Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Blender 2.33 Re-enables Game Engine

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the back-in-business dept.

Graphics 198

fforw writes "One and a half year after becoming free software, the Blender Foundation has released a new version of Blender which finally enables the game engine again. When Blender became free software. the game engine had to be disabled because SOLID, the collision library was not free software. After SOLID's author Gino van den Bergen changed his mind, Blender has now restored all functionality from the closed-source period."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027550)

fp

sp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027557)

sp

Ah but... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027561)

...does it make fruit smoothies?

Some Blender Games (4, Informative)

c_oflynn (649487) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027563)

A quick Google revealed a few examples of some games that use this engine, see http://www.spinheaddev.com/gameexpose0.html (NOT HTML clicking to help reduce load on server a tad...)

Re:Some Blender Games (2, Informative)

c_oflynn (649487) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027584)

PS: In case of slashdotting, here is the links from the article on some games:

http://www.spinheaddev.com/?id=crescentdawn
htt p://www.shadeless.dk/3d/?site=darksquad.htm
http: //project-blender.onlinehome.de/
http://www.brain storm-studios.net
http://zerooneentertainment.org /blengine/sachi
http://project-blender.onlinehome .de/
http://www.tudbzd.com/

Re:Some Blender Games (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027673)

jerk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027963)

What part of "NOT HTML clicking to help reduce load on server a tad" do you not understand?

Re:jerk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028156)

I think they are missing the part where someone thinks making a link copy and paste actually helps reduce load.

'Oh, I was going to visit that site, but it would take me an extra 3 seconds to copy and paste, darn, might as well go outside and play in traffic instead.'

FYI, It doesn't reduce traffic. In fact, it increases traffic thanks to the typos that have now been added to the mix.

Good job!

Re:jerk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028288)

Well some people(like me I admit).
Have a tendency of clicking almost every link just to see what it is. Those probably add quite much to the serverload. When you have to copy and paste you sort out those clicking the link without thinking.

Re:jerk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028836)

You're forgetting about the eighty billion people who cache Slashdot and its links for off-line viewing. Programs ignore URLs expressed without a link.

Jerk.

and another thing for newbies to learn (4, Interesting)

Goeland86 (741690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027564)

that's nice to have the functionality again... but it's something more to learn for newbies in blender. As if blender wasn't complex enough... I appreciate the gesture though, but there's really going to be a need for a complete rewrite of the online doc... most of it dates from the 2.2 era. So get those renders and movies and now games coming along! It's time for it now...

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (5, Informative)

zaphod_bee4 (752609) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027625)

Their is complete documentation for the 2.3x release available in several formats: http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Using_Blender.80.0.ht ml

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1, Troll)

Goeland86 (741690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027686)

yes, indeed, available for people who can afford $45 for the 2.3 paper book manual. It isn't available for download yet. And now with the game functions re-integrated they're going for yet another re-write of the docs. Read again, I'm not dumb, I've been using blender for the better part of 6 months.

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027699)

That is not true, the 2.3 manual has been uploaded in html and pdf forms. I do find a paper manual (+- 800 pages and 1 kg) easier to use in most cases, but for quick searching the pdf is nice.

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1)

zaphod_bee4 (752609) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027760)

I feel vindicated :-) I occasionally contribute to the Blender codebase and use it so I also know what I am talking about.

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1)

Goeland86 (741690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028494)

then tell me where I can download the pdf version of the paper manual? It's not the same documentation. The manual is based on it, agreed, but it's not as exhaustive. And I use the open doc project alot, I just haven't found any screenshots showing a blender 2.3 interface: it's all based on 2.2, except perhaps the Python API section which has major differences. Minor differences in the interface are not mentioned, and that's the criticism I have for that documentation: it's a good source of knowledge for experienced users like you, who apparently code and have been with blender since 2.2, but not for people who start on 2.3. I didn't mean any offense, but I have looked hard for recent docs, and aside from new tutorials, nothing major really new outside the manual has been done since version 2.2x.

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (2, Insightful)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028259)

As if blender wasn't complex enough

WTF? Compared to what? Softimage [softimage.com] ? Maya [alias.com] ? 3D Studio [3dstudio.com] ?

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028665)

Actually those comercial softwares are a lot easier to use by those knowledgeble but beginers in bleder. Blender takes quite a lot to get used to (interface and quirks).

