I would pay £200 for Blitz3d DX9!
Blitz3D Forums/Blitz3D Programming/I would pay £200 for Blitz3d DX9!
| ||
| Petition time fella's! Time for Mark to make us a new version of Blitz3D! simple quick and easy to code but with state of the art shader scripts/HDR's/Skins! Dx7 is good, can do basic games, but i just dont have the time to learn C++! |
| ||
| I can't see this happening at this point but you could get BlitzMax, couple it with the Irricht module and pocket the difference. Having automated garbage collection alone makes coding far simpler and stress-free in Max and the price for that -- making your own lists and writing your own Before/After methods -- is relatively small. I've no idea how flexible Irrlicht is, mind, but it seems well featured (not that I can check with my low-end gfx card). TrueVision3D seems to have a good rep' also, but then it should be good because it costs money. Regardless, Max and a 3rd party 3d engine is probably as near as you're going to get to Blitz3D+ unless you fancy giving Cobra a whirl. |
| ||
| TrueVision3D seems to have a good rep' also, but then it should be good because it costs money. It only costs money for commercial use. For non-commercial projects, it's free. |
| ||
| It only costs money for commercial use. For non-commercial projects, it's free. Neat, I might check it out myself then -- when I looked previously you had to have bought 6.2 to get 6.5 but I see from their site that this is no longer the case. Which version is your wrapper currently compatible with -- 6.3, 6.5 or both? |
| ||
| My wrapper is for 6.5. Previous versions cannot be linked from BlitzMax without using an intermediary DLL, which I wasn't keen on. |
| ||
| come on children. there were quite a few posts with topic titles like this and i'm tellin ya, this aint going nowhere. not even mark sibbly himself will post here. i bet he wont! |
| ||
| This is never ever going to happen. Move on. |
| ||
| I would pay too. |
| ||
| Time for Mark to make us a new version of Blitz3D! He already did -- it's called BlitzMax. |
| ||
| I would just like a little more info on BlitzMax3D |
| ||
| http://rubux.net/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,4/func,showcat/catid,13/ |
| ||
| oooo nice :o) |
| ||
| Why people asks for a Blitz3D with DX9? Just because the don't like BMax! BRL should it faces this truth. Many times through these forums I explained why I don't like BMax. Blitz3D and BMax are completely different products and each has it's own fan club. So please stop advise people to leave Blitz3D and program with BMax looking for other 3D engines. They just (as me) want a Blitz3D DX9 because they believe BRL can offer a clean and stable programing environment as the old good DX7... |
| ||
| well i would like to see dx9 in blitz3d, too. but i know that it just wont happen, so i stopped complaining... |
| ||
| As soon as blitzmax gets a native 3D engine I'm with Max. Until then... DX7 and Blitz3D it is. B3D isn't going to go to DX9. I would doubt B3D is actually going to get any more features at all. |
| ||
| Rob, maybe ou haven't read Mark's posts about Max and 3D, his thoughts are thus: (1) There are plenty of 3rd party engines which can be tied into Max already - why should he build another? (2) He sees the immediate future for him in developing some kind of game maker type application similar to Torque Game Maker and DB's Game maker. Sad init? Ipete2. |
| ||
| (1) There are plenty of broken ones. Flow beside MiniB3D Extended 2 will be the only one I really consider as 3D engine for BM. MiniB3D is nice but OGL only is a big no no for me, even if it would be god and had the same performance on Tuxies and Apples. (2) Lets hope not. BRLs adventures in the editor creation have not shown anything but rotten fruits. Maplet, once been sold, lacks that many of even basic features that I still ask myself who payed for it (beside Puki who seems to own a gold sh*** donkey). The default IDEs for all BRL languages so far show the same massive lack from the professional point of view. So I don't see that they "out of nowhere" learn how to create usefull editors and environments. Thats sad but a fact. Especially given the Fact that even the "simple" TGB had 3 programmers and a fully working base engine (TGE) + 18 months of work in it for its initial release and another 12 to its current, really good state ... mapped onto BRL this makes about 60 months, by that time they will have dropped it quite some time ago, as B3D |
| ||
| Dreamora, these statements (1 and 2 above) are 'precises' of Marks' previous statements gleaned from logs and forum entries, so unfortunately they are how he sees the future. There is no 3D engine coming for BMAX according to himself and he is coding a game maker tool afaik. Of course things change and I may have missed something, but these are the two key reasons I and my colleagues are looking down the microscope of C# and XNA, enjoying what we see and making slow but sure progress. IPete2. |
| ||
| Well, (2) was not targeted a 3D world ... but the thing in general. There is little to no chance that Max2D + Editors will even compete against TGB 1.0 due to all the things that just don't exist in BM compared to the Torque Core Technology, which btw would still be "stellar far" away from TGB 1.7.2 which is the current one. It can compate with Game Maker 2007 but mainly because thats true 2D, not 2D through 3D and therefor lacks hardware accelerated 2D blending, rotation and scaling. Thought the graphics aren't the main pro in GM2007, its the fact that the editor and the visual scripting works and that it offers a tile and layer system + pathfinding if you invest the 20$ in the registred version (want to see Mark compete with that if BM is already 100$) Thats my main problem: BRL would surely be able to do something usefull. But definitely not at the price tag they have to meet to stand the least chance against their main competitors. If we had a virtual stock market, I would invest my money in "FlowEd" stock when it comes to "what will boost BM the furthest" ... |
| ||
