Here is the live broadcast #03 recording, and your answers posted below:



Q. ​What happened in the last stream
A. We often do a quick 5 minute public sound pre-test before the main broadcast. It gets deleted after the event. Nothing to worry about.

Q. ​When alpha 2
A. This week

Q. ​Are we going to see the updated graphics today!
A. You get to see the demo graphics we are preparing for the MAX showcase.

Q. ​Are we going to see the new graphics system today? [question]
A. You will see the terrain system evolve, nothing specific on the underlying graphics engine work in this one.

Q. ​Will there be ally’s included in game guru max [question]
A. No plans to add Ally or other advanced AI features into MAX, we want to focus on terrain and the new graphics engine.

Q. ​Is there going to be a material editor?
A. No plans to add a material editor to MAX, you would use something like Substance Painter and a 3D modeller to create your art.

Q. ​apk and ios export system ?
A. No plans to provide cross-platform support, this will be a Windows 10 and above only product.

Q. ​Can we have dynamic weather [question]
A. You will have basic weather which you can control the intensity over (currently have snow and rain).

Q. ​Will we have levels to build on like making a basement then upstairs then outside [question]
A. You can use the Structure Editor to create a multi-level building, though not much more functionality than exists currently in Classic.

Q. ​Will we have a material and weapons editor [question]
A. No plans to add a material or weapons editor in MAX. We will be providing advice on how you can import and configure your art so they are functional weapons for your game.

Q. ​is there a roadmap or a long-term plan for any features after launch in September? [question]
A. No roadmap for post-release dev work, we want to focus all our energies on terrain and graphics engine, and then most likely spend some time refining those features before we commit to more features and ideas.

Q. ​what of the indiego doesn't reach it's goal?
A. No worries if it does not reach it's goal, this project is going ahead. The IndieGoGo will simply provide funds to create more art so you have more stock assets to play with on release.

Q. ​this LOD system works onky with terrain?
A. No, you will also have LOD support for entities as well, but the model needs to have specific frame names for the engine to detect them.

Q. ​Will you support uwp [question]
A. No plans to support Universal Windows Platform, MAx will be a Win32 only Windows 10 product.

Q. ​Package that can run on xbox
A. No plans to support XBOX or any other console for this product.

Q. ​Will we have full body awareness [question]
A. No support for full body VR suits are planned, only headset and VR controllers.

Q. ​Will the ocean plane have underwater shader support? (so we could program our own swimming)
A. There will be a dedicated underwater shader when you are in the ocean. You can also modify the player control script to add your own swimming logic, but you will need LUA skills and a good understanding of how the current script works.

Q. ​any improvements to tree's/vegetation in terms of speed? over classic.
A. Yes, we are completely replacing the grass system for MAX, and looking for more realistic grass that renders further into the distance, whilst keeping great performance when you chose to use this feature. This work will begin once we have finished the terrain rendering, including terrain texturing.

Q. ​Will you be able to organize assets like in unreal? Folders for specific assets?
A. Check out the alpha build to see how the Entity Library now works, you can select a specific folder, or you can use filters to search for the item you are interested in. Much better than hunting down an asset one folder at a time.

Q. ​Will be simpliest to import meshes and characters in this new version=
A. Yes we will using a new model importer and favoring FBX, GLTF and OBJ. Also keeping X files for backward compatibility with Classic.

Q. Mr lee, will there be a compiler ggmax
A. No need for a compiler in MAX, you simply create your levels, test them, and finally export as a standalone executable.

Hi synchro. Where can I pose the latest questions about MAX?

Edit-- I answered my own question @ GG MAX announcement page.

@Lee - Very, very impressive..... can't wait to get in and use all those amazing features.....

https://forum.game-guru.com/board/25

Music inspired by Lee's Cellar demo video.

It looks so cool.
About terrain system honestly, I don't get the whole point, but it looks promising.

The new wicked engine looks fantastic. My question is , how much of the wicked engine will be crammed into GGmax ?

I hope every bit of it.

@3com : Don't worry, we will take care of most of the horrid coding side, you can focus on making cool games

@bluemeenie195 : We are only taking the bits we need, and certainly all the ones that map onto the stuff you have right now such as Point and Spot lights. Of course we will be adding also the features that allow you to create a visually better game such as Area lights and choice of shadow casting lights so you can control how performant your level is in each area. There are some features we will not be supporting for release such as the real-time raytracing which currently requires a beefy GPU. We are still aiming for GTX 960 but this may change as we explore the trade-off between out of the box performance and visual quality.

