Sorry your browser is not supported!

Is the FPS going to be updated in graphics with time?
Without having to buy a completly new program all over again?

Coz I dont want to buy if graphics stay the same

No offense, but if your looking for HalfLife graphics, you can go pay thousands and thousands for the Havok engine, a computer good enough to run it, and all the other tools needed.

I personally think FPSC has the best graphics available for amateur designers.

SarusX,

Dont see you around here much these days - hope you are doin OK?

Havok engine - "and we certainly would if we could all afford to" - at least I would, though I suspect I would not be happy with that either for one reason or another.

Actually FPSC is really quite basic in its default support for graphics at least - "Graphics" a term which is used very loosely to describe well I dont know - different things to different people.

FPSC supports reasonable quality textures because of the size it can support but thats all one can say in support of its graphic capabilities. I dont see anything else grahically it can do especially well which could be described as anything other than basic. If it exists I have not seen it.

In most areas of visual capability it is very restrictive (texture handling for instance) with poor features or lack of them and those that exist are difficult for end users to get the best from.

Some things additionally which sound good in principle like shaders seem to have problems, issues or bugs. Lighting is nothing special - any indie engine can insert the most basic of lights as FPSC does and generate the kind of screens you can see at this forum that some users go ape over. Put a light in a level and people - think its the best thing since sliced bread.

Overall personally I dont see the graphics capabilities as being any better at best than any other engine I have ever seen or used and in terms of support for graphics features it has the worst current graphics feature set I am aware of available to the end user - out of the box certainly.

And its not true or realistic for people here to compare FPSC to other engines like Havoc when people post such requests for feature support and suggest to them that FPSC is comparable to other indie engines in some areas people refer too - its not. FPSC does have "some" advantages over other indies though granted.

You dont need an engine like Havoc or any such expensive engines to get such features as mirrors, particles, terrain and many, many other advanced features that FPSC lacks or need a super computer to run other such engines - thats simply not true. You certainly could well benefit from a super computer when running FPSC and if had avanced grahics support given that FPSC itself could run it I doubt any machine could as the FPSC engine is so inefficient - it might just destroy the CPU.

Most other indie engines I am aware of worthy of note you can find have a seriously better graphics feature set and overall feature/function set than FPSC - theres no real comparison or competition at all in those areas. Thats not where FPSC does best.

What the other engines also have that FPSC does not have however for the general user is a need to get into scripting.

Enough said there.

To answer the original posters question :

Sorry no one knows what FPSC may contain or support in the future.

You can however now : with enough effort achieve high quality visual environments if you are prepared to put in enmough effort to achieve
them.

You will need high quality content throughout, ingenuity in your level design and pay high regard to the importance of and care in the placement of lighting together with other environmental aspects such as support of the mood with audio to get the best from the scene in each case.

You will be rewarded with levels of a quality directly related to the amount of effort you are prepared to invest and not what you get out of the box by click and play in an add hoc fashion - thats if you want something that looks like those professional engines aluded to effect.

Yes, there will be an update I think......Riker9. But for now there are somethings you can do toup date the graphics. First off you could use full light maps, higer texture, etc in the file/preferences otion. Also, you could download better models with more pholys, oh and check out this...http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=72742&b=24
Oh and you can get some good models here...http://fps-files.net/index.php

Hope this helps.

Look... if your REALLY wanted nice graphics like Half Life 2 then steal it. Yeah, do it. And... uhh, use DBP to edit the engine.
(Yeah right)

Talk of stealing anything around here even if you are joking will bring you nothing but pain.

You have been warned.

Why do people assume FPSC is an engine?. You can't make much except for FPS games, it's nailed into a FPS engine, but you could'nt program your own game with it.

FPSC is priced and marketed and was indeed designed to be a cheap FPS game creation package that is easy to use for everyone. Are TGC to assume that everyone can make great graphics, everyone will need terrain, everyone will need melee. At the end of the day, most DBPro coders understand why this stuff is missing, it's because they're complex features that would have slowed down the release of FPSC. Don't assume that terrain is just a mesh, or that melee is just a weapon, or that saving and loading is a case of writing the data to a file and reading it back. The whole underlying system would need work in order to deal with the most requested features.
Like with weapons, it's easy to see how a setup file with the details inside is a nice neat way to handle weapons - but when you need a weapon to act differently, you have to program an exception, you have to support it with script commands to let end users take advantage, and how the feature will be used has to be assumed and catered for.

