Hi All,

Find a recording of today's broadcast:


And your answers:

Q> Will there be the possibility to import node.js files to dialogue?
A> There are no plans to support node.js in GameGuru MAX, we will be looking at a conversation system and dialog editing when we start the RPG Gameplay work.

Q> Terrain textures blending is a bit small is there a chance for an opacity brush. Alpha painting on the terrain will there be more options? Should I make a make Github issue?
A> Yes, pop it in as a feature request as I agree we could do more in this area. Right now it has been engineered for performance, with the idea you will overlay the basic terrain texture with other details such as grasses, trees and objects.

Q> Has the behavior panel been fixed so that we can now get to the buttons?
A> Sounds like you found a bug, please report it to our issues board here: https://github.com/TheGameCreators/GameGuruRepo/issues

Q> Do you plan to show the entity ID to the non-scripter users?
A> We are still working on the legends that show up when objects are selected. I think for standard users, they will not need to see an 'Entity ID'.

Q> Any way to attach particles to the player, and/or NPC?
A> There are no plans to attach particles to the player or characters at this time. It will most likely occur as a scripted feature from a third party.

Q> Texture quality can be a bit of a hit and a miss. Manually tiling can sort the problem, what are the chances for that?
A> There are no plans to add manual tiling of terrain textures. If you spot any terrain textures that do not cut it, send a shot and post to our issues board and we will take a look.

Q> Any chance to choose when I want to hide/show particles?
A> You can untick the option to show the particle when the level starts in the particle properties, and you can activate that particle using the visual logic system in your game.

Thanks for all your questions, more answers for you next time on Wednesday 4 PM GMT.

Interesting, I thought this was said a few times that it would indeed be possible to attach particles to characters when using the grouping system.

I think da gaffa vets carried away and goes on a creative tangent to be fair to him. But then if he says yes then it will mean yes i heard there will be implementation of lights and particles to attach as a group to characters.

I think with the harassment of issues for release let's sort the world out first and ai.....

Then maybe phasr 1 special efx

If I were tgc i would give a brief phase

Like
phase 1
World system - terrain, vegetation, water, weather. Rocks, physics, ai and optimization, character creator

Phase 2
Twaeks to phase 1, night and day and sky, player functions and weapon enhance, underwater and swimming, ai advancements, particles and lights, rpg functions, vr, character creatir advancements

Phase 3
tweeks to phase 2 and 1,
Character creator enhanced, puzzle elements, weapons and combat, third person, enhance world and updates to the environment,

The point being a good target and a roadmap
SMART..... Specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and timescale.
A well used and successful way of managing time and achieving the best possible outcome. So this would show deadlines that not always achievable but it gives focus and transparency to the customers.
So even though the deadline was postponed they did what I thought was spot on they committed and gave a time then apologised and rescheduled amd gave any one who wantex on board the opportunity to join a very smRt move.

So i think they should give us quarterly time frames and what is being worked on. This will make us all winch in our necks

Particles used to be scriptable at least in their position and visibility. Now they are not (new max particles anyway, the old system still working, bar showing particles from last run occasionally). Each update of Max seems to cripple simple things these days. A few months ago I made a snow particle in TGC's particle creator. Made it follow you as you walked fine. I left it alone at that point as spending time on a feature that is going to be standard in max seems to me a waste of time and effort. Now, you can't even attach a script to particles. Utter Bantha Poodoo. I can understand the need for speed, but we need to be able to move particles, scale particles and hide particles in script.

True. So MAX is becoming more of a toy sandbox software then ever?
Also-- from what I hear, it's not just particles that are tossed in the trash. What needs to be opened up more than ever is getting closed up and hard coded-- which are the worst words to hear for any developer. It feels like a wave of Cancel Culture progressing backwards by hating on scripters. It will basically cut off customized game development and all games will feel the same no matter what custom entities you place on your map. Do they really want to continue that legacy? It's really hard to get excited about and support those dead ends. Because procedural made games are just a little bit of tweaking all the same things over and over.

