A
nyone used it? We’re considering switching from our current proprietary rendering engine (to remain unnamed) to Ogre3d, an open source engine with quite a robust community. We’ve been evaluating Ogre3d since mid-week last week and are rather pleasantly surprised at the quality of the documentation and organization, both of which speak well for the Ogre community effort. Too many open-source projects are plagued by poor documentation and a lack of organization, but when you find a gem, you sometimes really find a big one. I was also impressed by the responsiveness of the forum members and the high signal-to-noise ratio.
Does anyone have any experience with Ogre3d? We’re reviewing the project pretty fully, but there’s no substitute for significant hands-on experience, and we only have approximately another week to finalize our decision. Any help is appreciated, thanks!
(I’m not really looking for suggestions on other engines, though I appreciate the thought. We’ve evaluated the offerings in light of our specific needs - which are not standard - and Ogre appears to be the only thing that potentially fits the bill, for a number of reasons.)
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 5th, 2006 at 11:58 pm
Mike Rozak
Some features that you may want in the future, but which I didn’t see on the features list: (Note: Ogre may still support, but I didn’t see in my cursory glance.)
- Animation, independent animation scripts for face (talking) vs. arms (combat) vs legs (movement).
- Fog - Is RGB attenutation independent so that mountains become purplish in the distance?
- Footprints in the sand/snow
- Fur
- HDRI
- Landscape, overhangs - Is this possible? Most landscape systems don’t allow overhanging textures since they’re only 2D maps. Also, can the landscape have holes?
- Landscape, textures - How well does it blend two textures? Can textures be rotated? This is particularly important for the roads.
- Light sources - How many point light sources can be in an area? How many infinite light sources? How are shadows affected?
- Materials - Can you customize the materials enough such that faces don’t look like plastic? Is a more complex surface like a Blinn model possible? (I suspect so because they’ve implimented fresnel reflections) You also might want to look for irridescent surface like beatles (as in EQII beatles).
- Multicore support - Dual-cores are almost standard issues. Quad-cores coming out in a few months.
- Particles, lights - Can particles incorporate light sources?
- Physics, cloth - Hair, tabbards, etc.
- Physics, character - Characters “feet” should automatically level with the terrain. This is particularly noticable with 4-legged animals on a hill where 2 legs are floating, and 2 go through the hill.
- Physics, particle - If your character stands under a waterfall, do the waterfall particles go right through him, or bounce off him?
- Radiosity
- Rain, snow, etc.
- Shadows, Z-buffer - I can see they’re supported, but I don’t know if Z-depth shadows are supported like in Assassin’s Creed and Conan.
- Shadows, colors - In real life, the are in shadow is bluish, and the sun-exposed light is yellowish. Is this possible?
- Skelton - How well does the skeleton code handle shoulders, wrists, elbows?
- Skydome - While it’s supported, do they have automatic cloud/sun/moon rendering to make life easy?
- Textures, animated
- Textures, volumetric - Marble, wood, stone formations
- Transparencies - I think this is a flaw with all DX cards, but having semi-transparent objects in front of semi-transparent objects may not be supported without first having to do a Z-sort, which can be limiting in your design.
- Tree support - My initial impression is that speedtree does a better job
- Trees, animated - Grass and trees that wave in the wind
- Trees, culling - Quickly cull distant grass. Cull trees in the distance, etc.
September 6th, 2006 at 12:12 am
Matt
Hi Mike!
Yeah, we have no need for virtually all of those features. We’re aiming well below what you’re thinking in terms of graphical sophistication.
–matt
September 6th, 2006 at 4:21 am
Iruen
Some of the things Mike Rozak mentioned are quite basic for me to play a graphic game nowadays. Or is the graphical part of your game downplayed intentionally?
With Hero’s Journey to be released as the first “graphical mud” (Simutronics) the standards are going to be set quite high I think (acording to the screenshots and stuff I’ve seen from them and their propietary engine).
September 6th, 2006 at 7:00 am
Par Winzell
I hung out on their forums for about a month in the recent past and was much impressed. The engine itself seems to have an excellent reputation, and under continuous development. The community is active and healthy with steady participation from the developers. The documentation had been kept up to date.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:34 am
Matt
Iruen wrote:
With Hero’s Journey to be released as the first “graphical mud” (Simutronics) the standards are going to be set quite high I think (acording to the screenshots and stuff I’ve seen from them and their propietary engine).
I don’t mean to quibble over semantics, but WoW is a graphical MUD, as is Everquest and UO and Meridian 59. MUD is just a generic name for everything from the humblest DIKU to World of Warcraft.
Keep in mind that Runescape is basically neck and neck with World of Warcraft in terms of active users (if not paying users), and has graphics from about 1994. It’s not just about the eyecandy for a LOT of graphical MUD (or MMORPG if you prefer) players, and I think the enthusiast press does a poor job of conveying that fact.