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028983)

I read that 5 or 6 times, and it still doesn't make sense, so it can't be just my hangover. But what I think you meant was that the commercial packages are easy to use by people who know how to use them, but blender is geared toward beginners. I'd agree with that, but isn't that like saying string theory is easy to physicists? 3D modelling is just not an easy thing, and I think any attempt at dumbing down the interface past where Blender is at, is going to risk over simplification.

Blender is pretty easy to get going in. Having never touched 3D software until Blender, I found myself getting pretty familiar with it in the first hour or two. Since then, a friend of mine has tried to sell me on Softimage and only left me baffled and confused. Quite honestly, I'm amazed at the quality of Blender when put up against a $4000 package like Softimage. Its parallel to the GIMP/Photoshop thing, but the price gap is humongous.

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (1)

Goeland86 (741690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028730)

All the various functions are there and everywhere else in blender, but it's just so complex to get to them... the mouse/keyboard system is good, but needs some practice, and the fact that I haven't found a complete listing of all keyboard shortcuts yet limits the ability to improve all that well. mostly it's just a matter of "looks", not feel. I did need 6 months to learn how to use blender through the keyboard/mouse system though!

Re:and another thing for newbies to learn (3, Informative)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028862)

I haven't found a complete listing of all keyboard shortcuts yet

This list [lib.hel.fi] looks pretty good.

A welcome addition - not just for games (5, Interesting)

JaF893 (745419) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027578)

This is good news - its not exactly a giant leap forwards but it is important all the same. Improved collison detection is not just good for games its good for modelling. For example a physics teacher could teach his students about the ideal gas law using a series of blender animations.

Re:A welcome addition - not just for games (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027599)

And he could wipe his ass to demonstrate the same thing. Collision detection in game libraries are not true to real life at all.

I hate nerds- 'I _can_ brush my teeth with piss'.

Re:A welcome addition - not just for games (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027907)

>I hate nerds- 'I _can_ brush my teeth with piss'.

What does your special ability have to do with your hatred of nerds?

(I dislike supervillians with pathetic and/or disgusting powers.)

A welcome addition - not just for games-Gassy exam (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027607)

"For example a physics teacher could teach his students about the ideal gas law using a series of blender animations."

A couple rounds of fatty foods, and beer will teach them about the Ideal Gas Law. No need for pictures of the blessed event...unless you want to.

Re:A welcome addition - not just for games (1)

MidnightBrewer (97195) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027996)

It's good for any kind of animation, if you actually do any. For example, complex actions, such as hitting pins with a bowling ball can be modeled, saving a lot of time setting keyframes and tweaking them to look right.

Great F/OSS (5, Informative)

mastergoon (648848) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027588)

Blender has got to be right up there among the best of the F/OSS software. It may not have all the features of 3d studio max, but for beginner and intermediate modellers, or people with no artistic talent, it kicks ass!

The controls are a bit hard to learn, though the interface has been getting better recently. In the end, once you read through the tutorials and learn all the keyboard commands you will find them to be great.

Re:Great F/OSS (1)

3dr (169908) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027795)

True, true. Blender provides a whopping surprise in the quality of the models, and the tools to make those models. The new rendering engine is nice, and an external renderer/ray tracer has been integrated. I've also combined 3D models with video streams for some really fun clips; the video editor isn't bad at all.

In my spare time, I've been utilizing Blender's Python bindings to write a mesh exporter, and do other things.

If one has an interest in 3D modeling and animation, Blender should be looked at.

Re:Great F/OSS (5, Insightful)

vivian (156520) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027825)

Which unfortunately highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of many OSS projects.

Blender can be used to do pretty much anything you want in 3d animation, and has a fantastic set of features and great potential - but it is simply painful to use. It takes days to learn the shortcut keys that are essential for basic editing, especially if you are also trying to use other 3d programs or 2d programs along side it that have their own shortcuts that the artist has to remember too, witout getting them crossed.

Ideally, there should be a visible navigable menu for every command, even if they are nested a few deep, with the shortcut Key written next to the command! Better yet, the shortcuts would be assignable to functions, so you could set up the key mapping to what works best for the artist.

