I found this video about importing 3D models
[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8_PXCdLdZM
[/video]
Almost all 3D engine editors allow users to directly import 3D models , edit material and assign textures, edit collisions, without bothering with a text file.
GG workflow works like a 10 years old editor.

Also GG terrain painting , you can't change textures on the fly and you must go to terrain textures folder and replace textures files.
It really needs to allow users to change textures on the fly in the editor without messing with GG terrain folders and files.
This is same for skybox as you can't import a skybox textures in the editor and you must go to folder and put your texture and change it's name to GG hard coded skybox names unfortunattely.

I often use custom models and textures, in this context GG is too much dependent on hard coded terrain textures, skybox textures and importing 3D models should be done throught editor smoothly like Unreal 4 for example.

Painting grass shows a green painting on top of floor textures, how do you want to work correctly once you start painting grass ?
You no more can modify and see how floor looks below green painting for grass. Some show/hide grass painting should help.

Perhaps it suits lot of people like that , but it could become so much better and usable with some work.

It's just my opinion.

This has all been stated a 100 times already.

We all know this already, we have to be patient and wait for GameGuru to be expanded on (at some point).

I agree that the import workflow for some models could be better, but that's actually not exactly the best video of how to import a model with multiple textures, not that it doesn't work, but it's totally the wrong workflow for the title of the video, it shouldn't be called "GameGuru import models with multiply texture", it should be called "how to convert multiple textures into a single atlas texture and import it to GameGuru". Importing multiple texture models into GameGuru is a completely different process..

The actual import while not perfect is a lot quicker and easier than that video makes out.

To start with you don't need to mess about with UV's and making a single texture, you just import it into gameguru, then go to where it's saved in your entitybank, open up the fpe, change .dbo back to .x, delete the texture reference from the textured line, save it, then copy all your individual textures into the same folder as your fpe folder. You may have to open up your .x file in notepad, find all the texture references and delete all the url except the texture names, but that depends on the how the modelling program you used saves the file.

This has all been stated a 100 times already.

This is the first time i use GG, and my first feedback on usability.

The easiest way to import a model these days is to use the importer. Just got to the menu, file>import model, run it, find your .x model and import it. You can then select the diffuse texture in the importer, set collision and such, then save it ready to be loaded in instantly. No messing with files at all. The importer makes things really easy now. It's not 100% with FBX files, but I always convert objects to .x anyway, so not really an issue. I also don't tend to go looking for free models like that anyway, as they are normally not designed for game use and I really hate converting multiple textured objects to a single texture. You can use multi textured objects, simply by removing any reference to the texture in the FPE, but I would advise against it in GG. You can get away with the occasional object, but expect potential baking issues and slower performance if you use many.

You can do it manually as well, but since the importer, I rarely ever do, except to fine tune them. Just make sure you copy your .x file and textures to somewhere in the entitybank beforehand. For example entitybank/mymodels/mymodel.x. If you grab them from wherever you have them on your HD you may well encounter problems down the line. Game Guru doesn't copy things automatically into your project like other engines out there. I actually prefer this, as with other engines you end up with several copies of the same object in each project. At least with Game Guru all your entities are in one place for as many projects as you want.

While this has been discussed to death, I too find the time consuming process of importing models tedious. Especially when I'm importing hundreds of clutter objects.

I'm used to the way GG handles assets but Mouaaa is definately right, it should be smoother.

"It's not 100% with FBX files"

That made me laugh, I have never got it to read an FBX flie!

3ds work about about 1 in 10 and .x about 50% of the time.

I downloaded a file in .obj format, converted it to .x with Assimp and GG wouldn't load it, converted it to 3ds, ditto, loaded the 3ds into Blender and exported to .x and finally GG was able to load it, unfortunately it was about 3mm tall!

I never really use them in honesty, so am mostly going by user reports. Perhaps, it's not even close to 100% with FBX files would be more accurate. I've tried a couple of static items with no issues though. Animated models in comparison, have no chance, which could certainly be improved. In general though I have no issues importing .x models I create or convert using Blender, apart from animated characters



You can scale it in the importer, or of course in Blender. You can't blame Game Guru about the scale of an object!

