Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

FPSC Classic Product Chat / FPS Creator Version 2

Author
Message
uman
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 01:44 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 02:16
"The Game Creator" is as direct as it comes and as good as it gets though I guess its a marketing decision.

At the end of the day if its good it will not matter given the history and reputation of TGC in the market whatever standing it has.

Game makers will know who the developers are and that it is a derivative of the past though a new engine if you like.

Clearly they will be able to adjudge it upon what they see and perhaps follow at these forums and elsewhere.

It would be perhaps a good idea at some stage way down the road to have available a demonstration of its actual capability which has always been severely lacking in some circles for those who wish to consider investing in an engine. Sure you have some with limited demos 1 player, 1 enemy if its a shooter if you are lucky and it tends to end there. Not really a demo of capabilities in a real gameplay scenario.

Such things are more convincing than a name and hype whatever it is.

From the point of view of non hardened game developers which are always good to get on board then The Game Creator is a to the point and easy to source naming option.

Yes its basic but its what its all about. You can choose any other name for the sake of some kind of perceived advantage but it wont make or break the product which will be decided by other factors I am sure.

A name would not bother me personally as I dont pay a great deal of attention to that. Personally I would rather see something with a sensible name rather than one with little relevance for the sake of some perceived marketing advantage as said as I tend to just see that for what it is which is a little offputting to me personally. Makes me think that the rest is based upon the same approach and not what it says on the tin. Enough of that me thinks.

But I am probably on my own there.

I guess it depends upon who you are targeting sales at a mass audience or a restricted enlightened game makers one. Most likely new game makers wont even know what an SDK or FPSC is and the words Software Development kit will frighten most of those to death thats not what they are looking for - thats a programmers world and Shooter is a bad term if it will not be an exclusively designed for that purpose but for wider range of game types.

Either way the new engine will quickly be seen for what it is when its done and if its good everyone will queue up for it and the name whatever it is will spread like wildfire and if its not good it wont.


Nickydude
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2006
Location: Look outside...
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 01:59
I wouldn't go with Game Creator, unless you're creating it for kids. How about some sort of naming competition, see what people can come up with?

I reject your reality and substitute my own...
TriSpefear Studios
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2011
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 02:34 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 02:38
We should name it Pheonix Engine - advanced game creation

"Everyone may doubt me, but your just giving me more of a reason to continue on..."
A dude
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2010
Location: The Solar System
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 02:35 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 02:35
Quote: "I wouldn't go with Game Creator, unless you're creating it for kids. How about some sort of naming competition, see what people can come up with?"

Sounds like a good idea.
skaterdude
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Apr 2010
Location: Turn Around. :D
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 03:08
Random thought here, not related to naming.

A big think that I'm sure all of us would appreciate is the support for native 3DS Max, Maya, and Blender file formats. DirectX is a pain to export to, and as others have stated, limited in some respects. If you want to see a massive influx of end-user created content, sometimes the increased ease of content creation is all it takes.

System: Windows 7, 2.5 Ghz Quad-Core, 1 TB HDD, 8 GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD 4650 | My Superheroes: bond1 and Errant AI

Design Runner
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2010
Location: In my own little world.
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 03:36
I'm going to make more posts in the future as I collect my thoughts on this, but here are some of my suggestions/requests/opinions. This is coming from an artist and level designer, not a programmer or game designer (it is important to note the difference between level designer and game designer).

1. Community Driven

Currently you are relying on feedback of the community to develop your plan on this engine, but I think this could go a step further. Interweaving the community with the development could lead to fantastic results and strengthening the bond between developer and community (never a bad thing). For example, consistently keep the community updated. Say what has been implemented, what the progress is, what the currently predicted release date is when it gets far enough along. Constantly ask for feedback on what has been implemented, and if a choice must be made between two features, or more, ask the community.

This will, A. Create a userbase before the program is even out. B. Because the community is familiar with the development of the tool there will be less learning curve for the program for those members and from there new users will have a place to go immediately for help without asking the developers directly.

This could also go for other important aspects of the engine. Stock media is essential for a new engine. There are a great deal of modelers on the forums who contribute to the community model packs released periodically. Many of the modelers would be happy to be working on stock media. If an experienced artist were to step up and take the position of quality control, and several others willing to edit submitted models to work with the engine or even improve submitted models which do not quite meet quality levels, we could have media of many genres ready out of box on release. I would even be willing to set this up and look for people to fill the positions so you don't have to.

Similar methods could be taken for other parts of the engine as well.

2. My dream features

Quote: "I personally feel that the segment system will have to go and be replaced by a terrain world with some form of easy building creation system. "


This is fantastic to hear. But I might make a suggestion. Modular segment creation is a simple and highly effective method to creating interiors and even other formations. The loss of the beautiful way fpsc handled this system would be a shame. I think where many people view the system goes wrong is the loss of all angles except for 90 degrees. A possible way to handle this would be a system similar to layers in photoshop (that is, not layers as in floors on a building, but layers where each has its own properties). Each layer could be classified as terrain, MBCS (Modular Building Creation System), or segment grid. Where this could fix the issue is: allow each layer to be rotated on the Y axis. In this way you could create multiple segment grid layers, build on them, and rotate certain layers to match with building or terrain. In this way the segment system would no longer be limited to 90 degree angles. In addition, it would be a simple method to create more complex levels.