Blender suffers from the same problem that the first CAD I wrote has - only the programmers know all the hotkeys and commands, and they make 100% sense to the programmer, but not neccesarily to the end user.
Eg. I like to work in 3d by basically selecting a point, and draging it in the screen's 2d plane, and rotating the object to a different view if I want to move the point outside the initial plane. Ideally, left dragging would move the point and right dragging would rotate the object. If it was possible to map the input interfaces (ie. mouse dragging/clicking,buttons and keystrokes) to program functions ( eg. rotate target, drag target , scale, rotate, zoom,copy, etc) then I could set it up the way that works best for me in the same way that Blender brilliantly allows you to completely customise multiple views and panels.

The lack of a full undo (ie. multiple steps, on all functions) really holds blender back. I hope this gets done before anything else. It really holds discourages experimentation and steepens the learning curve beause a mistake can screw your model, or cause problems for alignment (eg. no undo for having rotated the view)
Other than that, I think it's great and would be a much stronger challenger to 3d Studio Max if these things were implemented.

Re:Great F/OSS (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028210)

Hopefully someone will mod you up. Great insight!

Re:Great F/OSS (4, Informative)

dcuny (613699) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028601)

I agree. However, there's been a lot of work to redo the Blender interface, and that work is continuing. For example, the Blender Funboard newsgroup was put together for this purpose.

Unfortunately, this newsgroup hasn't proved entirely successful. One problem is that long-time users are loathe to have their beloved interface changed, since they feel that it's just "dumbing it down", and any changes will also slow them down.

Another issue is that coders would rather add new features (ambiant occlusion, new texture models, etc.) than work on the UI. Ton (the primary architect) has been working on the Blender Book, and the other major coder has been off on vacation.

I recently tried to learn RVKs. What's an RVK you might ask? They are Relative Vertex Keys, but the rest of the world calls them Morph Targets. And where the rest of the world allows you to actually select a named morph target and drag a slider, Blender insists that you create IPO curves (interpolation, not initial price offering) - somehow remembering that RVK curve #7 was a left blink, and RVK curve #8 was the phoneme "o" - and then ctrl+click on the IPO curve and drag to create a spline for the RVK ...

It's a freaking UI nightmare!

The refusal to use common nomenclature and standard UI tools here pretty wells sums up the problems with the Blender UI.

Still, William Reynish (aka Monkeyboi) has put together a great set of proposals to fix the UI, and many of his prior suggestions have been incorporated. So I'm hoping that Ton and others concentrate on getting the remainder of Blender UI out of the "dark ages" so the rest of us can use it.

We should thank this guy... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028198)

Considering how nice this fellow who made his library F/OSS was, perhaps we should find some way to thank the guy who made the library?

Anyone know where to find him & maybe send him beer money or something nice? :) Or hell, even to email him a thank you...

This is really good news (5, Interesting)

SavedLinuXgeeK (769306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027592)

As a Highschool Student I did an entire project in Blender's 3D Engine. It essentially had the ability to navigate look around and view objects in all dimensions. While this may seem a little base, as it was, it was not too difficult for a 17 year old to pick up and run with.

It actually gets even deeper when you combine the python scripting with the game engine, as opposed to using the built in object functions. The games can get really complex, and with the inverse kinematic options for human body(mapping theh way the human joints move), it makes for some really interesting possibilities. Personally as I am learning python now, I may go back to the blender engine, and see what havoc I may be able to create.

Collision detection (5, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027605)

It's nice of Gino to make SOLID free software.

Good collision libraries are fun. I've written one, as part of Falling Bodies. [animats.com] I think I was the first, back in 1996-1997, to use axis-oriented bounding boxes with GJK, which is what SOLID, and everybody else, uses now.

Lin and Canny are the ones who really cracked this problem. Before Lin and Canny, algorithms for collisions in a space with N objects with M faces each were O(N^2) * O(M^2). They got that down to slightly worse than O(Nm), where Nm is the number of moving objects. Very clever.

I-Collide [unc.edu] was the first generally available package for this. The original version was in LISP, which was translated to C, retaining much of the LISP style. They used axis-oriented bounding boxes with a linear programming package. This had some problems with numerical error, and the linear programming package was rather bulky. But it demonstrated, back in 1996, what was possible. Then everybody (well, the half dozen or so people into this stuff) went to work and built better systems.

Actually, collision detection is a pain to code, but well understood today. Collision response, the actual physics, is much harder.

The end result of all this is that games can now have really big worlds with working collision detection.