Thanks for the response Lee.

Can't wait for when GGmax is complete.

Here's my question; a simple one, and a little more complex one after.
Posting for Current state of GGMAX Alpha;

I don't have MAX right now, but probably will get it in a couple days,
AND want to convince a friend to get it -- whereas they can start to
build GG models and test them in the engine. We DON'T want to
rely on STEAM connection so the reason current MAX is attractive.

Q: Do the models that work in Classic currently load and work fine
in MAX?

Q2; In the dawn of the GGMAX announcement, we had extensive Q+A
discussions, I asked if models could be instantly spawned via script
(instead of having to be placed manually into the map) - will this be
featured in MAX? - - Lee, you said that was a good idea (as I recall).

@Lee [Questions]

Will the standalone process be different and more reliable, for example, at the moment some items may be missed out from the standalone build process, will this be addressed in GG Max?

Will entities, such as doors have collision switch off during the animation of the door, and then on again when complete?

Will the physics part of GG max be the same, or will it be something more versatile, allowing the player to easily push and slide entities without complex LUA coding?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I keep watching the demo video, and it really does look fantastic, the graphics and textures not to mention the lights and shadows are incredible. Looking forward to the next alpha, just hope my bulldog internet security will not delete it upon installation. ( It has done so on previous alpha? )

How is PushObject( objId, vx, vy, vz ) 'complex Lua coding'?

Thanks AmenMoses, I didn't even know that command existed.

I had a look at the graphics, while pbr improvement is great, I am not sold on the light mapping and shadows.The fall off for both shadows and lights isn't that great at the moment, it is quite hard, shadow edge blurring would improve things.Light mapping has always been pretty poor.

For me there is no point in having better rendering and not improve the light mapping to back it up.If you want to impress me show me a dynamic light moving around the environment.

@GubbyBlips : Classic models will load fine into MAX for backward compatibility. No plans to add spawning for release, but it is still a good idea and something we can look at once everyone is happy with the new terrain and graphics systems.

@Tarkus1971 : No plans to substantially change the way standalone are exported, much as you see now with the option to change destination folder and a progress bar of the export process. No plans to add significantly more scripts and LUA commands, and most if not all commands will appear in Classic too, so not MAX specific.

@wizard of id : It ain't lightmapping, it's all done in realtime. Light attenuation can be modified along with light type, but I will leave that you to clever fellows I do not plan to port the lightmapper from Classic to MAX and rely on real-time everything for as long as possible, with perhaps the exception of baking light probes and similar. There are no plans to write a new lightmapper for MAX, I am leaving that space for something awesome (i.e. a new third party lightmapper that rocks if we find one in open source land). I am Sorry you did not like our demo, goes to show you cannot please everyone

@All : The next alpha will not allow you to create the cellar demo by any stretch, the code is still very much in a million pieces. What you saw was a simple graphics demo to show off some MAX assets and the Wicked Engine, nothing more. Expect the second alpha build to upset some people with high expectations!

Im surprised your releasing another so fast to be honest.
At this stage I expect worse not better.

Just wanted to say that I was suitably impressed by the demo. It's a significant leap forward, and I don't think anyone should underestimate the effort required to integrate the Wicked engine into GG. I suspect it's one of those things that requires a massive effort up front for a relatively small perceived gain. However, I believe it will open up huge possibilities, and in the long term, free up developer resources which can be better utilised in adding new features etc.

I also want to second what @GubbyBlips said about being able to spawn models via script. I realise that it's slightly beyond the scope of what GG was originally designed for, however I think it would open up the possibilities of the engine tremendously. And of course, it doesn't take anything away from those people who never want to have to touch a script.