| So please stop advise people to leave Blitz3D and program with BMax looking for other 3D engines. When people stop posting redundant demands we won't have to! This happens because the question of B3D+DX9 has been raised numerous times, resulting in BRL expressing its intention to pursue other avenues. Given that, the best matches are BMax+3rd party engine or Cobra -- that's a brute fact and it's very sad if you don't like it, but it'd be remiss not to post the info for the benefit of those who aren't up to speed. I thought Maplet was quite promising rather than 'rotten fruit'. What scuppered it was losing the source code, surely? |
| ||
| There is little to no chance that Max2D + Editors will even compete against TGB 1.0 due to all the things that just don't exist in BM compared to the Torque Core Technology I should sincerely hope not. TGB just lurches from one set of horrible bugs to another set. Each time a new version comes out, existing demos ( including their own ) are broken and fixed seemingly at random. They went about four months with file IO completely broken. In short, GG have a TGC-like attitude to development, whereby you throw new features in every time someone says "you know what would be cool?" with little or no consideration to whether it breaks existing code. Furthermore, they clearly don't do any testing before releasing. BlitzMax can't compete with that? Great! |
| ||
| i dont see why mark cant recompile blitz3d for dx9 and release details of how to hook into it for people like tom. Torque is arse, its nowhere near as simple as blitz. |
| ||
| "i dont see why mark cant recompile blitz3d for dx9" He said himself that B3D isn't modular... it's too closely linked to DX7 and producing a DX9 version would be a massive re-write. He decided to create a new compiler not so tightly coupled with the graphics engine, called BlitzMax. |
| ||
| "When people stop posting redundant demands" Personally I hope they never do. I fully approve of people constantly asking for B3D+DX9. Maybe eventually BRL will realise what their customer base really want. |
| ||
| here here, John - they may indeed realise albeit after the fact. IPete2. |
| ||
| Nah, BRL stopped listening to their customers long ago. |
| ||
| Personally I hope they never do. I think that's a safe bet. From the POV of someone who enjoys tinkering with user creations, though, it's pretty disappointing, as there's already not a fraction as much to play with as there used to be. So if, on top of that, people have stopped making games because they're waiting for something they're never going to get, that is kind of disappointing. Maybe eventually BRL will realise what their customer base really want. BRL already realise what their customer base want better than anyone else can, as they have sales figures. So either there's a vocal minority unable to accept that they do not represent the majority of the customer base, or BRL are doing what they want regardless, in which case the customer base needs to realise what BRL want. |
| ||
| Come on Sibly, let's have Blitz Ultra for the new Amiga. I'm putting a clump of pocket lint and half a polo on the table. |
| ||
| There is a library(FastExtend) for B3D that adds all features of modern games- bump, specular, reflections and refractions, clipplanes, render to texture, aligning cubemaps, a lot of entity and texture blends and so on. And it is integrated into Blitz, so I'm using it like native Blitz3D features. It's MixailV's library(the guy who made fastimage ang fasttext libs) I suggest you to check it: http://www.fastlibs.com |
| ||
| wow..this is great .. thanks @rtur |
| ||
| ..by the way, I tried this FastExtension lib..so, clip planes example working just fine, but when I check over tris rendered, amount of rendered tris are same, no matter how many objects on scene clip plane cut off..or I miss something? |
| ||
| There is also discount coupon for libs: 50blitzersoff |
| ||
| I think that blitz counts triangles by himself. It does not takes this value from directx. But you can ask for this MixailV for sure: monster-sage@... |
| ||
| This extension is the best lib for Blitz3D I have ever seen. Do you know why? Simple and works! I buy now. Thanx MixailV |
| ||
| Don't worry guys! Blitz3D will handle DX9 in a couple of months. And in maybe a half a year, even DX10! My engine is for Blitz3D and even BlitzPlus! I dont even like BlitzMax. And with my engine, you dont have to change any commands, except some small here and there, because all the commands of my engine is based on Blitz3D's, and as long you dont use custom shaders, my engine fully automaticly handles shaders on its own (terrain, skinning, water etc.) |
| ||
| can't wait Quimmer! |
| ||
| Oh, nice library! I've bought it and using it now :o) I like the reflection effects and render to texture! And the rotate cubemap light source is great. You can make it into a spot light by rendering your entities one at time and keeping the z-buffer :o) |
| ||
| While I don't see it happening - like the OP I'd happily pay again for B3D with DX9 support (tho not £200, £60-70 seems more realistic) - I really don't like Blitz Max, etc. personally - I like the barebones no-frills B3D. |
| ||
| me 2. b3d + dx9 would be enough for the next years... |
| ||
| eh you guys still talk about this? |
| ||
| Sure. Given the fact that Max3D will never be happening, why not :) |
| ||
| Why not try BlitzMax+iB3D? It works very well. |
| ||
| Check out that library: http://www.fastlibs.com/ I know it's not dx9, but it has some great features :o) |
| ||
| Because iB3D is far from stable and its totally inconsistent handling of the different mesh formats is inacceptable. It selectively supports features all over the different formats. And thats just the tip of the iceberg of reasons why I wouldn't touch irrlicht unless forced for a payed programming project. My hopes go toward Flow and MiniB3D Extended 2 which will use a real OO design + support OpenGL and later DX. Ross C: Fast libs don't lower the problems that are mainly caused by the fact that DX7 is dead for long and gets less and less attention in the current driver generations of NVIDIA and ATI |
| ||
| I would pay 70€ for blitz3d Dx9 (not £200) |
| ||
| Still, it gives people something better to work with currently. And as blitz3d + dx9 doesn't really look like it's going to happen (i really wish it would. not seen anything close to what blitz3d has produced 3d wise from blitzmax) it's a good little lib. |
| ||
