Jump to content

Evolution

Josh

404 views

This is a good time to write about some very broad changes I expect to come about over the next year in our community as our new engine "Turbo" arrives. Turbo Game Engine, as the name suggests, offers really fast performance using a groundbreaking Vulkan-based renderer, which is relevant to everyone but particularly beneficial for VR developers who struggle to keep their framerates up using conventional game engines. I want to help get you onboard with some of the ideas that I myself am processing.

Less emphasis on how-to tutorials, more emphasis on API documentation

The new engine assumes you are either an artist or a programmer, and if you are a programmer you already know basic C++ or Lua. More attention will be paid to precisely documenting how commands behave. There will be a more strict division between supported and unsupported features. There will be less "guessing" what the user is trying to do, and more formal documentation saying "if you do X then Y will occur". For example, every entity creation function requires the world object be explicitly supplied in the creation command, instead of hiding this away in a global state. There will not be tutorials explaining what a variable is or teaching basic programming concepts.

More responsiveness to user requests, especially for programming features

Leadwerks 4 features have been in a semi-frozen state for a while now. Although many new features have been added, I have not wanted to create breaking changes, and have been reluctant to introduce things that might create new bugs, because I knew an entire new infrastructure for future development was on the way. With the new engine I will be more receptive to suggestions that make the engine better. One example would be an animation events system that lets users set a point in an animation where an event is called. These changes need to be implemented within the design philosophy of the new engine. For example, I would use an Actor class method to call the event function rather than a raw pointer. Emphasis should be placed on what is practical and useful for competent programmers and artists, and how everything fits into the overall design.

Less attempts at hand-holding for new developers

The new engine will not attempt to teach children to make their own MMORPG. Our marketing materials will not even suggest this is possible. The new engine will deliver performance faster than any other game engine in the world, period. Consequently, I think the community will gain a lot more advanced users, and though some of them will not even interact on the forum I do think you will see more organic creativity and quality. In its own way, the new engine actually is quite a lot easier to work with, but the sales pitch is not going to emphasize that, it will just be something people discover as they use it. I love seeing all the weird and cool creations that comes from people who are completely new to game development, but those people were new to game development and did well with Leadwerks had a lot of natural talent. Instead of trying to come up with a magic combination of features and tutorials to turn novices into John Carmack, we are going to rely on the product benefits to draw them and expect them to get up to speed quickly. Discussions should be about what is best for intermediate / experts, not trying to figure out what beginners want. Ease of use is subjective and I feel we have hit the point of diminishing returns chasing after this. If beginners want to jump in and learn that is great, but it is not our reason for existing.

Stronger focus on the core essentials

At the time of this writing, there are only eight entity types in the beta of the new engine. We can't win based on number of features, but we can do the core essentials much better than anyone else. Our new Vulkan renderer offers performance that developers (especially VR) can't live without. Models, lights, and rendering are the core features I want to focus on, and these can be expanded by the end user to create their own. For example, a custom particle system with support for all kinds of behaviors could easily be created with the model class and a few custom shaders, without breaking the performance that makes this engine valuable. Our new technology is very well thought out and will give us a stable base for a long time. I am planning on a plugin / extensions system because its best for this to be integrated in the core design, but you should not expect this to be very useful for a couple of years. Plugin systems require huge network effects to offer anything valuable. We can only reach that type of scale by offering something else unique that no one can match us on. Fortunately, we have something. It's right in the name.

More formal support for good standards

Vulkan has turned out to be a very good move. I don’t think anyone realizes how big a deal GLTF support is yet: you can download thousands of models from Sketchfab and other sources and load them right now with no adjustments. I may join the Khronos consortium and I have some ideas for additional useful GLTF extensions. I'm using JSON for a lot of files and it's great. DDS will be our main texture file format. There are more good standards today than there were ten years ago, and I will adopt the ones that fit our goals.

Different type of new user appearing

With Leadwerks, the average new user appears on the forum and says “hey, I want to make a game but I don’t really know how, please tell me what I need to know.” With the new engine I think it will be more like “hey, I’m more or less an expert already, I know exactly what I want to make, please tell me what I need to know.” I expect them to have less tolerance for bugs, undefined behavior, or undocumented features, and at the same time I think it will be easier to have frank discussions about exactly what developers need.

In very general terms that is how I want to focus things. I think everyone here will adjust to this more strict and well-defined approach and end up liking it a lot better.

  • Like 6


15 Comments


Recommended Comments

I love everything here a lot! Can't wait to ditch other stupid engines for this one!

