Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

FPSC Classic Product Chat / [LOCKED] "FPS Creator Reloaded - Project submitted to KickStarter"

Author
Message
Soviet176
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2009
Location: Volgograd
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 16:32 Edited at: 18th Oct 2012 16:34
I think a lot of people are mis-understanding how the memory works. You don't NEED to raise the memory consumption limit in FPSC. 2GB of dedicated ram is enough. What has to happen is optimization on how the engine utilizes the 2GB of Ram. Lets take crysis for example. Crysis 1, supported much larger maps with much higher polygons than FPSC yet it was only a 32bit application. A.K.A it only utilized 2GB of ram unless you had the 64 bit client.

This was back in 2007. It's the way FPSC uses the 2GB of ram that needs to be totally re-done. As I stated before, you will run out of memory with 4GB just as fast as 2GB with the current system and could potentially alienate certain members. Not everyone has a 64bit system. And even those that do, don't have 4GB of ram.

From textures to sounds, models to everything else is stored in memory and kept there for your entire level. When a level loads it takes EVERYTHING and puts it all into memory. This system is old and outdated to the fullest.

We don't need a larger memory limit if most games (Call of Duty Modern warefare 2 anyone?) only run on 32 bit clients and still can do 20x more than FPSC in its current state every could. I mean seriously the list of games that don't need a 64bit client is ridiculous. All the call of duty's all the Halo's and I think there is even a 32 bit client for Battle field 3.

No more memory, just optimize the bloody engine and change out the old universe system.

michael x
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jan 2009
Location: Cybertron
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 17:53
Quote: "This was back in 2007. It's the way FPSC uses the 2GB of ram that needs to be totally re-done. As I stated before, you will run out of memory with 4GB just as fast as 2GB with the current system "


Quote: "how the engine utilizes the 2GB of Ram"


Quote: "You don't NEED to raise the memory consumption limit in FPSC"



thank you thank you. I could not have said it better myself.some that understands. I think Lee has realize this and that's why he is going about this way with fpscR. when Lee said something about the memory blocks it just click i my mind on what make since. then think about all these AAA games with high resolution. with 2gb of memory we should be like is there no end to this. even with PS one and N64 games did not have half the memory we have today to make make those large games. even fpscx10 takes less memory than fpscx9.

more than what meets the eye

Welcome to SciFi Summer
eborr
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jun 2010
Location:
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 18:46
I am not going to be able to add to the debate in terms of the detail. However what 30 years working in the software industry has taught me, is that with each and every type of software from time to time you have to return to first principles.
The endless "enhancement and sticking plaster" approach will only last for so long, and then you need to re-write.

Typically the following considerations call for this
1. The underlying technology has moved on, and what was acceptable to users n years ago is no longer acceptable now
2. The program was designed to perform with a certain level of complexity and functionality. Over time every good software company will enhance and improve products by additional functional improvements - the weight and complexity of the improvements are such that the orginal sound decisions in respect of the core code are now unfounded.
3. Related to the above is a requirement for additional functionality which could be provided as bolt-ons. Adding this new fucntionality under a different paradigm would be much easier and cheaper.

Whilst I greatly admire the FPSC product and the way TGC have attemped to refresh it by getting external coders to contribute is a business model which appears, my current judgement is that FPSC is no longer fit for purpose, primarily because the sound decisions which dictated that DBpro should be the underlying engine are now not so. The latest versions of the FPSC in repsect of performance and robustness have all the indications of a code base which has been stretched way beyond what is was designed for. Adding additional capability is only going to make things worse, all that will happen is that the software will perform even less well and become more flaky.

Good luck with raising the money on kickstarter, I think it's an excellent vehicle for TGC to raise money. I must admit I would be far more inclined to financially support the version 2 product with a c++ core then a revamp of FPSC 1, it can have all the features it wants but, if it just don't work why bother investing the time.
TheK
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Mar 2007
Location: Germany
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 21:08 Edited at: 18th Oct 2012 21:09
Hey there,

Quote: "No more memory, just optimize the bloody engine and change out the old universe system."


Exactly what I was trying to say all the time (also in the older threads).

I don't get why everyone wants 64-bit support. For TGC it would be plainly useless, because some of the game-"developers" out there and especially the players don't have the money to upgrade to a new system, or just don't want to, because they want to stick to their old OS. This would be a real catastrophe when seen in the financial way. So I understand and respect Lee's decision about making a major upgrade to the engine.

