3D Construct

This forum is currently in read-only mode.
0 favourites
From the Asset Store
Casino? money? who knows? but the target is the same!
  • Jeswen, my idea of a 3D gamemaker it's quite different from FPS Creator.

    My idea is about using 3D models instead of sprites, and make levels out of 3d models, wich are to be placed somewhere in the actual frame editor, wich will turn into a placement editor.

    All the rest however stills as is now, with the event editor and so.

    Even better if the developer could add 2D stuff like a HUD on top of it.

    My idea: 1) model some interiors 2) place them in the frame editor 3) edit events and make up the game

    however, various components are required, like: water, skybox, skeletal animations, and so...

    Bye, Berserk.


  • berserk: I was responding more to the fact that Ashley seems to think it would be too much of a stretch to have a 3D WYSIWYG program that can compete visually and otherwise, with modern games.

    FPSC X10 is ample proof of such a concept.

  • I don't see Ashley saying it was impossible for anyone.. one programmer can only do so much and to create a modeller, a WYSIWYG 3D editor and then tie it in with the ease of the collision system, effects and everything Construct has is asking years of development in ground that he probably hasn't worked in before.

    Not to mention the huge library of 3D objects and artists they have at their disposal. I doubt the majority of Construct users have the talent to create them!

    To me it seems Construct should continue with Direct-X/OpenGL and gradually add more 3D features, if and when additional programmers with 3D experience join then hopefully a 3D engine can be built onto the existing system.

  • timtim: And where did I suggest that Ashley stated it was impossible? I didn't.

    I'm simply saying, that software already exists where if someone was creative enough and knew some programming, they could create an amazing FPS with such a program.

    You are only limited by your creativity.

    EDIT: I should add I really like Construct. Don't get me wrong.

  • Apart from all this discussion, this just isn't going to happen to construct within the next 2 years anyway (i would think).

    Its a nice idea, but Ashley has so much to do on construct at the moment anyway, and he's doing it mainly by himself. Perhaps if construct took off and had loads of devs (like blender3d) then different aspects would be developed by certain devs, and possibly a group would be interested in this idea etc.

  • I agree the concept is possible - FPS creator is a move in that direction. I haven't tried it so I can't comment much, but I (possibly unfairly) presume it's very drag-and-drop and not particularly flexible (eg. could you make nonlinear games loading sections of a world at a time like Crysis? could you make driving games and aircraft flying games? other 3D games like a 3D RTS or 3D simcity type thing?). As in, it's basically a heavily moddable FPS game with a limited engine. Now I don't actually know anything about its engine and I'm operating purely on stereotype (I'll try it out some time properly), does anyone know if I'm right or wrong there?

    My idea with Construct was not to make it 'Platform creator' or 'RTS creator', but be good in all areas of 2D, which is the most useful way to make it. Even if I added features specific to a genre (originally containers were designed to help create a unit for an RTS game) they were deliberately generalised to be useful to any type of game. So if I made a 3D game creator, I'd instinctively want it to be able to do all those 3D styles. As you can imagine... that's quite an engine to embark on.

  • Ashley: You are mostly correct, it is just for FPS games. However, they have stated in their forums they intend to open things to more genres, which they have already experimented with T3DGM.

    Definately tough to do right. I just hope someday, we have such a product <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" />

  • [quote:3oye5rpe]We could have competed against games coming out at that time!

    Interesting point - millions of dollars and whole production teams including directors and writers go in to modern games these days. Making a 3D game creator that could compare in any way whatsoever with something like Crysis (which is amazing, btw) is simply impossible from a resources point of view. On the other hand, in something like Construct, once finished I aim for it to be possible for an indie gamer to rival the top 2D games.

    This isn't the only reason I hesitate to move further in to 3D - it's a nice rosy idea that it could one day be possible to make impressive 3D first person shooters as easily and flexibly as Construct - but there are significant or even prohibitive technical and design challenges to get around. It's simply out of scope right now.