| Guys, B3D is nice and all, but it's had its time. IT will continue to be put to good use for many years yet! I really think Bmax and Flow will cover your 3D engine needs. (yes it's taking longer to prepare than we thought, but hey, I have a full-time dayjob to pay the rent and fund development, so :-P) MiniB3D covers alot of things right now, but if you want shaders, cross platform, etc, then Flow will fit the bill. Ogre is fully supported and updated and there are presently DX10 plugins in development. It may be more complex than B3D but if you are wanting to develop with top visuals, effects etc, you won't be dissapointed. [edit] Didn't mean to "big-it-up" on the b3D forums hehe. Also.. Partition? Like, Fdisk partition? X-) |
| ||
| I don't rate MiniB3D low ... but pure OGL is a big nono to my. My tablet is an intel GMA900, my games are meant to run on that. And OpenGL just won't, the drivers have no OGL support, it falls back to Microsoft OGL 1.1 emulation, even thought it has pixel shader 2.0 support so its definitely not stone age tech |
| ||
| I thought minib3d was cross platform, and it has shaders too :o) Someone made an extended version. But i'm still waiting for flow, so hurry up! ^_^ |
| ||
| What I would like to see in B3D is multi-threading. That's something what I would pay for, not dx9 support. Who needs good graphics when you can create games that are internally genious and beautiful. ;) |
| ||
| MiniB3D Extended has been dropped in favor of MiniB3D extended V2 that will not be a "extended MiniB3D" but its own with the same api and Opengl (and later DX) support |
| ||
| I thought minib3d was cross platform, and it has shaders too :o) Someone made an extended version. It does, I believe. It does it's job, and is usable. It is rather slow in some areas though. But i'm still waiting for flow, so hurry up! ^_^ We're working on it. ;-) (I'm at work now as I am every day. That's the main reason it hasn't already been completed and released. *sigh* I miss the days of being free every day!) We are making good progress at the moment, expecting our demo very very soon, and I think (and hope!) you will like it! |
| ||
| I would gladly pay for an updated version of B3D that does DX9 stuff. How much is it? Where can I get it and who do I make the cheque payable to?... |
| ||
| Seems like there is a market for it :o) |
| ||
| >What I would like to see in B3D is multi-threading. That's something what I would pay for, not dx9 support. It is possible to use multi-threading in Blitz3D, I've used it. But it is useless because you can't load graphics in another thread. MAV appears on RenderWorld() when mesh or texture created in another thread but did not fully loaded. |
| ||
| Aw crap - I see on rubux.net that their b3dDX9 engine has been postponed 'indefinitely'. Another one bites the dust. I wonder what killed it? Collisions? |
| ||
| thats because threads are async and you wouldn't use them to load assets independantly of the render process... to do that you'd have to check and recreate your renderer thread until the assets are ready... |
| ||
| Why would you have to do that? There is no problem with loading data async, all games do it beside "level based shooters". Current gen MMOs wouldn't be possible without async loading at all. |
| ||
| The best option for "shaders" and others FX is FastExtension. |
| ||
| Sorry to bump this old thread but I would even pay $200 for a new BB3D (not BMax!) with DX9 inside. Please Mark! :) If I read your latest worklogs I'm very pleased. :) Regards - Xaron |
| ||
| I would pay $200 for an old B3D :) For sources of it. |
| ||
| :D |
| ||
| Same, I think I'm gonna go try coding my own engine...or die trying...or give up after a month...or both, whatever. |
| ||
| The best option for "shaders" and others FX is FastExtension. FastExtend or FastExtensions is not the best option for shaders or indeed any option, because it does not use shaders. |
| ||
| FastExtend or FastExtensions is not the best option for shaders or indeed any option, because it does not use shaders. hmmm... i say "Shaders" with " " ... And yes, you can make nice FAKE shaders with FastExtension. Here some examples of "shaders".... -> Water ( Reflection & Refraction ) -> EBM -> Specular -> Blood -> Plastic -> Ice -> Air Temperature ( Explosions , fire, etc ) -> Etc... |
| ||
| They're not "fake shaders" either. A fake shader would emulate the programmable pipeline in fixed-function or software rendering. There are, in fact, engines which can do this, and FastExtend is not one of them. It is just making some visual effects with the fixed function pipeline, as Blitz3D already does and many other engines do. All of your examples are just visual effects, which are achievable in multiple ways. They're not examples of anything else. |
| ||
| Men, you have a problem... Anyway, i don't have time to expend with purist people. Shaders, Fake shaders, Visual FX, whatever you like. Bye =) |
| ||
| i would just like to add my input: i spent 4 years with darkbasic pro which uses dx9....this program is not stable and has so many bugs that most of the dx9 features are unusable...i have really enjoyed the stability of blitz3d with dx7....i would much rather have dx7 and have a stable language than the extra features in dx9....i would like to see b3d upgraded, but i don't want an unstable product....i will always use b3d but i think that bmax is the future here...i have been working with the demo and it seems to be a very good and stable language...i'm going to give it a chance and see what it can do....i don't think that mark will completely give up on blitz3d...this would be bad for business and he is a pretty good business man....thanks for a great product mark, pirate... |
| ||
| No I would not However, I WOULD pay for Bmax + Max3D (as a universal SDK). I dont see the point in this post, Max3D is the next B3D. For all intents and purposes it will probably 'feel' more or less the same anyway, with possibly the same number of syntactical 'differences' as a new updated old style B3D would NEED to have. Eg: completely different, updated functions with new parameter sets. AKA No longer B3D anyway. Plus, not forgetting the the seriously extended development time. As mark has already stated "THERE IS DEFINITELY NOT A NEW LANGUAGE COMMING" which kind of says it all. (A 'dx9 b3d' would be just that; -a new language) Also, whats so thrilling about DX9? Its already legacy. Edit: Oh, lol, i just saw how old this thread is. Who cast "In Animus Corpus"? |
| ||
