Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 82

Thread: Wasteland 2 To Run On Unity Game Engine

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    What open source engine? Cube lacks a editor. Cube with LUA lacks a editor. It only has nice map building tools.
    FPS engines lack editors.
    Etc.
    Which engine?
    OGRE, Darkplaces, Irrlicht, Crystalspace.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    33

    Default

    I was hoping they would have gone with Unigine since it was offered to the project free of charge and it was a choice between that and Unity but they went with Unity, maybe in the coming months we will find out why.
    I read conjecture that while the Unigine was offered for free that perhaps they were going to have to pay for support from the company or perhaps Unity was easier to use for asset importing than Unigine. They intially seemed excited about Unigine at least on the official forums and instead chose Unity.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    OGRE, Darkplaces, Irrlicht, Crystalspace.
    OGRE has no editor, and its not a engine.
    Neither of the 3 listed has a editor.


    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    I think idTech (Doom, Quake) comes with a editor.
    http://icculus.org/gtkradiant/

    A map editor is not a editor.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    OGRE has no editor, and its not a engine.
    Neither of the 3 listed has a editor.
    Be first to implement it!

    FFS "OGRE (Object-Oriented Graphics Rendering Engine)" "its not a(n) engine", 'nuff said.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Be first to implement it!
    Its not my job to do somebody elses job. Nor is it my job to complain about them not using a good FOSS engine when they lack critical features.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    Its not my job to do somebody elses job. Nor is it my job to complain about them not using a good FOSS engine when they lack critical features.
    Sorry, I think we shorten this just to "not competent", k?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Columbus, OH, USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    I'm with del_diablo. If Unity's editor is even half as good as UnrealEd, it'll be the first decent editor on Linux.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It's mentioned in many places like kickstarter. Too bad they didn't choose Unigine.
    If you were paying attention it was quite clear that I was referring to Overdose.

    Quote Originally Posted by lapis View Post
    Its better to use the extra 200% to fund projetcts like overdose which are much more opensource friendly.Using opensource license does not even need to expect the developer release a "linux port" because opensource is more portable .
    No, that is wrong actually. If we do not get the game code it would still not be portable. Do not give them money unless they commit to a Linux port, if that is what you care about.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    If you were paying attention it was quite clear that I was referring to Overdose.



    No, that is wrong actually. If we do not get the game code it would still not be portable. Do not give them money unless they commit to a Linux port, if that is what you care about.

    I was trying to say this.Funding a Open Source project is a lot better because the people have free acess to the source code .It's a lot more easier to port to linux.We need to invest on entirely opensource projects .Not proprietary project which "promises" linux 'port" at cost of (much)more money.(Look the absurd of Grim Dawn.They expect almost 300% of funding to do a simple port of linux.

    I prefer to pay much more for a 100% opensource project than pay a linux port for proprietáry project.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    "Lucky" is wrong word here. More correct word is "satisfied". Obviously 3 Mio is just enough to get opensource; but people should have understood it when they read the text, proprietary means burden of supporting incoming updates lies totally on creators. They can produce versions, but if they don't maintain it - and its proprietary, these ports are lost. The result is not bad, but is not superb either. We just get one good game, nothing more or less.


    Updates are not the big problem.The problem is we pay a lot of money for digital content(music,graphics,sound) and they never be used because it uses a proprietary license.

    For example 0AD is much better and we need to fund projects like 0AD because ALL content is realeased using opensource license (it means all community can reuse and get better investment of money).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •