by default and having to export meshes to UE4 to use them).
[/]
You clearly just haven’t used level design tools to do level design before. Not holding that against you, but y’know… you’re making an argument without the context to understand what it means.
[=;442251]
That’s a cool thing, and should defs be explored more, but in another thread, 'cause it doesn’t serve the need we’re talking about, which would also benefit many, many people.
It’s like the guy says, ya don’t get it. You can get it! It’s all here in the thread, you just gotta reach out and get it. It wants to get got!
Post back when ya got it.
[/]
Explain how it wouldn’t help? From what I can see, a 3D app has far better tools available than what BSP has in UE4 right now–for level design of course it’s missing things like gameplay elements, lighting, Blueprints, etc. But for the geometry itself which is what you’re asking for it’s far better than what we have now. It might not be the workflow you prefer, but it’s certainly a better choice. So if it can overcome the only downside which is that you have to export the meshes to UE4 to be able to see them in-game then it’s a solution to the.
[=;442253]
The you suggested actually may have higher ongoing development/maintenance costs than fixing bsp
[/]
In what way? Or are you just making a guess?
Also consider that would be of use to more than the people that want to use BSP, so if it’s more effort then it might be worth it.
[=;442253]
AND it will only help people who use very specific software packages.
[/]
They only have to cover Maya, 3ds Max, and Blender. All of which have Python support and that would cover 99% of users
You clearly just haven’t used level design tools to do level design before. Not holding that against you, but y’know… you’re making an argument without the context to understand what it means.
[/]
I have, and I’d much rather use a 3D modeling app that gives me far more tools to use.
In my opinion is right that there shouldn’t be big emphasis placed on getting bsp better. 3D modelling package integration is needed the most.
Even if you get bsp tools, modelling a level in bsp will be at best as hard as modelling the same level in a 3d modelling package. I think that your points about lightmass are true, but is also a part of “make the integration better”.
The problem with source engine is, bsp is , yes, it’s optimised. But… static meshes are inefficient. As far as I remember they even wrote “Use bsp to make your levels, use static meshes only for a little bit of decoration”.
I think that with better integration of 3d packages, you could use blender for example, as you would use bsp, and the changes would be synced immediatelly. There’s no reason to try to recreate what 3d packages do, it’s just inefficient.
[]
From what I can see, a 3D app has far better tools available than what BSP has in UE4 right now–for level design of course it’s missing things like gameplay elements, lighting, Blueprints, etc. But for the geometry itself which is what you’re asking for it’s far better than what we have now.
[/]
Modelling *is *a better option than the BSP tools that are in Unreal right now, yes. That’s because the current BSP tools are really really bad. If they were on par with Source’s, modelling would be a less good option.
@Cube: You have a number of points in there that are tied up with other engines and technicalities. It doesn’t matter what’s efficient/inefficient in the context of the Source engine - is a different context. There’s no reason why an implementation of BSP-style geometry tools in Unreal would have to be any less efficient performance-wise than building the level out of static meshes.
Do you guys have “I oppose bsp” club or something?
[=;442263]
you could use blender for example,
[/]
Nuh-uh. You couldn’t. I know blender.
You need environment that can efficiently process large numbers of additive/subtractive shapes and resize those shapes which will result in seamless textures all around the model. Blender miserably fails at that.
The closest kind of 3d software package that sorta tries close to that is sketchup, but it still ain’t it.
Also, the only specialized tool right now is valve hammer, plus older or half-finished opensource projects like “sledge”, etc.
It is different approach. Instead of dealing with polygons, you deal with CSGs (constructive solid geometry). Trying to replicate CSGs with polygonal tools won’t work well, you’ll be fighting the tools and working at quarter of possible speed, if not slower.
The only package that could possibly be useful for that kind of thing is Houdini, but I don’t know for sure.
In short:
You use 3d modeling tools when you make individual characters or object or small environments.
You will WANT CSG-based tools and bsps when you build cities, labyrinths, and the like.
The funny thing is that since “let’s make everything out of static meshes” became a thing I started seeing more of significantly simpler and linear levels in games. Could be a coincidence, of course, but you never know.
I created SuperGrid due to lack of usability in BSP. Do you model with SuperGrid or BSP? Hell no! But it definitely helps to cut the corner, when your objective is to create level, game flow on your level and etc. You don’t want to be distracted by visual details or complex modeling features, the goal is creating fun/good-to-play areas with field of view/obstacles/game flow and etc in mind.