| My 2 cents on Blitz3d 2.0 . I`ve been working with blitz3d on a project for a couple years now, and wouldn`t want to spend time porting all my code over to another language just to get a graphic engine better than DX7, but I would love the engine in Blitz3d to be upgraded to a more modern version. I would even pay for the upgrade, as long as the IDE/language stays the same or very close. |
| ||
| B3D (Yes the old non OOP 'fun' language) + Max3D = yes BlitzMax + Max3D = no |
| ||
| @Ian: B3D (Yes the old non OOP 'fun' language) + Max3D = not possible unless as a DLL wrapped through decls = slow (and will still have all the non-required DX7 Bloat in there) BlitzMax + Max3D = (Yes the old non OOP 'fun' language) as a BMax commandset Mark has already said that Max3D will probably be non OOP in its interface so i dont see the problem. Just use max as you would B3D |
| ||
| Well mark did say that he is making a 3D module for Max3D, and that it "could" replace the 3D engine of blitz3d. Not a new language, just replace the engine. |
| ||
| I'd much rather pay for a new 3D module or update to B3D than I would pay for the long-overdue 3D module for BMax, as I just prefer B3D - it's like an old friend and moving to BMax would feel like I was betraying it, like having an old dog put down. Hopefully others feel the same and I'm not just a bit odd...? |
| ||
| Yah I feel the same... B3D is just so familiar and friendly - I dislike bmax but love B3D. As I've probably already said in this thread - I'd happily pay £60 or so again to get a version with a few updates... especially the renderer. Proper 3D hardware audio and a built in physics engine - probably via nvidia (formaly ageia) physx as I believe they are now opening it up to developers. |
| ||
| I kind of wish mark hadn't said that he was thinking of replacing the engine in blitz3d, because there are so many people here that want that and as he said him self it prob wont happen |
| ||
| I agree with Vorderman here, B3D + New 3D, that's all, there's a market for the short-sweet and simple game makers language, that a lot of other language developers are currently trying trying to (NB, Cobra etc...) tap... B3D was there a few years back, BMax aimed a higher level and in the process lost approachability, B3D, language wise is there, it just needs a graphical boost. As I said though, there will be a few languages offering similar features, as I see it, this could be BRLs last chance to tap the vast 'indie nooby game programmers' market it once ruled. |
| ||
| Men, you have a problem... Anyway, i don't have time to expend with purist people. Oh, you mean I know what I'm talking about. Yes, sorry, that can be annoying. |
| ||
| replace the 3D engine of blitz3d. Not a new language, just replace the engine. . But it wouldnt be exactly the same language, it just couldn't be. If you think about all the differences between DX9/10 and DX7. It would be like another language. Many more funcitons, different, more complex parameters yadiyada. I guess it could be shrink-wrapped down but whats the point in that?!? All the glorious extra power would be lost so you may as well just keep using DX7. +Theres little chance of direct backwards compatibility anyway. I kind of wish mark hadn't said that he was thinking of replacing the engine in blitz3d, because there are so many people here that want that and as he said him self it prob wont happen Me too. He even said himself he wished he hadn't in the following post. The proverbial "Can-o-worms" springs to mind. Why dont we all just wait and see what the next gen offering will be like? If you dont like max, simply try it when the 3D is attached and the suggestions for friendliness improvement for max have hopefully been implemented. Hell, within a few weeks someone may have even come up with a Max3D.decl or something. Then we can all judge and grumble. Until then just let the man do his thing, which is make good 3d engines. |
| ||
| But it wouldnt be exactly the same language, it just couldn't be. If you think about all the differences between DX9/10 and DX7. It would be like another language. My Kimo Engine uses all the commands from Blitz3D; but it can do shaders, post processing, shadows etc. in D3D9 and D3D10. :) |
| ||
| Im sure it can. With extra commands? Parameters? Is it EXACTLY %100 the same? Is it for BMax? C++? There would be the differences for a start. My wip Irrlicht wrapper im writing for C++ uses the 'same' commands as b3d too, so does minib3d and irr.b3d. However, people will still complain "but... Its not B3D" Im sure Max3D will have the 'same'/'similar' B3D commands too, just with the extra ones+changes needed for the extra stuff. Which is my original point. ie. a new "blitz3d" is not needed (and to coin a phrase used by mark, "redundant"). I to some extent share sentiment with someone above who said B3D is like a faithful old dog who he doesnt want put down, but sad fact being all old dogs die in the end. If I still had my old dog i had several years ago he'd smell pretty bad by now! (worse than when he was alive :). |
| ||
| I kind of wish mark hadn't said that he was thinking of replacing the engine in blitz3d, because there are so many people here that want that and as he said him self it prob wont happen Surely that's a good sign that lots of people would buy it if he did modify B3Ds engine up to DX9? |
| ||
| Actually he said replace it, not modify it. Theres a BIG difference. As John G. already stated above: He said himself that B3D isn't modular... it's too closely linked to DX7 and producing a DX9 version would be a massive re-write. Pretty much sums it up. Why start from total scratch when the logical and better alternative is over 50% complete? ie. the compiler and language already in place & 3D engine project already started. |
| ||
| Why start from total scratch when the logical and better alternative is over 50% complete? ie. the compiler and language already in place & 3D engine project already started. According to his worklogs he is not starting from scratch and it is much more logical to build the engine as a lib. That way he can target much more customers than with the B3D version only. And he does have an excellent compiler in the form of BMax for those who want to stay within the BRL realm. I will, for example, try to use the new lib with C# and EBasic languages. Barney |
| ||