"I can understand the need for speed" Do you mean by that "ease of UI?" because all this locking down doesn't make sense to me either. There's no chance that everything a person imagines can be assessed by UI in the attempt to makes things easier! TGC cannot no matter how hard they wish or how much they talk about it-- create for themselves everybody's game by menu. Viable game engines leave customization opened up to the developer. I thought we where getting a better game engine?
https://www.yourdictionary.com/application-programmability

It keeps getting pushed back, so we'll just wait until it's finally released on Steam. What will the HONEST, VIABLE open public scrutinizers see of it? Only the GAMES made in MAX will tell.

I think the main words here are

Dave

Well he isn't wrong, currently every thing is pretty locked down tight.When asked about importing own grass and trees assets for the generation system, it will happen but to what extent is unkown. It hasn't been made clear what systems will be opened up if at all or to what extend.

Why wasn't these systems opened up from the start, It doesn't quite make sense that you open up some thing several weeks or months after the fact.It is a bit weird, it is like the removal of height and width adjustment of grass. You can't tell me it is because of performance, this has zero impact on performance as you are only scaling what is already being rendered.Having nerfed the grass visuals as well as other aspects there is currently zero scalability or flexibility based on hardware in the current builds. That is really troublesome and worrisome.

So he isn't wrong.You can't improve, quality of the grass, tree, or terrain even particles systems in any way or form, and the systems will only be opened up to allow importing your own, if you haven't noticed yet the grass system is different to that of classic.They needed to nerf quite a bit in max in the name of performance.

Thanks for the quote granada. I stand by it.
Did you know that if you want to build a procedural game map, a great benefit and help with that would be the capability to spawn entities via scripting? Also did you know that there are some people out there willing to write their own AI for games even into RTS and procedural RPG genres?!? All benefiting from the same feature. Some people are willing-- in fact eager to throw out nearly all stock scripts GG provides, so that they can build their own custom games! Relying on stock behaviors presents the possibility of your game feeling just like the next guys. Also to top it all off. First Person Shooter is the LAST kind of game certain people want to even think of.


I know most people here don't see my viewpoint. They have reached GG by means of seeking a very easy to use game engine-- primarily when it's description clearly says; " No Scripting required! " But what I'm looking for is an easy User Interface, with healthy scripting capabilities. Therefore I'm pretty much out on a high, skinny, slippery limb with very little company.

Sadly I've pretty much heard Lee stomp on the concept of scripting himself. The fist time being around the first of this year probably (or in other words almost a year ago) when I asked about entities being spawned via script in the live stream. He said; "In fact we will do one better than that and allow you to use the editor to spawn entities!" How is that any kind of spawn entity scripting?! A rude slap in the face like as if the request was mud on a boot. There have been other inquiries made by others that where kind-of similar. I don't expect all my requests to be built into the engine-- Only there are a few that can upgrade GG MAX into a higher tier, and more PLEASANT realm -- these are two separate benefits.

So certain features in scripting don't seem to fit within their vision of the product. They have these hard - coded concepts of TGC GG which lay at the foundation of their product namely the AI / AI path-finding. And they act like everyone has to use it or it's just not going to be a game they would like to see. This presents an obstacle to those who want to go another route. Of course if someone wants to show me demos that prove that wrong-- Wonderful. I'd be happy to see it. Whether they want to produce the easiest game maker in the world or not, scripting should be alive and well in a GREAT game engine. If scripting is closed up and unhealthy, the engine is unhealthy.

I don't think it will be closed up as such, just at the moment that side is less of a priority to get working properly. It annoys me to no end to find features removed of course. But if it helps get it working better and they are re-introduced later then I am fine. TGC are catering for the majority of users first and most will not want to touch a lua script if they can help it! Ticking some boxes or dragging a slider is as much as many want to do. It's not the best attitude to making games (I like to understand at least some in any engine) but it is by far the most common and not likely to change.

Don't forget a lot of the AI code is in lua, so should be customisable later or completely rewritten if someone wanted to go that far. I think the scripting will be improved over next year a lot when the core features are properly working. Also, to be fair it's not too bad and you can still add a fair bit of customisation already.

I have had a good share of weird and wonderful issues in Max so far, but that is gonna be the case with an early alpha. Some of it (of late) I'm sure is a system issue also, which is always great timing!

Just glad they decided to listen to reason and hold it back to get it more steam ready.

I think this explains it best



Dave

This isn't really applicable to TGC apps in general. Considering last couple of builds were intended to be the December release or at least as close to the build that was to be released as the first public "beta"/ early access if you will.