Just check out article. is 1st stage of level design and it requires appropriate tools, which is not modeling packages or BSP with improved modeling features.(It should be extended to help level prototyping, don’t get me wrong. I just don’t think that mega-modeling-tool inside UE4 could help in process)
[=;442273]
I created SuperGrid due to lack of usability in BSP. Do you model with SuperGrid or BSP? Hell no! But it definitely helps to cut the corner, when your objective is to create level, game flow on your level and etc. You don’t want to be distracted by visual details or complex modeling features, the goal is creating fun/good-to-play areas with field of view/obstacles/game flow and etc in mind.
Just check out article. is 1st stage of level design and it requires appropriate tools, which is not modeling packages or BSP with improved modeling features.(It should be extended to help level prototyping, don’t get me wrong. I just don’t think that mega-modeling-tool inside UE4 could help in process)
[/]
I guess it means that different people want the same thing (BSP) for different reasons and different purposes.
Which means it something that is worth improving and working on.
Excuse my jump in, But being a level designer and coming from source i find the unreal CSG block tool really slow when doing a level and worse when trying to do a multilevel map, i agree with that UE4 is geared more towards meshes and that the best looking levels are made using 3d model programs but my work flow as a level designer is 1. sketch a rough picture on paper 2. block out the map to get a game play feel 3. set up scripted sequences and action settings 4. detail out the map and do the lighting, using source i can block out a map in 1 or 2 hours doing 2 or 3 run around in it to tweak it out, trying to do the same thing in UE4 would take 4 or more hours to archive which is very unproductive when with UE4 you also have to create and BP or code in the game sequences, as for use a 3d modeling program to to the design i cant see me using 3dMax let say just to block out a level before finally detailing it, so to sum things up yes the CSG UE4 tools need improving even if the base csg level isn’t used in the final game produced
wow, its looks like thread got a little heated, I think should try to be a bit calmer.
as for the BSP tools, I for one think they do need to be improved even if its only for faster prototyping.
[=;441537]
There’s no point in bringing up high-budget AAA titles
[/]
I don’t know about anyone else but I consider the borderlands game series AAA and they use quite a bit of BSP:).
[]
Unity does that (monitors changes to file), and that is very annoying , because every time you re-save some file, you have to wait till editor editor finishes (re)importing it, before you actually can do anything in the level. If the file is an fbx skeleton with dozen animation, pause can be significant. Now, UE4 fbx import is very slow, so will get on your nerves very quickly.
[/]
what if you could choose which files UE4 monitored and when it re-imports them?, maybe even have “re-import selected” button so UE4 would either auto-import when it detects a change to a file… or it only re-imports any files being monitored when you press the button, that way you get the features without the annoyance plus the you would have total control.
what if you could choose which files UE4 monitored and when it re-imports them?, maybe even have “re-import selected” button so UE4 would either auto-import when it detects a change to a file… or it only re-imports any files being monitored when you press the button, that way you get the features without the annoyance plus the you would have total control.
[/]
I think it will just add clutter to UI instead of being useful .
In unity you can drop files into project through file manager, directly. Because of that auto-reimport makes sense. In UE4 you aren’t supposed to do that to begin with, so monitoring one specific file doesn’t really fit into workflow (let’s say source file got moved elsewhere. 2 weeks later it is replaced by another file with the same name. Now what?).
It is pretty clear you do NOT. Why do you continue to rudely battle ? As a moderator you should just step out (and quite frankly if I were Epic you would no longer be a moderator do to insults and attitude).
Just want to point out that many of the best and most popular games ever made used BSP for level design, which in and of itself is an objectively good argument for considering including it. For example: every COD ever made (including fan fav COD4), every Quake game, every Doom game, every Half-Life game (including 3 yukyuk - but, seriously, Source 2 uses it), Portal 1 and 2, L4D1+2, TF2. Essentially every game somehow related to the idTech tree. I know not in the world likes all these games but it is undeniable that many of them have had an enormous impact on the industry, developers, even the world!
Arguing against supporting tools that use technology is quite silly.
It’s the design methodology and optimisation of the source engine. If you pick a source engine triple A game, it uses mainly BSP and meshes for decoration. If you take an unreal engine (3,4) triple A game, it uses mainly meshes.