Everyone has their own ideas for what they'd add to FPSC, and those ideas are all trouble-free and easy, engineering features that keep everyone happy is probably something TGC don't relish starting.

TGC gave us the source code to make our own changes to, so they could argue that they've done their bit for now and deserve a break from FPSC development.


Van-B

Van B,

Fair comment.

Cant speak for others but I am aware of how difficult achieving the simplest addition for example to FPSC might be. The whole concept of FPSC is I would imagine quite complex to contemplate even developing and I have always said that TGC should be congratulated for the instigation of development of this innovative software which is much needed to fill a niche in the indie developers market.

Sorry if I use the term game "engine" rather loosely in definition - game creation system then - One of many tools if you lkie.

I have no idea but as game making is what TGC is all about I presume they will contiue to do what they do and would if possible like to see their game making products improved - FPSC included.

I sometimes make comment about FPSC in particular here at the forum - but dont make light of the task of devleoping such a product or the product as it currently is itself. I do try and state truthfully perhaps incorrectly what I see the status of the engine to be.

Of course I still use it in preference to others so I must have some faith in it and I dont use it in preference for one reason but because it has a number of benefits and the least important of those to me is click and play facility which has only a small part to play for me, not using a lot of default media content - I find it as much of a nusiance as a benefit as it imposes restrictions on the design of how the software works and what it is capable of doing easily without workarounds and such like in practical application to the task.

I wish FPSC a long life. Maybe I will then finish something worthwhile.

Cheers - is that allowed?

Don't get me wrong, the problem isn't people using the wrong terminology, the problem is when people start comparing FPSC to professional engines is all. I just want people to realise that they got what they paid for, they didn't pay much for it, and the more people who keep using it, the more likely TGC are to update it - right now though there's a lot of settling in still to be done on the FPSC forums. I'm sure things will improve once TGC's current project(s) are out of the way, but patience is indeed a vertue here .


Van-B

I was not and dont compare it to what you might term professional engines, but indie type engines either purchased or free and either open source or not.

Still its fair to say that as far as I can say from those I have personally encountered, used or own and work with - in regard to available features and functions or known bugs or issues FPSC does not offer a comparable set to the majority of those other indie engines in terms of features and functions but has more than its fair share of the other side of the coin in terms of the bugs and issues at this current moment in time.

Many of the features or functions that users ask for are not as far as I am aware particularly associated with professional engines at all but well within the domain of the other indies - the bugs and issues too it must be said in all fairness are not either restricted to the domain of professional engines but widespread throughout the industry. FPSC though does it seems to me have a bigger share of them and some serious ones at that.

Im not sure I would agree that users get what they paid for but thats another complex matter which is relative to everyones opinion too.

Ceratinly I would say its low cost - it being of less cost for instance than average modern computer game title which gives x number of hours entertainment value - similarly FPSC for many could offer the same. The point of difference is that FPSC is also available as a product that the more ardent purchaser may have purchased it for the purpose of more than entertainment as have perhaps many of those users who frequent this forum as opposed to many of the people who may buy it off the shelf - play with it for couple of hours and then bin it or put it away on the shelf.

Some posts of course do mention pro engines or commercial titles here in threads and its fair enough to expect users here to be educated enough not to expect the product to meet with those standards or anywhere near them perhaps even if some may get really outstanding results with FPSC - they will be few and far between - but really such things as terrain support, save load or particle support are just really not something from the exclusive domain of the professionals even though perhaps available in not all indies they are certainly widespread.

The forthcoming update would I hope squash any question of the value of a users purchase and anything further that users look for that should be added in future then I trust that TGC will seek to recover any dev costs appropriately so that such dev is worthwhile for them commercially in considering the same.

Existing important bugs and so on are one thing but becuse of the low initial cost as you have rightly pointed out - additional features and functions should need to be paid for by the end user and they should be prepared to do so if they want to see some of those improvements they ask for.

Thats me done. (in)

Here comes the smiley..

OK i went to fps files site and i found a character tht i really like so how do I mesh it with fpsc? Where do I put tht file?

Unzip the file into your user file into your entitybank. Than copy the .fpi and .fpe files and put them in you script bank. Than copy and put the texture files in the texture bank ect. Open up FPSCreator and go the object should be under your user file. If this doen't work just search the forums, normaly most your answears can be found.