People always tend to be negative on certain things, because it can always be better in one way or another.
So, a negative review is not bad per se, so long as the critique is based on the content and explained.
It would be great if reviews written on steam must atleast contain a minimum of 200 words for example.
Obviously this kind of criticism can be very valuable for a developer and should not be seen as negative.
But reviews with only one line are reviews i wouldn't value to much, be it positive or negative.

And of course those waiting for a "meh" before writing theirs

I think game guru is the easiest game maker.Because I had used unity 3d and having many problem.And this forum is very friendly everyone tries there best to answer others questions.And all are like friendly.I think if lee can promote game guru more than it would be very famous and many people will use it.And I think game guru should continue it's twitch broadcast we can learn more and more about guru.There is many thing to discover in game guru.If anyone want to make a good game he has to get good knowledge about game guru.But some dumb don't know anything about it and do bad review.Sorry for my bad English...

Just thought I'd add, that when I do write a review, it will obviously be a positive one.

I'm still so new lol I've only got 84 hours logged into GG thru Steam But thats just because I just found it a month ago. I've been working on learning as much as possible. I'm about 50% done with my first level of my hobby game.

Hi all,

I have followed this thread since it was first posted but till now have not chimed in. Soooooo....

I have clocked up 950+ hours according to Steam, but for the last 12-18 months have only ever fired up steam to get the next Game Guru update. I use Game Guru pretty much every day, so the hour count would be at least double what Steam reports and most likely three times more.

I actually like Game Guru - a lot, but as is obvious from the above I have zero interest in Steam. In fact the only time I have visited steam was to read an article on scripting not long after I first got Reloaded, and that was via a Link from TGC's site if I remember correctly

I would consider writing a review, but only after some real progress is covered.

To me, although I am not really against the EBE, I am really not happy with the time it is taking to get it out the door. The knock on effect is that Game Gurus progress has basically ground to a halt. aside from some small (and welcome improvements via updates) the only real progress I see is coming via Prebens shader fixes.

I think the best thing that could happen is get the EBE out the door, and for Lee to start working on the things planned for 2017 that he has mentioned in his other threads.

Then once we are getting some regular updates again (so long in coming) then there is something positive to review about. At the moment the fixes\updates\additions are pretty much stagnant.

Reliquia....

This is what I see all the time ..... You would expect that if GameGuru gives someone that much pleasure and they have devoted so much time to it then it would be a shining review despite its current downfalls ...


However I also see this all the time .... It seems that most just focus on the negative and the conclusion is usually a down vote that makes absolutely no sense to me ...

No one has to write a review .. If they do it should be based on good points ..Bad points and then a fair conclusion and not really what may or may not happen in the future otherwise I can tell you every product will eventually come to an end.. 10, 20, 30 years its inevitable .... Surly its the pleasure you getting from a product now that counts ... But I guess that's just my opinion ?

Ditto, I very rarely load GG via Steam, I really only do when an update's released, and when I need to download from the store, I just don't like the extra resources being used by Steam, there's no point wasting resources when you don't need to.

Ok, you got me synchromesh!

I wrote (actually updated - 2015 post!) my review.

Added this to the review:

Just wanted to add that the Game Guru forum is a huge asset to this product.

Not only are there plenty of projects in development that show what can be done with some time and effort, but it is one of the few communities that actually want to help people get the most out of Game Guru - and not treat you like an unwelcome noob.

If you want an engine that allows you to create the next awesome game with little or no time put in then Game Guru IS NOT for you.

But if you love learning, want to push the boundaries of your own skill set, and are willing to put some work into making your game concept come to life, then Game Guru, along with its awesome community is definitely a great choice imo.

2017 holds promise of some nice improvements to this still young engine - and for the price, along with a truck load of media to get you started it is almost a give-away.

But if you don't want to put time and effort into learning the software and the art of game design then I would suggest juat playing games made by others.

Still love this tool!

Reliquia....

I find your review does not follow GG philosophy that says " the easy game maker" when you talk about pushing their boundaries and put lot of efforts.
If GG would need so much, users would choosing another 3D engine more easy to use without needing work arounds.
Many GG games are made by people that doesn't code and uses only the available models, this is the easy way and why people choose GG.

