Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

(VIDEO) UE4's Geometry Mode is inadequate when compared with that of Quake 1

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I don't see anything about them updating their terms-of-use to allow for commercial usage outside of Steam Workshop though, which is still going to be a deal-breaker for a lot of folks. Do correct me if I'm wrong regarding that, too.
    I recently skyped with Andy Brown from the foundry. According to him this is Modo 10 in a nutshell:

    - EULA : Commercial for-profit use allowed for individual use, or individuals of a sole-proprietorship organization where only one license of each variant is allowed
    (So you can use it commercially. No ties to the steam world needed)

    - OBJ and FBX export limit expanded to 100k polys
    (which is ok for most assets, even characters....)

    Limited Bake and Render resolution to 4k
    (4k textures are also fine by me. I rarely use 8k textures.....)

    -Command eval options in the system menu disabled
    -Remove Commands, Scripts and results from Command History panel removed except Undo and History
    (Its not that super critical to the workflow. More a convienience thing)

    -Python editor and third-party script loading disabled
    (Hmm. I never have felt the need for scripting in modo. The built in tools always did the job so far.)

    -Third-party plugin loading disabled
    (again. modo has so many built in tools and poular scripts are integrated in the engine. There used to be a script for aligning verts in a a circle. "Seneca's perfect circle script". Now its part of the deform tools.
    The same with mesh fracturing. Built in, no script needed.)

    -Kit management options from the system menu disabled
    (there are still many good ways to organize and manage assets)

    -Export is FBX and OBJ only
    (Well, FBX is what UE wants.. So no real issue at all)

    -Can only save in .lxf format, although can still import all formats.
    (means it will work fullly together with all installations of modo indie. And you can import work from the "full" modo. You just cant make something in modo indie and then open it with a full version of modo, but if you have access to a full version, you dont the indie in the first place...)

    -Image save formats limited to .png and .jpg, .tiff and .exr
    (also not that big of an issue. Since texturing and material assembly is so much more pleasent in MARI, all I ususally export for initial work, are the UV maps, which can be exported as EPS)

    Network Rendering is disabled
    (I use it to model assets for UE and not to create stunning still images with VRay, so not a big issue)

    Comment


      Originally posted by KVogler View Post
      - EULA : Commercial for-profit use allowed for individual use, or individuals of a sole-proprietorship organization where only one license of each variant is allowed
      (So you can use it commercially. No ties to the steam world needed)
      Oh cool, so it's basically a single-seat license. Yeah, honestly, I had looked at Modo Indie in the past (iirc back on 801), and was really put off by the limitations. Glad that they seemed to have made a lot of strides to make it a more useful product for indie devs. WIll definitely have to check out in the future.

      Comment


        [MENTION=12918]KVogler[/MENTION]

        You are looking at it wrong way. You might know and use MODO, but I use Blender. There is no incentive for me to learn another package (and invest into it), as I already have UE4 to master and keep mastering my skills with Blender. There are many many people who use Maya, Max, Blender or don't use any of it and are simply level designers.

        If UE4 has had good CSG tools, these non-MODO folks would simply use UE4 with its tools and not have to waste time learning yet another package (I am still 100% certain MODO is no faster at level design than Blender; and I mean level design, not making elaborate static meshes to decorate levels).

        That's for indies. As for industry (working for a game dev company) - you might end up in a company that doesn't use MODO and doesn't allow you to use your software. With UE4 having proper CSG tools put everyone on the same board. Passing CSG based level between departments and companies is seamless, while anything modeled requires source assets and both parties having same modeling software and same skills.

        Good CSG tools is an essential component UE4 must have.

        Comment


          You got to be joking to try to use Blender for making games.... Because its FBX pipeline is all screwy, it messes up the rigs bones when you import or export skeletons meshes into it, it skewers the armature bones when you export out to FBX and when you go onto the Skeleton Preview in Unreal from Montage the bone corruption Blender caused by skewing and rotating around the bones in the armature of the Skeleton that you get a deformed looking skeleton rig in unreal but it looks perfectly all normal in Blender until you look at location and rotation values and see they have been changed... Blender maybe free, but its FBX pipeline is messed up. It also has problems importing in skeleton meshes exported from 3ds MAX. Blender has issues with meshes that have bones it rotates the bones in the armature, , it even creates multiple root bones with the bone names.

          This is just not normal, its FBX code is not working properly with the Autodesk FBX code and making things go haywire.. it even has some troubles with make Human rigs as well causing some twisting of limbs ect....... It couldnt' even import my doctor model properly and he was a max FBX model with bones although when you put him through FBX viewer, his mesh and skeleton is all perfectly fine.. On importing him, Blender gave him multiple root bones of his bone names that looked like porcupine spikes sticking out of his body and also threw his hair and eyes all down on the ground and supersized them. So I gave up on Blender with trying to get my Max FBX rigged meshes into Unreal because Blender couldn't
          import it correctly...
          Last edited by tozan; 09-21-2016, 09:53 PM.

          Comment


            I haven't used BSP brushes since HL-1, when hammer editor was the thing. I can't say that I feel realistic need for any kind of built in geometry tools in UE4. I got used to doing blockouts in modelling packages. But I have to admit, for some reason I miss that time, when whole level was constructed right in the editor.