| as Barnabius said...as for me, i will give it a try with Purebasic (since its multiplatform anyway) |
| ||
| According to his worklogs he is not starting from scratch and it is much more logical to build the engine as a lib. Exactly but i think you misunderstood what i was saying. By "compiler and language" i meant BlitzMAX (as native) and by "already started" i was refering to the underway Max3D engine.My point was: To create a new "blitz3d" (as a self contained all-in-1 language+engine+debugger+compiler+ide as some are wanting) it would (aparently) require almost a re-write from scratch, as blitz3d is non-modular and too embeded in dx7 stuff. If this is the case it makes it a totally impractical course. |
| ||
| B3D is an easier language... that's a big selling point to a new game developer, the next step up from B3D is not BlitzMax... its C++, its faster, same learning curve and has global support... in the years BMax has been about this has not changed, there's not even one decent BMax book compared to tens of thousands of C++ ones... the 'nooby' game programming niche that B3D hit so well, BMax has missed completely. This isn't speculative, its already happened. As for it not being suitable for DX10 etc... that's just a question of syntax, no biggie. Add the extra commands/parameters, call it the advanced section in the manual... whatever... |
| ||
| Define easier? Find me some simple B3D code (the kind a noobie would write) that doesnt look very similar in simplicity and structure when converted to Max. Im not talking about advanced clever stuff that "new developers" wouldnt be doing anyway, im simply talking about normal simple b3d code (imagining the max3d commands are in place of course). My point: Max can be simple too. (just needs improved & simplified documentation as you say) To say that a language, that can be used simply, in the same way as its predecessor, is unsuitable simply because it has the capacity for more advanced programming is totally ludicrous. Thats like saying "Dont put too much ram in that PC! Being able to have so many programs going will confuse the user!" As for the half cocked presentation of blitzmax (help, manuals, tutorials) I agree totally, but i imagine this is simply because Max has been still a long slow WIP used mainly by experienced programmers who only need a reference and dont need it spelled out quite so much. That stuff will HAVE to get improved & included eventually - if and when Max+Max3D replaces B3D as the primary product. Perhaps it will finally prove that Bmax is not this unknown, illegible, complicated demon that some seem to think it is. the next step up from B3D is not BlitzMax... its C++, Dont you mean the next evolutionary step for b3d is bmax? It incoroprates the easy 'basic' of b3d anyway. Plus for advanced programmers max would be a much better leg up to C++ than b3d ever would be. |
| ||
| Ian, that's so true. If I want OOP, I use C++/C# or even Java. I don't see a big market for something like BMax. BB3D is just easy to use. Just give us an up to date 3d engine (and please integrate it into BB3D) and a lot of people would be really happy. Regards - Xaron |
| ||
| "BB3D is just easy to use. Just give us an up to date 3d engine (and please integrate it into BB3D) and a lot of people would be really happy." There you go. That's said it all. Thanks Xaron. |
| ||
| If I want OOP, I use C++/C# or even Java. I don't see a big market for something like BMax. BB3D is just easy to use. Just give us an up to date 3d engine (and please integrate it into BB3D) and a lot of people would be really happy Argh! Its not going to be OOP oriented According to the latest worklogs, the engine is PP the same as B3Ds is. In max you can progam procedurally in exactly the same way as in blitz3d, OR object orientated if you want. As far as the engine goes though, it will be a procedural interface. http://www.blitzbasic.com/logs/userlog.php?user=1&log=1043 Read the posts dated 25-05-08 and up. I think it will put your mind at rest there. Ie: it will be as easy as B3D, but with optional Max power. I notice a lot of people posting in this and other threads like this, have either not used blitzmax, prehaps tried the old 2D demo for 5 minutes and are unable to visualise just how modular and interfaceable it is. When used with modules like irrlicht.core or whatever then yes, it can become a more complicated OOP language, with more C++ like traits. However, with a procedural (& native) 3D engine module it can become a more simple language closer to BASIC, not dissimilar to b3d at all. |
| ||
| ..im wondering how new renderer will be..i mean..if for Mac and Linux, apart from windows, then does that mean that i will be able to use it with Purebasic? |
| ||
| In one or another way, i dont find using blitzmax nice anymore, because it looks like C# or VB.NET in many ways. I find it as much easy to programme Bmax than it is to programme C#. But one blitz product i really liked was Blitz3D and BlitzPlus! Because they were so simple, but still, very powerful. THe problem with Blitz3D is just the lack of newer graphics functions. And therefore i am writing an engine for Blitz3D, BlitzPlus, C++ etc. so you can use new Direct3D 9/10 features in BlitzMax, Blitz3D and even in the old good BlitzPlus ;-) |
| ||
| "BB3D is just easy to use. Just give us an up to date 3d engine (and please integrate it into BB3D) and a lot of people would be really happy." There you go. That's said it all. Thanks Xaron. Spot on. I'd happily pay full price again to get that. |
| ||
| Yeah, i don't see the problem. Some people just don't like blitzmax. There are still issues with it as far as i read in the forums. I love the language as it is. It works fine. It's solid and has proven that over the years :o) |
| ||
| KimoTech, where is that engine you pointing?? Is there any demo or something..i would like to see that ... is it possible? |
| ||
| I am through with making a demo right now, but i am still messing around with soft shadows. But soon, i'll post it in my worklog :) |
| ||
| I want to be able to code in Blitz3D with an updated graphic engine. After all it still is the "Flagship" product according to home page: www.blitzbasic.com It would make an awesome xmas present mark :) |
| ||
| I bet you have forgotten about Xors3d! Those guys are seems to be working hard because their site isn't returned to the previous view. Here's that they say http://rubux.net/ |
