Atomic Game Engine (MIT Urho3D Fork)


#61

I blogged about the 20 year adventure leading to the Atomic Game Engine, 2016 Roadmap, and our plans for moving the technology forward:

atomicgameengine.com/blog/future-of-atomic-1/

:smiley:

  • Josh

#62

Wow… That was one inspiring adventure :slight_smile: . The resolve to keep pushing on is really encouraging. Kudos


#63

Created a visualization of the Atomic master branch through March 10th, 2016

Super easy to do with Gource

:smiley:


#64

Good news everyone!

The Atomic Game Engine is now Open Source under the permissive MIT license! :open_mouth:

We made a blog post with the announcement: atomicgameengine.com/blog/announcement-2/




Cheers!

  • Josh

#65

Wow, hey nice congrats! :slight_smile:


#66

Cool, thanks for opening up! :slight_smile:


#67

Wow, that’s big news ! Thanks !

I’m curious what the plan is-- maybe going for an asset store model?


#68

Cool.
How is AGE in relation to Urho? Has it developed into a different direction or is it like a current Urho with additional stuff?
What about the development? Are the developments of Urho and AGE going to keep totally separate or will there be some kind of exchanging or merging, which would mean a bigger team on one engine?
Has it conflicting goals or intentional different design decisions?


#69

Well, the “core” of game engine which is Urho3D is MIT all these time, so that’s not news. Open sourcing the editor part, however, is a surprising but welcome news.


#70

Oh so they didn’t change Urho that much and primarily added an editor? Did they change Urho at all and is the editor like an external tool? Or just slightly modified? Could it be used as an alternative to the normal Urho editor?


#71

Oh so they didn’t change Urho that much and primarily added an editor? Did they change Urho at all and is the editor like an external tool? Or just slightly modified? Could it be used as an alternative to the normal Urho editor?[/quote]
I didn’t say that. I believe they do extend on what core Urho3D provides and keep them there. As I understand those code has been licensed under MIT as well in the past, so that not news to me. As for the editor, I have no idea so no comment.


#72

I’ve now read this whole thread, parts of their website and their story.
Seems like I’ve underestimated their success, they’ve sold over 3000 licenses and have quite some connections.
The forum is slower as the Urho one so I assume their community is smaller.
They made some changes to Urho and pushed it into a slightly different direction with a focus on Javascript and WebGL.
They try to make games under a “THUNDERBEAST GAMES” brand.

I’m wondering what happens now after making their engine and tools free? The prices are already gone and 3000+ sold licenses are not bad but for that price of somewhere between 60$ and 100$ (if I remember correctly) not enough to hold a whole company/team. They seem to be two people.
They seem to have a lot of plans but it also sounds a bit like trying to get money on other ways and maybe reduce their effort in AGE.
Oh they have this uWebKit Unity viewer for 95$: uwebkit.com/store/
Maybe that and possible other things sell quite well.

So there’s kinda a commercial project using Urho. Not a lot of manpower though but they seem to be really effective in getting stuff done.
Hm, so what could be done with this situation? I guess some things could be exchanged between both engines and others have to be kept separated due to the different goals.

I came to Urho3D by looking for a free software engine after more or less bad experience with Irrlicht, CrystalSpace and Ogre. I don’t know how good Urho3D is currently in relation to all the other engines (as in Top 10, Top 5, or Top 3 or whatever) but it seems really good from a technical point of view as I’ve heard a lot. I read that Urho mostly lacks stuff like editors and other tools compared to the big commercial engines, with AGE there seems to be a step in that direction though.

Project “Let’s catch up with the big engines like Unreal, CryEngine and Unity”. :wink:


#73

AGE has a quite a few changes compared to urho core, including javascript and C# bindings and chromium built in. I imagine with much of the hard work done in atomic, porting back to urho would be a smaller task than implementing them from scratch, but still no small task either way.


#74

Yeah the question is also: will AGE keep like a different engine or will it be more like optional extensions extending Urho? The Chromium build in looked really good for example, could that be a library?
AGE could be a bundle consisting of Urho and some extensions and an external editor or whatever. Like a Linux Distribution. Maybe a lot of what they added/changed could be made into extensions/libraries for Urho. So that the “AGE project” would be basically working on the normal Urho and their extensions and other stuff.
No idea how much they changed Urho and which parts could be relatively easily made extensions for Urho itself.
Merging the projects would be a big step forward.