            Comment


              I drop this too over here this video explain all what i wanted to show here about special non cubic shapes


              *Not my video, credits to the original author.
              Hevedy - Instance Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/hevedyinstances
              Hevedy - Image Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/imagetools

              Comment


                Can't say I miss patched. It's more like mesh modeling than CSG.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by motorsep View Post
                  Can't say I miss patched. It's more like mesh modeling than CSG.
                  Well is an upgraded version of the ID Tech 3 radiant I used that years ago and is pretty cool to make caves, terrain details etc
                  Hevedy - Instance Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/hevedyinstances
                  Hevedy - Image Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/imagetools

                  Comment


                    Its basically mesh editing that is shown in the video. Not really much boolean CSG going on there...
                    On that level, a 3d package is surely more powerfull than what is shown in the video.

                    but I use Blender. There is no incentive for me to learn another package
                    If you know blender, you will find Modo very easy to learn.

                    As for industry (working for a game dev company) - you might end up in a company that doesn't use MODO and doesn't allow you to use your software. With UE4 having proper CSG tools put everyone on the same board. Passing CSG based level between departments and companies is seamless, while anything modeled requires source assets and both parties having same modeling software and same skills.
                    Well, that argument is flawed.
                    For example, I know offhand 3 companies that would not let you use blender for example.
                    Also, in the industry, it is not a problem to work with source assets. Thats why FBX is so well used.
                    Especially to be seamless between companies. There are tons of software packages out there for 3d asset creation.
                    They would all be useless for UE custom CSG geometry.
                    Usually levels are not "passed around"; not in the more matured workflows.
                    Lastly, not everyone needs to have the same modelling skill because not everybody is doing the same job on the model.
                    Besides, wouldnt everybody then need the same "csg skill" level?

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by KVogler View Post
                      Its basically mesh editing that is shown in the video. Not really much boolean CSG going on there...
                      On that level, a 3d package is surely more powerfull than what is shown in the video.
                      Is basically about have a plug and play level edit, that you can press play if you don't like something back to the editor and edit something auto UV and collisions generation and press play another time and test the level and a control about the sizes and vertex locations.
                      Hevedy - Instance Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/hevedyinstances
                      Hevedy - Image Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/imagetools

                      Comment


                        Just found this thread, and as people said before, unreal brush editor sucks, and while I used hammer, it took way more time to do an level compared to make it from a 3D program.

                        Also, another problem is dealing with detailed enviroment, to make detailed walls and etc would take way much more time in brush editors than in an 3D program, that's why I think everyone gave up on them and decided to use only for prototyping levels.

                        Not sure about the Radiant from BO3, but if solves these problems, then it will be a nice feature for unreal, one of the advantages in the brush editors were the pre made UVs, so you could already apply the texture on it.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Pavomba View Post
                          Also, another problem is dealing with detailed enviroment, to make detailed walls and etc would take way much more time in brush editors than in an 3D program, that's why I think everyone gave up on them and decided to use only for prototyping levels.
                          If you are skilled 3D artist, sure, it might not take whole a lot of time to model nice detailed mesh. However, taking into account sculpting/baking/texturing, it will take more time to get level done (from idea to final implementation) and requires specific highly developed skill.

                          With brush based level design you don't need to know any modeling. Texturing is blazing fast as you don't need any unwrapping/baking/painting to do. You can utilize tiling textures is many ways and reuse them on the go, while with 3D models you have to back to 3D app and re-UV map you mesh.

                          Brush based level design doesn't work for all games of course, but it works for many many games, especially for indies as they don't have whole a lot of resources and time to go after highly detailed meshes.

                          Comment


                            With brush based level design you don't need to know any modeling.
                            If that is your opinion, then I wouldnt call it "modeling".
                            to make detailed walls and etc would take way much more time in brush editors than in an 3D program
                            Indeed. And you are stuck with the default unwrapping for textures.

                            Texturing is blazing fast as you don't need any unwrapping/baking/painting to do
                            And thats where the performance goes out of the window.

                            Im currently making a turorial on how to do fast level prototyping without brushes.
                            Ill post the link when its online

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by motorsep View Post
                              If you are skilled 3D artist, sure, it might not take whole a lot of time to model nice detailed mesh. However, taking into account sculpting/baking/texturing, it will take more time to get level done (from idea to final implementation) and requires specific highly developed skill.

                              With brush based level design you don't need to know any modeling. Texturing is blazing fast as you don't need any unwrapping/baking/painting to do. You can utilize tiling textures is many ways and reuse them on the go, while with 3D models you have to back to 3D app and re-UV map you mesh.

                              Brush based level design doesn't work for all games of course, but it works for many many games, especially for indies as they don't have whole a lot of resources and time to go after highly detailed meshes.
                              Indeed, it's way faster to apply textures, but at least for my case, it took way more time to create an level in hammer/jackhammer than model it on Maya, even with the UV hassle it would end being faster, but if an brush editor for unreal have those problems fixed, and including easy polygon control, extrude and splines, it would surely be amazing.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Pavomba View Post
                                Indeed, it's way faster to apply textures, but at least for my case, it took way more time to create an level in hammer/jackhammer than model it on Maya, even with the UV hassle it would end being faster, but if an brush editor for unreal have those problems fixed, and including easy polygon control, extrude and splines, it would surely be amazing.
                                Is not just auto UV, but auto collisions, lightmaps, and the change to edit in map without export and import at any point, hammer is slower workflow than radiant by the way.
                                Hevedy - Instance Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/hevedyinstances
                                Hevedy - Image Tools: https://hevedy.itch.io/imagetools

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X