The EDGE Landscape SDK

... would Blender do?

No! Ewwww Blender. :smilewink:

This is not true. Many of high end 3d engines uses standard 3d file formats - FBX or Collada.

 

FBX is used in Unreal Engine 3, Unity3d, and many others.

 

Example:

 

http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/FBXPipeline.html

 

FBX can be exported from 3ds max, Maya, Softimage, Modo, Blender and many other 3d packages.

I was talking about the applications to build the model, not the Format Container it is in.....

Well it seems to me the $1 backers won't get the game free as the higher backers will and I wonder what they can do with the SDK if they don't have Alpha access.

Right. $1 backers aren't getting the game's alpha or beta, so that means they will only be able to fly over their own creation at release.

Luthier, I once did some work in FSX where I used G-max (its free) for 3D objects like buildings. Would a full package like 3DS Max be necessary (it's not free)?

I'll need to check on this once the more knowledgeable people wake up. I know we're using 3D Max. No clue about any other formats.

I know this is a big deal, so I'll try to have an answer as soon as possible.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would make it impossible for developers to test their creations in the simulator. That seems pretty counterproductive. As a developer myself, I find this part hard to understand. If the concern is an oversaturation of mediocre or "half-baked" terrains, why release the tools to all backers in the first place. Why not just just to those with serious interest and capability, such as how 3rd party development of aircraft is currently operating?

 

If a user wanted to create a free terrain or even one that was only used by himself, would he really need to have ED/RRG convert it for him. What about every time he wanted to make a change?

Guys, we have an SDK for a game that's not out yet.

Even if we were to release the EDGE source code as freeware, you'd be in the exact same boat. Build, create, compile, and then what?

Until you have at least the DCS WWII alpha, you have no game in which you can fly over your terrain.

We cannot release an even earlier build than our alpha.

The SDK comes with its own landviewer, which is the app in which I did all the footage in the latest vid. That's where you'll test your landscape.

I'm sure we'll have the outstanding questions resolved well before DCS WWII hits alpha. Once we have an official stance on commercial use of EDGE by 3rd parties, everything else will follow naturally.

With non-commercial use, we're obviously interested in having a large amount of user-made content. We're also a very small team and we can't be the quality control or the publisher for everything our users make.

The only reason to release an SDK is to help your product grow. No one on this side has any desire to be the bottleneck in that process.

"The only reason to release an SDK is to help your product grow. No one on this side has any desire to be the bottleneck in that process."

+1 :)

Can't wait.

Luthier, can you shed some more light on the purpose for restricting the SDK? Will this be specifically for DCS:WWII purposes, or will 3rd parties be able to create sceneries unbound by the WWII theme? I like what you're saying, I just want to see an improvement of the simulator as a whole.

Even if we were to release the EDGE source code as freeware, you'd be in the exact same boat. Build, create, compile, and then what?

SDK won't work with DCS: World? Lets say, wouldn't it be possible to make a tiny map for DCS: World? Like Corsica from the video or even smaller.

FYI,

anyone who is a student or member of staff at an educational institution can obtain a free copy of the latest (or older versions) 3DSMax (and a whole range of other Autodesk software). All you need to do is register and give your school/uni/college details.

Cheers!

SDK won't work with DCS: World? Lets say, wouldn't it be possible to make a tiny map for DCS: World? Like Corsica from the video or even smaller.

The EDGE SDK is manufactured by ED, not RRG Studios. This works in DCS: World and parnets products, but will be restricted to work content performed within RRG studios addons and maps, there is not a freeware addon until ED sees fit.

Luthier, can you shed some more light on the purpose for restricting the SDK? Will this be specifically for DCS:WWII purposes, or will 3rd parties be able to create sceneries unbound by the WWII theme? I like what you're saying, I just want to see an improvement of the simulator as a whole.

SDK won't work with DCS: World? Lets say, wouldn't it be possible to make a tiny map for DCS: World? Like Corsica from the video or even smaller.

There's pretty much one game engine at this point.

What works in DCS WWII works in DCS World, at least on the developers' machines as of this very second.

You can theoretically create anything you want, but I really have nothing to do with DCS World as a product line.

The reason why we are talking about the SDK now, the reason why we're releasing it when we are, is DCS WWII specifically.

I personally am interested in garnering and supporting a large-scale community effort to create new WWII content. Here, my main goal is to make sure we have as many talented, dedicated people working on this as possible, and that they enjoy doing it and want to keep doing it long enough to finish the process.