Another feature I feel the need to ask for is support for addition model and texture formats. At the very least, .psd and .obj formats should be supported. .obj is the most common and "standard" model format. I can't name a program that does not have import and export for it. .psd files can be edited by a number of programs, and have support for so many things, such as animation, video, 3d, alpha channel(s), the list could go on.

As many others have stated, programmable cameras could have many uses, including cut scenes, third person view, overhead view, level presentations, etc..

This is a small request but it would have its uses. A built in editor-and-game video screen capture tool. This would be useful for recording tutorials of using the engine, and game play videos of completed projects.

3. Open source

The availability of the source with fpsc was hugely important in the development of both the engine and many games created within. FPSC would never be as far as it is today without mods being integrated into the source and developers be created by the personal need to modify the engine and publicly releasing the results. Furthermore, the ability to edit stock media and stock maps made many processes much faster and allowed users to quickly change media to fit their game's style.

I hope this wasn't too long, too confusing, or had too many grammatical or spelling errors

Your signature has been erased by a mod, please reduce it to no larger than 600 x 120.
Vent
FPSC Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Apr 2009
Location: BC
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 03:40
Quote: "I wouldn't go with Game Creator, unless you're creating it for kids. How about some sort of naming competition, see what people can come up with?"


I am completely on board with this idea.

As far as the actual engine goes, it would be nice if things from FPSC imported easily into the new engine. It would also be nice to expand on the file types used, primarily models.


Le Shorte
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 04:06
I think a naming competition like Nickydude said would be the best way to go. I'm not a huge fan of the Game Creator, as it seems a bit too broad a term to me.

Cheesehead for life.
rolfy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2006
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 04:06 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 04:11
I believe with the recent additional features in FPSC it has actually gone beyond what it once was regarding ease of use for those completely new to game creation I am not saying it has lost this completely but getting a handle on it, I think, is a bit more complex than when it was first released.
It will probably take me another year of using it before I fully understand what can be done and how, not to mention how best to implement some of it into design.
For this reason I think it should be renamed too, particularly as it appears to be a completely different software your aiming for. Simply adding 3rd person makes it no longer First Person Shooter.

Around here we are all FPSC users and I think its great to gain feedback on the idea from us, but from whats being said this tool would be attractive to users across the board. If it retains the speed of prototyping with easy export/import with other TGC products, you got my money.

Don't get rid of the segment method completely, its this one feature above all that attracts newly interested game creators.

I would aim it at both beginners and advanced users for sure, more I think about it, I am seeing it less as FPSC 2.

You only have one life ... Abuse it well.
Beno09
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jun 2011
Location: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 04:23
I didn't posted on the FPS Creator thread for a long time, but I was here all the time and this FPSC 2 got my attention.
FPS Creator itself will i'm sure stay as my favourite engine ever, I worked in it for a long time and didn't quited it even now. The amazing community is also responsible for that.
I would pay a lot of money for FPSC 2 in action, of course we first need to see what are you thinking to include in it.
I'm waiting for that new feedback about certain features and in it we will see how high are you pointing up, with money i'm sure some amazing features can be included in.

Same as Rolfy, don't remove segment method, leave it as a choice to choose. Also Skaterdude said something that must be included, that's support of diffrent formats.

-In trouble you know a hero;
-If you don't start, you won't finish;
-Without suffering, there is no learning.
Hamburger
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2009
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 04:54
Just one more thing I might add while it might be considered:

I think the new fpsc whould have better sound capabilities, and be able to have support for dynamic sound ranging and environmental sounds. It should also let the user set sound volume and range so they can customize their sound emitters to their liking. The engine should also have a system to cull the sounds as to provide optiman performance when running multiple emitters at once.

The current 3d sound capabilities don't even come close to the term "3d sound". I can put a sound emitter entity down and it will still blast the noise from 40 segments away, and never fade...

Its something I've always wanted and would make for more atmospheric environments instead of just the ambient sound playing the whole time.

[/href]

++New Products Being Uploaded++
Jingle Fett
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2007
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 05:31
As far as the name goes, maybe something like Shooter Engine or Shooter Maker might work. The key word being Shooter given that it applies to both 1st Person and 3rd person perspectives. The word shooter in the name also makes it clear what the engine is for.

As far as my thoughts on FPSC 2, it should aim at being a legitimate engine that indie developers can use to make real games. Meaning it should have a really professional feel to it, have a nice art pipeline, be expandable in terms of tools, support for standard formats (like .psd and .fbx), that sort of thing.
For example, one of the things I really liked about Unity after coming from FPSC X10 was the ability to have whatever folder structure you want. Even little details like that are really important because it leaves more up to the user.

I might back the project but it would really depend on how much it wows me, what new features it would have, is it a complete re-write, etc. FPSC2 should be as easy to use as it possibly can be, but only as long as it's not at the expense of customizability. Tools like material editors, cutscene editors, visual logic editors go a long way towards that.