Re:Collision detection (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027651)

It would be nice to see ODE [sourceforge.net] integrated into Blender instead of SOLID. ODE is a complete dynamics simulator, not just a collision detector.

SOLID is a nice library, but its license terms are still unfriendly to commercial products. The author wants a couple thousand dollars to license it for even a shareware game, which is just silly when ODE is free under a BSD-style license. ODE's collision subsystem isn't quite as, well, solid as SOLID, but it's good enough for many applications.

Re:Collision detection (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027729)

ODE is still at version 0.039, and not improving much.

Reliable dynamics simulators are hard. If you want one for a commercial game, there's Havok 2 [havok.com] . All the free stuff is very limited.

It takes years of hard work to write a physics engine. If you're competent, in six months you'll have something that sort of works. From "sort of works" to "works" is years of effort. And it's not patches. It's theory. So the open source process doesn't work very well.

Re:Collision detection (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027816)

ODE is still at version 0.039, and not improving much.

I wouldn't agree at all. There's an ongoing debate on the ODE list about what features to add, and the consensus is towards improving stability and collision quality rather than adding unnecessary frills. This is exactly the right approach, and Russ Smith, the original ODE author, is behind it one hundred percent.

ODE actually is undergoing substantial improvement and debugging, even if the feature list doesn't seem to be growing at its prior pace.

Re:Collision detection (2, Interesting)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028771)

I hope you know about the great future ODE has :). Softimage has incorporated hard-body dynamics into the brand new version 4 of their flagship product Softimage XSI, by including ODE. One guy has worked on it and they are going to give back the changes. There was also talk about Softimage's customers (think ILM), who, having access to the source code, are going to modify and contribute to this library.

Re:Collision detection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028864)

I wouldn't agree at all. I've written 3 dynamics codes. But I studied Mechanical Engineering in Uni. Too many games programmers I see have _no_ mechanical knowledge - the classic "what path will the ball follow as it comes off this spiral ramp?" question gets them every time. That's the sort of stuff that SHOULD BE TAUGHT IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. People come out of college these days unable to FUCKING ADD. That's sad, and is why India and Europe are overtaking us - they actually teach kids trivial skills!

Games that use the Blender Engine (1, Informative)

JaF893 (745419) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027612)

For those who are interested here are six games that use the blender game engine:
Crescent Dawn [spinheaddev.com]
Dark Squad [shadeless.dk]
Dracolith [brainstorm-studios.net]
Sachi Soup [zerooneentertainment.org]
Twilight Quest [onlinehome.de]
Vertigo [tudbzd.com]

What a pack of loosers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027636)

I havwen't heard of any of them!!!!!!

Informative? Funny/troll! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027715)

Only one of those links actually works. Gee mods, you could of clicked before you rated.

Re:Games that use the Blender Engine (1)

Deraj DeZine (726641) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028094)

I got 404s on all but the link for Twilight Quest

3D modelling (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027615)

3D modelling sucks ass, d00d!!!

How to NOT sound like a moron (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027622)

Just drop the have/has from your sentences when you are refering to a company. No matter which side of the pond you are on you are going to sound like an idiot to the other side if you use either. Besides, you are using "passive voice" - a serious no-no. Use neither and you sound succinct.

Example:

1) the Blender Foundation has released a new version
2) the Blender Foundation have released a new version
3) the Blender Foundation released a new version

And the winner is??

Re:How to NOT sound like a moron (-1, Offtopic)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027648)

And the winner is??

Seabiscuit!

KFG

Garbled menus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027642)

Does anyone know whether this release fixes the issues with garbled menus? Makes Blender kinda unusable :\

Re:Garbled menus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027677)

It does not. But blender is still usable for those that know how to rtfm...

Re:Garbled menus (1)

ReyTFox (676839) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027688)

In X11, this problem is usually caused by the cursor settings. Some people have to render it with software mode, others hardware.

I dunno about under other platforms. I never had trouble with it in Windows.

Cursor issue (2, Insightful)

r6144 (544027) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027835)

As another poster has pointed out, this is possibly caused by bad interactions between new pretty X cursors, video drivers (i845 for me) and Blender. Just try adding "Xcursor.core: true" to ~/.Xresources, reload it using xrdb (or restart X), and see if it gets better (the mouse cursor would return to the good-old black-and-white style though).

what about Undo? (1)

Kiro (220724) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027665)

This is great news but when is UNDO gonna be implemented, if ever? This is a major feature for a software like that to be missing.