I'm waiting for gameguru to be a formidable software fit for a gleaming review, actually. If that never happens I may spare it the slander because it's not horrible. It could be better, and It should've been before ever coming to steam.



To get the most out of gameguru or any software for that matter, you'll wanna match that with hours in your 3d modelling/texturing tools and if you're really versatile, LUA scripting



Still, compared to all other game design tools I have used, it is very easy. It could be easier, but I'm hoping lee keeps that pillar of his design philosophy going forward and doesnt just start adding lua commands, but rather considers the artist too, wanting a tool to easily show off their models in game form without having to invest the time or money developing the systems from scratch in a big, complex, difficult, multifaceted engine.



Many but not all. The games full of custom media made by talented artists and talented coders, or better yet, teams of talented artists and coders are what will SELL GAMEGURU. all it takes is a few truly good games that reach a wide enough market and gameguru will be considered a worthwhile tool. The smartest thing the devs can do, and the best way to get good reviews, is to improve it and OPTIMIZE IT as much as possible as often as possible, and devote the entirety of their time to it, thus improving the chances of people around here creating truly impressive works of art that make the game engine look good to the outsider.

Yeah most of what we see on Steam. But I highly recremmend checking out and supporting those that do dive into LUA and using their own custom media. The WIP and Showcase threads in the forums don't get as much traffic as they deserve.





and Shavra - Renaissance by Wolf.

The whole fbx file format debate came from new users finding out they could not easily important their own custom media or free downloaded 3rd party media. Its usually the first question we get.



While I support Game-Guru, I still struggle to actually make a game with it because I feel I am too ambitious. I quite often face barrier when trying to actually use GG for myself. So as a reflection of my own use with it... I find I've mostly just been supporting it and testing it but can't say that I myself can make a complete game with it. Others sure, but I'm not going to write a review about how others can use it.

I was tempted to write a negative review when FPSC Reloaded became Game-Guru over night and I felt a lot of suppression as a gold level pledger... So when it went over to Steam and out of Early Access far too soon, I was quite triggered to respond immediately with a negative review. Thankfully, I did not. Started to get more of an understanding of what was going on behind the scenes and I felt a bit empathetic and I decided to try to help in any way I could. Still doesn't mean I should just write a random review to up-vote. I'd rather be completely open and honest. So I think I might actually wait a bit so that my list of "cons" isn't too heavy.

@ Reliquia

That all looks perfectly good to me ..

Again exactly the statement that's accurate and fair ... Personally I would rather people did not buy GG with high expectations of creating the next hit and being disappointed which does lead to bad reviews .. At the end of the day its whether you personally enjoy the product even with its current downfalls for its final conclusion of a thumbs up or down


Agreed things are starting to look quite bright over the next 12 months

I surely agree!

I know the product has issues, and as with all software there is always something not in it that we personally want.

But overall to me it is simply great fun and I have learnt so much as a result of using it.

When I first found Reloaded\Game Guru, I had zero knowledge of 3D game software, modeling, terrain, skyboxes, but because of this product and its awesome community, I have been able to dabble in all those areas to some degree of success, and while I am in now way a pro at any of this stuff, I find the work flow in Game Guru natural and just fun to work with.

I still wish I had pledged more while it was open for pledges to be made - because I reckon it was and still is a steal.

I do feel sorry for those who bought the product with higher expectations, but the fact remains that you will only get out what you put into whatever you try in life.

And I would say to Lee keep the spirits up, keep making this awesome tool better, get the EBE out the door, and start on the roadmap for 2017.

Oh that makes at least THREE Steam visits for me - Wow - must be turning into a Steam junky already!


Reliquia....

That maybe true and it is up to TGC to make their advertising more accurate if they feel the need.

But that said, my review is not about endorsing TGC's advertising of Game Guru, nor are the reviews by anyone else for that matter - it is about my experience with the product and what I feel is required by any would-be purchaser to make the most of this product.


Reliquia....

I will wait with a review until 1.14 is out , i believe the new visuals / speed and EBE will give new users a mush better experience. And mention the updates, makes new users see that GG is a software that get attention and updates.