^^My Portfolio^^
Errant AI
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2006
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 05:48
I have a feeling they would like to drop "shooter" from the engine name so that it won't hinder marketing to educational and youth sectors.

Likewise, having a camera toggle to 3rd person doesn't make it NOT a First-Person game. Battlefield2/3, Fallout3+, Skyrim, etc. are all still FPS games primarily.

I personally think TGC needs to stick with FPSC2 as a FP/Ego centric platform. But at the same time recognize that the FP genre has evolved beyond late-'90s corridor shooters. Do one genre (general gaming sense) and do it well, efficiently and robustly. Don't let a re-branding choice be so vague that it opens the doors to people expecting to make MMO, RTS, etc. games.
Daniel wright 2311
User Banned
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 06:48
The ultimate game creators tool. Just a thought

my signature keeps being erased by a mod So this is my new signature.
michael x
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jan 2009
Location: Cybertron
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 07:21
Quote: " segment system will have to go and be replaced by a terrain world "


I think that's a great idea Rick. game creator is a great idea to. beings this is not going to be fpsc anymore its more a v2 of fpsc like program. to allow you to create easy to make games like a Mario 3d type of game or a legend of Zelda type of game. this would be so cool. freedom amp base levels. this would make it the ultimate game creator program ever.

if this is the case maybe lightmap should be gone to. creating everything in a dynamic immobile and mobile flow. this way we can bring any type of models in the program. like multiple diffuse map texture models and allow dynamic shadows on immobile models.

more than what meets the eye

Welcome to SciFi Summer
Mini0013xx
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2010
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 07:35 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 07:37
Would definitely back up whatever few dollars I have to spare on the program.

Just one thing. I posted this video in the FPSC 1.20 thread before realizing that it was a bug fix only update.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcmitUFc9fE

Firing positions should be put in there in order to handle where the ai can go. Without being able to control where the ai can walk, there is no way to develop a proper game.

This tool can be used in many ways, for say enemies running from behind a crate or out of a hiding place, and is a necessity to have in any modern game creation tool. Halo CE (2001) had it. I know some of the CoD games have it. Why can't FPS Creator?

On top of that, the 1.85 limit MUST BE TAKEN DOWN.

Motion blur would also be nice.

I'll also gladly buy the product upon release.
defiler
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 08:42
Why not keep the segment system but allow a special type of segment called terrain or whatever and have a separate editor of sorts which has the ability to manipulate this special type of segment.

Just a thought

Current Project: The Underground: Awakening
wizard of id
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Location: Sunny South Africa
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 10:50
Got the email filled in the form.I would back it on a few conditions, kickstarter fund and all, it is what the users want in the product.

Unfortunately this is not always possible unless Lee is capable and actually committed to doing what users want.You have to remember it is a users sponsored product, so I would like to see a user sponsored product and not taken in a direction the company wants it to be, of course Lee still has to consider making it commercially viable.


Things that is a must.

Engine

1. A new collision system, please don't use the old one burn it, shred it, throw it in black hole any thing but the old system.Basically I want the entity to be able to walk on a terrain the size of the moon, walk on entities, walk upside down, inside up.Crouch, crawl, jump.Basically I don't want to design things around the collision, complete freedom to do any conceivable shape, size, thickness, detail ect.


2.Directional light source.Sun and moon, single light source that will effect the entire map.

3.Spot light source

4.neon light sources

5.New dynamic light sources, rotating directional lights, colour changing light sources you name.

6.Camera commands, shake, bake, upside down, throw, push, camera following way points, basically any conceivable type of camera command that would be useful.

7.Don't use water planes, period.

Basically the software must include the features before hand and not revision 2.009, Some consider this as a fun hobby, others would prefer it to be a competing product on the market, making a game you can actually sell.

This should be a multi-player version, online is where the gaming world has their attention directed to, single player should be secondary.

This should also be a module based engine, if I require water I plop in the water DLL, if I want camera action X I plop in the camera dll.

Hardware flags, doors, water no collision, I want to tick a box on entity and tell the engine exactly what I want it to do be

9.Non linear engine, enough said, want to be able to build a huge city with different tasks and goals, and short loading between sections.

Then for multi-player, different types of multiplayer types, as well as being able to add multiplayer Bots, and should be able to build multi maps.


Editor.
The editor is seriously underpowered and has awesome potential for a engine like this.

Things I would like to see here.

1.Stick with the map base paint, but expand on it to either paint in sizes 100, 200, 400 ect.

2.Allow textures to be changed by simply dropping a texture from either the texture menu or from windows explorer.

3.Allow painted segments to be tweaked, in other words if I want to lower or raise a floor section a bit, or change wall height, angle even extrude wall section.Should have wall/floor extrude tool that will allow section to be extruded, in 5/10/25/50/100 units.Textures should then be allowed to be tweaked, or automatically be adjusted even tiling.

4.Real time light mapping in the editor, where a light source can be scaled,rotated, changed by simple mouse interactions and with flag tick boxes to allow it to cast shadows, and if needed bloom and flares.

5.Allow simple model importing, by simply dropping the model, segment ect into the editor.

6.A Weapon importing wizard, enough said.I want to simply drag the weapon to the correct hud position, and play animation.

