Where are the projects people are working on?

I see on YT tutorials, but seems nobody had made a game with Armory yet . It’s a bit like Godot … fantastic on paper, but why i see so many games still being dev on the discontinued BGE ? Why users cannot work on a same project ?

my project

The reason for that is because Armory is still early in development. The average user will encounter issues that might stop their work or missing tools they require, something common in every alpha product, so don’t expect other than PoC for a while until the engine could be called production-ready.

Godot had some time before it got popular among indie devs, and even so it had/has the same stuff going around: issues that might be crippling serious projects, requiring workarounds in a lot of places, or coding yourself a lot of what you need. Those might be some of the reasons you don’t see a lot of “game made with” other than the more mature engines.

1 Like

i just don’t understand that story of ‘still in development’ as an excuse to not start making games. On BGE, it’s the same story , but reverse … BGE is no more maintained … "bla bla so i can keep talking on the forum about the weather and what is the best shader in 2019 " . Do people realize that at indie level, the engine is not really important ? Only AAA games could be picky on the engine they use.

I think starting games is not the issue here but rather being able to finish them. There are some issues in Armory that could hinder your progress in serious projects, like audio issues, rendering issues, compiling issues, incomplete or unusable tools, etc. Not that I am complaining, after all this is normal in alpha software, but not that many like working around issues in tools to get results.

Though this is not exclusive to Armory, Godot has a similar tendency. Starting a project is easy, but the issues with the engine and the tools might slow you down, if not completely halt your progress.

It’s a matter of how much work do you wanna put into the tools for your project vs the actual work in your project.

1 Like

I’m not totally agree. When there’s a technical issue you can put a pause on that aspect of the game and work on others. You have to confine/contain/report the problem and put it aside the time it’s fixed (you cannot name a better example than audio issues)… If it’s really a depend issue, you can hard-code a replacement. Anyway, it seems Armory has already all the necessary to make some awesome demos … so why not a game ? Who cares there’s some hidden bugs or missing features ? We all came here coz the eye-candy fps demo of Armory. Not some obscure github page

Also, having a community of users working on building a template embedding animations, sounds and objects is probably the best service one can make to help the devs to test their technology they are working on as they will test proof on real game and not only on quick scene they create for the occasion

So waiting that everything is fine, is probably the best way to exhaust a project as only the devs are pulling the wagon of work

Well I agree with that, I also think along the same lines, but unfortunately I don’t have time to continue my projects to prototype Armory and help it spread.

But I also think there is a limit to what you can put “aside” for later though; for example, I need navigation with multiple agents for one of my projects, and my game rely on it, so I need it working to get other stuff in the gameplay working too.

And probably with terrain it would be the same, I didn’t used it myself so I’m not sure of it’s capabilities, but if the tool doesn’t work there isn’t much you can do to progress other sides without the main aspect of a open world, for example.

Also don’t forget that a lot of users like and rely on the logic nodes to program their games, so if the tool is not working there isn’t much they can do if they don’t know how to code.

2 Likes

I could probably point out other reasons for game not being made with godot3 other than not being ‘mature’.

It different reason for BGE, one of the reason is that the fact that it is mature, and thing don’t keep poking out here and there while creating game.

Indie game dev(especially artist) need to be picky on game engine they use, because not being comfortable and not getting what you except can trouble you and for AAA game it might just be opposite, because it not only a guy or two behind computer, there are lot of people managing it. I get it that they will have to re-learn the engine, but they have lot of resource, just lot of…

Well, speaking from experience of trying to develop full game in armory, bugs in armory were not small and can be ignored like sound issue, issues were with rotation, animation, canvas, rendering such as area light, triangulation, etc. Trying to do animation is lot of trouble especially for non-artist, canvas UI is really insufficient, in order to write proper UI system, you will have to create some of UI elements by yourself and hard code lot of it yourself, and some time things just keep poking out of here and there.

But, I still don’t get it what you meant by a ‘game’, are you talking about games like COD, CS:GO, etc or games like space shooter, flappy bird, etc or somewhere in-between?

1 Like

Making a complex game to work as a well adjusted system takes time. I am using Armory3D to make a football (soccer) game, which is pretty complex in some areas (big state machines, intercept system, tactics, physics fine adjustement, etc.) and really simple in others (no terrain, no navmesh, no story, etc.).
One key aspect in the current state of Armory to make it really useful as a developer is being able to program and work in a hostile environment. You can do almost everything, but sometimes you have to fight to get it to work at all. It is an alpha of a very complex and challenging software, so that is expected.

BTW, I expect to upload development videos of the game in about 6-8 weeks (I hope it’ll be sooner, but you know how this works).

1 Like

I’m entirely sure that Armory will become an extremely important and influential game system, both because of its Haxe origins and for its seamless integration into Blender, but the development of any complex system of software takes time. Blender, for instance, has taken dozens of years, and (IMHO) “it only very-recently started to be ‘good.’” (Hell… much the same can be said of Haxe!) We simply have to wait for it … and contribute to it, if we can.

If I were starting a new game right now on behalf of my company’s venture capitalists and other financial stakeholders, I doubt that I could safely justify the use of Armory yet. I don’t think that I could yet make a case for the additional uncertainty and perceived business risk. I’d feel that I needed to play their($$) cards closer to my chest in order to guarantee to them that their($$) investment is protected. As an individual, however, (as I am …) the advantages are compelling and there are no “external” risks. I can bear to take chances.

Fast-forward a couple years and I am quite sure that Armory3D will be the “new” package that everybody is talking about … and, beginning to seriously use. My decision on behalf of my financial backers then might very well be reversed in favor of Armory3D, and I would look them in the eye. Writing today, the maturity is not there “yet.” But it’s really unrealistic to expect it to be … “yet.”

1 Like

What makes a game engine great is the games/templates/assets made with/for it . Technology is less important. Keep in mind those exemples : Betamax, Jaguar and DreamCast consoles.

Unfortunately, it seems very hard to find contributors on BGE/Armory/Godot ; they prefer to talk about how awesome and advanced their engine is.