Blender and DTS
by Ian Wheat · in Artist Corner · 01/24/2002 (3:04 pm) · 8 replies
Are there plans for a Torque exporter for Blender?
It is a pretty nice modelling program and I think it's a great alternative for those of us not financially blessed =)
Well, just wondering.
It is a pretty nice modelling program and I think it's a great alternative for those of us not financially blessed =)
Well, just wondering.
About the author
#3
01/25/2002 (10:31 pm)
or, instead of paying $30 for a converter, you can pay $20 and get MilkShape 3D, which is an amazing 3D modeler.
#5
It just seems to me that this one of the most impressive free software available. Aside from the fact that it's free and supports close to a dozen platforms (they have a pic of it running on the ipaq on the main page,, for christ sakes), it seems to be a fully featured 3D modelling tool and then some.
Maybe that's why people don't seem to like it, because it has too many things. As far as I can understand, you only use the features that you want to use.
I think the main complaint is that the interface is weird, or different, or has too much of a learning curve. I don't see how the interface is in anyway weirder than max or maya when you first use it. I think it's because people use those other software first that they are taken aback by blender's interface.
I just wish that people would give blender a chance. It's free (and money does seem to be an issue in this community). It's multi-platform, and completely based on OpenGL (two of Jeff Tunell's criterias for a good modelling tool), and did I mention that it's free?
My biggest concern is the lack of importer/exporters. But if a couple of dedicated people put a little effort into this this would be solved.
Also, I think Tim Gift mentioned something about inadequate animation capabilities in blender (I'm sorry if I'm screwing up the reference or what exactly was said, but I think I got the jest). Again, it seems that Blender is fully featured in this, although I am not an expert on this. Please judge for yourself, and I apologize if I'm wrong:
http://www.blender3d.com/UsingBlender/character_animation.php
That's it.
02/26/2002 (9:47 pm)
A little something about blender.It just seems to me that this one of the most impressive free software available. Aside from the fact that it's free and supports close to a dozen platforms (they have a pic of it running on the ipaq on the main page,, for christ sakes), it seems to be a fully featured 3D modelling tool and then some.
Maybe that's why people don't seem to like it, because it has too many things. As far as I can understand, you only use the features that you want to use.
I think the main complaint is that the interface is weird, or different, or has too much of a learning curve. I don't see how the interface is in anyway weirder than max or maya when you first use it. I think it's because people use those other software first that they are taken aback by blender's interface.
I just wish that people would give blender a chance. It's free (and money does seem to be an issue in this community). It's multi-platform, and completely based on OpenGL (two of Jeff Tunell's criterias for a good modelling tool), and did I mention that it's free?
My biggest concern is the lack of importer/exporters. But if a couple of dedicated people put a little effort into this this would be solved.
Also, I think Tim Gift mentioned something about inadequate animation capabilities in blender (I'm sorry if I'm screwing up the reference or what exactly was said, but I think I got the jest). Again, it seems that Blender is fully featured in this, although I am not an expert on this. Please judge for yourself, and I apologize if I'm wrong:
http://www.blender3d.com/UsingBlender/character_animation.php
That's it.
#6
1. The company has a new mission of providing back end tools for wireless, networked games on cell phones, etc. Seems to me they took in VC$ during the dotcom goldrush, then tried to figure out how to make money from free software. The two things simply do not add up.
2. Blender is free, but it is not Open Source. If we put a lot of effort into making our system work with Blender as a key tool, what happens if they decide to start charging $500, or go our of business and ther are not fixes/updates.
3. Blender is just too wierd and hard to use. It doesn't know what it wants to be. All of the current development effort behind Blender is to create stnad alone games, i.e. they want their software to be in control.
Anyway, keep track of this post because the Blender "solution" pops up from time to time, and we just want everybody to know that we have gone through the math and it doens't add up for GG.
Jeff Tunnell GG
02/27/2002 (7:18 am)
We met with the Blender guys at CGDC in 2001. The best thing I can say about the meeting is that it was very strange. Here are the reasons we do not jump on Blender:1. The company has a new mission of providing back end tools for wireless, networked games on cell phones, etc. Seems to me they took in VC$ during the dotcom goldrush, then tried to figure out how to make money from free software. The two things simply do not add up.
2. Blender is free, but it is not Open Source. If we put a lot of effort into making our system work with Blender as a key tool, what happens if they decide to start charging $500, or go our of business and ther are not fixes/updates.
3. Blender is just too wierd and hard to use. It doesn't know what it wants to be. All of the current development effort behind Blender is to create stnad alone games, i.e. they want their software to be in control.
Anyway, keep track of this post because the Blender "solution" pops up from time to time, and we just want everybody to know that we have gone through the math and it doens't add up for GG.
Jeff Tunnell GG
#7
I've actually been learning Blender3D and, thus far, am really impressed by it and what it can do - especially having seen what some talented artists have done with it.
Yes it does have an unorthodox interface, and yes it does have a strange way of doing certain things and has a fairly steep learning curve. I would also agree with Jeff Tunnell in that it does seem to be a bit schizo in what it's geared toward. But, all in all, I think it's a great program - especially for the price.