Also, why have a 64-bit program when you can throw out the universe system, make it more dynamic (by streaming content from the hard drive) and still have all the people that were working with the program by leaving it 32-bit?

Greetings,
Jan

Skype name: thek491
Zigi
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jul 2009
Location:
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 21:44
Hi.Sorry for my english I do my best.

Personally I'm happy about that is Lee decided to upgrade FPS Creator v1 with new features instead of rewrite v2 from scratch,because to rewrite from scratch opens up endless possibilities and the peoples wants too much and it require more money and time to complete.

This is the list of features I would like to see in FPSC Reloaded:

-bigger map size
-built in terrain editor or support to import and use terrain
-possibility to rotate and scale objects inside the editor
-a way to easily import custom 3D models and apply physics to them like gravity,collision type...etc
-built in custom segment editor
-vehicle system (car,boat,helicopter) for player and NPC's
-destructible segments
-would be nice to have a chance to use a "body" under FP camera,similar to Fenix MOD
-better shadows,don't have to be real time but have to be nice,detailed at least
-keep DarkShader support or built in Shader editor
-Linux support under Wine

Wine is a free and open source Windows compatibility layer (not emulator) for Linux.It works very nice with many Windows games and apps except FPS Creator and FPSC games.It would be nice if Lee could support it officially to run FPSC Games or the entire development environment under Wine or even redistribute Wine and create a custom Wine launcher for FPS Creator Reloaded

I hope that,these features going to show up on KickStarter
A dude
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2010
Location: The Solar System
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 21:52
Quote: "I am not going to be able to add to the debate in terms of the detail. However what 30 years working in the software industry has taught me, is that with each and every type of software from time to time you have to return to first principles.
The endless "enhancement and sticking plaster" approach will only last for so long, and then you need to re-write.

Typically the following considerations call for this
1. The underlying technology has moved on, and what was acceptable to users n years ago is no longer acceptable now
2. The program was designed to perform with a certain level of complexity and functionality. Over time every good software company will enhance and improve products by additional functional improvements - the weight and complexity of the improvements are such that the orginal sound decisions in respect of the core code are now unfounded.
3. Related to the above is a requirement for additional functionality which could be provided as bolt-ons. Adding this new fucntionality under a different paradigm would be much easier and cheaper.

Whilst I greatly admire the FPSC product and the way TGC have attemped to refresh it by getting external coders to contribute is a business model which appears, my current judgement is that FPSC is no longer fit for purpose, primarily because the sound decisions which dictated that DBpro should be the underlying engine are now not so. The latest versions of the FPSC in repsect of performance and robustness have all the indications of a code base which has been stretched way beyond what is was designed for. Adding additional capability is only going to make things worse, all that will happen is that the software will perform even less well and become more flaky.

Good luck with raising the money on kickstarter, I think it's an excellent vehicle for TGC to raise money. I must admit I would be far more inclined to financially support the version 2 product with a c++ core then a revamp of FPSC 1, it can have all the features it wants but, if it just don't work why bother investing the time."


That's exactly what I think. A new FPSC written with another core may take longer to develop, but in the end it'll be a way better product.
TriSpefear Studios
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2011
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posted: 18th Oct 2012 23:19
I think that a recreated version is a horrible idea

"Everyone may doubt me, but you're just giving me more of a reason to continue on..."
DigitalFury
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jul 2010
Location: United States
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 06:19
Please put more effort into Dark Basic Professional as a kickstarter project. I love the idea behind the language but it is just outdated now.

With window 8 coming around no one will use it because they can't program in windows 8.

DigitalFury

Dar13
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th May 2008
Location: Microsoft VisualStudio 2010 Professional
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 07:09
Quote: "I think that a recreated version is a horrible idea"

Why? I honestly think that a recreated core would be for the best, so that Lee can take advantage of his increased programming skill/knowledge(He created a OpenGL interface using DX11 for goodness' sake! In a week or two!).