Thanks for the reply Lee, while I will agree that it is a major improvement so far, minor tweaks with regards to the lights whether real time or baked will make a huge difference, even wicked engine developer has pointed out while the lighting model used especially area lights, while good isnt accurate all the time, well that was at least in the 2017 version of wicked engine.The 2019 version has path tracing, which you have mentioned will not be included, which to be honest is rather disappointing, and in my opinion sort goes against the grain a little, as it is mentioned in the videos that you want max to use a little horse power, but in the same breath say lets reign it in. GTX 960 was released over 5 years ago, the GTX 10XX series wasn't a tick architect as far as I remember and the horsepower difference is quite large. Currently only 1.7% percent of steam users is currently still using the 960GTX, compared to GTX 1060 which is at 11%. Which means you are sort of selling max short a bit on outdated hardware, by the time max is released and stable in the next year, pretty much no one would be using the 960GTX, hardware performance would have increased a fair bit as well. If you were to adjust requirements to newer hardware you would be cutting a small number of users in the short term, but the long term benefits far outweigh that.I think the focus of supporting current available hardware doesn't leave much room for future proofing eventual hardware in the next 1-2 years which would overall run the engine even better.

Max is currently making sacrifices for hardware almost no one uses any more, I much rather have max now with slightly slower performance overall which will gradually improve as new hardware adoption improves in the short term, then overall immediate performance.TGC has always approached their FPSC and max products with graphical system of one fit for all solution, ignoring the users with high end systems, which will eventually become the mid range and then the low end.Wicked engine supports path tracing, so why not have it included and use it based on hardware requirements with hard rules to turn it on and off.

Which means it is there from the get go, doesn't require updating in the future, which allows for different levels of hardware support rather then the one fit for all solution, considering the usage of the wicked libraries, I suspect any future advances with the engine will make it into the product at some point as development progresses.
Even vram based on stats show that over 20% has 8gig. Which to me shows max may be aiming a bit on the low side, midrange and low end graphics isn't what they use to be and pack quite a bit more horsepower compared to 2015.



To some extend the crisp shadows and lighting annoys me a bit, and reminds me a fair bit of FPSC classic.Which is why I mentioned in particular the level lighting needs to compliment the environment. For me there is still something missing, overall the shadows and lights.


So the question isnt max setting the bar pretty low with 5 year old hardware support, which would likely not be even in use same time next year ?

Hi Lee

it looks fantastic thank you, just a couple of questions please, with the realtime lighting you mention baking light probes above my understanding is that baking leads to static lights is there a 'dynamic bake' option never heard of it but maybe there is ? or does the bake take in consideration of the entire scene from every angle ?

With the realtime system how will AO maps be treated? for instance if AO provides shadows on detail the real time light might not look as convincing will there be dynamic AO ? i can adjust my AO maps to be very subtle so that light direction would not look too bad but was wondering how max would treat them.

Oh and as far as the baseline being a GTX960 and a cut down version of wicked, why don't you leave it to the end user to choose their own baseline, for instance when you start a game any current game it will either detect your specs or you choose your GPU from a list most gamers have top rigs nowadays so putting most if not ALL of wicked features in would probably make life easier in the long run, instead of cobbling on features in the future features could be activated by the type of GPU the end user has in their system so effectively the end user can atomatically upgrade to new features when they can upgrade their GPU .
so :
GTX960 = LOW
GTX10xx = MEDIUM to HIGH
RTX20xx = HIGH to ULTRAHIGH

just a thought

@graphics Baking light probes is different to baking a lightmap in GG - light probes tell how much light is in the area so shadows and light on objects have their strength adjusted accordingly depending on the nearest probe (the more probes the more accurate)... It's basically a faster way to calculate light changes during the game but doesn't look good if the lights themselves move (moving shadows / entities is fine) and/or there are sharp cut-off points (i.e. wall edges) without a nearby probe

@AmenMoses Well to be fair to people that is not common knowledge.

How is PushObject( objId, vx, vy, vz ) complicated?

Perhaps the fact the documentation is, as normal in GG, rubbish.
Global file description of above command.

PushObject -- To be documented

In fact that entire section is the same.

So perhaps that may account for it. Not to mention most people don't even realise that they can see the commands in the global.lua file in the first place. Although, even there, many commands are skirted over in terms of details and some are even wrong or completely missing! As you yourself told me not too long ago
In fact this is a big failing of GG, documentation has always been put off, touted as not worth it until it's at a more complete stage. Well were looking at a new version now, and still no real proper manual for GG at all. This lack of proper command descriptions and the severe lack of example usage makes GG a lot harder to work with than it should be.
GG Max would do better if this was addressed early and features listed and explained with usage examples as they are added. Before they get forgotten about in the next phase of work. Which I'm quite sure has happened to GG a lot over it's long dev cycle.

