*laughs* ok sure its easy to get started with, but a simple language it is not! its very high level, with many concepts. A simple language would be C, or lua, with far fewer concepts.GML is simple
I think that should just be a thing in general, not just for 3D. (It most likely already is a thing).IMO the best course of action for the Yoyo / GM / 3D combination space would be something like, Yoyo contacts these devs and asks about what they struggled the most with, then adds any fixes/features that would also benefit 2D games into the big pile of secret new features when
SandyKrystian isn't looking.
I think them having some internal dev team to work on more experimental, or longer form projects to identify issues of pain points first hand would be helpful. I suspect this is also already a thing in some shape or form. I also suspect this is what the YoYo labs were supposed to be.
You can already create GC and n64 level graphics in GM, with just vertex buffers and matrix/camera functions.They might focus on 2D, but no way will they avoid adding 3D. 3D will eventually happen with time, even if it is 10 years from now lol. It might not be great 3D, but as long as I can make Pikmin for Gamecube, or Ocarina of Time for 64, then I and many others will be happy lmao. Releasing Gamecube or Nintendo 64 quality 3D games onto Steam would be awesome.
In fact shaders actually give you a lot more power than what was available on GC.
its interesting how these features do not align with what I would have requested at all.@Yal I guess since I'm one of the people in this topic mentioning this(despite the fact that I'm not really one of the guys doing the 3d stuff, rather just vouching for the needs), Russell directly asked me what we are looking for as far as exposure. I've included the following things in my responses. Feel free to add more and I'll shoot them his way.
Geometry shaders have been abandoned by the industry as a whole. We tend to favour compute shaders to generate geometry instead. Its far more flexible and high performance. (Geometry shaders were a mistake).
also no mention of buffers which I believe to be the gateway to many high performance and flexible graphics pipelines.
allowing us to split shaders into multiple files and use includes would be tremendously useful too.
(mind you i'm not saying your list is wrong, but rather that what features developers will want to use is highly variable and depends on the person)
I think people underplay the potential that these features have in 2D rendering as well.
I think where many game engines fall short in 2D is with the ability to develop advanced graphical features. Which is why the more visually stunning 2D games tend to use in house engines (eg dead cells).
should we have a topic dedicated to this discussion? this really feels out of place here.