Peter Parker
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Apr 2009
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 08:14
Mmmh. I don't know. What about DarkBASIC Elite? Lee stated here http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&b=1&t=199018&p=5 that he thinks it is time to move on with DBPro to support latest technology and now this seems to be dropped for a FPS Creator Relaunch? I don't know. I like FPSC very much, but I think first it should be DBPro Elite and than building on that a new FPSC. That's what I think.
007
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Aug 2011
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 10:49
In my opinion, i totally agree with TGC guys, is better stick with FPSC correcting the bugs and adding new features instead of creating a totally new Product. I think the best feature of FPSC is it`s easy to use characteristics. Out of curiosity, i recently tried UDK, Crisis and Unity. Yes, those are awesome softwares, however, i, as a Professional Graphics Designer (i came from the advertising market), i found too much difficulty on merely importing a custom model on those engines, i mean, the simpliest tasks, in FPSC, you can do it very fast and easy, faster and easier than doing on those "Professional Engines".

I also downloaded some fps game examples made in UDK, Crysis and Unity, and sincerely, i have seen some FPS Creator games even more beautifull than those created in those "High End Engines".

The most important thing to note is that FPSC is really fun to work, because is easy and simple. I know html programming and php, becaue i also work as a web designer, however, i don`t know any gaming programming language. But whenever i spent one month to study FPI Scripting, i could learn it easily, and i have done a lot of cool things in FPI Scripting, some of them i even shared with folks here.

So because this i think FPSC should continue as it is, an easy to use game creation software, a drag and drop game creation software. I think the way fpsc works should stay as it is: paint segments, drag and drop entities, easy to use fpi scripting, and such.

If TGC can add those new cool features asked by the community, and most important, correct the bugs, also add more stability, increase a lot it`s performance, and the such, i think we can have a awesome and killer product.

Best Regards,

007.

Goldenye 007 N64
eborr
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jun 2010
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 15:28
I have no argument with retaining the interface and the scripting approach, but my fear is that we have come to a point where we fixing the bugs and adding new features will only increase the grief.

The program core and it's development environment need to be reviewed and whilst I acknowlege Lees' comment regarding the time for the re-write, it's a bullet that has to be bitten, or maybe it's time to retire the program.

I have no issue with the investments that I have made in FPSC or the model packs, I bought them as is, and whilst the later stuff is flaky it's been a good deal, however I am nervous about making more financial and even more importantly time investments until I have some confidence in the core of the product.
science boy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Oct 2008
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 16:59
Quote: "In my opinion, i totally agree with TGC guys, is better stick with FPSC correcting the bugs and adding new features instead of creating a totally new Product. I think the best feature of FPSC is it`s easy to use characteristics. Out of curiosity, i recently tried UDK, Crisis and Unity. Yes, those are awesome softwares, however, i, as a Professional Graphics Designer (i came from the advertising market), i found too much difficulty on merely importing a custom model on those engines, i mean, the simpliest tasks, in FPSC, you can do it very fast and easy, faster and easier than doing on those "Professional Engines".

I also downloaded some fps game examples made in UDK, Crysis and Unity, and sincerely, i have seen some FPS Creator games even more beautifull than those created in those "High End Engines".

The most important thing to note is that FPSC is really fun to work, because is easy and simple. I know html programming and php, becaue i also work as a web designer, however, i don`t know any gaming programming language. But whenever i spent one month to study FPI Scripting, i could learn it easily, and i have done a lot of cool things in FPI Scripting, some of them i even shared with folks here.

So because this i think FPSC should continue as it is, an easy to use game creation software, a drag and drop game creation software. I think the way fpsc works should stay as it is: paint segments, drag and drop entities, easy to use fpi scripting, and such.

If TGC can add those new cool features asked by the community, and most important, correct the bugs, also add more stability, increase a lot it`s performance, and the such, i think we can have a awesome and killer product.

Best Regards,

007.
"




the ones asking for x11 or rewrite are not asking to change the language so to speak or the simple easy way to do it. we are asking for the fpsc with a newer optimized x11 if possible. which will be what you have learnt with but with more capable things, instancing and multi threading etc, which makes the games we make now have more speed and more stuff to put in. able to have more ai etc.

i love fpsc and its simpleness is so fantastic, but yet it is held back by being x9 and the engine is very old, its like hving a 1920's car engine, you can up the bodywork and you can make better aerodynamics, and all the little things to make it go. but race that next to a 2012 engine the newer engine will really do the same as 1920 but with all the latest hurdles taken into account to make the newer engine cope with the demands.

if that help

( note to stop any depending on the engine, put the fastest car of 1920s against the fastest car to date i believe its a bugatti or something, thats the comparison)

an unquenchable thirst for knowledge of game creation!!!
DarkJames
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Aug 2009
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 18:11 Edited at: 19th Oct 2012 18:16
X10 failed horribly, X11 will crumble in an instant. A global fpsc for all directX should be the one to go ahead with.