#75

I could be wrong but I recall the CEF3 work was being done by Enhex first. topic1021.html


#76

If The Atomic Game Engine team was focusing only on Urho3d then we had more complete Game Engine, if Panda3d, Ogre3d, Irrlich and … (a very long list of free engines) team and contributes was focusing on one unit engine, then we had a very good community driven game engine, LIKE BLENDER (a good free 3d software), the main problem is everyone wants to build an engine, and halfway they sucks, I think we should ask other developers around world for contribution to build Urho3d (or any name) a unite game engine (more like Merging all engine to one, of course not code but merging and grouping people together), however if you probably ask them, most of them will reject.

So people please, do not make another engine, just focus on one, Urho3d has this potential to become one unite game engine.


#77

There are other factors to consider. For one they probably initially thought to not release the engine open source, so making their own fork made sense. Then they open sourced it, but still they get to decide the quality standards that are acceptable for their engine-- by adhering to their own standards they could develop new features faster rather than waiting for their work to receive approval via pull request. Also, by making their own engine they didn’t need to worry about doing things that might not fit the goals of Urho3D.

I agree, I’ve seen many similar featured open-source engines with huge amounts of work put into them that might have been better if they focused effort into one engine (eg, urho3d, atomic, maratis, polycode, minko.io, gameplay3d), but in the game engine world sometimes it’s better to start new every few years to keep up with new technology, than to beat a dead horse (eg, blender game engine, irrlicht, source, quake, etc ).


#78

[quote=“Shylon”]If The Atomic Game Engine team was focusing only on Urho3d then we had more complete Game Engine, if Panda3d, Ogre3d, Irrlich and … (a very long list of free engines) team and contributes was focusing on one unit engine, then we had a very good community driven game engine, LIKE BLENDER (a good free 3d software), the main problem is everyone wants to build an engine, and halfway they sucks, I think we should ask other developers around world for contribution to build Urho3d (or any name) a unite game engine (more like Merging all engine to one, of course not code but merging and grouping people together), however if you probably ask them, most of them will reject.
So people please, do not make another engine, just focus on one, Urho3d has this potential to become one unite game engine.[/quote]
Yeah getting hobbyists together is really hard.

It’s quite a while since I last checked Irrlicht, Crystalspace and Ogre. Ogre seems to be active under the hood but Crystalspace looked pretty dead the last time I checked. As I was searching for a new engine I also found one called Delta3D but I never really looked into it because I randomly looked at Urho3D first. It seems kinda active but not that much: delta3d.org/
Urho has a great potential, especially compared to Ogre, as it is a complete Game Engine and not just a 3D Engine. And it usually just works on any system and is relatively polished. Crystalspace is/was also a complete Game Engine but as I used it, it was really buggy, super slow and most stuff wasn’t working properly.

As I already mentioned several times: It would be a giant promotion to have various very simple games that proof and show what Urho can do, as in “Yeah that’s also possible with Urho”. Can be inspired by successful games in various genres. Some of those may yield new features for Urho, or find bugs, or improve stuff or introduce new systems as libraries.

Would be also great to have a professional team working on a game with Urho that contributes stuff back.
We really need organized manpower. Seems like we have a relative big community but everyone is kinda working on his own. Who would work with others?


#79

Very nice move on Atomic’s part!

Yeah the core idea of hobbyism & hobby open source participation (as opposed to corporate open source) is to work on things you’re interested on. Unfortunately it’s unlikely for anyone’s hobby passion to be fulfilling someone else’s dreams, so I agree it’s hard to get together a “critical mass” group of talented developers who have the same aim.

If we speak realistically, Urho / Atomic is a good implementation of game engine state of the art from a few years back. It’s certainly usable for getting games done, and the architecture is solid. However it’s not necessarily suitable for the more modern and high-performance methods (Data-oriented design, more utilization of CPU cores, getting good utilization of new to-the-metal graphics APIs). Though I can’t think of any other permissive open source game engines that are ready for that either (*), and most proprietary engines, at least those with a long legacy probably aren’t any better. What I’m saying is that if your goals are high, Urho may not be the “final” open source base to build on so to speak, but you’d be better off starting a new “god” engine project :slight_smile:

(*) Ogre2+ is heading in a future-prepared direction, but it’s just a rendering engine. It makes choices that are oriented around the “AZDO” approach (such as creating large vertex buffers and managing them manually) that may not be universally good choices, for example on mobiles. From what I read the focus on optimizations makes the API hard to use.


#80

Note that using the latest technologies isn’t desirable, since some people won’t have computers that support them.
Even OpenGL 3.2 isn’t supported by the low end Intel HD Graphics GPUs.

Unless you’re going to have AAA multi-million $$$ game production it’s unlikely that you’ll really need to squeeze every last drop of performance to get your “cinematic” 24 FPS using the newest technologies.
If you don’t have that kind of requirement it’s better to use older tech and support more potential users.

For my project I’m using full detail models(didn’t try to optimize them), and with GTX670 it runs at 200(max) FPS.