That said alpha builds of gameguru classic which I was apart of the initial testing team and later on beta team, didn't have similar restrictions in place, like currently not being able to add your own grass/trees and terrain textures, even as far as iam aware relates to particles as well. Unlike classic, max has hard locks in place unless it is physically removed by means of code, which may or may not happen soon if at all.

It has nothing to do whether the product is alpha or beta, as none of their other software at various development stages intentionally hard locked features or greatly apply restrictions.

Contrary to the definition you posted, the intention of alpha even beta builds is to test software by a test team with the intention and freedom to discover bugs and break the software under normal and abnormal use. The current state of the software leaves very little room to test the software outside of the preset and fixed defined perimeters, and little or no experimentation.

The way max has been designed goes completely against their previous design processes. It is currently extremely hard to discover new bugs or issues with features having it hands tied behind their backs and only having to work within a fixed area.

Whether alpha, beta or first release the software has been considerably nerfed.The question is, what is up with that, as it isn't due to alpha state, there far more to it then that.

Many right now have been disabled for relocation or temporarily disabled as part of the clean up process.

I give up

Dave

I do agree that it is sad the amount of downgrades or outright removed features. If classic had better graphics, i would prefer to use it more than MAX at the current moment.

@ Gubby
Just out of curiosity, when you say; entities being spawned via script
Do you mean entities that are not physically located on the map?
If so, then this is not the answer to your request, however, I can think of another solution, in fact, I tried it in GG and it works.
It is, for example, placing 6 soldiers on the map, using and re-using the same soldiers over and over again, at different points on the map, that you consider that the player should be attacked.
Do not kill the soldier, just hide him and move him to his new position.
Obviously, you will need an LUA script and a little Amen's funky math.

Hate to work "steam-based".
When the product is ready to be released, if TGC has met expectations, and delivers a final product that meets what was promised, it will not matter absolutely anything what the guys from steam say, or any other "Youtuber" hungry for "likes. ".
Any user with common sense will appreciate the quality of the product, and this should be enough. Just my thought.
On the other hand, I am aware that TGC is a company, and as such, it has the last word.

All these complains or criticism should be taking in consideration by Lee and the TGC team. This is the reason why I say Lee and Rick should not set a release date for game guru max. If most or if not all these issues are solve by march the forum community is going to sound like a broken recorder. The best way to deal with these issues is to focus on getting the engine as close to complete as possible with all features done properly and remove the release date. For example, the VR feature will be time consuming to get done and may not be finish by march, but even if the VR is release by that date it may be incomplete in some way. Remember how the third person feature was release with bare bones game play set up in game guru. No one wants a repeat of that with the VR. This why I said it's best for the main focus to come close to complete as possible. All the feature in game guru max needs to be complete before setting a release date. None of the features should not feel like it's bare bones and rush to complete. Game guru max should feel like a complete game engine and ready to make a complete game with by the time of it's release date.

I want VR more than anything but even i know that wont even be started by March.
It will get started in 2022 but thats probably the best info there is.
The main goal between now and March is to get what we have solid.

That's my point right there. TGC can not advertise game guru max with VR coming soon. Game guru max needs to be a complete software when they release it. So the VR won't happen in March, they should remove the March release date until the VR is complete. That way the only develop work needs be done after the release date is bug fixes. I personally don't care for VR and have no use for it so I'm only speaking on the behalf of those who will complain about the engine not having that feature ready, like the people on steam. If game guru max couldn't be a day one release with VR Lee should have never hype it up by advertising it with VR. Don't say the game engine is going to have this feature or that feature if it not going to be a day one release feature. If the feature was never mention then there will be nothing to be disappointed about and no one can't really complain about it. so if day one release is June or July 2022 with VR so be it. We should be able to make a complete game with the day one release or come close to that. When you look how game guru on day one release on steam. The lesson should have been learned from that mistake. No one want to hear go use another engine if this one doesn't have the feature you want. Lee and TGC needs to get this right on the first release. So remove the release date and focus on the main goal of the engine which is complete the engine.

I agree, but with the photon multiplayer. That was big deal at the start of gg MAX and people have been wanting it forever. Now suddenly they have gone all quiet about it.

