Hey.. found someting interesting on youtube.. just wanted to share this incase it could be possible on os4.. a open source game engine.. check out the youtube video
Requirements
OpenGL 2.1 / OpenGL ES 2.0 compatible hardware
About Godot Engine
A game engine is a complex tool, and it is therefore difficult to present Godot in a few words. Here’s a quick synopsis, which you are free to reuse if you need a quick writeup about Godot Engine.
Godot Engine is a feature-packed, cross-platform game engine to create 2D and 3D games from a unified interface. It provides a comprehensive set of common tools, so users can focus on making games without having to reinvent the wheel. Games can be exported in one click to a number of platforms, including the major desktop platforms (Linux, macOS, Windows) as well as mobile (Android, iOS) and web-based (HTML5) platforms.
Godot is completely free and open source under the permissive MIT license. No strings attached, no royalties, nothing. Users’ games are theirs, down to the last line of engine code. Godot’s development is fully independent and community-driven, empowering users to help shape their engine to match their expectations. It is supported by the Software Freedom Conservancy not-for-profit.
Godot requires SCONS to build properly which doesn't exist on OS4. SCONS is similar to CMAKE but it relies on python, not to mention that the build process also requires a recent version of GCC. Someone would also need to write the OS4 GUI specifics for the user interface which is no easy task in and of itself. Godot also requires OpenGL 2.1 which is missing on OS4. OS4 has MiniGL which is just a sub-set of OpenGL, not a complete point release. It might be possible to cross-compile this on a Linux box but then you're left with the GUI and OpenGL issues mentioned earlier.
It's an interesting alternative to the Unreal 4 Engine or the Unity Engine but you're not likely to ever see any of these engines ported to such an ancient and lacking OS as OS4. Too much water under the bridge.
yea.. i kind of knew we where missing something.. anyway, reason i posted it is that i though we have got OpenGL ES 2.0 support from the radeon driver team.. don't know how this works but. isn't Open GL & OpenGL ES 2.0 two different api's the last one meant for portable devices like phones.. and it require just one of those, so you only need OpenGL ES 2.0..
anyway.. i guess it need more than we have for it.. just thought it was a very short list of things you needed.
edit: so if i got this right
opengl is for engine editor and executables/players/games only need OpenGL ES 2.0?
Sam460ex 2GB 120Gb SSD&1Tb HD7750 Envy24HT A-Eon Drv 2.10+Warp3D New Uboot Apollo v4 Standalone
The "ES" stands for Embedded Systems. It's a pared down version of OpenGL for phones, tablets, etc. and other devices that may not have the ability to support a full OpenGL implementation or they are "weak" in comparison to systems with dicrete GPU's.
Here are some of the differences between OpenGL 3.3 and OpenGL ES 2.0. ES lacks the following:
- lack of geometry shader support - no min/max blending (there may be an extension for this) - no Quad List primitive - more restricted texture formats (especially regarding floating point) - glGetTexImage is not available - there is no Transform Feedback, same for several other advanced features
If the game you are developing in Godot targets the least capable hardware, then yes, OpenGL ES would provide the in-game graphics. Theoretically it would be possible to have Godot to use GLES (or MiniGL) for the developer interface but it would limit many of the things you'd want to do as a developer and make testing painful if the target system used OpenGL instead of GLES.
Typical game developers want the beefiest hardware they can afford in terms of CPU and GPU horsepower so that they can target the full range of systems for their games as well as speed up development cycles. Unfortunately, Amigas don't fall into the beefy category anymore and haven't since about 1991. Even the most current X5000 has rough feature parity with Wintel systems from about the year 2003-2005. I don't know of any developers, game devs or otherwise, who would seek out such outdated hardware for current game development unless they are masochists.
My A1200 has a 68030 running at 50 Mhz and I stuck to period tools (SAS C 6.58) but used a CF drive to speed things up. That was a painful experience and one that I won't repeat.
Now I use AmiDev C++, a cross-compiler, on my Windows system to code and debug and I drop the resulting executables into a shared folder under WinUAE for testing.