    Well, I personally don't want full 3D. I mean, it might be possible if you had the resources but it's just unrealistic to try to make the next Crysis with a point and click game tool.

    Just the ability to use some 3D features in the 2D world would be great and that alone would be enough to give games like Shadowgrounds a run for their money.

    But even if that doesn't happen soon, Contruct seems much more capable of making better, more professional looking games than most of the other simplified game makers can so far. The engine doesn't feel as "cheap" as the ones you find in freeware games made in GM or the click tools. It's just feels a lot more fluid, so to say. It can definitely make games that can compete with most other not very computer intensive shareware 2D games.

    I just think that being able to incorporate SOME limited amount of 3D would make it even better though. To the point where it can compete with more than shareware but even mainsteam commercial titles. I don't mean Crysis now, but more realistically games like 2.5D top down shooters like Shadowgrounds or RTS games like Warcraft III (and of coarse, 2.5D platform games like Contra: Shattered Soldier but I've mentioned that already).

    If I knew how to code or anything about programming for that matter I would help out in every way imaginable to see this happen. But for now I'll just wait and see what happens. I wish people who knew how to do this stuff would try to mess around with the SDK a bit and see what they can do.

    Maybe I'll try to learn how to program again but I've tried in the past so many times and bought all these books and learned nothing. I just can't understand how to do anything in terms of programming, it's too hard. If I ever learn to program someday within the next few years (or decades), I'd give it a shot, considering if Construct is still around by then.

  • I think machrider is correct in what he says. 2.5D is definitely achieveable and allows some awesome games (paper mario, anyone?).

    A mostly working SDL runtime is ready for testing in the next build hopefully. If that goes well I'll crack on with some OpenGL. 3D in OpenGL is very simple.. it would just need the IDE to be modified.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • not only is the 2D side not finished, but there are problems like 3D collisions which the engine simply has no way to support at the moment.

    2D has certainly the priority, but actually the possibility of just having a 3D sprite with simple 2D collisions would be AWESOME.

    Personally I'd die for the possibility of using 3D sprites in my 2D games. Things like 3D collisions would be surely great, but also not strictly necessary at the moment for what is intended to be a 2D games maker.

    Please consider, when more urgent priorities are solved, including 3D sprites in Construct: even limited for the moment to 2D functionality it would be an outstanding feature!!

  • 2D has certainly the priority, but actually the possibility of just having a 3D sprite with simple 2D collisions would be AWESOME.

    I agree this would be pretty sweet if Construct had the ability to do this somewhere down the line.

    If I could ever make something like this with Construct, my head would probably explode:

    Subscribe to Construct videos now
  • I'm not too enthusiastic about this.. I think 3d in 2d games in most cases is a disaster. It just feels wierd. I think we should forget about this for now, and focus on what really matters. Soure, when ashley get out of things to improve on construct, and the program is perfected in every way, this could be a possibility, but i don't think it's very important.

  • Attan: I disagree 100%. We already have several 2D gamemakers to choose from. Anything to set Construct AHEAD should be added.

  • I kinda feel sorry for Ash with everyone nagging him about 3D. If I were him I'd probably snap and go on a murder spree with a machete.

    "RRRAAARGGHHH! I've got your 3D right here!" *choppity chop* <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_twisted.gif" alt=":twisted:" title="Twisted Evil" />

    Attan: I disagree 100%. We already have several 2D gamemakers to choose from. Anything to set Construct AHEAD should be added.

    Stability and feature-completeness aside (and assuming these will be a non-issue by v1.0), Construct is already way ahead of most 2D game makers. It's definitely ahead of all other free and open-source ones.

    Compared to commercial game-makers, it'll be about on par with MMF. The only 2D game maker I can think of off the top of my head that may be better is Torque.

  • Well after 1.0 I will explore 3D a bit more, and see if I can come up with something cool to play with - 3D sprite would be a good way to go.

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)