Page 2 of 2

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:25 am
by c6burns
Could split PU into multiple tasks if necessary. At a minimum, multithreading at the Technique level for the Affectors. Then a modernized interface for particle systems via a new billboard system as dark_sylinc mentions.

I love PU with all my heart from the design perspective (THANKS SPOOKYBOO!!!), but its a real performance hog.

Also if you think Ogre takes a long time to compile now, wait till you see what would happen adding PU as a component :lol: It'd be unity build or bust

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:13 pm
by nickG
i forgot:
-Tiled Based Deferred Shading

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:24 pm
by hydexon
nickG wrote:- Physically based rendering
- Deferred/forward+ render
- True volumetric lighting
- LPV
- Image Based Lighting
- SSAO Alghoritms(SSAO,SSDO,HBAO,HBAO+)


I chose Ogre3d instead BGFX for new version of my project
LPV and Image Based Lighting was an earlier 2011 GSOC Ogre3D project called "Modern Illumination Techniques" but never made merged to the Ogre repository, the repository is here. And BGFX is interesant and intent to grab some bits from them like Weighted, Blended Order-Independent Transparency sample and other more (Stencil Reflection).

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:09 pm
by nickG
hydexon wrote:
nickG wrote:- Physically based rendering
- Deferred/forward+ render
- True volumetric lighting
- LPV
- Image Based Lighting
- SSAO Alghoritms(SSAO,SSDO,HBAO,HBAO+)


I chose Ogre3d instead BGFX for new version of my project
LPV and Image Based Lighting was an earlier 2011 GSOC Ogre3D project called "Modern Illumination Techniques" but never made merged to the Ogre repository, the repository is here. And BGFX is interesant and intent to grab some bits from them like Weighted, Blended Order-Independent Transparency sample and other more (Stencil Reflection).
I seen this repo,and used in my project...but LPV and IBL is not was made

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:57 am
by syedhs
I think we should focus on completing the previous gsoc project which are greatly beneficial but still not ready for production.. otherwise what we have here are many excellent gsoc projects around, but unusable. No offense - they are all very good: projects, contributors and mentors, but finishing gsoc projects vs preparing it for production use can be very different. I am not sure where Google will allow that (polish project or making the api more friendly), but I would have it is so.

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:01 pm
by Transporter
syedhs wrote:I think we should focus on completing the previous gsoc project which are greatly beneficial but still not ready for production.. otherwise what we have here are many excellent gsoc projects around, but unusable. No offense - they are all very good: projects, contributors and mentors, but finishing gsoc projects vs preparing it for production use can be very different. I am not sure where Google will allow that (polish project or making the api more friendly), but I would have it is so.
I agree to that. Where is the new resource system? PU is more a gsoc project for Ogitor.

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 11:47 pm
by scrawl
https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org ... e/gsoc2015

No Ogre in there :| . Actually, it seems no 3d engines at all were accepted this year. I don't see CrystalSpace, WorldForge, or JMonkeyEngine in there either.

Unless you count Wine a 3d engine...

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:34 am
by hydexon
scrawl wrote:https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org ... e/gsoc2015

No Ogre in there :| . Actually, it seems no 3d engines at all were accepted this year. I don't see CrystalSpace, WorldForge, or JMonkeyEngine in there either.

Unless you count Wine a 3d engine...
Imagine CrystalSpace an abandoned and almost unmaintained game engine, getting GSOC slots this years and me be like: "WHAT. WHAT THE F**K".

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:51 pm
by Klaim
scrawl wrote:https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org ... e/gsoc2015

No Ogre in there :| . Actually, it seems no 3d engines at all were accepted this year. I don't see CrystalSpace, WorldForge, or JMonkeyEngine in there either.

Unless you count Wine a 3d engine...

:/

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:57 am
by N0vember
Second consecutive year ?
Can we see a tendency here ?
Harmful lobbying ? Can we start making conspiracy theories ?

It's really sad. Open-source is tremendously successful recently in some other market sectors. But not in gaming it seems. I see some proprietary business execs shadows here.....
Really, when you look at it from afar, open-source game development is in really bad shape, and the attitude of Google will only make it worse.
I guess if it's not web, node.js or android and java based then it's not sexy....
Is gaming such a small market share of development in general ???

No users anymore, and no now sponsors anymore :(

I'll go cry and mourn for a few hours now

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 6:36 pm
by Klaim
Not really a tendency as no 3d renderer was selected, it looks more like a choice of focus for this year or something like that.

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 7:48 pm
by Thyrion
too bad :(

was there any ogre candidate?

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:35 pm
by Thyrion
OpenGEX Importer

We want to officially support OGEX as the main format for importing meshes into Ogre, as it is really looking good and gaining traction throughout the industry. After a more thorough evaluation we believe this is a perfect 3-month project for students.
It seems the C4 engine (the creator of OGEX) has closed its doors since a half year?
The future of OGEX doesn't look so good?

Re: [GSoC 2015] Idea discussion thread

Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:19 pm
by dark_sylinc
Well... the C4 thing is unfortunate. But it is actually beinginternally developed.
Nonetheless, OGEX does look like a superior format and has good exporters available with source code.
The thing about standards is adoption, and this format is a good format for handling mesh data, material data, and skeleton data. The is ageless. It's what Collada should have been.