Actual 3-dimensional idea
-
Are you really trying to say that I don't know about the difficulties in making a 3-D game? I know it's not all cut and dry, so stop assuming jack all about me, child. No, I haven't done any programming at all, but that doesn't mean I don't understand the complications of creating an entirely new game engine and then remaking a 2-D game inot 3-D. So get off your high horse.
For the most part, running a 3-D game require a nearly maxed computer. Take a gaming computer, those 40 inch asus monitors. I could very well make a computer capable of running a 3-D powder toy. Y'know, the same computer that runs minecraft without fail. Minecraft is Two hundred sixty-two quadrillion, one hundred and forty-four trillion blocks. Yeah... 100 x 100 x 100 isn't hard to make. Not hard to make. No, it's rather time consuming. As long as you know lua codes, or coding in general, it's not a hard build. It's just time wasting and the results aren't worth it if you're not being paid for your effort.
Yes, minecraft and TPT do not run off the same engine, but duplicate engines aren't that hard to make.
-
More things to consider:
- Nobody is going to develop a game without some kind of initial investment. The promise that "people will pay $20 each for this when i'm done" isn't enough.
- The UI (placing particles) would be complicated. I'm sure there are existing models for doing this kind of stuff, but they would not be as intuitive as the game is now
- TPT isn't written in Lua now, and a 3D game would definitely never be written in Lua if you cared about performance
- I don't think it would be as slow as people think (the excuse "it would be too slow" annoys me), but you definitely couldn't have a 612x384x100 sized screen or anything
- In minecraft, small areas are loaded as you get near them. Not all 262 quadrillion blocks are loaded at once ... a 3D TPT would need all locations loaded at the same time to function
- Like others have said, the engine and everything would have to be done from scratch. The code couldn't easily be converted to a 3D format. The reactions could be ported over, but the code itself couldn't be
I think it is very infeasible that a 3D TPT would come from us, with no initial startup money, working in our free time outside of our jobs, on a free open source project. I'm sure someone could create a 3D particle physics sandbox game, and that game might be very fun to play, but that game won't be TPT.Edited 2 times by jacob1. Last: 7th Aug 2016 -
Minecraft loads around 64 x 64 x 192 blocks. You couls set up a kick start, but there's only around 1,000 active TPT members. That's the base problem. Not enough work to profit ratio.
-
@Breaker4life (View Post)
Minecraft actually loads a lot more blocks than that. But minecraft is very complicated and does a lot of things that don't apply to TPT, so it's not really a good comparison.
Anyway, the rest of your post summarizes some of my reasons why this won't ever happen from us. It's just not worth it. -
Yes,I was,in a sense, trying to say that. To me,with your talk of "why,money is motivation" and "3-D modelling programs are royally expensive" and "payed TPT will make it easier to get better coding", you seemed to think that lack of funding was the reason there was no 3D TPT. You saying "The Powder Toy is a more advanced game" and replying to cxi and jacob1's "there are technical difficulties" arguments with talk about finance strengthened that view. By questioning your technical knowledge,I wished to bring to light whether you truly understood the coding aspect of game development.
(And so far,your conversation with jacob1 is not really showing that you do.)
So there was no reason to call me a child or tell me to stop being arrogant.
-
Youre insane. The fact that you even suggested using "lua scripting" to make the game 3d just shows your severe lack of knowledge of the subject.
If you really want to bring up minecraft, are every single one of the blocks in minecraft constantly trying to fall or do they even have physics calculated on them at all? no.
Look at sand. Sand doesnt fall unless there was a block update in the area. What causes a block update? a player breaking a block nearby, and oh that happens maybe once every 2 or 3 seconds for 10-15 blocks (which then are converted to entities which physics get calculated on), not 60 times a second for 143,824,896 blocks and 170 different blocks with combinations of thousands of reactions and calculations for heat and newtonian gravity and air pressure.
GRAPHICS CARDS, which are some of the effin fastest floating point processors in THE WORLD STRUGGLE to calculate semi realistic physics on 100,000 particles at 60fps, and you want to do that for one hundred and forty three MILLION, so a increase of 1500 TIMES THE ORIGINAL load, and you want to do that on a household or laptop processor. Right.
Also youre a jerk for even suggesting that nobody here has the programming skill to do such a thing. What the F do you know to tell someone they have no idea what theyre doing.
Seriously, its very obvious you have no idea what youre talking about so you should just quit while youre ahead
Edited 2 times by jombo23. Last: 9th Aug 2016 -
@Breaker4life (View Post)
Minecraft is a bad example here - only around 10-20 blocks are actually "updated" per second. And those aren't updated that often either - see block update detectors for redstone. Not many moving particles here either, which lets Minecraft actually skip updating most particles.
I'm not saying this wouldn't be cool - I'd play Minecraft-scale 3D TPT literally every day. Or I could go outside.
The first issue is what was mentioned before - how to interact with a 3D world of TPT. Having 2d "slices" to draw upon would be clumsy and slow, while having 3D interactions that make sense require devices like the HTC Vive.
The second issue is that air and heat simulation would be immensely complicated - even semi-accurate single-phase fluid simulation requires very complex computation.
The third issue is that nobody's that passionate in rewriting TPT from the ground up, so the implementation for this kind of simulation has to come from both private investment and passion. There's a *lot* of work to do in order to get something that runs close to 60fps.
Overall - this would be really *really* cool. We'd all love it. However, there's a lot of stuff to plan ahead, and a *lot* of high-performance GPU-intensive code is needed before the game can simulate anything. Right now, none of the TPT devs really wants to spend time on that out of free time.
Also, take it a notch down. It isn't very cool to resort to flaming when you get feedback on your idea. -
My freind Poodiepie made a 3d version that was 16X16, but it was very limited in its elements. And not made with lua
It would be a whole seperate game, and provide contest. Not good in the biusiness perspective. And it was soo laggy. He gave up.
Edited once by Uberpt. Last: 14th Aug 2016 -
Uh, what? Where the hell did it say I'm 11? I'm 20 years old. I joined in 2011, so maybe you say that? No, it never said I'm 11 years old.