| ||
| oh..Xors3D is back..great..are you with them Mikhail? :) I would like to see ya involved :) |
| ||
| Im still loyal to Blitz3D It maybe DX7 but it can still do stuff remarkably well! Specially now machines are getting faster and smarter! :) A welcome would be actioned if blitz3D can take advantage of the multicore cpus ;) |
| ||
| Dont get me wrong from what i said above, i love B3d and wish it had everything i need, but it doesnt and is not likely to have. Unless I have missunderstood all the past postings on this subject, then the problem is, is that B3D is not a language in the *normal* sense. Its more of an engine with a dependent compiler language completely built and embedded around the DX7 engine itself. Meaning it will likely be a pain to replace, kinda like replacing a smart car's engine with a diablo's. Possible?- yes (see youtube :), practical?- no, as everything would need re-engineering, the brakes, the suspension, almost the whole thing as it was never designed for it in the first place. Im not worried about it though as i know i will be able to use blitzmax in more or less the same non-oop way as i use B3D once Max3D is bolted on. (I do already with the exception of 3D commands which are only radically different because i use a non native engine). As soon as max3d comes along the basic syntax for max+3d is bound to be close to b3d. |
| ||
| I think the insides of B3D are very tied to DX7, but as for the language itself the syntax etc.. is already excellent and could work as it is on DX9, perhaps with a few extra flags here and there and some specific new commands for shaders and suchlike. |
| ||
| Hmmm... well I kinda disagree with the whole, BlitzMax can handle non-OOP so you non-OOP should be using it. The subject of this thread shows that people want BLITZBASIC (not BMax), a language that they have an affinity with, that WAS successful, was not taxing to learn, did not have users struggling to attach a large sprawling mess of libraries and documentation. Yes OOP is an option in BMax but lets face it, its not really... unless you ignore most of the library bindings, documentation, legacy source and fragment the community into who uses OOP and who does not... Now C# is a good OOP language, easy to learn and well supported... you can even buy the odd book on it... why the hell would a nooby programmer look towards the large sprawling mess that is BlitzMax? It wouldn't be so bad if you could buy a book on it but even after all these years its still largely ignored by the rest of the world outside this website. What BlitzBasic has, that BMax does not, is a niche in the market. BMax's niche, has already been taken by a little language called C++... that will never change... its pretty easy to see why a lot of people long for an updated BlitzBasic under these conditions. |
| ||
| Comparing something with modern ideas like BM to pointer hacking trash like C++ is quite a personal attack. Compare BM to C#, thats fine. They target the same "ideas" and have the same performance. But please, never put BM and hack++ into the same sentence again. |
| ||
| Hmmm... well I kinda disagree with the whole, BlitzMax can handle non-OOP so you non-OOP should be using it. Why? Blitz3D can handle 3rd party lib-wrapping and custom types. Does that mean people shouldnt use Blitz3D because they dont want to / can't use those features? Despite the fact that Max3D is going to be procedural anyway and not oop (or so we are told) BMax's niche, has already been taken by a little language called C++... What!? Blitzmax is nothing like C++ (certainly not from a noob's POV anyway, i would say its closer akin to a modern BASIC/pascal than any flavor of C or java). It prehaps shares some structural similarities and can easily interface/mix with it, but then so can most modern oop capable languages. Syntactically its like comparing stone to rubber. It sounds to me like you have not used either. |
| ||
| Blitz3D can handle 3rd party lib-wrapping and custom types. Does that mean people shouldnt use Blitz3D because they dont want to / can't use those features? Yes, but BB3D is complete. BMax is just another language which can do nothing special. You need a sound library, you need a graphics library. BB3D is just "ready to use". ;) That's the difference. Oh and BMax compared with C#? ROFL... BMax is so much behind C# and Java... And C++ isn't soo bad. If you don't want to use pointers, well, just don't use them. C++ is industrial standard and used for game development as well as for other professional software. Regards - Xaron |
| ||
| Yes, but BB3D is complete. BMax is just another language which can do nothing special. You need a sound library, you need a graphics library. BB3D is just "ready to use". ;) That's the difference. Yes, it is a complete system based soley on and around DirectX 3D,2D,play and sound V7. If its complete then why this thread? why not just use it as it is? No, Blitz3D -was- complete, its missing lots of things that people keep crying out for (eg. shaders) that are either difficult or cannot be added BECAUSE its so "special". My point all along has been; when the in house engine comes out bmax will be much more blitz3Dish and 'complete' as you put it. And C++ isn't soo bad. If you don't want to use pointers, well, just don't use them Yes i know, im using it, however you do need to learn and use pointer operators if you want to do anything remotely interesting at all. Anyway, you have to use pointers in all languages, even b3d (a 'handle' is an 'indirect mem pointer', so is a stored array location or user-type-object reference, its just b3d's engine handles the low level pointers for you.) |
| ||
| Someone already doing Directx 9 and 10 Blitz 3D Library! |
| ||
| yes as a wrapped external. This is not the same as having a built in engine. All that 'special' DX7 stuff is still there linked into your exe. its just not used, however when DX7 finaly bytes the bullet and is no longer properly supported (its possible) then what happens?. |
| ||
| >>however when DX7 finaly bytes the bullet and is no longer properly supported (its possible) then what happens?. << I think it will take some time, and by then B3D v.2 will be out anyway (or Max3D, whatever you wanna call it).. |
| ||
| which is what i've been saying all along :D |
| ||
| ...seems a little illogical that you are saying that current B3D should be forced to wait till DX7 dies off before they are allowed a graphics API update?!?! Put simply, for the people who love B3D and dislike BMax the title of this thread makes a lot of sense. |
| ||
| I used to like B3D...It had so many potential compared to other engines back in the days. Fast, stable, and runs fine on my old 8mb Savage3D card...7 years ago... Throughout those years, I upgraded my graphic card twice. A friend had given me his old GeForce2 Ti 64mb and it allowed Cubic and Dot3 mapping. Many great things... When pix/vert shaders became a norm, since many games use it, I bought a GeForce 6200 256mb for $20. Many great things.... However, I was unhappy developing for it...BlitzMax was my only hope. I used to come to this site everyday, looking for new things, updates, news, etc. and had high hopes for BlitzMax esp. Max3D. Until I was shocked to see Blitz3DSDK....I thought hard. Should I get the sdk or get Blitzmax... I got the SDK instead....many good things...but it didnt last me for long. I had overlooked the main core features for the fact that it was still DX7...I can only do exactly the same things in B3D, a bit less. I guess I bought it because I've outgrown the basic language and move on something higher. Its the year 2008. Other engines have become much better, supporting latest feature. Is B3D falling behind? Is this the end of B3D? Now that I have ditched my 7 year old computer, got a MacPro with 8800 GT card, programming for DX7 seems stupid....I mean really! I see that the average consumer has a much better computer with a better graphics card. As for the B3DSDK, I slowly had to let it go , alone, untouched, somewhere in deep folders in my harddrive to bit rot. Now I use a popular opensource 3d engine called Irrlicht. It has what I needed that B3DSDK lacked: DX9 with shader support. On the plus side, it had more to offer: Multiplatform, Opengl, all kinds of 3d format including my favourite .b3d, and whats best it that it ALLOWED low-level file/data access that B3DSDK Load functions didnt have. It allowed me to load and stream resource files directly from memory instead of only string based file/path approach. Honestly, it was like Blitzmax and B3D was combined when using Irrlicht...It offered many good things for free. I hear also that the engine has port to PSP and now the iPhone. Now, I'm not saying BRL has lost another customer. I still look at these forums, I just don't program for it anymore. If BRL were to save itself and become on top again things has to happen: -Get rid of DX7 -Consider DX9 as core renderer, or OpenGL 2.0 or both -If OpenGL was used, it can now be freely a multiplatform engine. -If it were to become multiplatform, then there is a reason for BlitzMax -BlitzMax = BlitzMax IDE + B3D 2.0 (Max3d?) Integrated all in one. -B3D has to be phased out esp. the syntax language. Just use BlitzMax language -Having B3DSDK transitioned it much more easier to port it to BlitzMax which means, -Existing B3D owners can upgrade to BlitzMax now enjoy the Blitzmax language with the ease of basic with 3D,DX9 features, etc. The drawback is time and effort, and the whole software development cycle. It can be sped up by making the SDK open source community driven. Not free, but allow a license you can buy and download the sdk with source and any changes to the source must be put back up to the site that gets peer evaluated to becomes a revised version. As for the less technical programmers, they just buy BlitzMax for the sake of the language and IDE and get free engine updates as SDK members improve the engine since they only have access to the code. So basically there can be two types of members: -Regular (one just use BlitzMax to make games with basic) -SDK member (has access to the source and and make changes and improve the engine itself as well as make apps). Of course, SDK member would cost more but there are alot of people who are willing to pay for it. Looking at these forums, its what people really want. And to me it would be a great thing, but its only what I could dream about. It may or it might not happen...I don't know. -J |
| ||
| -Existing B3D owners can upgrade to BlitzMax now enjoy the Blitzmax language with the ease of basic with 3D,DX9 features, etc. blitzgeek, a lot of people (including me) don't want to "enjoy" the BlitzMax language. I had a look at it and it was no joy for me. ;) I just use BB3D and will use it in the future. But if I want to go a step forward I'll use (and actually do it) C++ with Irrlicht or a next gen engine like C4. Regards - Xaron |
| ||
| ...seems a little illogical that you are saying that current B3D should be forced to wait till DX7 dies off before they are allowed a graphics API update?!?! No i wasnt, i was saying that BMax+Max3D will be the new B3D. If DX7 (ever) gets dropped although i doubt it will for a very long time yet and by then i suspect some kind of emulator will be available instead. If this ever happened, programs will need to be re-coded in it (as they would if B3D ever got rewritten for DX10/OGL as it would undoubtedly be some big differences too) When Max3D is released i propose a community project to create an auto syntax converter to take some of the pain away from conversion. By this i mean to smart replace all the symbolic differences, ignore strings / comments, insert lists for types, that kind of thing. Of course something like this would never work properly with strict (unless it could be made to intelligently declare everything too), but i did something similar at a very basic level on my on-ice jetpac project from B3d to minib3d and it worked quite well and saved a lot of conversion time. The only problems i had were with some of the 2d stuff which i am going to remake using a 3D overlay. |
| ||
| BlitzMax still isn't as stable as blitz3d in my opinion. And the old point still does come up, whether it's BlitzMax or Blitz3d. Most people on here haven't finished anything, and those who hav have made excellent efforts with gameplay. The graphics really are secondary. A professional game artist, using DX 7 tech, could beat the pants off of what most people on here could produce with DX 9, in terms of art. I'm not saying there aren't excellent artists on here though. SOme of their work is impressive, but you get my point. When blitzmax becomes as stable as blitz3d, then i'll def switch over and use that, that way i can maybe learn the new language features and make use of them too. You still then have the question of the new 3d engine blitz research are developing. How long will it take for that to be stable and usable? |