7.Shader application window, I want to be able to preview a shader via a window and make direct tweaks when possible to the shader.

8.Texture baking of shadows and or lights.

9.BSP map importing.Want to be able to import a map with or without textures, scale it move it to correct place ect.

10. Multi mesh models, I want to be able to import a building with a 100 meshes, and be able to apply textures from within the editor, add entities or change specific mesh properties, from static to dynamic or entity to world object.

Unfortunately I feel the product has matured enough, I can say the same for the rest of the people, but two version or more should be available and geared towards specific needs.

a kids version, a advance and a professional version.FPSC is currently geared towards a certain age group.I don't want to be frustrated with a one age fits all version with simple interfaces and game objects.I want a version that is complex offer a 100's if not 1000's of options, I want to be able to tweak, re-size, change, re-texture, if the wall sticks out a bit I wall to edit it real-time or if that wall over laps that floor mesh I want to be able to change that, quick and simple without having to use 10 different programs spend half an hour importing a replacement floor to fix the problem.Every should be able to be imported scaled and adjusted within the editor.

The keyword here is real-time.

Using the same designs for the second version simply isn't going to cut it.Progress needs to be shown, major, major improvements and advancements.

I don't mind paying $400 for a version that gives me total freedom and spoils me rotten to my core, don't mind paying $50 and buying $10 add on modules as needed, I do prefer the last method, making the engine as cheap as possible, and have people buying modules as needed and when they can afford it.

If it is going to be the same old thing don't bother.....
The Nerevar
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th May 2010
Location: Vvardenfell
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 13:56
I'm not sure if this was mentioned, but how about the option to use fully functional player models (like in those hitman games, I think one of the Battlefield games, or the upcoming Chivalry: Medieval Warfare game).

That would be best for accurate for Third/first person toggling.

Fulfilling the Nerevarine Prophecy, one trial at a time, because I... Am... The Nerevar!
Hamburger
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2009
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 13:56
I think maybe a node-based scripting system that utilizes fpi scripts to make a sort of fps script 'circuit" could be useful, to have some more complex properties for entities and characters for example.

I think UDK actually has some sort of python node-based thing in it.

I do see WoI's point though on this being an engine for specific needs. It whouldn't be designed with the current restrictions of this age group. It should be able to stand out there as a known game engine some time after its released I think.

[/href]

++New Products Being Uploaded++
science boy
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Oct 2008
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 14:23 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 21:40
my view is this

1. it needs to be simple still with the possibility to be more complex

2. needs to be an improved engine ie x11. nothing less. to allow instancing better speed and multithreading etc.

3. possible game choices, birdseye, fpsc, 3rd person

4. graphics capable of x10 shaders with,spec,norm, all in dds format.

5. weather imittation, moving sky, bigger zone.

6. none linear level design option for making big maps

7. an in game slider system like x10

8. be able to put in a lot of detail without lag

9. increment a security to the game compile. so all games will be secure with every game build.

10. roleplay elements, experience, level, a lot of simplified ways to make items collected to make new items etc.

and a stable working system with many possibilities but able to be simplified

this would be an awesome engine with my full support. just make sure you dont do what you did to me. and other x10 owners, spend 40 plus for an engine that was half done, and left for dead. stick with version 2 and stop listening to moaning complaints from people with intergrated graphics only or 1920's computer systems and a loathing for anything new.

an unquenchable thirst for knowledge of game creation!!!
RickV
TGC Development Director
26
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 14:34
Hi all,

I have thought about the name again and I think it's best to stick with FPS Creator 2. We need to remain focused on the existing brand and could lose customers if we move away from the name.

I should have a new survey up for you all to input into. I've used the feedback from this forum to make it.

Rick

Financial Director
TGC Team
uman
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 15:11
Seems very sensible to me
science boy
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Oct 2008
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 15:31
agreed as it is fpsc version 2

an unquenchable thirst for knowledge of game creation!!!
firelord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th May 2007
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 15:33 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 15:38
look i think all were asking is fps x9 with some features of fps x10 and the advanced effects of direct x11..its not that we dont want unreal 3 engine or unity, it is a first person shooter engine,and thats why we love it, its simple and easy to use
we want backwards compatiblity
we want editors like firm v2 and entity editors and script editors in the engine
we want 64 bit and no memory cap
we want x11 gpu processing
we want better sound processing
we dont want it to be another fps x10 mess
we want more model formats like .3ds and fbx
we want better physics
we want all the mods to be put into a package we can use
we want better collision
we want a program that can grow
we dont want a cluttered front end
we want bigger size maps
we want it to be simple
I like fps x9 and x10 because i can make stuff quick and turn out good results, its simple and easy to use, maybe sliders like x10 but i suppose fps v2 will only come about if darkbasic elite comes out, or am i mistaken will fps v2 come out with out darkbasic elite a question for lee....
michael x
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jan 2009
Location: Cybertron
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 15:34
but if you keep the name it remains as a first person program. if that's the case maybe a 3rd person program should be made. it just that the name could be miss leading because in the title first person shooter and that what it is only. it like the halo engine it nothing more then that.

but the biggest wish I have for this program is that it will be a 64bit or make a 64bit and a 32bit version. I feel that those who limited with 32bit should stick with the the old fpsc. but maybe in the survey you should ask to see if more people own a 64bit os. now days computer have change and all most store like best buy sells is 64bit pc. I believe the biggest thing that kills programers creation is the limits of 32bit. what better way to step forward is to think bigger than your last idea.