------
Pain
FPSC Reloaded TGC Backer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2007
Location: Lake Orion, MI - USA
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 18:17
@ michael x

I was being Extreamly sarcastic... But I guess you can not read it. Im a joker I joke about things alot hint for the future

but YES 4 GB and 64BIT support would be like Awsome cramed into a tin can.

but those are weird metaphors of mine coming out so I should stop before someone gets hurt.

PAIN!

Me = noob

and i love The TGC : )
TGSlp
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2012
Location:
Posted: 19th Oct 2012 21:03
Hello.

Plase update the Multiplayer (My only wish)
And maybe a selfscriptable GUI in c# or vb.net base.

I hope you can understand this, im German, so greetings from Germany dear FPSC Team!
defiler
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 02:41
Not sure where I would go to suggest something, but would it be possible to have multiple textures for a single mesh? as opposed to one texture for one mesh?


The only example I can think of is Valve's VMF and VMT files where your model can contain any amount of those and each can have their own values as long as they are of course put into the QC file.

Current Project: The Underground: Awakening
s4real
VIP Member
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2006
Location:
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 03:10
Quote: " think a lot of people are mis-understanding how the memory works. You don't NEED to raise the memory consumption limit in FPSC. 2GB of dedicated ram is enough. What has to happen is optimization on how the engine utilizes the 2GB of Ram. Lets take crysis for example. Crysis 1, supported much larger maps with much higher polygons than FPSC yet it was only a 32bit application. A.K.A it only utilized 2GB of ram unless you had the 64 bit client."



I agree the amount of memory used does not need to be updated, the problem with fpsc is it loads the whole map into memory where big games like crysis does real time loading.

I think fpsc need to enforce real time loading so that its not loading the whole map in at once.

Multicore support has to be a must as well.

The problem I'm only seeing is as well isn't Microsoft officially not supporting dx9 anymore when windows 8 comes out ?

Anyway Im going to reserve any comments until I see some demo of whats going to be on offer because fpsc is an old engine and pretty messy now so I do wish Lee some luck or who ever works on it.

best s4real


Pack ya games with vishnu packer its free. Vishnu game launcher is now released.
michael x
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jan 2009
Location: Cybertron
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 03:54
@pain yes I knew you was joking that's why I lol. I thought it was funny..

but truthfully I dont care anymore about this debate. Im just going to simply wait and see what happens and leave it at that.

more than what meets the eye

Welcome to SciFi Summer
The Zombie Killer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Mar 2011
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 04:19 Edited at: 20th Oct 2012 04:45
Just thought I'd put in my two cents:

- Slow motion
- Multicore*
- 64bit support*
- Improved/rewritten physics
- Real-time dynamic shadows
- CONFIGURABLE third person, like over-the-shoulder, or far away etc.
- Bind the camera to a limb
- Developer console** (like Quake or Doom 3)
- EDIT: Huge idea! Have FPSC games grouped into projects, like, a folder, or zip file that has all the scripts, models, maps etc that are used in that game, this would make team efforts so much easier! This folder or zip would be read by FPSC and then load all the media, then ask to add a new map, or continue working on an existing one. If you're not understanding what I mean, look at GameMaker: Studio's way of handling and making projects.

* Not at launch, maybe after release as an update.
** Let me elaborate on this, the console would be toggled with a scripting command, and all of its commands would be loaded from a file, eg:

console.fpi


commands.con


-TZK

Hamburger
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2009
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 16:20
Quote: "Improved/rewritten physics"


It'd be sweet to have projectile physics as well (like grenade physics)

[/href]

++New Products Being Uploaded++
Dar13
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th May 2008
Location: Microsoft VisualStudio 2010 Professional
Posted: 20th Oct 2012 17:16
Quote: "It'd be sweet to have projectile physics as well (like grenade physics)"

If Lee could convert the physics system from ODE to DarkDynamix, FPSC would be so much better off for it. DBP's ODE support is terrible, and DarkDynamix has PhysX powering it.

