Hello

savestandalone does not have settings
Any amount that increases the graphics quality and progresses smoothly
But the exe output software is not good
As a result, the gameguru's goodness can not be voted positive
If it can provide a good exe output
My vote will be positive
I suggest a good setting for the exe output
!!! Even the FpsX9 and FpsX10 have a simple setting !!!
There are also other problems after the save standalone
Including :
1- Display some effects
2. Many files and scripts are opened by other software.
And that's not good
Because it allows others to manipulate files.

Please read attachments

Please fix these problems in the new version ...

Thank you for your efforts ...

Maybe try scripting it? The settings script is a script, you can add whatever settings you like to it, and now we have control most of the settings in the tab menu in test as script commands it should be easy enough.

Actually a couple of important points here:
The game should be built at highest settings with the player being able to choose which best runs on their machine, high or low with all graphic elements being adjustable in menu. No point in me creating the best looking game I can and cutting out a lot of users who then complain the specs are too high for their mid range rig or so low they complain about 90's looking graphics.

As far as I know these settings aren't placed into a start menu by default which means scripting it yourself, if it's even possible right now. but still defeats the entire purpose of an easy game maker aimed at non-scripters for something so important which should be in place now and not later.
The following is a quote form Lee's update thread.

So should I ramp it all up and limit the market to high spec machines or should I not use it and take the flak for a low par graphic game?
Of course I could have missed any introduction of player changeable graphic menu settings going into the product. If I did then I stand corrected

As for encryption this is something that should have been sorted long ago, particularly when you got thousands of models, scripts, music and media selling in the store and to cap that you get the advice to manually copy over missing files around these forums, which effectively means your breaking the license by distributing un-encrypted assets which can be grabbed by anyone who feels like it.
No point in telling me no encryption is safe, that's not the issue here.

I have never created a standalone, never thought GG was complete enough to have anything worth creating as standalone, I was creating a game when the EBE came out that gave me issues so I put it on hold until the DX11 update. so as far as creating a standalone I'm not sure but I would say there is no point at the moment there are a lot of big changes also the encryption will probably be changing the likes of FBX can have animations and textures embedded or so I thought

Basically we do have High, Medium and low settings in our standalone menu ..
Is that not better than selecting your quality settings before you compile like FPSC
You can then further edit them further in the setup.ini ...

I didn't use FSPC that much but remember selecting your quality before creating the standalone and don't remember being able to change it after ? But of course I could be wrong

There are a few games already commercially released and probably a substantial number of free ones floating around not to mention demo's etc.

It is right there on the product page that you can build and release however you like and as this is the only engine I know of that has so many problems with encrypting all media and the advice given here I won't be releasing any new media to the store till it's fixed once and for all. Fbx can store materials but these are only references to materials and some parameters and not a huge leap forward from .x which can store texture references but neither store the materials or textures themselves these are usually placed into a container folder alongside the model file so makes no difference. They call it 'embedded' on export but it isn't really. The only thing worth using stored within either .x or .fbx are the animation frames. For fbx you can export the animations without skins to add/swap to an existing skinned model making it a breeze to change it up.

Just an aside since I have seen it mentioned around here but you don't need models to be fbx to use pbr either any mesh can use the shader whatever format it is provided the appropriate texture maps are available.
Again what will be missing is an inspector panel where you can assign shader and texture slots in editor since it looks like the current approach is to have all this info embedded in the model file. This would only result in a bloated fbx file which (even if you do get an inspector panel) will be pointless if you change the shader and textures in editor.

You are correct and I forgot that exists, like above I don't build many games with GameGuru

thank you for making it clear Rolfy

Well lets face it if your making a game you really need to be constantly test building exe's to ensure it all works as you expect

I create media mostly so built games aren't a priority for me either, but recently had the urge to make a game, that's when I realised I wouldn't be able to get anything worthwhile for my efforts in GameGuru as it is now.

Spot on. As long as the model has a UV map and it matches the texture map, then any format of model can use PBR, it's not the model format that processes the textures, it's the shaders that matches the texture to the UV map, so if the shaders can handle PBR then any model can be PBR.

I'm pretty sure I could do something ... Simple shooter or adventure but nothing I really want to do or as you say worthwhile for me hence I stick with my demos ... But each demo has an element something I'm trying for my game when it is possible

I used to do a lot of 'tinkering' myself but when I want to create a full game it totally changes things....the wait is too long. Hopefully I will come back to GameGuru further down the line but too much missing from it for me personally at this point..

Yeah, I really love Game Guru. And have great respect for Lee, but pretty disappointed with GG atm.

The stand-alone builds have been bugged out forever - and should be addressed with every build. It just seams bugs and broken features just don't get the TLC they require.

I remember the great push to get multi-player in the the engine before renaming it to GG and launching on steam, but multiplayer - at least for me - just does not work, never has. This is just another example of things added - at a substantial cost of time - but either not working, or bugged out and not sorted in subsequent builds, while other more important features like building a stand-alone don't get sorted.

GG's biggest drawback is the voting board - even with the reset option. The amount of time wasted on non-essentials has left GG, after all this time, practically the same engine as when it was renamed, and nowhere near it's predecessor in terms of features.

Sorry, I guess this is sort of getting a bit off-topic now.......

Reliquia....

A lot has been said in here, I still think that an FPSC X9 style build game dialog box where you can customize the music menus and loading screens is among the most important things necessary for gameguru right now. You really can't call yourself an "easy game maker" when intense lua scripting is required to so much as give your game more than one loading screen.

I also agree with reliquia. since multiplayer is a feature that seems completely incompetent, why not remove it until it becomes ready?