Alpha clipping to make things easier to place items inside buildings, has that been forgotten about, this is a very important feature and is probably the most used feature for me in classic. I thought this would be in MAX by now..... I know Lee was "thinking about how to implement it" I hope this will arrive soon.

At the wizard.
I think that if i was them i would probably do the same. disable to fix the bigger boys of the bug world or adding new code to sort issues out. I would. Only release other areas once i felt the main issues were completed.

I think that our Job at present is to find the bugs that exist. Before they let lose the other beasts that will then create more and more Issues.

I think they are being. Sensible rather than release software that is going to be riddled with thousands of bugs due to letting all areas be used to create More Bugs. They want to fix the bugs they have and pinpoint quicker. So they can deal with bugs faster. If they let it all out now as. You suggest it will be a mine field and probably take twice as long. So i for one think lets find the bugs we have and let them sort them and then i am sure bit by byte they will release the code.

You seem extremely worried to not getting in the software before release. I am thinking the bugs will still be there if you're in or not and i think us not being in to break it is good i am sure they expect that at some Point but not yet.

I am sure you will be able to create your media ready in time for Release. So jusy be ready like a coiled spring for when they let us in.

At the newest topic features and release date.
the product release date its tricky maybe they need to do a 2 part release

First early access release has X. Y. Z. Features basic core with shooter and world features...
Early access part 2 has RPG, night n day, swimming and under water efx, VR, puzzle logic, 3rd person etc...

First release first half 2022
Second half end of 2022

That would work if out out in huge easy wording

This was reported to lee several months ago, he even opened up a gitbub issue for it.
So it wasn't anything new, or how to go about it, simply was ignored.

https://github.com/TheGameCreators/GameGuruRepo/issues/1434

@science boy
Well they currently have 692 issues on github several older then a few months. It is pretty much already bug riddled.Whether they allow adding of grass/trees and changing of textures. Won't make much of a difference bug wise, these things aren't really introductions of new code or things that could potentially affect the stability of the software.

Crying out loud it is only adding custom textures in most cases, grass is literally the addition of a new mipmap alpha textured grass pictures. Tree are the addition of the model for the generation and the tree textures for the billboard, terrain is the addition of the color map normal map and the surface map.

It isn't exactly rocket science, it isn't some thing that is going to introduce new bugs either, perhaps on the visual front maybe, but that would be due to user induced bugs, incorrect formatting of textures too high polygon tree for the generation system ect.

There is no logical reason, why either the grass, tree system or adding of terrain textures needed to be hard locked. Really don't understand why these systems needed to be hard locked.There is literally no logical reasoning behind it.

Look at this way you worked on the grass system feature, complete it and move on to the next part of the project, as with the terrain system textures and tree system, and several weeks later you have to revisit that feature add new code to enable importing of new grass and terrain textures add new folders for these custom textures so the main gameguru folder doesn't overwrite it, and most probably introduce bugs by doing so.

Why wasn't it completed entirely for the testing phase, from the start, performance ? Not really you just adding your own textures in most cases.Just doesn't make sense......

I am not being difficult here, I am looking it mostly confused for what is consider is a misstep, having to go back to old code to add new code which should have been there from the start. It doesn't exactly scream logical for some thing as simply adding custom texture support, honestly.

Quote: "Alpha clipping to make things easier to place items inside buildings, has that been forgotten about, this is a very important feature and is probably the most used feature for me in classic. I thought this would be in MAX by now..... I know Lee was "thinking about how to implement it" I hope this will arrive soon. "



Not ignored , its on there list

Dave

Lol technically no :p but it has been two months.....that is a little sus.I knew about it because I recommended to lee, after spending some time looking up what other engines were doing or weren't doing in this regard. Camera clipping plane was the most common method used. Lee mentioned because he didn't write the shaders the wicked engine developer did, he was about to go mess around with it as he is more likely to break things then fix things.In classic the shaders were used to clip builldings and interior.

The problem however is wicked engine has no native clipping plane support. Considering how essentially the feature is for designing levels , Tarkus it is some thing that should be added ages ago.

When I bought GGMax, I was aware that I was buying a product that was in the development stage, that its development would take time, that the team in charge of its development is a very small team, that had a rough idea of what the word meant. alpha or beta for a product in development.
I also knew that my contribution to the development of the program could be positive, negative, or simply non-existent.
I knew that I could report software bugs, or even suggest features, on GitHub.
All this comes in the package and I was willing to accept it, and I see no reason to ignore my decision.
I simply decided to be part of the solution, and not part of the problem.
We all have the implicit right to protest, although I reserve that right only to protest a finished product. IMHO.