TriSpefear Studios
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2011
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posted: 21st Oct 2012 17:40
TGC needs to think about the future. If they do create this "reloaded" version then they will still need to make FPSC 2 in 5 more years. Why not just work on #2 now and keep adding goodies to X9?

"Everyone may doubt me, but you're just giving me more of a reason to continue on..."
gozzy1999
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jun 2011
Location: in the closet
Posted: 21st Oct 2012 19:10
agreed

''Make sure your hands are clean before you point the finger''
Bootlicker
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posted: 21st Oct 2012 19:42
I really could not care less as to whether more features are added. The engine is good enough in my mind to create games to a degree. I would be more than happy to pay again for the exact same thing that didn't crash every test game and used the exact same process to build games as it does test so that new bugs dont appear in the building process when i had already spent 2 weeks flattening others. My only other thing would be that the engine were to take maybe 500,000 polys in one scene at 30fps on most machines. I would pay for this to happen. Not more features, no-one needs new features but everyone needs to be able to finish their creation with the software.

my 2cents. k. cheerz. bi.

Rampage
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posted: 22nd Oct 2012 01:49 Edited at: 22nd Oct 2012 01:53
It'll still be based on DBPro. No matter how much you try improve on it, it'll still be slow and sluggish compared to other engines unfortunately.
4gb support is something games have supported since - I can't even remember. Developing for a past generation is not going anywhere.

Lee, 18 months waiting for a beta is absolutely fine with me as long as a good product is released, it's expected. For that project, you have my money, and my bow, and my axe.

I enjoy food quite a lot.
Pain
FPSC Reloaded TGC Backer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2007
Location: Lake Orion, MI - USA
Posted: 22nd Oct 2012 15:23
@ Michael X

Agreed!

Me = noob

and i love The TGC : )
Airslide
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Oct 2004
Location: California
Posted: 23rd Oct 2012 03:01
I guess this means that my hopes for a Macintosh and iOS version of the engine are dashed

Kind of surprised they aren't opting to recreate it in AGK. It'd be slow going but it would prompt a lot of maturation for AGK's new 3D command set, and provide a cross platform base for FPSC.
skeeter
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Jun 2010
Location: Australia
Posted: 23rd Oct 2012 11:25
It would be great if you could test the game in real time instead of waiting to compile everything. Or even just decreasing the time it takes to compile a level would be great

window 7 ultimate, AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 3.3 ghz, XFX Radeon HD6790 1GB, 16gb ram

Bejasc3D
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Aug 2008
Location: Down Under
Posted: 23rd Oct 2012 18:15
As Marc and Xplosys have previously said in this thread, I too am with them in saying I would only back or repurchase this if it were something completely new and much better optimized, rather than adding features to an largely broken (yet capable) engine.

spudnick
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Nov 2010
Location:
Posted: 23rd Oct 2012 19:19 Edited at: 23rd Oct 2012 20:00
To LeeBamber. i no of another game engine that is also struggling, and has many of the features that has been brought forward in this post, so as a sugestion, would it be worth while to communicate to them and see if one can work together and develope the best engine on the market for Indi users.

i shall only say about the over game engine as to not spamm or market them in this post but would mention it in a pm.

if a meeting could go ahead, it would cut down a year or two of development, anyway it is just a fought, as the new version would be a new product, it is an idea, so im not trying to get fps development team into or combine compananies.
Daniel wright 2311
User Banned
Posted: 24th Oct 2012 00:48
Well, As I though this was a rewrite in the first place I do not know, if it runs faster and works better I guess so.

My whole argument was third person and this is real important for so many.

I can make any type of game with third person, so I guess I will stick with dark basic pro after all.

my signature keeps being erased by a mod So this is my new signature.
seppgirty
FPSC Developer
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2009
Location: pittsburgh, pa.
Posted: 24th Oct 2012 01:18
Quote: "My whole argument was third person and this is real important for so many. "


third person and an inventory system would be a huge reason for me to repurchase this program. not just a couple of frames faster.

I WISH LEE WOULD RELEASE A FEATURE LIST OF PLANNED IMPROVMENTS BEFORE THEY GO LIVE WITH THE KICKSTARTER PAGE. THAT WAY WE COULD TELL THEM IF IT'S WORTH IT OR NOT. (not yelling just stressing a point )

gamer, lover, filmmaker
J Swain
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Dec 2010
Location: Sweden
Posted: 25th Oct 2012 21:27
I would rather have a new FPS Creator 2, rather than just an upgrade for the current program.