If we just put hurdles in their path, prevent them from seeing their own work, or provide poor support, then this entire effort is wasted: me making that video, discussing this now, us making the effort to create the SDK for external consumption, future discussions with backers, writing tech specs, etc etc etc. There's no point in us doing any of that if we'll give you the kind of SDK that people play with for a while, shrug their shoulders, and go find something better to do with their time.

This I guess should be a more important point than any technical details. Not what we're doing, but why we're doing it.

Thanks for the transparency and quick reply, Luthier!

There's pretty much one game engine at this point.

 

What works in DCS WWII works in DCS World, at least on the developers' machines as of this very second.

 

You can theoretically create anything you want, but I really have nothing to do with DCS World as a product line.

 

The reason why we are talking about the SDK now, the reason why we're releasing it when we are, is DCS WWII specifically.

 

I personally am interested in garnering and supporting a large-scale community effort to create new WWII content. Here, my main goal is to make sure we have as many talented, dedicated people working on this as possible, and that they enjoy doing it and want to keep doing it long enough to finish the process.

 

If we just put hurdles in their path, prevent them from seeing their own work, or provide poor support, then this entire effort is wasted: me making that video, discussing this now, us making the effort to create the SDK for external consumption, future discussions with backers, writing tech specs, etc etc etc. There's no point in us doing any of that if we'll give you the kind of SDK that people play with for a while, shrug their shoulders, and go find something better to do with their time.

 

This I guess should be a more important point than any technical details. Not what we're doing, but why we're doing it.

Of course I understand your position, but I'm very curious how ED/RRG will handle this, and what will be possible with these tools, I'm going to play both DCS: World and DCS: WW2, it would be nice to play with these tools for both sims. That's why I'm asking so many questions. :thumbup:

I want first to congratulate ED and RRG for this decision that could be one big milestone in future DCS WORLD development!

I understand that this decision is still work in progress and final details are subject to change.

I hope you will go towards a model in which DCS World will be the main official "world". DCS World can have parallel "worlds" for different eras... like RRG DCS World War 2. We would have Corea, Vietnam era etc.

In this main world future parts of the world should be integrated on quality criteria and also commercial interest.

For example if a group of dedicated fans create a map of say... Germany... at astounding quality and they are willing to give it for free and the content does not break any author rights etc it can be integrated in DCS World (or a parallel era world) so it will be available for all to use inside DCS.

Also if a company decides to create a map for commercial interest it can talk all licensing details with ED and release their map at a contractual defined quality to public for use in DCS but separate from DCS Worlds.

Then, after initial release and after money are earned that map can be later integrated in DCS World for free access for all.

Maybe even limited access for people that payed it could be possible... like the planes today in DCS. Everyone see the external model but only paying customers can fly it. Same with the map... Terrain and few general feature could be free but detail towns and objects could be visible only for paying customers.

And finally but most importantly... "The Brewery". MAKE DCS BE THE BUZZ!! Let everyone create maps for free use at any quality!

This will attract as time pases more and more people. Sand Boxing and map building could in time create a mania around DCS.

All you need to do is make impossible for people to sell a map if a license with ED is not signed. This can be done by having any map be digitally signed or encoded with an unique hidden code by the SDK tool that creates it... like a hidden watermark and that map could be disabled or scrambled upon signing in to DCS World remotely by ED. That before any further legal actions.

DCS World could evolve with EDGE towards a sort of Wikipedia of Earth... tiling maps one by one and attaching them to full earth map (like Outerra has) as the technology and hardware progresses. All by power of distributed work and self-correcting of many content providers. All under the "umbrella" of ED that provide arbitration and decision to wich map or part of map should become part of the big World.

If you see in future enough... you can licensee EDGE and its increasing detailed map to any game... we could play DCS World or... GTA on same engine and map. Or ArmA of BF in the future :D .

@Luthier1: Good post. This is completely the opposite approach from a number of AAA companies these days that spew PR BS like "The reason we do not support modding is that it would be too difficult for someone who is not a professional." (I am looking at you, EA/DICE) First off, there are professionals in the community. Second, even medium to low quality mods can be fun to play around with. Third, a mod doesn't have to be a giant total conversion. It can just be little tweaks that improve the game, like a sky color mod.

Guys, we have an SDK for a game that's not out yet.

 

Even if we were to release the EDGE source code as freeware, you'd be in the exact same boat. Build, create, compile, and then what?

 

Until you have at least the DCS WWII alpha, you have no game in which you can fly over your terrain.

 

We cannot release an even earlier build than our alpha.

 

The SDK comes with its own landviewer, which is the app in which I did all the footage in the latest vid. That's where you'll test your landscape.