Lee: i would set everything to highest as the default , so people trying it out for the first time get shadows etc... and dont get disappointed when they have no idea about how to change the settings. Also make sure to completely disable "DOF","MB" in the default settings , so people dont have a low fps the first time they try out GG.

@Preben : On my list for V1.14 - Turning everything up to 11 (except DOF and MB)

This is not "the easy game maker" no more lol
Many beginners or kids takes GG because they won't do any code, they have pre made characters, models , they just put them on terrain and press play.
I think it will always be lot of people interested in such "easy game maker" way, and this is GG main purpose.


When you suggest a team and coders or modelers, you are suggesting experienced people that could use Unreal , that would be able to do lot more, because Blueprints are as easy as Lua, and managing 3D art and animations in Unreal is better, it's some more tools to learn but you won't need to edit FPE files or struggles with directories and files, and you'll work faster once its' learned.
For example replacing a terrain texture is drag and drop your texture and that's it, no DDS and no naming file needed, no grass painting color covering terrain hdding your terrain texture work. This is the same for many things.

It's a learning curve , it's not harder, if you have used GG and Unreal some months you would say i can do anything easier in Unreal and faster. If you prefer and find GG better , i think it's more a matter of preference.
You recommend GG for experienced people, indeed they will do more , but that's looks strange to put so much more efforts in GG when you would do more and faster in other software with same effort ?


The first game is impressive game, the second as well but i am not fond of old bad quality photo sourced textures lol
You are the second one to recommend programming and custom models, this is for experienced people able to use any 3D engine, this is not again the "easy game maker". If there is so much characters and models packs for GG, ready to use , this is because GG is designed to stay that way.

GG has so much hard coded things and issues on workflow, clearly it has not been designed as a flexible 3D engine to heavy code with Lua or to easy import your models , replace FPS or make a TPS.

You experienced guys are trying to make games finding work arounds, trying to simulate some physics or effects, because GG was not made as a multi purpose 3D engine first. You don't understand you are doing it the hard way compared if you was using another software.
Experienced users like you is a minority using GG and trying to push it, this is not what will do the majority users.

Recommending GG for experienced users looks like saying to a beginner that just want fun with GG :
"GG is best when you to put lot more work in Lua, modeling , and find lot of work arounds , it is like using a 3D engine , it will be longer and more complicated than Unreal , but i recommend you to work that way " ?



GG adverts to easy make games, should adverts been changed ?
GG main purpose is to make average good games, it has never aimed to next modern games with astonishing effects and physics.

Experienced people using GG is a minority , this does not represent the majority users that choose it as the "easy" way to make a game with no coding.
This is why experienced users review or recommendations are perhaps not the best one to follow for the average GG buyer and user.

It says nothing about make awesome games with no coding, it says you can create games without having to know coding, which is exactly what you can do, it says nothing about them being awesome games. It also specifically goes on to say...

" If later, you want to take your creations further or perhaps delve into the world of strange technical magic, GameGuru can do that too, with editing tools and a mystical scripting language for those who want to take their game creation to an even greater and more complex level."

Which is where the lua scripting comes in.

So basically it says if you don't know coding and want to drag and drop some very basic games you can, but also if you want to make better more complicated games then you can learn to script and use that.

I missed that part, perhaps it's considered as minor option for a minority people.
Why Lua Api is so limited and no physics,camera etc ... ? give scripters the full Api control if GG also aims to be a 3D engine that can be fully programmed.

The majority GG users and buyers won't code, people that will code will be a minority until GG is aslo advertised as a 3D engine for coders also.
Until you make and engine with graphics and assets like Crysis giving the illusion at beginners they are making great games, you won't avoid some Steam bad reviews.
When some users with higher expectations find scripts not working well, AI behaving wrong, or lighting and shaders outdated like 10 years looking games, these users will make bad reviews unfortunatelly.

Because it just hasn't been implemented yet, all these things are on the cards, Lee just has to get around to them, for example every time he updates he adds some new LUA commands with the update, it take a lot of time to add everything, and considering the amount of "fluff" features people keep voting for getting in the way of important stuff, he's doing well so far.