Share this comment


Link to comment

I hope that turbo has some sort of tool development framework using the editor gui in c++ so that we can create our custom tools for the type of game we need and our editor tool can help us speed up the development process, I think turbo's speed should not only be limited to performance as sales pitch, it should also be linked to speedup of development processes, and the editor toolkit can be a good indicator towards it. This editor tool development system might be linked to plugin system. I am pretty new to leadwerks just purchased it this past saturday and on one day of use, I think this is the feature I missed in it. Keep in mind that I am coming from an experienced game developer perspective.

Share this comment


Link to comment

While I think we should have less tutorials, example content is a must. I myself learn things by looking at examples, and then modifying those samples to make it do what I want it to do. Samples should both be freely available and on the market place.

We should also have a tutorial on the editor, and where everything is/what it does. But otherwise I agree; no "How to make an FPS shooter" this time. Give them a template and let them be creative. 🙂

Share this comment


Link to comment
2 hours ago, m.yuneeb90 said:

I hope that turbo has some sort of tool development framework using the editor gui in c++ so that we can create our custom tools for the type of game we need and our editor tool can help us speed up the development process, I think turbo's speed should not only be limited to performance as sales pitch, it should also be linked to speedup of development processes, and the editor toolkit can be a good indicator towards it.

I think this is the right idea and your expectations are realistic. A strictly defined API that exposes the editor internal structure to Lua, similar to MaxScript in 3ds max, would be very useful.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

I feel like a lot of what I wrote above is just us acknowledging what we are and not trying to be something different. I want this to be more of an advanced technology company.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think having a basic setup tutorial would be helpful (as getting a window and camera set up with your API isn't exactly standard), but beyond that, the only thing I'd want is for everything in the API to actually be documented and searchable. There are a lot of things within LW4 that are simply not in the documentation, and are things one would run into pretty easily when going beyond basic functionality.

Share this comment


Link to comment

No tutorials is ok providing the api examples are enough to get a beginner started. Gameplay coding comes easy to me, but not setting up code.

Share this comment


Link to comment
7 minutes ago, cassius said:

No tutorials is ok providing the api examples are enough to get a beginner started. Gameplay coding comes easy to me, but not setting up code.

That's exactly how I feel too. Creating a feature in C++ is easy, it's just finding the actual commands to interface with the API you're working with.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I don't feel like money is going to be a big problem in the future, which frees us to do what we really want to do.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
7 hours ago, reepblue said:

While I think we should have less tutorials, example content is a must. I myself learn things by looking at examples, and then modifying those samples to make it do what I want it to do.

I'm the same.  I gave up on the Leadwerks GUI because it's not documented and a question I asked wasn't answered clearly (and it's also more convoluted than I feel it needs to be.  I just want to put down a button and detect if it's clicked on.  This should be like 2 or 3 lines of code).

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think, undoubtedly a good tool must have good documentation. That is to say imagine that you buy a powerful appliance to use in your home and you don't see any explicit documentation about its respective functions.  I think it can ruin the product, it's just what I think. 

Now, the simple example is based on for example a C++, lua, or C# template, something very simple like creating a simple window. And the rest is left to the user's mercy when digging into the documentation structure, or asking questions in the community.  

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

Share this comment


Link to comment
4 hours ago, aiaf said:

Btw the gui system will be available to turbo in a form similar to what we have now ?

Yes, although the idea of letting Lua run inside the rendering loop (for the drawing function) is definitely verboten in the new architecture. Instead it will use persistent 2D primitives that are created and managed by the script. Like instead of having a function that says "draw a rectangle here" the script will create a rectangle object with the characteristics it needs, and that will be sent to the rendering thread.

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
1 hour ago, Josh said:

Yes, although the idea of letting Lua run inside the rendering loop (for the drawing function) is definitely verboten in the new architecture. Instead it will use persistent 2D primitives that are created and managed by the script. Like instead of having a function that says "draw a rectangle here" the script will create a rectangle object with the characteristics it needs, and that will be sent to the rendering thread.

Please make UI editor happen

Share this comment


Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Blog Entries

    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 5
      You might have seen this graphic comparing the size of the world in different games. I've played Fuel, and never reached the end of the world in that game. You can drive for a very long time on those roads.

      We want to use the new engine for realistic simulations of air and ground movements. At normal cruising altitude of a commercial airliner, the pilot has a view range of about 400 kilometers. The image below shows that area (800 x 800 km). You can see the areas of the biggest games ever fit neatly into the corner of just our visible area.