I do not understand people with low end pc idea. most these guys on here have to be playing some of todays 3d games and we all know by now you need a decent pc to play them. one thing everyone fail to realize is fpsc was meant to run on low end pc because the idea was made in the time of xp and 32bit pc. but time has change if people are not willing to jump forward this would be all for nothing. it would be like buying the same software twice. it like going from xp home edition to xp pro edition. I run 64 bit programs like photoshop and 3dmax. they are way faster than the 32bit version. there is a lot that a 64bit version of fpscv2 can give back and the memory cap is one of them.

more than what meets the eye

Welcome to SciFi Summer
Dar13
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th May 2008
Location: Microsoft VisualStudio 2010 Professional
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 16:06
Quote: "but the biggest wish I have for this program is that it will be a 64bit or make a 64bit and a 32bit version. I feel that those who limited with 32bit should stick with the the old fpsc. but maybe in the survey you should ask to see if more people own a 64bit os. now days computer have change and all most store like best buy sells is 64bit pc. I believe the biggest thing that kills programers creation is the limits of 32bit. what better way to step forward is to think bigger than your last idea."

There should be a 64 bit version for those who want it, and a 32 bit version for those who want it and can handle the limitations of the platform. Win7 64bit seems to be the most popular on Steam.

Quote: "we want backwards compatiblity
we want editors like firm v2 and entity editors and script editors in the engine
we want 64 bit and no memory cap
we want x11 gpu processing
we want better sound processing
we dont want it to be another fps x10 mess
we want more model formats like .3ds and fbx
we want better physics
we want all the mods to be put into a package we can use
we want better collision
we want a program that can grow
we dont want a cluttered front end
we want bigger size maps
we want it to be simple"

(in order)
Maybe, depends on the technical stuff.
That'll clutter the editor, are you sure you want this?
I agree, but there should be a 32bit version for those who can't go to 64bit right now.
I agree, DX11 is a must.
I agree, that would be nice.
No comment.
3DS,Collada,OBJ,MS3D,Blender,etc? sure. FBX? No, it's too heavy for direct use in games.
Agreed.
Not gonna happen. It's just not possible.
Part of the physics system(I wonder how many people know that the collision is implemented by the physics engine, not by the graphics engine?).
Plugins would be awesome.
KISS* is a good thing to remember.
Would be good to see.
KISS*!

* Keep It Simple Stupid

wizard of id
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Location: Sunny South Africa
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 16:33
Quote: "look i think all were asking is fps x9 with some features of fps x10 and the advanced effects of direct x11..its not that we dont want unreal 3 engine or unity, it is a first person shooter engine,and thats why we love it, its simple and easy to use
"


Actually I spend time working with both UDK and unity in recent months actually was quite enjoyable experience, so asking for UDK or Unity would be stupid, FPSC is unique, and that is what we love about it.But with that said, I want a decent engine like UDK, under the bonnet and the body of an improved FPSC editor on it.

Right now for the average joe that uses the standard MP and 3rd party media with the engine has little or no problems, Some one like my self it is a complete nightmare, not in the sense that it is hard to do certain things. The amount of time needed to do things.

Sorry as much as I love the easy to use editor and engine file formats blah blah ect, it needs some thing more advance and be A LOT and I mean A LOT kinder to content creation and content creators, I can't stress that enough content creators know what I am talking about.
Sting
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2011
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 16:39
I couldn't believe it when I saw this thread, I almost swallowed my gum (and I had 5 shoved in there)!

First thing is; take heed of what everybody is suggesting towards what they want and/or are looking for, however as you know don't take them all too seriously. Not everybody is clued up on the internals and alot of people make uneducated guesses regarding features based on what they've read on these forums and/or other forums.

In other words, listen to the loyal supporters but I would ensure you welcome feedback strongly from the current mod developers as they will be the ones who take this bad boy by the horns and continue to improve it after release. Also it gives them a good chance to share their knowledge and work with TGC to provide a more rigid way of deployment, updates and integration of mod features.

I think TGC already know (based on Market Research) what needs to be implemented into FPSC2 for this to be a viable product on the market.

I would gladly pay whatever cost if FPSC2 escalated into something that was speculated so I will be looking forward to the initial 'proposal sheet' of features and framework.

I only have one thing to add to the already huge list of insane features; Node Based Eventing System and/or better scripting usability/interface. I think you could keep the current 'point n click' system in place that would be cool, but rather than having external files called for each entity, we could handle the entities in an easier and faster event environment, where we could specify conditions to be met and apply actions in correspondence. I think Lee will get the gist.