I think if the best gg game developer be united and make a great game and publish it.Then I think it will be great.

Seeing all GG limitations in many fields if you go for another average outdated game it can be done indeed, you can't expect today a game on par with Unity or Unreal on graphics,physics, AI or gameplay.

If you hit "average" as an indie with limited time and resources you are doing it right. If I'd, or any lone developer'd hit something close to HL² test demo "Lost Cost" I'd be thrilled. However, this happens rarely.

You bet lol (watch is level design timelapse, it's fantastic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmn02pgbT1w )


I find it far above HL2


Another guy used available assets , but characters, level design and fantastic gameplay is made by him
What he has done is equal to what some big studios are doing (no C++ only blueprints)


A tech demo (not legal as using Nintendo concepts)


Without the right tools and easy workflow none of them would have reached what they have accomplished. Software with lot of tools and menus is best as you have lot more features and options available, this is a learning curve, but it worths it.
And there is plugins to help you create faster ( or this one [video=youtube]4aNgzmibRIs [/video]).

I consider plugins as what has helped a lot indies to do many amazing games, even a small 3D engine like Godot has plugins funcitonnality.
Without plugins you cant't get the whole potential of 3D engine combined with talented users, can bring to people.
When you can get the work looking great and done with plugins and tweak manually after why loosing time doing all manually ? Without plugins i would have spend double or five the time doing all tasks manually.

A software product is something that is always and continuously improving, but if you don't have some minimum requirements about workflow and features, any software will make you happy and you don't need a more advanced 3D engine.
GG won't be Unreal, but i wish it will get a decent modern pipeline , like doesn't need users to convert textures or edit files, and i wish it will get more flexible also , because GG fits perfectly for lot of indie games with lower expactations or games with different style graphics or different gameplay.

FOOTNOTE: Lee is not planning to recreate Unreal or Unity - he's a crazy ass Brit, but he's not Mad! [yet]

P.S. For Unreal features, Lee highly recommends Unreal 4, it's full of them

LMAO !!

I kind of hope Mouaa that you are on the Unity and Unreal forums as well shouting
" CAN WE HAVE SOME OF THE FEATURES THAT GAMEGURU HAS "
I'm not sure if you want GG with Unreal and Unity features or Unity and Unreal with GameGuru features ..

LOL, couldn't have said it better myself!

Sometimes I wander why you are even bothering with GG,it would be nice to see something you have made with GG though.

Dave

Indeed no one is asking GG to be Unreal that is maintained by hundred people LOL
I only wish GG will get to a great indie engine level on par with other engines about the workflow and getting some missing things i find mandatory( particles, navigatin, physics).
Then lot of indies will jump on board, experienced or beginners.

The particle system that was added to FPSC later one was quite nice. You could modify its settings right from the properties panel with the editor. Like you would edit an entity's property. I'd like something like that again.

Navigation? AI navigation is up next after EBE.

Physics? The engine's current physics aren't too bad.

Particles? I think it would be great for a third party developer to step in and create a particle generator which ties into GG's current particle system. I'd throw some $$$ towards it.

Where are common commands ? AddForce , SetVelocity, SetRotationSpeed, Raycast, Move, Rotate. Where are all physics joints ? (why not spring and cloth physics). Also you can't change physics shape at run time.



I don't have seen a 3D engine where you edit particles in another software, particles is mandatory and included in the editor for optimal workflow like almost any decent enought 3D engines available.


Because like lot of people i code game functionnality first before doing any graphics work lol
It's a game with exploration and puzzles, i would be happy if it gets some minimal success to promote GG and i believe GG will become great.
The graphics will be minimalist style as it is a side project for fun first and as it should fit GG really well for best performance.

As you want some picture, here is one in prototyping phase, the loot box rought undetailled model with animation

By the way Lee I noticed you mentioned that you felt whenever a DLC was released we received negative reviews. Is that statistically proven to be the case? I only just noticed now that that free expansion DLC reviews have a 92% positive feedback. That's incredibly good. Are people directly saying they don't like the DLCs on the main product reviews? Or is it more whenever a DLC is released that coincidentally happen to get new reviews (negative)?

