Sorry your browser is not supported!

[3D]

Greetings, I've been debating over the last few months to move my current game project from 'non-mentioned' game engine over to Agk mainly due to the outstanding performance agk shows when showing more than 100 animated models on screen. My current game projects usually has anywhere form 35 - 100 animated models on screen at once and my current game engine setup really bogs down under that stress.

I've been playing with the Agk-c and Agk-s trials and thus far I've seen what I needed to see, the ability to display the amount of animation I need to in my game project. I do have a few question however before making my choice:

1) What is the main advantages and disadvantages between classic and studio ?
2) Is Vulkan only available in studio ?
3) Do I even need Vulkan in the long run or later down the line?
4) Will classic code run under studio without porting ?
5) For a rather large project I'll be porting over - would I be best jumping straight into tier-2 ?

Thank you for any insight you may provide.

Hi, and welcome

I don't have super much insight into this but I have a few words to share anyway

1) Classic does, as far as I understand, not receive new features. I like the IDE on classic, stuff like help is online or local HTML files opened in a browser, I like the search IDE box better. Bugs are still fixed. Studio does receive new features, the help files are shown inside the IDE which can be handy if you like that.
2) Yes
3) I would say Vulkan is very useful going forward seeing that it is a new and supported graphics framework. I think It'll be quite some time before Vulkan goes out of style.
4) More or less, yes, although I've had an issue with mixed 2D and 3D graphics where the 3D would be misplaced running in Classic code in Studio. This was a very specific case where I was trying to achieve some special effect, you most likely won't have any problem running Classic code in Studio, I often switch between the two for the same project.
5) That is hard to say, as far as I know, Tier 2 will be faster in some cases. I made a pathfinder that took two 2000 milliseconds to search a massive in Tier 1, the same code took 12 milliseconds to execute in Tier 2. Loop heavy stuff is way better in Tier 2. The nice thing with Tier 1 is that it is a sandboxed interpreter that protects the rest of the system (unless you really are trying to harm the system, you most likely won't, and on some systems, it is entirely impossible to mess up other stuff on the system). It is easy to move Tier 1 apps between systems, they basically all use the same bytecode file but run it with different interpreters.

I hope this gives a little more insight, and I really hope others will share their thoughts on this as well.

Cheers!

1 • It's better to look at AppGameKit Classic v1, v2 and Studio as iterative releases.
I'd argue it would be better if they were called AppGameKit 2011, 2014 and 2019... as this more accurately reflects them in relation to each other.

2 • Yes

3 • This is a much more difficult and involved answer.
At present because AppGameKit (Classic and Studio) is entirely designed around the OpenGL ES 1.1 Specification... this means that neither Graphics API (OpenGL 2.0 or Vulkan 1.0) are being fully supported.
While to a degree I do get why TheGameCreators took this approach of limiting Feature Support., as you never have to worry if a Platform Supports the feature you're using; the downside is that adding Vulkan Support was a bit like buying a Bugatti Veyron; only to add a limiter that provides similar performance to a Ford Fiesta.

And this is more frustrating to consider, given there are features that are Mobile Only., or iOS / Android Specific.
It just makes it feel like the decision made are entirely focused around Mobile Development, with support for Desktop (Linux/MacOS/Windows) merely being a side effect of supporting them as Development Platforms.
That's just frustrating because you look back at AppGameKit' predecessor Dark BASIC Professional., and it was MUCH more heavily focused as a Development Language, API and Platform as opposed to a Scripting Engine connected to an "OK" Middleware Engine.

Mind both usually are "On Sale"., so I'd suggest just waiting until a Steam or Holiday Sale Period and just get both for the same price you'd get one.

4 • Yes. There are some deprecated functions, but other than that as noted in my first answer it's better to look at these as iterative releases.
In fact I'd argue TheGameCreators could better fund the project if they used a Subscription or Yearly Release approach.

5 • That entirely depends on how comfortable you are with C++
I personally tend to use AppGameKit as a Rapid Development Environment., as the BASIC-Style in AppGameKit Script and fact I don't have to setup a Project is just easier to crack open and block out ideas.
And most of the time the limitations in the speed of AppGameKit Script are usually "Fine" for Desktop Applications... where-as for Mobile., outside of small arcade experiences; it's usually best to block out in Tier 1 then port to Tier 2 for better performance.

Well thank you both, you certainly have given me much to consider. At the current time I'm leaning towards Agk2 since it's well established ( not to mention it's what I ran my trial tests on to determine if I could be interested in it to begin with ). I am bother by a few lesser but hardly minor issues, being a windows or Os specific Ui system and the lack of a 3d world editor, the fact being you need one to make the other. I suppose we have all become displaced these days with game engines feeding world editors and scripting compilers at us rather we wanted them or not. But to not have the one would suggest the other is required.

I really wasn't planning on spending a great deal of time up front making a drop/world editor and to learn of the absence of UI commands makes that task seem even more avoidable. but if that is my path than I will do it.

I have great respect for TGC team, I've been around since the pre-darkbasic era and I have always relied upon Lee and Rick's advice and their software. As I now return to the game making scene after a long absence, I wish to continue my endeavour where I left off at and that's with TGC products.

I agree with the above apart from the subscription model. This a big no no for me and TGC have stated that this is not a business model they wish to pursue. Even their latest Gameguru Max isn't subscription based and it looks like they are planning on making their money from DLC.

I would perhaps be willing to pay a small annual maintenance fee but this would be on the understanding that my product would still work if I decided not to update and not be limited in anyway AND that TGC spend a lot more time improving AppGameKit with regular updates and not the 'fix a few issues every 3 or 4 months model'

Appgamekit is a great language and I would highly recommend it. Personally I prefer Classic as I like the editor more. If you can afford both you can easily swap your code between the 2.

Support from TGC is great if you ever need to contact them directly, they always reply promptly and do their up most to resolve any issues.

Animation format seems to be a monster to tackle, I've been all over the forums, in the manual, still to get any of my own animated models into agk-s. After playing with agk-s for most the night and all day today, I really get the feeling of a very unfinished product, in general. Not knocking it at all, but I really don't see ( at least myself ) being able to take this product to the finish line with a legit game project. But it was worth a try, and despite a lot of aggravation, I did have some fun trying to do stuff in it for the last few days. and I do thank you all for your above feedback.

Adios, I'll be back one day to see what else TGC has got out, or perhaps even a finished agk-s - which I would jump all over.

Perhaps someone on the forums could have helped you to do this, there are some very knowledgeable people on here and I'm sure AppGameKit could do what you needed with a bit of guidance. Also, if you are using the demo versions they may be quite old and may explain why you feel the product is unfinished.

Yes I'm using the demo version of Agk-s. 2019.08.05v. I really only wanted to load my own animated media, but I suppose I'm caught in format limbo. I tried the dae, x and fbx formats. I could get my character loaded via a few different formats but never could it find the animation track 'run'. I exported in at least 12 different apps hoping one would solve the format problem. Do you think it's because I'm on an older demo? Has there been work done to the animation import since version 2019.08.05v. ??

Thanks.