I shall look forward to an update regarding this

// EOF
A dude
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2010
Location: The Solar System
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 17:47
Quote: "I have thought about the name again and I think it's best to stick with FPS Creator 2. We need to remain focused on the existing brand and could lose customers if we move away from the name.
"


That's okay if there is no third person feature but if there is, I think the name is a bit misleading.
MrValentine
AGK Backer
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Dec 2010
Playing: FFVII
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 18:41
Clearly not a lot of people ever played Hidden & Dangerous then...



BlackFox
FPSC Master
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th May 2008
Location: Knight to Queens Bishop 3
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 18:51 Edited at: 26th Sep 2012 00:46
Since we have made quite significant money on developments using v1, we are happy with the current version. We'd need to know what this "new" version will contain before we commit to backing/supporting a product.


Twitter: @NFoxMedia
michael x
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jan 2009
Location: Cybertron
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 18:54 Edited at: 24th Sep 2012 20:13
I would like for us to keep the x files. its what we know most about fpsc. We still have keep in mind to keep everything simple so when we transfer our model on to fpscv2 there will be no problems.

if you want something like udk well then use udk and so on.

also keep the editor as a over head view. I dont care what other software editors are like the idea is to keep it simple at the same time give it an open feature of tools.

also keep the shader pipeline open. that was the biggest fail in fpscx10.

make sure that fpscv2 can have a 50 or more copy of the same model. like if I put 20 chairs of the same model they wont discolor or turn pink like in fpscx10. or turn black and blocky like in fpscx9.

make sure fpscv2 has smooth groups if light map is going to be in this version.

somehow we need fpsc2 to not have dynamic lights bleed through segments and light map bleed through dynamic model like dynamic doors.

this is why I want to cut out light map as well and go dynamic with mobile and immobile. this will cut the process of bugs in half. as well allow a dynamic light to follow the player instead of having like 20 lights on the map. this way is thinking outside the box. this must Rick.

dynamic immobile will work like static mode and the map editor can go into a quick real mode when clicking on a object or a real time mode button. but the real time thing not a must but a idea that can work for those who want it.

yes having a 32bit and 64bit version is a must. installer a can give you the option of installing one of both of them. or can be optional the shader mode was in fpsc. allowing 64bit owner to choose 64bit mode. but most like to avoid problems its probably best to have separate installers. giving the developer the best of both wolds of game development. with maybe a optional Direct x line of 9,10, 11. in this time of new software we have to think in a long term way. plus instead of update adding new feature they could be just bug fixes. which can save on the hassle of large updates like fpsc has. thinking long term but simple at the same time. this is the goal that needs to be follow for fpscv2.

more than what meets the eye

Welcome to SciFi Summer
KeithC
Senior Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 19:18
I'd like to echo another poster, in having a more dynamic sound system set up. I know that Unity has a system that allows for gradual drop-off in a defined area (symbolized in a sphere or half sphere); letting you slowly hear that car engine as you get closer, instead of all or nothing.

-Keith

007
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Aug 2011
Location:
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 21:09
As a long time FPSC user, i also want all the improvements cited by the folks, all those enhancements and gameplay possibilities.

Indeed, i think FPSC already has all those "eye candy" effects, with the use of shaders and high resolution models.

My list of features i want to see in FPSC 2 (this is just my opinion):

- First of all, i think TGC SHOULD stick in developing FPSC in Dark Basic Pro, because this language is a lot easier compared to C++, and we have a huge amount of modders who dominates dbpro and this can help a lot to people add new cool features

- I think TGC should use a better culling system, like the new Dark Occlusion, from which i have seen, it can occlude even parts of models (polygons). I already tested, FPSC cull entities, not polys, i mean, if you have a character entity behind a wall, it will be ocluded, but if you go and see it there, even if you close the camera view to lets say, just a part of the character (arm), it will show all the polygon mesh. And this feature of Dark Occulison, which occludes just polygons, is awesome.

- FPSC should stick on what it is, a First Person Creator Shooter. I think TGC should not make it a "All Kinds of Game Creator", because it loses the focus of the engine. For those who want to create a car battle game, they should go for Dark Basic Pro.

- However, there is nothing wrong with the user has a choise to chose a 3rd person camera view, and even driveable vehicles. Off course that we will not be making a Need for Speed in FPSC, but just basic driving system like the old Battlefield 1942. P.S: I think FPSC already is capable of doing this with the new scripting commands, just need to be perfected more.

- I think is very, very, very important for a good framerating that FPSC uses the LOD (level of detail) System. But this should me something most simple than in Source Engine Games (Half Life 2, in example), where the model must be "compiled with all the lod meshes". I think that it should be something like this. You have a folder to your custom character. So you export all the LOD versions of your character from inside 3dsmax (in example). The character is the same in all 3 LODS (in example), it has the same animation, but the number of polys is lesser on each LOD. So in your entity folder you have something like "my_character_LOD1.x", "my_character_LOD2.x", "my_character_LOD3.x". So the engine will look inside the folder, and search for this naming convention to find all LOD models for your entity, and according the distance of the player from this model, FPSC will load the corresponding LOD model. It should be something very simple for the user.

- I think a new shader feature should be created to simulate body damage. This could be done with custom textures, however, to be real, this should be done with shader. If the character gets shot in his chest, then this shader would overlay a blood splat above the character texture in the chest position, and so on for the other body parts.