–matt
September 6th, 2006 at 10:43 am
Andrew Crystall
Runescape is also a “play-anywhere” browser game, though…
September 6th, 2006 at 10:47 am
Matt
Sure, absolutely it is, but that doesn’t change its penetration. Playing from a browser is a feature of a game, just like deciding to use 3d or have gnomes.
September 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
Mike Rozak
Matt wrote: “Yeah, we have no need for virtually all of those features. We’re aiming well below what you’re thinking in terms of graphical sophistication.”
It’s your call, but I’d remind you that you’re aiming at a moving target. Runescape now has free-to-play competitors that actually have good graphics.
The other thing is to always be thinking about features you’ll be needing in 2.0 so that you don’t accidently code yourself into a corner. Make sure you don’t sign into an engine that’s going to become unsupported or hit a brick wall. (From what you describe, this doesn’t seem like an issue in ogre.)
I forgot one feature; I suspect Ogre has it though:
- LOD blending/faiding - Trees (and all objects) aren’t drawn if they’re further away than 500m. As you approach from 510m to 490m, the tree should fade in over 1/2 sec so it suddenly doesn’t pop into view. Then, as the tree gets closer, its LOD improves, and at the transition from a low LOD to a high one, the images are faded together.
EQII has a really neat (and comical) LOD fading where equipment appears over time. When a character first appears in the distance, the character is usually “naked”. Then, as textures are loaded and the object gets closer, armor, shields, etc. appear on the character.
September 6th, 2006 at 3:07 pm
Neil
I have been using Ogre for small hobby projects, and it is a well-designed API with way more features than I would use as a hobbyist. The community is excellent.
I don’t think that one more week of evaluation is long enough… But that’s your call of course. I would spend some time looking at implementing GUI’s in Ogre. Ogre uses the CEGUI (Crazy Eddie GUI) system, but you can implement your own from scratch too. You might find CEGUI to be weak, although it is fine for my purposes. CEGUI still has not reached version 1.0, so its interfaces may change as it pushes towards v1.0.
September 6th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Matt
Neil wrote:
I don’t think that one more week of evaluation is long enough…
Grin. Got the money to pay our people to spend longer?
–matt
September 6th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
Matt
Oh, one more comment, Neil: We have demo’d CEGUI and find it to be oddly slow. It does plenty of what we need, but just does it slowly. The more technical oriented guys on the team tell me that there is a new GUI in the works for Ogre (perhaps for version 1.4?) or an update of CEGUI that people are excited about though. Maybe that’s the update to v1.0 you’re referring to.
In any case, while our current engine (has to remain nameless) does some things well, the GUI stuff, for instance, is abysmal and even if we have to dig in and optimize CEGUI quite a bit, it’s likely to be less work than trudging through and around the barriers that our current game engine creates for us.
–matt
September 7th, 2006 at 5:43 am
Andrew Crystall
Matt, I disagree to an extent - people are more willing to put up with poor graphics if the game’s portable. Quite apart from the entire handheld market, people play flash games etc. all the time which they wouldn’t touch in a paid box…
I think Runescape’s much the same. Because people can pick it up from any net connection, and on any very moderate spec PC… Sure, people ARE starting to see past the shiny, but it’s only starting as of yet and they need other benefits like portability or a constanconsistant themed graphical style to do it.
September 7th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Neil
Hey Matt, I have found the same slowness with CEGUI. I believe it is because the cursor is not a “hardware cursor”. It lags behind your movements with the mouse, which can make users somewhat frustrated with the lag. CEGUI is rendering the mouse cursor as a graphical overlay, which means it is tied to the overall framerate of the application. (Or something like that.) I don’t know how to fix that, but most games have the problem solved somehow.
Good luck!
September 9th, 2006 at 8:22 am
PlayNoEvil
Matt -
Take a look at Panda3d… its Disney’s engine and is released open source with a very open license. It is built with Python and so is very easily scriptable and extendalbe.
September 10th, 2006 at 3:55 am
Eric
Having downloaded the demos from Ogre’s site, I’m pretty impressed. In particular, the “Facial Animation”, “Grass via Static Geometry”, “Physics Integration”, “Shadows”, “Skeletal Animation”, and “Water Simulation” demos seem to really show off the capabilities of the engine.
I obviously have no idea what you envision your final product looking like, but for an open source engine, my immediate reaction to this is “impressed.” In terms of projects that have used Ogre, I only see The Blob and FragFist listen on their site, but I have played The Blob and it is both (1) lots of fun and (2) artistically gorgeous, and FragFist looks very attractive from the screenshots.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:40 am
Anonymous Coward
Comment Necromancy!
I know of one commercial MMORPG that is switching from its own proprietary engine to Ogre, and the preview video that they released looks really, really good. Since it hasn’t been officially acknowledged that they’re using Ogre, I figure that I should better not say which game it is, but I expect that the new engine gets released in 2008