Re:what about Undo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027678)

FULL undo support is available for mesh editing. Other than that, make copies of things before you change them? It's actually possible to learn how to not need undo....strange but true.

Re:what about Undo? (1)

Kiro (220724) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027684)

why learn how to live without a feature you take for granted? heck we can "learn" to live without electricity too, but that don't mean I wanna.

Re:what about Undo? (1)

Klowner (145731) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027754)

It's not really learning to compensate for not having an undo feature, as much as learning how blender works..

The only time I ever really NEED an undo feature is in mesh editing mode. But when I'm in object mode, it's possible to clear the rotation/scale/transform of an object with a couple mouse clicks, then simply re-position your object however you like it..

The lack of undo was my biggest complaint at first, and now I really don't care about it.

Re:what about Undo? (4, Informative)

DavidLeblond (267211) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027690)

This is great news but when is UNDO gonna be implemented, if ever? This is a major feature for a software like that to be missing.


Its been there for awhile now. Press U in edit mode.

Re:what about Undo? (1)

MadChicken (36468) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027742)

Heh with the all CAPS my first thought was that UNDO was another acronym.

Hey, it's got a SOLID collision engine already...

Re:what about Undo? (2, Interesting)

sahonen (680948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027771)

There is full undo capability (as many steps back as you have RAM for) in mesh edit mode. In the 5 years I've been using Blender, I've never needed any other undo.

Re:what about Undo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027792)

hm, i guess the docu should be updated then, as it tells something like that there is sort of undo but not really an undo without explaining it in a way a newbie like me could understand it. So far i also just tought blender had no undo.

the next major step (1)

MozillaFireBird (701394) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027667)

The next major step should be to include Blender in various GNU/Linux distro. Since most of the linux geeks play those games anyway, why not have Blender?

Re:the next major step (1)

StarfishOne (756076) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027808)

Or 3D desktops so that we can fly through our files, just as in movies like Hackers ^_^

Reaching back (2, Insightful)

metallikop (649953) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027683)

These games look like they came right off the store shelves back in 1998. You get what you pay for.

Blender doesn't need a game engine. (3, Insightful)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027694)

It needs GOOD DOCUMENTATION. I'm a pretty smart person, if my test scores are to be believed, but I find Blender's interface to be completely inscrutable. And I have managed to work with other 3D modelling programs before...

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027702)

You can buy the blender manual...
Or read it online if you don't want to pay for it.
And if you have done, what was so bad about it?

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (1)

sahonen (680948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027785)

It has plenty of good documentation online. Just open your eyes.

As for people who complain the docs aren't current, I haven't read any actual docs since I bought the 1.5 manual. After you get the hang of it, everything is self-explanatory.

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027842)

The current documentation is even worse than just bad. It's sometimes plain wrong. It's probably easy when you used it for some time and know the keys. I wanted to learn how to use it and tried the recommended first tutorial (building an animated man - i think he was called gus) which was nice written, but some steps simply did not work (like wrong keys for mirroring an object). Searching some time in the web i managed to advance slightly in this tutorial, but i simply failed to finish it.

I still want to learn how to use Blender, but by now i tried a second tutorial with samples that didn't work and i just don't know HOW i can learn using it if i don't have correct documentation. I figured out some things by now - but it's really very, very annoying if you spend several hours on simple tutorials just trying to figure out how it really works instead of beeing able just to get it done.

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027861)

Oh, one thing i forgot: If anyone knows a beginner tutorial which does work with the current version of Blender, i'd really like to hear about it!

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (1)

greay (462639) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028148)

I haven't checked the documentation lately, so maybe things have gotten better...

But it was awful hard to get the hang of Blender in the first place, what with the documentation not being current. And a lot of the features just weren't documented. Not having up-to-date documentation /is/ a valid concern. It makes learning (especially something as complicated and confusing as blender) a lot harder than it needs to be.

Re:Blender doesn't need a game engine. (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028314)

It needs GOOD DOCUMENTATION

Try the gingerbread man tutorial [blender.org] . I had a lot of fun going through that. It explains the interface very well, as well as provides a brief intro to modelling in general.

Obligatory /.ing comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027705)

Looks like his webserver was put in a Blender :P

Re:Obligatory /.ing comment (1)

m4ik (576357) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027831)

At least they got humour.
www.blender.org says:

Hello Slashdot!

Our community services are suspended for now. Please visit www.blender3d.org.

Is .3ds support still omitted? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027734)

How long are the Blender guys going to continue overlooking this common file format? There are plenty of modelers who have looked at Blender (DESPITE the inferior interface), but the minute the find out it cannot import .3ds, they go back to 3D Studio max.

I mean, what's the point of using a 2nd rate app that can't even import a commonly used file format?

Just plug in a Python script (3, Informative)

ReyTFox (676839) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027756)

http://bane.servebeer.com/programming/blender/

Re:Is .3ds support still omitted? (2, Informative)

Klowner (145731) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027775)

[troll food]
Ever heard of a plug-in?

Blender has excellent support for import/export scripts written in python. If you do a little digging around on the blender sites I'm sure you'd find a variety of 3ds importer/exporters available.

[/troll food]

Re:Is .3ds support still omitted? (1)

greay (462639) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028113)

it may have excellent support for plugins, but the plugins are often a pain to find, and a lot of them just don't work.

Game engine = worst...idea...ever (3, Insightful)

sahonen (680948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027759)

I firmly believe that shifting the focus of Blender to the gaming engine at the expense of the rendering engine is what killed NaN in the first place. When Blender went OSS and the game engine had to be taken out, Blender took on new life as new features were added to the rendering engine including the much-requested raytracing. Now that the gaming engine is back in, I fear that Blender will soon fail again.

It was nice having it while it was around.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (4, Interesting)

zaphod_bee4 (752609) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027787)

Being a contributor and hanging out with the Primary Dev's I can reassure you that the Rendering engine is still a high priority. Not to mention the new emphasis on Yafray integration. I doubt you will have to worry about this being neglected.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (2, Insightful)

sahonen (680948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027911)

Since I made that post I looked around the Blender site and checked out the new features. I take it back, the game engine is the least of what's been introduced in the latest version. I love the reworking of the material system. Given all the amazing stuff I've been able to do with just clouds I can't wait to try out the new texturing modes.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (2, Interesting)

adrianbaugh (696007) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027857)

That's the difference between the cathedral and the bazaar though, isn't it? In a small company certain aspects might get neglected at the expense of others. In an open development model, people can code what they want. I doubt there'll be a sudden shift of rendering engine developers to the game engine; rather, its becoming free just opens it up for extra developers who want to work on game engines to work on it. This sounds like good news (though I wouldn't really know as I'm another of those people who've never been able to get to grips with the UI).

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028000)

Blenders internal rendering engine isnt great, i think they would be better off to do what they are currently doing - integrating with YafRay, and PovRay (PovRay is very mature)

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028100)

What is the problem with the integrated render?
They are not going to replace the internal render with yafray. Yafray is slow but realistic. The internal is fast but better suited for non-realistic images. Though it can do both radiosity and raytracing...

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028207)

AFAIK it lakes depth of field and motion blur and afew other things (photons/caustics?). The radiosity interface seemd cumbersome (last time i used it in 2.32) and destructive to the geometry if i remember correctly (reapplying things all the time is a hassle and doesnt make a good interface). You're right its an internal renderer thats best suited for somethings not others, i have no problem with it, and the good thing about these things being free/open is that they can use another projects renderer aswell.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028265)

DOF is possible through a plugin.
Motion blur is not missing.
Otherwise you're right.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9028274)

DOF is possible with a sequencer plug-in, motion blur has been there for ages too (mblur button in scene buttons). Radiosity can be done at render time with the Radio button in the scene buttons.

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028157)

I agree. Quick peeks vi YafRay work great. And PovRay is simply awesome!

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (2, Interesting)

sahonen (680948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028524)

Replacing the built-in render with a raytracer would be the worst thing they could possibly do. Raytracing is SLOW. The built-in scanline renderer puts out great images in a minimum of time, which is necessary when an animation needs to be done by yesterday. (I make graphics for television).

Re:Game engine = worst...idea...ever (1)

burns210 (572621) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028301)

since it IS opensource, the developers that wish to further improve the game engine can, and those that want to improve the other aspects of Blender(like the raytracind and other features you mentioneD) can aswell... It isn't a single company shifting focus, it is the adding of a new feature into an open program that now has room in new markets where it didn't use to.