"No plans to substantially change the way standalone are exported,....."
Well, the option to use the own game icon for the standalone would be great.
Shouldn't be to hard to add that little feature. At the standalone creation process just use the .ico file which is in the title (?) folder. That would be great.

At the moment if u change it there and create a standalone, its still ignored by GG... and the GG icon appears as your game logo... come on...

Yeah, all for better graphics and better terrain. But why sacrifice Wicked tech to cater only for lower end hardware. Why not aim for higher end stuff and offer options to turn stuff off for lower end hardware.

The overall feeling I get with the current road map is that we are doing the same thing again as with classic - just make it look better.

And surely the underlying issues that are inherent with Classic should be fixed in MAX.
It would be useful to get a small team to make a game with the engine as you build it, so you can see the issues devs are having in the end result, and create a game maker that doesn't just look good, but works for its intended purpose - namely to make games that work outside the editor.
Standalone reliability and performance are key. It is pointless having an engine that works fine in test-mode, but once compiled with all the test overheads removed, doesn't work as expected.

Make MAX great!

OldFlak....

Use Resource Hacker and change out the icon that way. It's free and simple to use.

I agree with Wizard of Id and OldFlak - why sacrifice things for hardware (i.e. GTX 960) that few use any more? If possible, why not provide the best of both worlds - allow the creator to determine if they use high-end features or not. When most games are being developed, the developers look at what hardware is going to be used in two years or so, not what is or was being used in the past. Since GameGuru MAX is not set to be released until at least September, wouldn't it be better to think about what hardware will most likely be commonly used by gamers and developers then and onward instead of what's used now (or in the near past)? As pointed out, few are using the GTX 960 any more and even fewer will be using it in the months to come, I would guess.

i have asked the same question

I only have an ASUS Strix GTX970 with 4Gb of DDR5 onboard and it seems to run most things I throw at it. When I got it, a few years ago now, it was pretty expensive. I will continue to use this card until I really do need to get a better one.

@Dvader - Yes I saw those in the Global.lua too, but as you pointed out, there is no info on any of those commands, when will that be added?

@Argent
I really don't understand the backward thinking here.I suspect Lee might be playing it safe, for whatever reason, I don't know, it is not like users won't have the option to use classic, in the event of not willing to use windows 10 or upgrade their hardware any time soon.
What TGC should have done is a hardware survey of their own as this would have given them precise idea of what hardware users have and not what hardware they expect users to have.

Graphically you have an engine capable of producing crysis level graphics and then decide nope let's limit it. Considering the wicked engine isnt some half baked under optimized engine either, and a step up from what TGC could do within a limited time frame and budget.
Considering you could play crysis on core2duo and core2quad 8800gt at the time with full graphical settings.

Several years down the line even low end systems can play it.

Additionally if this doesn't at least match S2 engine graphics, or surpass it, what is the point. S2 engine has spectacular graphics and effects and the min requirements are a AMD5850 or Nvidia 460gtx, recommended is 1060GTX or a RX570, Considering S2 is also developed by a single person, while it isnt as stable as one would like.

It begs the question why has gameguru and TGC products relating FPSC brand ran relatively poor on the same hardware, while several things have drastically improved over the years, it never quite gets to where it needs to be.

Unfornately I am being brutally honest here and some might not like it.But if max isn't able to beat S2 engine or match it at least it will miss the mark completely, I am still supportive of their products and will continue to do so, if you going to do the effort of touting a graphical revolution for max, I expect it to match or surpass S2, it is neither unrealistic or being greedy.They are able to do this on far weaker hardware, which is why you then end up asking why are they able to do it on far less. ?

@DVader :
I have sent Lee the documentation to insert into global.lua but he didn't include it!

Anyway I have covered these functions in tutorials and many example scripts.

Doesn't really make much difference though as even when you point someone at global.lua or at one of my many threads they still moan.

Wicked engine dev talks about Voxel-based Global Illumination as well.

Yes, guys, you are right about providing the best of both worlds, I myself have a GTX1060 as you can see on my sig, anyway this card is going to be the past and others come to be the future, such RTX or something other, about hardware is hard to be always updated.