Sure there are things that are not there yet, like custom textures for terrain, and grass (completely doable atm btw if you want to go under the hood), but for a small team they making great progress imo.

We have essentially signed up to be an alpha\beta tester by buying into MAX now - the real question here is are you up to the task?

Best thing to do is - especially considering it is alpha (you now - ALPHA) is use the engine - report what's broken, request what you think is missing, and just have fun playing with it.

On the other hand creating negative banta about the direction, design choices, progress on features, missing features, etc won't do your blood pressure any good

Of course, while you be waiting for MAX to be what you want it to be - there is of course Unity, UE, < insert favorite game engine with all the features you ever wanted here >.

OldFlak....

Not angry in the least, weird design choice. They finally added some thing in this weeks build I won't discuss, neither should anyone else, something we have been asking for ages, and fixes one of the problems I mentioned in a previous thread.

My issue is, if you actually look at the the change log you would have noticed it mentions "final" UI for grass and "final" UI tweaks. Now unless "final" has changed in definition, this won't be changing anytime soon, and a good bet this will also be the UI for the march release.I worried about a crippled release in march. Which is going to earn them a great deal of flack on steam.I would love to be wrong and everyone telling told you so. Gut feeling however........is another story.

I see this thrown around quite a bit (in various places ... not just here ... and not just with this program). But that doesn't really hold up, does it? I know of several engines, for example, that have smaller teams (i.e. one person or only two) that area developing a much, much deeper engine (on par with Unity/Unreal as far as what you can do with them) and they are developing much more quickly, adding more features, and squashing more bugs more frequently. So, the size of the team is not necessarily the benchmark to go by here, is it? Especially not considering that MAX has been in Alpha for ... how long now? And even when it's (hopefully) released in March 2022, it will still be "Early Access" and, most likely, even then will still be an alpha release ... maybe beta? But still early access, regardless.

In any case, MAX has a lot of potential (or so I think). I think what they are doing, what they are planning, is pretty cool. It's not there ... yet. It's sort of getting there. It's pretty broken at the moment. And it seems like it keeps getting broken a bit, fixed a bit, and broken a bit more with each release. So, it's been an interesting ride, to be sure. And there has been progress, certainly.

Depends what you consider the UI.
The User interface layout or the functionality and features included in those area's.
The UI layout maybe final but that does not mean things wont be added or changed within them.

I agree with wizard of id on this and this is why I said TGC should not set a release date before getting most if not all the features and issues done. It's small team of people yes, but that's more of the reason why they should not set a release date. If more is needed to avoid a cripple day one release then that should be taking inconsideration so this engine can be done right. I feel there's no rush for a day one release because you can make a decent game with an game engine that is half finish or don't have the full functional feature that anyone need to make their game. We would standing in same place with game guru max as we were with game guru/ reload when it first release. Looking at game guru max now how it has improve over the course of time at the stage of alpha release it get better results in the end if they keep developing the game engine at this pace under the alpha stage it's in right now.

Will have to wait and see.

Sadly not so great news on the custom grasses, terrain textures and trees, as confirmed by the latest broadcast, not planned for march release, "but if there is time" maybe. My gut feeling about being as close to the release version is more or less correct, with the exception of odds and ends of course.

Will have to wait and see how steam users react to the lack of customization, and how long this will remain hard locked.Not the news I wanted to hear on level design critical components.

The rock system is also a long, long ways off too, the camera clipping plane to edit inside buildings also a long, long, long way off. Pretty much what I feared and expected for the march release. I don't think it is a great idea leaving out the customization in the march release even it is a steam early access, steam users might not take to kindly to it. But yeah pretty much what I expected and I wanted to be wrong.

yeah but look we have a new feature - heightmap imports ha (tongue in cheek)

Well it fixes the major issues I had with the terrain symmetry, well not the underlining problem just a work around to it, (still welcomed) one down couple more to go

Well the plan was to stabilize and optimise everything we had right now for March with nothing new added unless there was time so heightmap importation is kind of an unexpected bonus right now so who knows what we still might get.