| ||
| A professional game artist, using DX 7 tech, could beat the pants off of what most people on here could produce with DX 9, in terms of art. I don't think it's an art issue. Folk mainly want DX9 for easier access to (and better performance from) bump/normal mapping, stencil shadows and shaders I suspect. |
| ||
| A professional game artist, using DX 7 tech, could beat the pants off of what most people on here could produce with DX 9, in terms of art. I'm not saying there aren't excellent artists on here though. SOme of their work is impressive, but you get my point. I agree, B3D is an AWESOME DX7 engine with a built in language and it should remain so. (as its not just a case of simply adding a few functions to make it dx9)When blitzmax becomes as stable as blitz3d, then i'll def switch over and use that, that way i can maybe learn the new language features and make use of them too. You still then have the question of the new 3d engine blitz research are developing. How long will it take for that to be stable and usable? Blitz3D completely rewritten to support DX10 (why 9 anyway?!?) how long would it take to get that stable and useable? Max3d is on the way so whats the point starting all over again, why not just improve and get Max up to specs instead?. BlitzMax still isn't as stable as blitz3d in my opinion. lol, give it a chance, blitz3d is V1.9x & BlitzMax is V1.2x..and the 3Dengine V0.XX thats a fair difference. |
| ||
| I don't think it's an art issue. Folk mainly want DX9 for easier access to (and better performance from) bump/normal mapping, stencil shadows and shaders I suspect. That's what I need for my project. For my case it's a little more complex: I need to generate my models by code (ie. CreateMesh, CreateSturface, AddVertex etc.) and to have my models compatible with a stencil shadow system. I have tried many combinations, and couldn,t manage a 100% accurate compatibility. I've come to the conclusion at s9ome point that the meshes that Blitz3d build internally can't be compatible with a stencil shadow system. Unless someone can prove this wrong. I would need help on this if it does work. Someone wonce stated that I need closed meshes, and I understand the difference between a closed mesh and an open mesh. But I am hardly going anywhere with my model generating system. Finally I am counting on a CSG engine to help me out with this. So, my problem is hardly because of Direct X 7. But I have to agree that there are things we have to look up to. |
| ||
| I do believe, B3D can produce better looking games than many commercial dx9 i saw out there already...of course, its not reason to stick with it, and not asking for modern features builted in to it..but regarding B3D itself..properly used, im very sure, it can look way way better than many DX9 games I saw out there already.. |
| ||
| 100% agree with sledge. |
| ||
| I had a look at it and it was no joy for me. ;) I just use BB3D Spot the minor differences here. This is a straight conversion of some of my old code. Its not THAT different compared with the original, its certainly not C++ or c# like some are claiming!MAX (non strict): Function plotradar(source,contact,range,colorr,colorg,colorb) dp=CreatePivot() PositionEntity dp,EntityX(contact),EntityY(source),EntityZ(contact) dis# = EntityDistance (source,dp) FreeEntity dp If dis<2000 r:radardot=New radardot ; radardot_list.addlast(r) r.p=CreatePivot() r.h=CopyEntity (contactsprite,r.p) EntityColor r.h,colorr,colorg,colorb RotateEntity radarsprite,0,0, EntityYaw(source) EntityParent (r.p,radarsprite,False) r_yaw=DeltaYaw(source,contact) RotateEntity r.p,invx,invy,r_yaw MoveEntity r.p,0,dis*(0.6/range),0 RotateEntity radarsprite,0,0,0 EndIf End FunctionB3d: Function plotradar(source,contact,range,colorr,colorg,colorb) dp=CreatePivot() PositionEntity dp,EntityX(contact),EntityY(source),EntityZ(contact) dis# = EntityDistance (source,dp) FreeEntity dp If dis<2000 r.radardot=New radardot r\p=CreatePivot() r\h=CopyEntity (contactsprite,r\p) EntityColor r\h,colorr,colorg,colorb RotateEntity radarsprite,0,0, EntityYaw(source) EntityParent (r\p,radarsprite,False) r_yaw=DeltaYaw(source,contact) RotateEntity r\p,invx,invy,r_yaw MoveEntity r\p,0,dis*(0.6/range),0 RotateEntity radarsprite,0,0,0 EndIf End Function Looks bretty B3D to me :/ |
| ||
| I agree with you. I don't think Blitz3d should be rewritten for DX10 or whatever. But i'd like to see the new 3d engine Mark's working on, be accessable from blitz3d :o) And regarding wanting access to shaders and proper bumpmapping and such: I've not really seen much at all in the showcase, or graphics section that would benefit from bump mapping etc. Bump mapping and shadows would be the icing on the cake for a game with good underlying artwork, i believe. If you have dodgy artwork, slapping on a bump map texture and adding shadows doesn't make it look better. I've tried it :D Just my thoughts. |
| ||
| the thing is bump mapping is sorta in B3d but isnt implemented 100% it would be nice if that was finished so people could use it |
| ||
| Hmmm, still dont want BlitzMax... I've not seen one argument above to dissuade me. Mark has stated, he is exposing Max3D using non-OO techniques, so that it can be slotted easily into non-OO languages, Blitz3D should be one of those. If not, then its good bye BRL. |
| ||
| Hmmm, still dont want BlitzMax... I've not seen one argument above to dissuade me. Hmmm. My arguments would be 'superstrict' and 'garbage collection'. The OOP is really only the icing on the cake -- those two are the main additions that will help you write stable, bug-free code. You want to write stable, bug-free code, don't you? :D I've a lot of sympathy for people who are wary of BlitzMax, but it doesn't half grow on you. |
| ||
| Surely not garbage collection? If your code well enough, you don't need a system to do this surely? The superstrict would be a nice thing though, as it can save you searching for a bug with a mistyped variable name. |
| ||
| GC's great, turning what would otherwise be memory-leak making mistakes into best practise. B3D always leaves me paranoid about memory leaks. |
   |