But if there will be an upgrade, i would love if these features was to be added:

The map size should be alot bigger, maybe even eight times as big as it is right now.

A terrain editor/system.

The physics should be removed and replaced with a better physics engine, such as Havok Physics. ( http://www.havok.com/products/physics )

Dynamic entities should have the same shadow detection as static entities. It looks very ugly when a rotating fan or a simple door is brighter and less shaded than the rest of the environment.

The ability to add areas of liquids, instead of covering the entire map with liquid based on the water level. You should be able to select a certain area and add liquid to it. And you can choose if you want the liquid in the area to be clean water, dirty water, radioactive water, lava, acid, blood, etc.

Lens flares should be fantastic.

Improving the stock items, especially the characters would be a good idea. (adding more details, etc) As well as adding the X10 exclusive items to FPSCR, plus some more stuff to attract more customers.

You should be able to choose what character model the player should use.

The player should cast a shadow of himself/herself, like in S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Where it points away from the light source, just like in real life.

Working mirrors and reflective surfaces would be great, as it has many uses.

The ability to "gib" enemies. (blowing them up into pieces of meat and blood). You can disable this in the entity's options.

Character animations MUST be remade. I hate the current standing animation, which looks like he's having a spasm every fifth second.

You should be able to have much, much more entities in a map, as there is a limit in the current program.

You should be able to have loads of enemies without having a crash or extreme lagging.

Better compatibility to Windows Vista/7/8. If you update the program, you'll have to edit the userdetails.ini, otherwise you'll end up with a FREE version of FPSC. This MUST be fixed.

An air meter should be added. This way you'll know how much air you got before you start to drown.

The categories should be better. Instead of having the space guns in scifi/items, it should be in weapons/scifi.

I got much more ideas, but i'm too lazy to write them all down right now.
Soviet176
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2009
Location: Volgograd
Posted: 25th Oct 2012 22:02
I would stress that everyone reads this thread here:http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=200956&b=21 and review the response that Lee has given.

Levi barros
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th May 2010
Location: The Grid
Posted: 25th Oct 2012 22:42
SOOOOOO GOOOOOD!!!!! FPS Creator is gonna be the best FPS Engine evar!!! Nuff said! YAY!!!

imageflock.com/img/1345000393.png[/img]
Le Shorte
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posted: 26th Oct 2012 01:27 Edited at: 26th Oct 2012 01:33
The top things I want in FPSC are definitely...
1) Good performance/better culling
2) A wider support of screen resolutions (what is FPSC's max, 1024x768? A bit tiny...)
3) Antialiasing

Though, I know they're planning on doing a lot. I'm excited regardless.

Quote: "Lens flares should be fantastic."

Not needed, you'll never see them through human eyes.

Quote: "You should be able to choose what character model the player should use."

Already done in several mods.

Quote: "Better compatibility to Windows Vista/7/8. If you update the program, you'll have to edit the userdetails.ini, otherwise you'll end up with a FREE version of FPSC. This MUST be fixed."

Unless I'm just very special, that never happened with me on XP, Vista or 7, and I have both FPSC x9 and x10. This doesn't happen universally, to my knowledge.

Quote: "The categories should be better. Instead of having the space guns in scifi/items, it should be in weapons/scifi."

But guns are items that you can pickup, are they not? It's totally fine the way it is, and you can actually change that yourself if you're so inclined.

Cheesehead for life.
Pain
FPSC Reloaded TGC Backer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2007
Location: Lake Orion, MI - USA
Posted: 26th Oct 2012 18:59 Edited at: 26th Oct 2012 19:03
@ Le Shorte

Prety much what you said are my needs. I could care less about the addition to the features list. I just would like to build a game without the anoying small Memory Cap that are now in place (yes I know you can disable the cap, if you want to chance issues with the build). Anything else can be added further down the road or added to a new version of FPSC. If I could actualy complete a project with some size. That is my dream with FPSC.

All these other Wants and Needs are not as serious as people bring them to be. even if we had those features added they would be completely useless. How can you use them effectivly if you would only be able to use them in a one room level (stable) and anything more you have the possibilities of the game crashing.
Just saying it would be BEST to take care of the major issues first as a priority and then add the pretty stuff.

You can not add frosting to a cake if you dont have a good cake in the first place.
the frosting would be just hidding the bad cake.