About Global.lua, it is not well documented, I myself have discover some command thanks to Ames that advise me, but I ignored that this command already exists.
command used by the default player control mechanism does not help a lot.



@ Lee


That's the idea, I'm going to do so, especially when I get what you were talking about the new terrain system, in your video.

For what it's worth here's my two cents: I think the direction GGM is headed in is much better than what we've seen with GGC so far for the most part. I like that Lee seems very focused on getting the foundation right first before promising additional features. A proper rendering engine and solid terrain system are absolutely fundamental to building an enjoyable FPS in 2020. With that said, there are obviously other things that need improvement (entity grouping/prefabs, improved standalone builds, etc.), but I'm hopeful these will come later on.

I have a bit of a soft spot for TGC because I've used their products since I was a kid, and they're one of the reasons I became a software developer professionally, but I really think it's pretty amazing what they've accomplished with such a small team and limited budget. Sometimes products fail or get left behind, but that's the nature of most development firms; you can't keep pushing what isn't making money.

With all that said, I do have a few suggestions to offer about GGM:

Stay focused on the foundation and finish one core feature before starting another. I know some users always want to see the shiniest new features as soon as possible, but the extra eye candy isn't useful as long at the core of the engine is unstable.

I really like the direction of moving as much functionality towards Lua as possible, and I think this should be status quo going forward. Add a new engine feature? Skip the hardcoding and immediately open up as much of the API as possible to Lua scripts so we can control it.

Building on the last point, limit the number of Lua scripts offered as official "features". There are several talented scripters who frequent these forums, and various resources to learn from, including (self-plug) ScriptGuru, for people who want custom features in their games. It will be especially easy for the community to share scripts now that we have the dynamic Lua system. I believe most the "cool new features" involving Lua should be new functions to give us more power over our games. That leaves more time for the core team to do the hard stuff .

My last suggestion is more to do with the business side, which I know nothing about, so take this with a grain of salt. I think TGC might be selling themselves a bit short, and potentially hurting the product in the long run, with the current pricing model. I've bought every iteration of FPSC/GG released, and frankly the $40 or whatever I paid for GGM in 2020 seems concerningly low for a product I hope will continue to be developed for years to come.

I realize you want the barrier to entry to be low for GGM so it's as accessible as possible, but I really think you need to go back to the drawing board on this one and consider something more sustainable long term. Maybe something like a one-time payment version that comes with two years of free updates, and an alternative insiders subscription model for those who are serious about supporting GGM's growth in the long run. I don't know what works best, but I do know I would subscribe at $4.99-$9.99 a month and forget about it to support the continued development of GGM.

Overall I'm really excited for GGM and have high but realistic hopes for it, and I only have one question: Will the source code for GGC and/or GGM be returning to GitHub at some point, and if not, why? Coming back to GG after years of being absent, I was really excited to crack open the source code on GitHub and see what I could contribute, only to find out the latest versions have been resealed. I understand this isn't an open source project, but I loved the idea of community contribution, so I'm curious what has changed.


This is unfortunately true, but I'm currently making an effort to help improve that with a community documentation site called ScriptGuru. Feel free to check it out when you have a chance, or see the announcement thread here.

Yes darimc. More open script functions please.
Spawning of models on the fly would be incredibly valuable in creating flexible
games.

As far as scripting goes-- what constitutes global.lua is what we have!
So-- there is plenty that could be added to GG lua commands, to make MAX
more than another FPS level creator. 64 bit will help, but all that still falls flat
when the commands to do more are absent. TEXT and more entity tracking
systems for example.

So yeah, I agree and fear //even re-feared// in re-reading the TGC MAX promotion
page, that MAX is their most advanced First Person Shooter Creator to date! --that
we are off on the wrong foot again. Why is Lee creating our game genre for us?
What is valuable here, for an advanced GG is not ONLY a better looking FPS engine,
but more flexibility. Who cares about the looks when all you do is click your mouse
on popping up enemies?? Anyhow- I want to be positive and motivational, not just
gripey sounding! So good work guys!