Speaking of Collisions (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027779)

The best collisions in life are free. Like, for example, Porrasturvat and Rekkaturvat.

http://jet.ro/dismount/

3d web plugin (1)

Gleapsite (713682) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027887)

A little off topic, But as i was looking at their site, i found a "3d web plugin" which apparently has versions for IE explorer and netscape. Why ever isn't there a pheonix/firebird/firefox plugin? does anyone know of one?

Re:3d web plugin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027921)

The web plugin isn't being developed.

Re:3d web plugin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027970)

...firefox can use netscape plugins under linux, can't it under win32 as well? (same for konqueror, but I'm not asking about it under win32 ;)

Re:3d web plugin (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028164)

Mozilla/Netscape/Pheeonix/Firebird/Firefox all use the same plugins [mozdev.org] . Exploder used to support them [microsoft.com] as well.

fi8St (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9027945)

that they side7ine Fortunately, Linux

Collision detection libs and Karl Sims' famous vid (1)

Szplug (8771) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027957)

Great; it's probably possible now to implement Karl Sims' old evolving 3D creatures. Anyone know of other free libs besides SOLID?

Re:Collision detection libs and Karl Sims' famous (1)

dcuny (613699) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028677)

If you want to implement Sims-esque life, you might have a look at breve [spiderland.org] . But you might need a Beowolf cluster:
  • "In the aptly named Creature Evolver I attempted to reproduce a project originally conceived by Karl Sims, but which at the time that Sims implemented it required an expensive super computer. My goal was not necessarily to improve on Sims' work, at least not in the first iteration, but merely to demonstrate that it is possible to evolve novel physical morphologies and accompanying neural control in a three dimensional world with an accurate underlying physics. Ideally, I would like to explore the possibility of entire ecosystems of physically simulated organisms. At present it is only barely possible to evolve a single organism in a reasonable period of time however."
Still, it looks to be a very cool project.

Awesome, thanks /nt (1)

Szplug (8771) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028744)

Ok, t. Stupid slashcode :)

Bring it on! (2, Interesting)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9027972)

Woohoooh!!! ive been checking the blender site almost everyday for the next point release. 2.32 seems to have a very annoying memory leak in win2k. This program is really showing great potential, if you start it up for the first time you'll be lost, but once you hit the learning curve its great. Theres layers and layers of functionality all inside that tiny binary, oh wait.. its slashdotted. :(

Plugin too?? (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028088)

restored all functionality from the closed-source period

Does this mean the browser plugin is back too? Or does that not count because it never left beta?

Re:Plugin too?? (1)

lambermo (74399) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028772)

Yes, it's in the source (actually it never left ;-) only SOLID left). I just built the browser plugin (and the stand alone player) for FreeBSD (I'm the FreeBSD platform manager), but it won't be released as a binary yet; not tested.
I hope that changes soon, I liked the browser plugin. But it was very hard to get it working right at NaN, that's why we never released it. Netscape/Mozilla's plugin API is a mess, it works different on all platforms and such :(
So: new coding help is required ;-) Don't be shy !

Re:Plugin too?? (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028833)

new coding help is required ;-) Don't be shy !

This is definitely something I'll be playing with. Where do blender developers hang out, Freenode?

Lightwave vs Blender vs Max (4, Interesting)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 10 years ago | (#9028728)

OK, it's nice that blender has a game engine again, which is something I feel is lacking in Lightwave 7.5 (i know game sdk exists, but it would be nice if it was a little more intergrated). However, the point is, what is Blender trying to be? An open source alternative to the big hollywood rendering soloutions, capable of doing boradcast level animation and compositing? Or is it trying to be an open source alternative to 3d Studio Max, a sorta half-game, half-studio, totally lame program that does neither modelling nor rendering very well? If you look into a lot of production games, modelling these days is done increasingly in Maya or Lightwave. Not 3ds max. Surely basing it's development model a little on max is a road to distaster? At the end of the day, Mx is neither fish nor fowl, nor good red herring. It doesn't really do anything very well. For games development, it's fairly good, but rendering in it is horrible, and modelling in it's a joke. I sincerely hope that Blender, which as someone rightfully said is one of the gems of the OSS world, does not follow Max down that road now it's got it's game engine back.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?