PAIN!

EDIT:

Also I would like to point readers of this thread to look here (as stated above) but I linked it so people do not have to copy and paste (lazy people like me)

http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=200956&b=21

Me = noob

and i love The TGC : )
Le Shorte
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Apr 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 00:13
Quote: " Memory Cap"

I seem to have forgotten to mention that

Yeah, that needs to go, too.

Cheesehead for life.
Norion
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jun 2010
Location: The Netherlands.
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 01:32
And multi core support please... anyone ???

Great features you guys came up with, but most of them can never be achieved without a massive performance upgrade. I think Multi core support is one of the many keys to a powerfull engine.

Cheers,


- Martin.

PC specs: CPU: Intel core i5-2400 3.1 Ghz 6Mb. GPU: Radeon HD 6850 2Gb. RAM: 24 Gb DDR 3. Case: CM Stormtrooper.
Dar13
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th May 2008
Location: Microsoft VisualStudio 2010 Professional
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 06:27
Quote: "And multi core support please... anyone ???"

Not unless Lee is doing a rewrite. Otherwise it's simply not possible.

Norion
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jun 2010
Location: The Netherlands.
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 13:05
@ Dar13

Thats to bad...

Its either Norion or Martin, your choise. ////////////// PC specs: CPU: Intel core i5-2400 3.1 Ghz 6Mb. GPU: Radeon HD 6850 2Gb. RAM: 24 Gb DDR 3. Case: CM Stormtrooper.
Kalex91
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jul 2009
Location: Isle of Wight / UK
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 14:14
The main issue is not being able to make big maps like normal games.
A dude
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2010
Location: The Solar System
Posted: 27th Oct 2012 18:14
Quote: "The main issue is not being able to make big maps like normal games."


But if the map size is increased, it would be way too slow without multi core support, unless you have really high end hardware.
Nickydude
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2006
Location: Look outside...
Posted: 28th Oct 2012 23:38
I've just bought Legend of Grimrock and that comes with an editor with a preview of the level right in the editor itself.



Might be interesting if FPSC-R had something like that.

I reject your reality and substitute my own...
Nomad Soul
Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Jan 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Oct 2012 02:50 Edited at: 29th Oct 2012 02:53
@Lee

PLEASE can you make realtime / dynamic shadows high on the list. I think this and multiplayer are the only 2 out of the box features which never got an update since V1.

I don't mind the concept of a RELOAD but all of the core FPSC systems need to be updated. It would only be worth really hanging onto some of the file system type stuff.

The other problem I see its not just FPSC itself which needs an overhaul but the editor needs to be updated. For all the cool new stuff that got added in V117+ the editor was never updated to make use of all that. You must tie in all the updates with the editor otherwise nobody will be able to access them.

Also unless you are going to invest in some 3rd party middleware solutions for things like lightmapping, physics and online you need to make FPSC compatible with the Dark Basic Pro plugins.

How much funding is required to get development off the ground and how quickly will we see an early Beta to give confidence this isn't going to be V117 all over again?

BlackFox
FPSC Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th May 2008
Location: Knight to Queens Bishop 3
Posted: 29th Oct 2012 05:27
Quote: "this isn't going to be V117 all over again?
"


Some of us have done very well using v1.17.


There's no problem that can't be solved without applying a little scripting.
uzi idiot
Valued Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2009
Location: Who Knows?
Posted: 29th Oct 2012 10:52
I agree with Nickydude. A preview window would be very useful.

If something compiles on the first try. Something is terribly wrong.
Red Eye
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Oct 2008
Location:
Posted: 29th Oct 2012 14:29
@Nickydude: That editor is insane! Very nice! The placement method does altough have alot of similarities with FPSC. But besides the level preview, I think more important is that fpsc needs either a built in or a thirdparty app that allows you to create conditions and events and link them together, like in that movie at minute: 5:47 . I believe knxrb started this some time ago.

Codepard
Poloflece
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th May 2010
Location: Australia
Posted: 29th Oct 2012 14:39
Wow, All these suggestions are making me dizzy.

The 1 thing that must be improved is performance (I guess that's actually a few things), with that a user can do much more and as an artist it would allow me to truly recreate what's in my head.

Oh and also terrain


Poloflece

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-06-10 23:42:38
Your offset time is: 2025-06-10 23:42:38