Apricot recruiting started
Ton Roosendaal has announced that the Blender Foundation is now recruiting for the Apricot Project. The deadline for submissions is midnight, November 25, 2007, Europe time.
“We have three full time positions for artists.
Our preference is to find multi-talented people with a wide range of skills in several areas, but especially
- Gameplay and level design
- Character animation and rigging
- Texture and 2D art
- Environment design and lighting (baking)
- Graphics design (print, web, game interfaces)
One of the artists will become the lead, responsible for game design and game play.”
Also note, here is a forum for discussing open projects like Orange, Peach, Apricot:
Nice! Can’t wait to see who gets picked!
Apricot finally starts! I hope they’ll try to apply some small updates to the core Blender Game Engine too. But they probable won’t because they work with CrystalSpace.
– AniCator
@AniCator: this thread will answer your question:
http://www.blender.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12400
That’s pretty cool.
My Qustion is, if this meant to be for the pipeline to create
commercialy succesfull games with crystalspace?
I am not a programmer, but for example:
If i would like to use an engine like Torque, will there be a better
support for plug-ins or any other way to use Blender as a production-source?
Blender rulz!
Sen
I wish I could sign up for this so badly! Unfortunately, I don’t have the time, nor many of the required credentials.
Finally :D
I’m very curious to see the result :)
Blender GE needs many improvements. I say Modeling, Animation, and GE should come in separate Blender Packages so not everything would have to be packed in one UI.
As far as the game goes I could do great level designing but I could not goto Amsterdam as much as I would love to.
This is very cool and I look forward to watching developments.
Anthoni_C: Don’t forget that Zaghaghi is working on the Blender game engine.
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/GameEngineDev/BlendX
He also added something with 2d filters. http://blender.gameengine.googlepages.com/
I actually must disagree, I would prefer the way, blender is now. I like the Modeler, animator, GE, and everything else in one, nice simple window. Now, if having all of these together made blender over 100-200 MB, then yes, I would agree, they should be separate just to save space if you’re not going to be using Widget A, but you need Widget B. But with blender’s size, I am more worried about the space my animations take up, then blender’s size.
Hi,
“Blender GE needs many improvements. I say Modeling, Animation, and GE should come in separate Blender Packages so not everything would have to be packed in one UI. ”
I have already read this in a former topic, but you mustn’t forget that the game Engine is really an animation tool, allowing to bake rigid body simulation into Ipos ! It is a great tool for accidents simulation and any animation including gravity and bouncing objects ! So, having the GE available inside Blender is a great advantage !
yes thats what I said the last time seperation was proposed.
3d apps are NOT ONLY used to render animations believe it or not.. half of the tools used these days haven been developed for creating games and their content. These tool then end up being used to render animations. eg normals maps. While this project is a good idea and I support it.. I feel that if they had been supporting the GE instead of just ignoring it for 2-3 years now, they wouldn’t need to partner with crystalspace which is a huge game engine upwards of 100megs.
to be honest I don’t use blender because of the modelling at all, I use it because of the game engine. If I’m going to be making game content I won’t wast my time modelling it in blender because there are better faster programs out there which is the reality right now. But what Blender has going for for me , that other 3d apps don’t have.. is the game engine. Which has a large community following. This community has largely been ignored by the other DEV’s eg. 20 devs for blender 3 for the GE?
I’ve looked at ogre.. too complicated..who has time to code that if you’re an artist.. crystal space looks nice but again very large.. always ended up coming back to the GE despite all it’s bugs and I think the Dev’s should wake up to the fact that having a functional game engine, be it crystal space or whatever is a HUGELY useful tool and will only increase the popularity of blender.. but ONLY if it is quick to use and you can launch it INSIDE of the 3d app.
but what do I know..? I’m only some lowly GE user interested in games and not rendering static frames of animation. Maybe it’s time the other half of the community get’s some support?
But who knows maybe they will interegrate crsytalspace nicely.. but forgive us GE users for being skeptical.. it happens when you get ignored for so long.
Cool thing.
I’m really excited to see how this will work out.
If I wasn’t too busy ATM I’d probably try to apply for a position there myself. :(
Ah well … I just hope this will give Blender the kick for those few missing game-features I was always hoping for over all this long time :)
Regarding the Game engine I feel that it indeed was the right decision to go for CS. Blender’s own integrated engine is for me a nice toy but not at all mature enough for a commercial quality game. That probably wouldn’t be much better if there were more updates over the years just because Blender is a 3D app not an engine.
It’s good the way it is now – lots of very competent people contributing to the modeler/renderer/animation tools. That’s what blender’s for – and that’s what it should stay good at.
Expanding the game engine may distract too much from the vital parts.
It would be a different story if the Engine indeed was split up from blender. Then it would be a standalone project with people specializing in it’s specific needs and workflow (that might greatly differ from blender).
That would be cool, IMO.
I’ve always longed for a game engine that could – at least in it’s basic functions – be used without the need to be a Java or C++/C# Programmer. Like Unity3D or Quest3D.
… my two cents … :)