For what it's worth, they also have one of the most nicely made manuals I've ever seen for a program - the Blender 2.0 User's Guide, which is available at book stores or online.
That said, here's something I've been considering doing with Blender as far as Game Design is concerned: using it as a basic proto-typing tool. If the prototype flies and is indeed something worth pursuing on a larger scale, I would then move on to developing it on a full-blown game engine; in this case the Torque engine.
I wouldn't argue for Blender as a full-blown game engine to publish anything commercially. But I think, due to the fact that it's free and that you really don't have to be a programmer to use it, thanks to its method of using logic bricks to "program" the interactivity, that it is quite feasible as a proto-typing tool. There are lots of tutorials available for it (ranging in quality, like with any program) and tutorials failing, the community surrounding it is quite friendly and accomodating when it comes to providing assistance for specific problems.
Anyhoo.. that's my two cents on the topic :-)
03/05/2002 (9:40 am)
Wow... an interesting thread :-)I've actually been learning Blender3D and, thus far, am really impressed by it and what it can do - especially having seen what some talented artists have done with it.
Yes it does have an unorthodox interface, and yes it does have a strange way of doing certain things and has a fairly steep learning curve. I would also agree with Jeff Tunnell in that it does seem to be a bit schizo in what it's geared toward. But, all in all, I think it's a great program - especially for the price.
For what it's worth, they also have one of the most nicely made manuals I've ever seen for a program - the Blender 2.0 User's Guide, which is available at book stores or online.
That said, here's something I've been considering doing with Blender as far as Game Design is concerned: using it as a basic proto-typing tool. If the prototype flies and is indeed something worth pursuing on a larger scale, I would then move on to developing it on a full-blown game engine; in this case the Torque engine.
I wouldn't argue for Blender as a full-blown game engine to publish anything commercially. But I think, due to the fact that it's free and that you really don't have to be a programmer to use it, thanks to its method of using logic bricks to "program" the interactivity, that it is quite feasible as a proto-typing tool. There are lots of tutorials available for it (ranging in quality, like with any program) and tutorials failing, the community surrounding it is quite friendly and accomodating when it comes to providing assistance for specific problems.
Anyhoo.. that's my two cents on the topic :-)
#8
I have to agree with point 1 and 2. They've always come off as somewhere out of left field. I don't know what's up with all this wireless stuff (although the shot of blender on the ipaq is cool).
They seem to want to do everything. They should just stick to what they're good at.
Blender is free. It's not open source, but they would also lose a lot of their community if they started charging $500 a license. As for fixes and updates, yes, that could be a problem if they go out of business, but the last few releases have been very stable. It should also be noted that NaN has tried added all the features that used to be only in the non-free version.
On the same note, GarageGames could go out of business. Ok, I may be wrong, and you can't harshly correct me if I am ( i don't feel like reviewing the whole license right now), but if I purchase the Torque license, while i have access to the code, I don't own it, and if you guys go out of business, Sierra would probably try and reclaim their code and stop any development. Also, nothing is stop you from starting to charge $500 a license. I know that you guys won't, but it's kind of the same argument.
Lastly, I don't think Blender is weird. Yes, they have their own engine incorporated into the editor, but It's not any weirder than 3DS Max or other big time modelling tools. You put a new modeller in front of either of those tools, and they will just both just as confusing. And as Mike said, there's an excellent book, plus a boatload of tutorials, and a helpful community.
I understand that you want a Torque oriented modelling tool. And that makes a lot of sense; Actually, I think it's a good idea, and we should strive for that. But currently, there is none. I just think that Blender is one of the most solid tools available for free for indie game developers.
03/05/2002 (3:00 pm)
Jeff:I have to agree with point 1 and 2. They've always come off as somewhere out of left field. I don't know what's up with all this wireless stuff (although the shot of blender on the ipaq is cool).
They seem to want to do everything. They should just stick to what they're good at.
Blender is free. It's not open source, but they would also lose a lot of their community if they started charging $500 a license. As for fixes and updates, yes, that could be a problem if they go out of business, but the last few releases have been very stable. It should also be noted that NaN has tried added all the features that used to be only in the non-free version.
On the same note, GarageGames could go out of business. Ok, I may be wrong, and you can't harshly correct me if I am ( i don't feel like reviewing the whole license right now), but if I purchase the Torque license, while i have access to the code, I don't own it, and if you guys go out of business, Sierra would probably try and reclaim their code and stop any development. Also, nothing is stop you from starting to charge $500 a license. I know that you guys won't, but it's kind of the same argument.
Lastly, I don't think Blender is weird. Yes, they have their own engine incorporated into the editor, but It's not any weirder than 3DS Max or other big time modelling tools. You put a new modeller in front of either of those tools, and they will just both just as confusing. And as Mike said, there's an excellent book, plus a boatload of tutorials, and a helpful community.
I understand that you want a Torque oriented modelling tool. And that makes a lot of sense; Actually, I think it's a good idea, and we should strive for that. But currently, there is none. I just think that Blender is one of the most solid tools available for free for indie game developers.
Torque Owner Mark Cecil
Look for a cheap application called, 3D exploration.
It allows you to convert differnt 3D file formats to other types. Then you could create in Blender, but then convert to max styles.
It will cost about $30 to register. Well worth it.