@wizard of id



Another thing that S2 has going for it is the developer is creating his own game, Hell Seed. What this means is he is actually using the product to build an actual game. You can see some screen shots/videos on Steam, too. Therefore, as he builds his game, he can see the shortcomings of his engine, his editor, and GameMachine, the visual coding system used to script (it's an FSM). As he encounters issues, the engine/editor/GameMachine get fixed/updated. After those updates are tested (by his continuing to develop his game), they get released to the public.

Has Lee or anyone at TGC ever tried to make an actual game (not just a demo) with GameGuru? Have they seen what happens in GameGuru when levels become complex, when scripts are firing for everything in a game, when simply attempting to compile a stand-alone for play? I don't know, to be fair, but from what I've been reading on the forums, it doesn't look like it. I hope that Lee and company do a lot more testing on GameGuru MAX, especially to see what it's like to attempt to develop an actual game within it. It's great to have a new GUI and all, but if it doesn't flow properly when developing a game, it can look nice and all, but be a PITA to use.

Take Classic, as an example - why is snapping in Classic so non-standard? Why isn't it implemented like snapping is in every other 3D app and game engine editor out there? Why does hitting Properties on a selected entity cause the camera to zoom in on it (it seem's that few, if anyone, really likes this ... not from a previous post I'd made suggesting getting rid of it)? It's often the little things that can get in the way of having a smooth (and fun) development cycle within the editor.

Now, while it's true that S2 is being developed by a single developer, the engine has also been in development for years ... over a decade at least. So, yeah, it does some spectacular things, especially for the price, but development is fairly slow, too.

I do wish that GameGuru MAX's sky, weather, and water would look and function as well as S2's, though. His water system is an absolute thing of beauty and the amount of control you have over waves and the like is pretty amazing.

To be honest he made a couple back in the early 2000's … Didn't really help if that was to iron out bugs

Yes, both will come back. But they want to make a even base for GGC and GGM and that costs time.
Link to Lees post: https://forum.game-guru.com/thread/221517?page=2#msg2625849

"Use Resource Hacker and change out the icon that way. It's free and simple to use. "
LOL

Yes, I know that work around... but they should be able to fix that little problem. Do we really need to modify the exe after compiling again.... that cant be the normal way.

It actually is ... for a few game engines (at least it was for a few I'd used in the past). Like you, I would love to see a means to accomplish this within GameGuru itself, though. But, yeah, I've run into this before with a few different systems.

Agree with Agent_Arts
I don't get that option on any of the engines I have purchased on steam ( unless I missed them )
Good news is that Graphix could be adding an icon changer to his Asset manager meaning it will be the ultimate All in one tool

Fpe Editor
Lua editor
FX editor
Menu Creator
Icon Changer

Ah, thanks for clearing that up for me! That sounds like a good decision on their part, and I'm sure I can wait until September .

Yes sure the water system is great and bought the engine just for the hell of messing about with it, I however I wouldn't say copying S2 ideas is the best for max.

But engine is great flexibility with regards to what it does with full screen shaders, and is a particular unique effect, and compliments the rest of the graphics very well.

Some effects in S2 isn't as great, the texture rendering is far better in max, but what I seen with regards to lighting is where it sort of falls a bit flat for, and the same thing happened in classic, classic has a pretty great graphical system overall, but is greatly let down by a fast and cheap lighting system that really lets down the graphics in classic, classic insisted on using a bloom shader, that didn't really do any thing useful in a scene then washout the entire scene instead of individual areas.

I haven't seen max yet with a nice full screen shader(s) the compliments the environment, so yes realtime lighting is great and well, and from what I can see a cheaper route was used, as there is no shadow blurring or fall off from shadows.

When we started out with gameguru version 1.04 or some thing, Rick reached out to me with regards to editing the original escape level, pointed out wouldn't it be better to create an entire new level and assets to showcase a bit more on what custom level might look like.
Thus the big escape was born, the initial level and assets took about a month or so to create, and overall it was a pretty decent level, and the design was pretty neat, it was a bit taxing on hardware at the time.It was never intended to be a showcase level to show off what can be really be done in gameguru, but rather a level design showcase.This level then officially became the performance benchmark for lee, when ever new things were added or improved, kinda got messed up when they decided to make it smaller.

Lee wants to create a small enclosed level to show off the features of the wicked engine, while not a bad idea, I do think they need to broaden that a bit with a more interactive level, and throw every thing they can at the engine, as a real engine demo, rather then a small showcase of what can be done, it seems they are sticking to the zombie theme, which has pretty much been done to death, gameguru zombies overall have been pretty dumb for the most part.

TGC can do much, much better with regards to a proper showcase level, but it costs some serious money and time, 3-4 months isn't nearly enough time to create some thing awesome.Creating PBR assets takes time as well as planning the level design ect, I would gladly take a shot at it again, but alas I wasn't asked this time around, so will just have to wait and see.

Have some content at the ready which would make a great level with all the new features, ect. I decided on holding off releasing the content for the time being as I would like to release the content for both classic and max on release in September. I have 4 different level building kits at the ready, 2 is only for classic and 2 for both.

I definitely can't wait to see what the cold war pack would look like in max, should be some thing spectacular.

Certainly. I was only recommending a look at their sky, weather, and water. Particularly, the water system used. I love that I can take a gizmo that is simply like "wind", place it where I like on the water, adjust it's strength, and I instantly get waves to the size I want, moving in the direction I want. And I can set several of these to get as stormy or as calm of a sea as I like. It's a pretty sweet system, actually, that makes creating custom waters very nice and easy. I could see something like this in MAX. We already can set things like where sounds are, start points, etc. Why not be able to set the direction and strength of waves via markers? It won't happen, but a guy can dream, right?



I thought this initially, too. But I don't think it's the case. Once you start playing around with the system, you find there's a lot that can be adjusted. After playing around a bit in S2, I was pretty able to get just the look I wanted, from how lighting and shadows looked, to how bright and vibrant I wanted the materials to be.

Lol kinda like the world turns one way, and tgc says nope we will go the other way, don't worry it is fine, we will meet you there. lol

Either Will comment again on the graphics once I have it in my hands, right now the shadows and lights seem a little off, would like to see what it does outdoors and with a more complex models, as well as the amount of polygons you can throw at it.

@AmenMoses. He is slacking as ever! Not having a go at you, I know you made the commands, but the rest of us are in the dark or guessing until the dark arts are released to us! Lee seems to love avoiding documentation :/ The thing is if we had it, we would make better use of GG and thus improve it's image.

Many things in scripting are a bit vague. I remember watching a video of Lee scripting some AI. He had every issue I had gone though in that vid. It was uncanny. I watched it and thought "and he wrote it! No wonder I'm struggling". Every bug found in that video still exists to this day. I do love the vid though, as it does show the kind of work around's you need to work on at times (much more so in GG).

Returning to Max speculation. From what I gather, we can expect no new features in Max, apart from a new graphics engine, the new character editor and of course 64-bit (which is a lovely future proofing addition as far as I'm concerned) . Once it is released and operational, only then will we see any plans regarding any new features. With that new engine in place though, the potential for new features is a lot more rosy. I must admit to having high hopes for it in September.

Don't forget the dynamic LUA system thing as part of the editor GUI. That's a pretty big deal, imo.

@Argent_Arts I wouldn't call it that big a thing, dynamic lua is only the ability to mark your LUA scripts to expose your own variables so they can be changed in the properties tab instead of having to edit the scripts, it will make a difference, but not exactly a game changer

@Wizard, I have a feeling the reason Lee is pushing a interior demo is because if gameguru classics history, when reloaded was introduce a major selling point was the jump from FPSC's interior only maps to the outdoor system reloaded gave us, unfortunately they focused so much on exterior and terrain that interior scenes were left behind, especially where lightings concerned, and over the years issues creating an interior scene have been a constant complaint, So this time around I think he's trying to show us that we will be able to get a much better interior scene with max

I think the answer to that question needs to be checked.

I think you're underselling the dynamic Lua system a bit. It's essentially the difference between non-coders being able to customize their game logic or not. I think a lot of the features users request could be implemented with some well written Lua scripts exposing the correct parameters for customization. Weather and day/night systems, AI behaviour, custom control schemes, etc. It's one of the main reasons I decided to pick up GameGuru again, and I think we'll see a lot of good things come from it.

This is what I'm talking about. Finally some eye candy. This is the selling point of the game engine. I'm also liking the indoor lighting which is the biggest turn off about game guru and it seem game guru max improve that. I just hope the indoor lighting works correctly with the characters. I think that also needs to be the main focus of getting it right this time around. If that work well then I'm sold on getting this engine.