Over at the AmigaWorld discussion about Godot, Hans pointed out that it might be possible to port Godot to OS4 and use MiniGL or GLES for the interface. But even if it were ported I can't imagine too many developers who would want to use an X5000 or an X1000 for development. It would be terribly slow and you would still need to have a PC standing by to test any games you develop that use OpenGL 2.1 or higher. It would be much easier from the developer's standpoint to conduct development on a fast PC and target the X5000 or X1000. This would require someone to figure out how to get Godot to produce OS4 compatible binaries which probably isn't all that difficult if it's using a good cross-compiler, but I'm not certain about that.
slight correction there, it might be doable with GLES2. Definitely NOT MiniGL, which doesn't support shaders.
It appears that Godot has a GLES2 backend, which increases the possibility that it'll work. I also know that it does NOT use geometry shaders, so lack of support for that doesn't matter with this game engine.
Incidentally, floating-point textures are supported.
Also, just because we're using GLES2 does NOT mean that we get poor performance. It's still a desktop grade GPU in there, and the "ES" API does NOT slow it down. What probably will slow it down is our current lack of GART support,** but we'll have to wait and see what impact that has. Regardless, it's too early to say that it'll perform poorly.
Hans
** NOTE: GART support is something that I'd like to implement, although I cannot say when that will happen.
i see.. thanks for your long and good answer.. and yea. agree with you about pc's performance.. it's just that personally i haven't been creative on pc since fastracker2 era.. but, i was/am 10x more active on my creative side when using amiga/amigaos.. don't ask me why.. it's a bug.
anyway.. would probably been to hard for me..just wanted to share my findings:)
thanks for your time
Sam460ex 2GB 120Gb SSD&1Tb HD7750 Envy24HT A-Eon Drv 2.10+Warp3D New Uboot Apollo v4 Standalone
have seen many times there shouldn't be a lot of difference.. but ES is cleaned up code, easier to use.. but same speed and modern specs.. it's just what i have snapped up between my net-surfing:) but i have no idea lol
anyway, just readied that that game engine would be using vulkan & ES 2.0 instead of Open GL ES 3.0
If someone encounters missing features or bugs while porting Godot, then we can look at adding/fixing them. Daytona has just mentioned improvements to GLES2, and I'm fixing a Warp3D Nova bug right now (well, would be if I weren't posting this ). We've already added/fixed a number of things in response to developers using OpenGL/GLES2/Warp3D-Nova. This is especially true of kas1e's GL4ES based ports, which have thrown quite a wide variety of existing OpenGL code at our new 3D graphics system.
How about creating only the export Engine for Gobot. I mean, if someone develops in other OSes and there is an export engine for OS4/MorphOS, this will bring the game to OS4/MorphOS as well. Like they do with Android, iOS and Web. How possible or hard do you thing this is?
@all Oh, I forgot to mention that I know that one talented guy is already playing around with Godot for a possible AOS4 port for some time already I will hint him to that topic here, in case he wants to talk.
Yes, obviously the slow downs on Godot if ported to OS4 wouldn't be due to the discrete desktop GPUs used in the X1000 or X5000. But there'd be a huge performance drop in comparison to current systems due to the X1000 and X5000 using outdated, EOL'd CPUs that were designed for embedded systems needing high single-threaded performance. As I said earlier, an X5000 performs on par with desktop Wintel systems from around 2003-2005 in terms of features and CPU horsepower. I don't know of any devs who would want to step that far back in time/performance to develop games for current platforms let alone drop what they're doing on current systems and adopt a dead (or on life support) platform to develop games for the same dead platform, except maybe kas1e.
There simply isn't enough demand for new games on OS4 to motivate anyone to port the Godot engine and Scons over to OS4. Again, it would be much easier to modify a current version of Godot running on a Wintel box or Mac to produce OS4 binaries than undertake the effort to port Scons AND Godot to OS4. And Scons is the one dependency that is definite. In my life as a developer I've found the FAQs for such projects to be totally inadequate and fail to mention the plethora of other dependencies required for a complete build.
