What do you want to see in Urho Core?

Lately, there has been tons of discussion about the future of the engine. Some people are comfortable with it the way it is, others want more features, others want less. This is all great because it shows that the community is passionate about the project. Also, since the project is open, anyone can do what they think it’s best, but it’s good to know what others are thinking, so you know that your contribution won’t be useless.

So, what would you like to see in Urho Core?

  • Area Lights
  • SDF Shadows
  • SSR
  • Octahedral Impostors
  • QT / imgui editor
  • More samples
  • Tesselation
  • Dynamic sky models
  • GI - Radiance Hints? Voxel Cone?
  • SSAO
  • MSAA, SMAA
  • Automatic instancing
  • Ocean shader
  • Networking examples: lobby, PVP
  • Physics samples: destructables, fluids, controllers
  • IK Examples: Limb IK, Aim at IK
  • LOD for foliage, vegetation
  • Performance improvements
  • Bug fixing
  • Lightmapper

0 voters

1 Like

Completely off topic, but this post just made me realize my phone and my laptop are logged into 2 different accounts. Never noticed that before.b

1 Like

I think the number of samples is reaching a point where it may be wise to start merging some. We could have a single physics sample for instance where you can drive a raycast vehicle into a tower of blocks and push a soft body blob around.
There would still be separate files for the code, just less folders and binaries.

2 Likes

Samples are supposed to be simple for people to understand. Those “sample binary” galleries are usually complex and require advanced code.

1 Like

pls add level streaming to vote :slight_smile:

3 Likes

(Un)fortunately polls cannot be modified after 5 minutes of their creation, it would require an extra poll.

It’s good to see your (upside down) face again, @1vanK. :upside_down_face:

I don’t think a merger of sample 46 into sample 11 would require more complex code. The Vehicle would still have its own source files… and it could have a cannon to maintain the possibility to launch physics objects. Note that there is no terrain sample, but two samples that use terrain.
I think the sample could be made more fun (emotionally worth it) to explore by turning them into richer sandboxes. All the while giving a quicker overview of the engine’s capabilities.

@1vanK, polls have a limit of 20 options, unfortunately. :frowning:

What you are looking for is a demo, not a sample. A sample has a clear focus, and a demo is a showcase of the engine’s capabilities.

1 Like

In that case I’m suggesting to turn sample 11 into a demo that would still be called a sample.

Cool! But Sample 11 continues to exist.

Honestly the engine itself is amazing and does not lack anything I need (so far)
What I would like is more samples/learning material to encourage others to try it out and not think of it as another small time engine.
Also Urho3D 1.8 please!

Better lightning, ocean and sky would be amazing for me atm. We can’t hire someone for somethings like this? Patreon I dont think would works, coz our community is very small.

I see the Urho editor is very poor compared to others, but the best thing for me on Urho3D its the engine as library, this way I have a lot of more freedom than fuckin game engines where u do evertyhing on editor and c# (mee).

It would be cool to have a sample scene with atmospheric scattering, sun and ocean together, kinda like the sample scene from CryEngine 2:

Or UE:

It’s funny how everyone obsesses about editors, yet they’re the last items on the list.

1 Like

There is also the wiki where additions by the community could be categorized.
Do not hesitate to improve it.

1 Like

Javascript integration…anyone ?

Definitely no.

At least for me.

We already have 2 scripting languages. Lua is already a pain in the a$$ for anyone who wants to contribute as it has an awkward binding.

If you want JavaScript then there’s the Atom game engine. Which is basically a fork of this one but integrates Ducktape as the JavaScript engine.

Besides, a scripting component can be implemented as a standalone component. So anyone is free to do it as a third-party component.

A lot of the unnecessary components could probably be moved into their dedicated repository and provided as a standalone option. For example, the Database component, both Lua and Angelscript. And to provide a minimal c++ experience with an option to try the others.

6 Likes

Great , constructive topic ! Finally we can see what the community wants. For me personally what Urho lacks right now is custom depth maps and/or subtractive shadows.

And a series of advanced tutorials how to use/create shaders , how to create custom renderpaths , how the material/technique system works , how to access certain textures in shaders (depth map , shadow maps , etc) so basically a better guide how to use the 3d effect capabilities of the engine. For now if you’re not an experienced core developer you have to figure out everything on your own by trial and error which is a PITA and really time consuming.

2 Likes

The wiki is also a perfect place for that.
Yes, it’s a mess, but it used to be empty and the community changed that too in the past.

1 Like

@suppagam Did you see Lumak’s FFT ocean?


Maybe you could make it prettier?