 

I'm sure we'll have the outstanding questions resolved well before DCS WWII hits alpha. Once we have an official stance on commercial use of EDGE by 3rd parties, everything else will follow naturally.

 

With non-commercial use, we're obviously interested in having a large amount of user-made content. We're also a very small team and we can't be the quality control or the publisher for everything our users make.

 

The only reason to release an SDK is to help your product grow. No one on this side has any desire to be the bottleneck in that process.

Thanks for the reply. I understand that using the terrain will be impossible until release of EDGE in the alpha, but I was assuming you had meant that the terrain conversion to be usable in the simulator would never be part of the SDK for average backers. Glad to hear differently! I think.

Guys, we have an SDK for a game that's not out yet.

Even if we were to release the EDGE source code as freeware, you'd be in the exact same boat. Build, create, compile, and then what?

Until you have at least the DCS WWII alpha, you have no game in which you can fly over your terrain.

 

The SDK comes with its own landviewer, which is the app in which I did all the footage in the latest vid. That's where you'll test your landscape.

Nevada EDGE was supposed to be out later this year wasnt it?

Nevada EDGE was supposed to be out later this year wasnt it?

Yes. I certainly expect it now that the cat is out of the bag about EDGE being fully functional (which we were told was the hold up).

Most outsourced 3D Contractors have License Terms that prohibit the material from being re-distributed in a method that allows the 3D Geometry to be extracted and recompiled, so Everything would have to be in a 1 Way Container Format. (ie EDM.)

.3ds, .x, and other "Popular" formats would allow 3d Geometry to re-compiled/converted.

Whether or not a EDM Exporter for other 3D Software Suites Emerges is another story.

It would have to support the same systems being used by 3ds Max (Same Materials, Same Animation Controllers, Same User-Defined Systems, etc)

EDGE being fully functional (which we were told was the hold up).

That's not the issue. EDGE by itself is functional yes and you can view the maps you are working on with the land viewer, but the integration of the EDGE code into DCS so that the maps work there, that's the next step. And as was already stated, that part is still in alpha stages.

I was on the edge about pledging, but the SDK tools being made available convinced me. With it being the first of the month a lot of people are probably getting paid too this week. So, hopefully that'll help spike pledges. So, who do I need to talk to about the EDGE NDA?

...Yes, I did make that bad pun *chuckle*

It would be very interesting for me .. I flew Yak9 and MiG15 a lot :) I know them quite well..

Is it possible for the developers to provide a map larger than they anticipated, say way North of London with correct terrain elevations and airfields of either grass or concrete with enough spawn points on each and then let the players who are mission makers populate each airfield as they need it for their missions from objects within the game? There are plenty of photos of of airfields from that period, especially in England, which show the orientation of the runways and the extent of the surrounding buildings constructed to support the men and planes.

If the developers provide the skeleton of these airfields/strips, then the community can populate them as necessary.

In this way the general map would already be approved by RGB and the developers but they wouldn't need to spend the very large amount of time putting in the essential details of every field, town and village. Even London itself could be "skeletonized" and the community could add what details they desire.

We did this in IL2 and it worked out fine as long as the developers provide us with enough of objects (building and structure types) necessary for populating areas.

Yes...everyone remembers the talent and work that went into the 352nd Channel Map. A true community spirited effort and immensely appreciated.

This is what the SDK should be for chaps ;)

Cheers, MP

Is it possible for the developers to provide a map larger than they anticipated, say way North of London with correct terrain elevations and airfields of either grass or concrete with enough spawn points on each and then let the players who are mission makers populate each airfield as they need it for their missions from objects within the game? There are plenty of photos of of airfields from that period, especially in England, which show the orientation of the runways and the extent of the surrounding buildings constructed to support the men and planes.

If the developers provide the skeleton of these airfields/strips, then the community can populate them as necessary.

In this way the general map would already be approved by RGB and the developers but they wouldn't need to spend the very large amount of time putting in the essential details of every field, town and village. Even London itself could be "skeletonized" and the community could add what details they desire.

We did this in IL2 and it worked out fine as long as the developers provide us with enough of objects (building and structure types) necessary for populating areas.

That's what I have been saying all along..put out the basic map and let the community map guys build the rest of it before game launch. That would save a ton of work for Luthier and company IMO.

I like better the trees in #20 update the devs seem to be going in the right direction. If you read this llya, I'm wondering if we will be able to add our own tree/shrub types in the objects list? We should be seeing the release of the SDK very soon and I am just curious what objects we will have to create with.