Login  Register

Re: Java3d pushing the limits...

Posted by philjord on Feb 25, 2016; 1:59pm
URL: https://forum.jogamp.org/Java3d-pushing-the-limits-tp4035814p4036344.html

Alexei,
I've been playing with Java game programming for twenty years, I was writing my "engine" before Jogamp, Lwjgl, Ardour3D, JMonkeyEngine, libGDX and especially minecraft existed, so my approach of extending the Java3D scenegraph is looked on as a folly by everyone that's working on the "real" Java engines.

Based on that I'd say nothing I'm doing is easier or simpler :)

The only aspect of what I'm doing that could be considered good practice is the following:

Game engines only exist in relation to an asset pipeline,
The definition of the 3d models (in a file format) allows a game engine to render things and allows it to to do advanced rendering techniques.
The definition of the 3d models (in a file format) allows artist to record what they create, though they create in a 3d studio tool.
The definition of the 3d models (in a file format) dictates file size, load speed, and many other performance factors (byte colors, half floats, compressed geometry etc).

So before you even think about writing a game or 3d application by using any engine or writing a single line of code, you MUST know your asset pipeline, which is at root knowing (or defining) your 3d model file format, and to a lesser extent your compressed texture format.

A lot of Java engines do not come with file formats other than the open ones that Ogre3D and Blender support, for example the .obj format; because of this many, many games are re-written over and over as the file format and everything derived from it comes up short.

So I decided to use a commercial strength format that was leading the way, the nif format, right from the beginning.

And that is the only thing about my work that is "good design", for everything else the other engines are better written and better supported.