- Dynamic shadows for characters is already achieved by using bond`s shader, but it would be cool have dynamic shadows for normal entities and all game objects.

- I think the scripting system on FPSC must, and needs to stay as it is, simple, easy to learn, and very agradable to work. I think TGC should not change the FPI Scripting System. It is already perfect as it is, just always add new commands and conditions.

- I think TGC should improve the lighting system in FPSC, to make something like in Leadwerks engine. I sthink the lights should have more options, like in example, spot lights, omni lights, directional lights, shadow color, shadow volume, shadow intensity, in resume, a more customizable lighting system

- About the particles system (decals), i think we should have an option to have more frames of animation and not only 16 frames. I have a lot of After Effects Particles Effects that i tried to export to fpsc, but it did not work, because the AE particles have more than 30 frames of animation each one.

- I think that the FPSC Segments Editor and Make Entities from X-files should be integrated in the FPSC UI, and should come already installed with FPS Creator.

- And also FPSC should have an own Particles Editor, in where the user would import the images sequences that compose the particle animation, and then export it as a decal

- FPSC should have an internal model viewer for both character entities and weapon entities. So the person can see how his character will look in game, without having to test in game. This should be like Half Life 2 Model Viewer, in which you see the character and it`s animation sequence (preview).

- FPSC should have a weapon creator in which you can visually adjust HUD position, fire range, and all the weapon sepcs without having to waste time inside testgame. There is already a commercial application created by sequoia games who does it, whoever as this will be a new FPSC version, i think it should come with all things that a person needs to create a FPS Game.

- Also, it should be created a kind of achievment creation system. Model Pack 54 already has it, but as a FPS game, i think the marjority of FPS games have a kind of mission objectives system, so i think the features of the achievment system created in Model Pack 54 (and also RPG Mod), should be included in FPSC 2. I think the way achievments work in Model Pack 54 is already perfect, but it should be included in FPSC 2.

- Also is essential an Options System. I tried too much the GUI-X9 but never could make it work. I think the options should be easy to set up, with menus and such.

- I think the Menu System in FPSC should have support for animated swf files (flash files), so this way we could create animated buttons very easy inside FPSC. I think the scripting system in FPSC should be able to "read" the animations frames inside swf files, so we should not use the Flash Script, but we would just only create animations in flash, and the script control should be done in FPI Script. In example, if player put mouse over a button, fpi script would tell the swf file to move to frame 50 and play the animation, something like this

I think those are the marjority of features that i, personally, would like to see in FPSC 2.

Cheers for all,

007.

Goldenye 007 N64
Hamburger
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2009
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posted: 24th Sep 2012 22:26
Quote: "I'd like to echo another poster, in having a more dynamic sound system set up."


That was me

Quote: "Dynamic shadows for characters is already achieved by using bond`s shader,"


I dont actually think these were dynamic shadows per se, but actually poly planes generated under the character's feet, because they never reacted with light sources or fell on complex objects.

I also agree with the lightmapper not making entities look so blocky.

I think one LAST think I would like to see is just some better normal mapping. The current looks flat and uninteresting. I'd like to see more hard edge reflections like in the normal maping from Corvus Mod. Some heat haze effects would also be really awesome, thats another effect I've always wanted in fpsc!

[/href]

++New Products Being Uploaded++
Nomad Soul
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Jan 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 01:26
All FPSC really needs is better performance and fully unified lighting and shadows.

FPSC must have dynamic shadows to be considered relevant going forward.

Daniel wright 2311
User Banned
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 01:50
As I love to code, I have many little games, never released anything, but still do plan to, Dark basic pro is my first love, learned how to code in it.

But, fpsc 2 with third person support that is re written to support higher frames per second, well, hell, can not wait.

I am even willing to help if needed with anything......

my signature keeps being erased by a mod So this is my new signature.
BedsideReaper
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2011
Location: Lakewood, WA
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 01:57
Quote: "I'm not sure if this was mentioned, but how about the option to use fully functional player models (like in those hitman games, I think one of the Battlefield games, or the upcoming Chivalry: Medieval Warfare game).

That would be best for accurate for Third/first person toggling.
"


That might also be helpful if you wanna make a game where you can see the player body or his legs, or if you have a mirror that you can look into. Anyways, I don't know if somebody brought this up beforehand, but I think an autosave/archive feature would be loved by EVERYONE. It may just be me, but when my computer goes to sleep mode from being idle too long, FPSC crashes a good 75 percent of the time and I lose alot of my progress.

"I think I'm getting the 'Black Lung,' pop."

"Derrick, you've been down there for one day."
Nickydude
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2006
Location: Look outside...
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 02:35
The top 3 things I'd like to see for FPSC 2 are:

1/. Speed
No matter what's thrown into FPSC 2 I'd like the speed as a top priority, creating the next 'Source Engine beater' would all be for naught if it runs a 10 FPS!

2/. Larger area
I don't expect vast wastelands but definitely bigger that 40x40.

3/. A fully up-to-date manual!
The current FPSC can do great things but there's no manual explaining what you can do with those great things. There are bits and pieces scattered about the forums but nothing that ties it all together or explain how to get the best out of it all.