I'm just hoping this is just a coincidence since it seems like the DLC's themselves are fairing well on Steam.

I would agree with this. Perhaps there was an influx of negative reviews when DLCs released due to the state of GG in that point in time?

So I would suggest that DLCs don't stop completely but rather release one when GG is in a better state. Eg. After EBE and the AI work is done.



I see, you want more commands for physics. I misunderstood you there.

Well if he ever wants more to add to the DLC or for a new one. I've got a lot more Classics converted over:

Every so often it does get mentioned as a negative, and very rarely is it reviewed as a positive (at least on Steam). I thnk it harks back to games that lock content and then sell it to the fan base, even though it's already been developed and in the original game binary, and it's too late to explain this is not the case as they seldom come back to change their review or read the comments. For 2017 I will focus on core product updates, and if a huge set of nice graphics drops in my lap, I will consider some kind of release (as long as it's below the core product price which is another bone of contention out there).

Oh okay that all makes a lot of sense. Picky Steam users

Going back to the main topic ....
This is the kind of review that has the focus on just one thing ... I'm sure he's a nice guy but because he has no real knowledge of LUA we get a thumbs down ... Don't forget your reading from the bottom up ... In cases like this we just have to put up with it ..Nothing Lee can do or we can say will change this kind of review unfortunately and we get many just like this

Perhaps he wants a better coding language like C#and a better coding tool like Visual Studio. Lua is cool , but C# is a lot better i find.

Unity uses Lua, so does Lumberyard!

There are plenty of coding tools out there for Lua as well.

Actually, he said, "I miss other scripting language " For all we know he could have been referring to FPI.

Or Basic on the C64

Na I still don't get it .... So the whole thing is a thumbs down and its rubbish because of that ....
In my old age I'm either getting very wise or very stupid

Definitely wise, definitely not stupid, lol. It's Steam! When they decided to go from Reloaded to GG and the Steam route, I'm pretty sure we all told it wasn't ready for that crowd, and it's been 2 years, I think, since. It's still not ready. Some day, it will be, I'm sure.

Unity uses C#, it even comes with visual studio packages so you can write in c#

Painkiller had almost everything nailed down in LUA, and I survived it nevertheless. (just a few nervous breakdowns)

I am annoyed whenever comparisons to unity or unreal are drawn .. those complaining should just use these programs! Gameguru is much more easy to use than all other engines and simply has charm. I dirscovered gg last year by accident and I fell in love. Now I know more and I can say that big improvements are necessary.

Lee, if I where you, I would not waste too many thoughts about the reviews.
Many of them are simply not based on experience.
Sure, gg has yet to go a long way, but it is fun to be here and the community is nothing like I have seen before.

Just keep it up and it will pay off for you at the end.
I am definitely looking forward to what's next.

I concur!

I'm pretty sure those reviews about the scripting come from the comparison of FPI which was incredibly simple compared to LUA; which requires a complete knowledge and understanding of syntax and coding in that environment. FPI you could easily get anything working with ease and it was very straight forward. This feedback is fair. Maybe not down-voting the entire product however. But because Game Guru spawned from FPS Creator (if you recall from the old forums) the debate on going to LUA or keeping FPI was brought up. Majority of skilled programmers asked for LUA. A lot of us who were not very script savvy were kind of left clueless with how to get basic mundane tasks working in GG. I actually was one of the few that voted to keep FPI back then before FPSC Reloaded came off the ground. I understand why everyone voted for LUA as it opens up more control.

I strongly doubt he's made that negative review wishing for or expecting C programming.... anyone with an understanding of C based programming will have no problems in LUA. Its quite possible he's coming from the FPSC community.



Its expected. Unity and Unreal are free and Game Guru is not. So the expectations are much higher.

Correction, Unity HAS a Lua interface but you don't have to use it.

Not sure why anyone would want to use C# myself, in the Apple world, where it is mandatory, everyone bitches on about having to use it all the time!

Personally I don't give a hoot what language I use, I'd be quite happy coding in Assembler if that was all that is available, but having 40 years of software development under my belt in over 50 different 'languages' I can honestly say that Lua is bloody awesome.