Sdk

(Dolo_420) #1

Does anyone know what the sdk will be like?

For years I have learned and worked with the various incarnations of radiant as the quake/doom/id engine has evolved.

Recently I started using the GECK for New Vegas and, oh man!, wow, it is very sweet. Sooo super easy and intuitive for building everything. Especially for rigging AI. Basically GECK = Awsome!

My question is…

Since both teams are working on this game, does anyone know if the tools will be more in line with Quake Wars’ style tools or Fallout’s GECK tools?

(SockDog) #2

The game is built on a modified Quake Wars (idTech4) engine. The tools (IMO) will be much like those for previous id games.

I suspect Zenimax’s purchase of id, and so idTech5 and even further so John Carmack’s brain from the future, will mean they are going to shift internal projects to that engine. I’d watch Rage for signs of what is to come with Bethesda.

(LyndonL) #3

As SockDog said Brink is idTech4 and Fallout runs on the GECK engine. 2 different engines = 2 different SDKs.

(.Chris.) #4

ET:QW used Editworld which is imo the best radiant based map editor I’ve used and I heard they using modified version of it for Brink, which makes sense seeing as they using modified ET:QW idtech4 engine.

#5

Iv asked some questions regarding the tools in our Q&A, so hopefully you will get some answers once I get it back and publish it.

(Crytiqal) #6

Jammydodger I am very patient, but wheeeeeen :frowning:

I’m just messing with ya, it’s out of your hands I know…

(Dolo_420) #7

I like custom maps to, I been mapping since quake 2 engine but over in fallout they have a ton of custom content. They have custom player models, custom player animations, custom player clothing, snap and go interchangeable parts for mapping, they even have black jack and hookers. I’d like that same freedom in brink especially since its got the integrated single player aspect.

(system) #8

What the …? People should stop linking Bethesda with Brink’s development. They are only publishing it, the WHOLE game is developed by Splash Damage.

sry had to be said…

(.Chris.) #9

Thats only thing I found off putting in GECK for mapping you basically just re-arranging map objects resulting in areas that just look like every other area in the game. From what I gather you had to make lots of custom models in similar setup to be able to make something truly unique and make it look good (This true for most games now though).

For Brink though if they follow in ET:QW’s footsteps they will provide quite of few of the .world references with the SDK but considering they probably using more model work than brush work now I guess you just need the models released with the SDK and then references of the objectives and maybe another “etqw.world” that has a basic example map with all the objectives and so in it but hopefully one that fully works this time :slight_smile:

Make it happen SD!

But yeah forget about GECK for Brink it’s not going to be of any use as it’s totally different setup.

(brbrbr) #10

something tell me SDK will not ready for official Brink launch time 4 share/download even IF ZM allow/sanction/pay 4 this.
after one or two patches/fixes for game itself, i guess …

(Violator) #11

Only thing I hope is that it will be easier and more accessable than QW so we’re not stuck the same half dozen mappers and players again :slight_smile:

(.Chris.) #12

That wasn’t really down to the accessibility of the SDK though :slight_smile:

(brbrbr) #13

yep i hope SD/Id will focus on SDK functionality/easy of use/pre-sets/built-in tools to make game content, to make it more or less comparable to way more sandbox-usage-ready stuff, like CryEditor3 or UnrealEd 3, let alone FarCry2 or Arma2/VBS2 editing tools[both stock and custom-made ones in both cases].
so both teams[along with other ZM assets/companies], can rolling out products like cookies, instead of spending countless hours or [relatively]simplest things again and again and again.

(.Chris.) #14

No thanks, I don’t want dozens of maps all looking the same.

A couple of tutorial/example maps would be welcome for all the new stuff, I think this combined with a selection of reference .world files from each map as with the ET:QW SDK and an accurate wiki would be enough.

(SebaSOFT) #15

Prefabs . . . .

I correct myself, a good set like ETQW will do…

(Cankor) #16

Shouldn’t the SDK get easier to use over time not harder :slight_smile: (SDK hardness should be Z axis not a variable).

(Violator) #17

I personally didn’t find the SDK all that bad but there was a steep learning curve for some things (terrain, MCP deployment). More examples wouldn’t hurt though there was good stuff in the SDK if you dug around enough :).

(tokamak) #18

Worldedit is incredibly hard compared to kits like the UnrealEd.

Oh well, it’s not like you can even aproach stock maps without proffesional tools, a team and a budget these days.

(brbrbr) #19

[QUOTE=.Chris.;250145]No thanks, I don’t want dozens of maps all looking the same.

A couple of tutorial/example maps would be welcome for all the new stuff, I think this combined with a selection of reference .world files from each map as with the ET:QW SDK and an accurate wiki would be enough.[/QUOTE]

but thats eventually result in “games looking the same”, cuz developers of any kind and [reasonably]high budgets simply have [almost]not time for [anything]else.
point is Efficient SDK/gamemaking tools - 1st and most important step to make game development EFFICIENT[in both speed and quality] enough.
ie making this biz commercially interesting 4 more wider branch of investors/publishers, than usual “E Intertainment-addicted jerks” circle, among investors.

(Dolo_420) #20

When I say prefabed I may have been too general. Yes people will make maps using some stock parts on any game. But you can just as easily create your own content and add them to the game library. In an attempt to stay with the theme of the game yes some maps will look similar but that has no bearing on the potential for making new content. They also have some good support and plugins to help with creating custom player models, custom clothing, custom player animations and other such fun things. Custom models are almost always good and help make your maps and mods stand out. I do appreciate the degree of environment customization allowed by games like quake wars I just wish they could take a page from what bethesda did in making the content building package easyer for new people to pick up without comprimising the degree of customization seasoned modders expect. I think it would be good becuase with easyer tools new players could get involved with modding with the ease most of us started on when the engines were simpler. Half the fun of pc gamming for me at least has always been the crazy user created content which seems to become less abundent when the learning curve for modding increases along side engine complexity. I don’t want to have to learn every last nuonce of the engine just to put some of my own goofyness into a game. Easyer tools = more content.