There, my 75p worth.

I reject your reality and substitute my own...
The Nerevar
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th May 2010
Location: Vvardenfell
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 02:42
I forgot about that manual, It's just collecting dust in my F: drive.

Fulfilling the Nerevarine Prophecy, one trial at a time, because I... Am... The Nerevar!
TriSpefear Studios
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2011
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 03:11
I think that FPSC has to many flaws for people to finish an actual game easily. FPSC 2 needs to address this by making models easier to import, an really good stock FPI editor (like FPI Edit pad but updated faster) and etc.

"Everyone may doubt me, but your just giving me more of a reason to continue on..."
skaterdude
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Apr 2010
Location: Turn Around. :D
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 05:00
I post these as I think of them.

Dynamics lighting, if it is to be done, needs to be done right.

Simply, it means the dynamic lighting of all entities, dynamic and static. Additionally, there should be three types of light sources: sun (Global point light for outdoor environments), normal dynamic point lights, and direction "cone" lights for better performance and realistic lamp lighting. Lastly, the ability to have moving lights is key. There is nothing more amazing that making a point light source move through a room of ladders and boxes, casting shadows in all directions at 60 fps. One light. That's all it takes.

Cheers.

System: Windows 7 64-bit, 4.0GHz Core i5 2500K, 1 TB HDD, 16 GB RAM, 2x SLI GTX 560's

mrniceguy
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 12:54 Edited at: 25th Sep 2012 13:32
A level editor which is able to import models but also create own walls etc. would be appreciated.

And support for the current Model Packs

Smart Packer Pro - Distribute games and applications
V-Packer for Games - Compress your game files into one executable
Flash Packer - Pack your Flash movies
uman
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 14:02
On the subject of the Editor an important part of any game making endeavour.

Currently a user of FPSC who is developing extensively can spend a great deal of their time in a session and over the life of a development doing nothing more than compiling and in test mode and back to editor repeatedly back and forth between editor and test level and also perhaps compiling additionally a game.exce to also test the quailty and credibility of final .exe. Overall far too much development time is lost to this. A very large percentage of time invested overall in fact even though this has improved.

It would be helpful if a level in editor was actually what you see is what you get and accurately representative of the final game.

An accumulative level compile showing the currently state of a the compiled level in real time in Editor would be good that does not rely on loading, compiling and unloading the constituent parts before launching a separate test level.

i.e. Real time accumulative compile directly in the Editor - when you add something it is added to the compiled level, live in real time in editor.

I guess this could be akin though not the same perhaps as the survey question regarding editing inside a level which would I presume be compiled to test first and edited external to the editor itself as test levels are displayed now.

Not sure if any of that makes any sense and is all very complex stuff to contemplate I understand.

Point being it would be good to have an improved method of construction, editing and test that would help users speed up development and make the process a somewhat smoother and more efficient operation.

TriSpefear Studios
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2011
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 14:12
I like it but maybe an option to turn it off for people with non-Super ram?

"Everyone may doubt me, but your just giving me more of a reason to continue on..."
skaterdude
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Apr 2010
Location: Turn Around. :D
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 15:08
I completely agree with uman. Real-time rendering in the editor, with dynamic lighting and all, would be immensely helpful. Now that I think about it, I would lose a lot of time by simply compiling a test build and walking around to see if I had placed a chair or light source correctly. Very distracting, and time consuming, indeed.

System: Windows 7 64-bit, 4.0GHz Core i5 2500K, 1 TB HDD, 16 GB RAM, 2x SLI GTX 560's

bond1
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 25th Sep 2012 17:42 Edited at: 25th Sep 2012 17:44
And a reminder to TELL OTHERS about FPSC2 if you think they'd be interested, since this will be truly be a user-driven and supported project.

Quote: "I believe with the recent additional features in FPSC it has actually gone beyond what it once was regarding ease of use for those completely new to game creation I am not saying it has lost this completely but getting a handle on it, I think, is a bit more complex than when it was first released."


I agree with Rolfy, FPSC v1 has gotten very cool additions over the years, but has become a bit of a beast. It would be daunting for new users to get the most out of it. It needs a reboot, keeping some core functionality like scripting intact, and streamlining some other redundant parts (like legacy character AI versus DarkAI).

SPECS: Intel Corei7 3770k, Nvidia GTX680, 16GB RAM, Win7 Pro
King Fluffs
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2010
Location: Telford
Posted: 26th Sep 2012 18:37
I'd back this.

Swift Beta Studios
4125
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2008
Location: Bronx, New York
Posted: 26th Sep 2012 22:29
I would back this if money was kind to me. My rent was raised and things has gotten even more difficult for me.

IMO, this should have been done about a year or two ago. I'm kinda stunned they would think about this now when it should have been considered back in like, 2010...

But unless it really happens, I'll just keep my mouth shut and wait to see what comes up...

Intel Core i5 3570, Nvidia Gefocre GTX 560 OC 1024MB, 16GB RAM, P8H77-M Pro, Windows 7 Home Premium x64

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2026-06-11 20:05:05
Your offset time is: 2026-06-11 20:05:05