      The gray space above is not the total world size, it is just the area you can see at once from high altitude. The total world size is about 50 times bigger.
      This is what I am working on now.
    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 26
      Gamers have always been fascinated with the idea of endless areas to roam.  It seems we are always artificially constrained within a small area to play in, and the possibility of an entire world outside those bounds is tantalizing.  The game FUEL captured this idea by presenting the player with an enormous world that took hours to drive across:
      In the past, I always implemented terrain with one big heightmap texture, which had a fixed size like 1024x1024, 2048x2048, etc.  However, our vegetation system, featured in the book Game Engine Gems 3, required a different approach.  There was far too many instances of grass, trees, and rocks to store them all in memory, and I wanted to do something really radical.  The solution was to create an algorithm that could instantly calculate all the vegetation instances in a given area.  The algorithm would always produce the same result, but the actual data would never be saved, it was just retrieved in the area where you needed it, when you needed it.  So with a few modifications, our vegetation system is already set up to generate infinite instances far into the distance.

      However, terrain is problematic.  Just because an area is too far away to see doesn't mean it should stop existing.  If we don't store the terrain in memory then how do we prevent far away objects from falling into the ground?  I don't like the idea of disabling far away physics because it makes things very complex for the end user.  There are definitely some tricks we can add like not updating far away AI agents, but I want everything to just work by default, to the best of my ability.
      It was during the development of the vegetation system that I realized the MISSING PIECE to this puzzle.  The secret is in the way collision works with vegetation.  When any object moves all the collidable vegetation instances around it are retrieved and collision is performed on this fetched data.  We can do the exact same thing with terrain   Imagine a log rolling across the terrain.  We could use an algorithm to generate all the triangles it potentially could collide with, like in the image below.

      You can probably imagine how it would be easy to lay out an infinite grid of flat squares around the player, wherever he is standing in the world.

      What if we only save heightmap data for the squares the user modifies in the editor?  They can't possibly modify the entire universe, so let's just save their changes and make the default terrain flat.  It won't be very interesting, but it will work, right?
      What if instead of being flat by default, there was a function we had that would procedurally calculate the terrain height at any point?  The input would be the XZ position in the world and the output would be a heightmap value.

      If we used this, then we would have an entire procedurally generated terrain combined with parts that the developer modifies by hand with the terrain tools.  Only the hand-modified parts would have to be saved to a series of files that could be named "mapname_x_x.patch", i.e. "magickingdom_54_72.patch".  These patches could be loaded from disk as needed, and deleted from memory when no longer in use.
      The real magic would be in developing an algorithm that could quickly generate a height value given an XZ position.  A random seed could be introduced to allow us to create an endless variety of procedural landscapes to explore.  Perhaps a large brush could even be used to assign characteristics to an entire region like "mountainy", "plains", etc.
      The possibilities of what we can do in Leadwerks Engine 5 are intriguing.  Granted I don't have all the answers right now, but implementing a system like this would be a major step forward that unlocks an enormous world to explore.  What do you think?

    • By Haydenmango in Snowboarding Development Blog 6
      So I've been researching snowboarding lately to get an idea of what animations and mechanics I need to create for my game.  I have learned lots of interesting things since I've only seen snow once or twice in my entire life and have never even tried snowboarding or any other board sports (skateboarding, surfing, etc.) for that matter.
       
      Snowboarding tricks are quite interesting as they are mostly derived from skateboarding.  Snowboarding tricks pay homage to their equivalent skating tricks by sharing many concepts and names.  For example basic grabs in snowboarding share the same concepts and names as skateboarding: indy, mute, method, stalefish, nosegrab, and tailgrab.  Something interesting to note is in snowboarding you can grab Tindy or Tailfish but this is considered poor form since these grabs can't be done on a skateboard (due to the board not being attached to the skaters feet) and grabbing these areas is generally something a novice snowboarder does when failing or "half-assing" a normal grab.  Check out this diagram to see how grabs work -
       
       
      So, after reading lots of text descriptions for tricks I was still confused by what all these terms meant and how they were actually applied.  So my next step was to look up these tricks actually being done and I found some really cool videos showing off how to do various tricks.  This video in particular is the best reference material I've found as it contains nearly every trick back to back with labeled names and some tweaks -
       
      Sadly my rigged model doesn't handle leg animations with the snowboard that well so I can't animate as many tricks as I want to.  Regardless there will still be around 15 total grab/air tricks in the game.  Now it's time for me to stop procrastinating and start animating!  
×
×
  • Create New...