I was only trying to point out you don't need to go through the intimidating process in the video. The importer is pretty easy to use in general. Want to re-texture an object? Simple, copy your new texture into the same directory as the item in question, import the .x provided and simply pick your new texture. Sure, you could delete the .dbo file and edit the FPE to do the same, or simply rename the new texture to the original, but most people would prefer using the importer at a guess. I find it pretty easy to work with and it is the least of my issues with GG in honesty.

.x is working 100% for me.

.fbx is an awkward format but its the industweee stahmdart so we should have an importer for it.



-Wolf

I asked harry ( His amazing characters and Dinosaurs ) why fbx is so important for characters and models when he doesn't seem to have a problem ?
His answer ....


Its strange that users say FBX is needed so badly yet to some its not a problem ?

Its strange that users say FBX is needed so badly yet to some its not a problem ?

I tried to import a static model or a character with animations as FBX in GG, but it failed, i don't know why.
But it can be versions of FBX that si different depending if you use Blender, Maya or 3DSMax. I know Unity recognizes any FBX files, whatever it comes from Blender or Maya, so GG is missing a better FBX import.

There are so many iterations of FBX it's ridiculous. Animated, regardless af FBX version, won't work in GG, don't even bother (unless someone knows better?). I converted some models to fbx back when Lee introduced the fbx importer just to see what worked for me with what I had, and UU3D seemed to work the best as an exporter. Doesn't currently matter anyway, because Direct x WORKS in GG. For me, every time, using any of several programs. I think the appeal of fbx is simply that so many programs export it vs. Direct x.

I do think Game-Guru needs a drop down View file menu. To hide terrain would be helpful for hiding entities that have fallen below.

Toggle Terrain
Toggle Grass
Toggle Water
Toggle Lights

etc

Technically though what your asking for is for the Terrain buttons to respond the same way as the "Entity Mode" button and "Makers Mode" button. Clicking those two remove the grass paint from the scene. Clicking on the 4 texture should do the same. but currently dont.

I've never got a FBX to work either
I've dragged up an old friend which is Truespace and its exporting X format into GG no problem.. with animation

My scary workflow is Sketchup to C4D, bake the textures to a single file, export back to Sketchup as FBX, export to Truespace as 3DS and resize and animate

I've always had trouble with assets into 3D engines, I can think of loads of older engines that if you didn't have 3D Studio Max you where in for a world of pain, IF I could remember how to use Truespace; GG would be a doddle
FWW You can get TS 3.2 or TS7.6 free.

IMHO FBX is a weaker format than .x. So far I've had characters, weapons, props, setpieces and entire levels in .x with zero problems whatsoever.

In my work with the unreal engine 4 however, I've had several hick ups with the FBX's not retaining smoothing groups and leaving out some animation frames.

I think the main issue are the exporters of popular modeling suites like Blender and 3ds max. I've been paid before to batch convert models to .x because nobody seems to bother coding a decent exporter for these programs....at least there wasn't one back then.

However, despite being a solid and easy to use format, its not what the industry dictates us to like so people demand .fbx support. And as I have stated above....we thus need it.

Basically the reason i think FBX is preferred by more than .x is quite simple, .x is an abandoned format, it hasn't been updated or changed for years, whereas FBX is constantly undergoing updates and changes, it's just a matter of people preferring a format that's still supported over one that lost all its support years ago.

As to what the difference is, to be honest there's not much difference to the end user, it's mostly on the modelers side of things, for example .x used to be the only format that supported shaders referenced inside the model itself, and also supports splitting and naming animations, but i think FBX has caught up in that regard.

Apparently .x is actaully better than .fbx for animations, actually i will rephrase that, apparently it's animations are more robust and less prone to breaking, there's not really anything more you can do with .x animations than .fbx animations, they're just less likely to fall down completely if something is slightly wrong in the models animation.

I would say a reason many want FBX support is because Fuse exports it's characters as FBX. I think that is the main reason, it would make adding more unique characters a lot easier, plus the obvious many free FBX objects out there. It's certainly the only real FBX stuff I've tested.

I'm with Belidos on this. I also suspect that Autodesk simply pushed their licensed file format onto us.

@DVader: Its been like this before FUSE was popular but I also believe the recent popularity of that tool has gotten people more towards adopting FBX.



-Wolf