After looking at the Linux build dependencies which would most closely mirror what would be needed for an OS4 build, there are quite a few more dependencies that would need to be addressed. These are:
Audio Handling Freetype (for the editor) OpenSSL (for HTTPS and TLS) Optional - libudev (build with udev=yes) Optional - yasm (for WebM SIMD optimizations)
The audio code would require a lot of work whereas the other dependencies already exist for OS4 or can be left out of an OS4 build as they are optional. But all this doesn't even matter because as I mentioned earlier, there's nothing to motivate anyone to even begin porting such a large amount of code to OS4. The Godot source archive is 96MB after unzipping the archive from Github. That's isn't a small project.
Updating the export engine of the Linux or Windows version of Godot to produce OS4 binaries would probably be easier than going for a full OS4 port. I'm not trying to be negative. I'm just being objective and pointing out how much work is needed to port current software to legacy systems. It is no easy task and takes a LOT of time. Such ports are also almost always inferior too. Either the hardware can't handle the new features, so said features are left out of the port or perform very poorly if left in, or the features/dependencies haven't even been developed for the legacy system which yields the same result.....a working albeit a crippled port.
Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/23 18:27:52 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/23 20:42:49
I'm not sure why you keep talking about developers using AmigaOS 4 to develop for other platforms. Nobody expects commercial or even indie developers to do that. The prime motivation for wanting to port such engines is to bring more games to AmigaOS 4, and also as a toy for existing AmigaOS 4 developers.
As for performance and/or missing hardware features, the Godot engine has a GLES2 backend and targets mobile devices too.
Quote:
There simply isn't enough demand for new games on OS4 to motivate anyone to port the Godot engine and Scons over to OS4. Again, it would be much easier to modify a current version of Godot running on a Wintel box or Mac to produce OS4 binaries than undertake the effort to port Scons AND Godot to OS4...
In order for the Windows/Mac version to be able to produce OS4 binaries... the Godot engine needs to be ported to AmigaOS 4.
I guessed you missed the point about Godot being a cross-platform game engine/game development system? That's the whole point of having a cross-platform game development system and engine....to create games for various systems regardless of the hardware and OS that the dev prefers. That's why I keep talking about devs using it for cross-platform development. Why do you keep talking about it?
And of course the engine needs to be ported to OS4 if anyone is going to use it to play Godot developed OS4 games just as the engine was ported to Windows, iOS, Android, and Linux. Why are you so good at re-stating the obvious? The developer interface also needs to be ported to OS4 with all the dependencies that I mentioned earlier unless you expect PC devs to create Godot based games for OS4 on their PCs and move them over, so what's your problem? And I don't see any PC developers who will be doing this as most of them don't even know what an Amiga is, let alone want to develop games for an Amiga for free in their spare time on their Wintel boxes.
As for your statement, "As for performance and/or missing hardware features, the Godot engine has a GLES2 backend and targets mobile devices too." I never said that any missing functionality or performance hits would be tied to OS4's precious GLES, so stop acting so butt-hurt about my comments. None of my comments have attacked your work. I specifically mentioned anemic embedded CPUs and the lack of muti-core/threading capabilities. Engine performance will be less than optimal even if it ever gets ported to OS4 due to this "anemia". Game build times will also suffer greatly. OS4 sound handling code needs to be written and added to the engine and the developer interface as well if you want sound with those games. I didn't even mention the SSL/TLS functionality that would be missing in any network enabled games since SSL/TLS support is so outdated on OS4.
And don't forget about LIBUDEV. The game engine needs this to enumerate things like USB joysticks and mice for in-game play. This also hasn't been ported to OS4 and it's unlikely that it ever will be ported, so custom code would need to be written to accommodate USB devices under OS4.
So let the porting of this "toy" begin! Actually Godot is no toy. It's more comparable to the Unreal 4 engine or Unity. Here's a video showcasing it with comparisons to Unreal and Unity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPCv6F-IgXU
It also supports C# so there's another large chunk of missing functionality if the dev interface and engine ever get ported to OS4 since there's no Mono support for OS4.
So in this developers opinion, it's more likely that we'll see a port of the Unreal Engine to OS4 before we see a Godot port, and the chance of that happening is 0%. Unless you're talking about a very early Godot version that is feature and performance crippled.
Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 5:29:55 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 5:31:10 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 5:33:39 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 5:39:40 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 6:12:53 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 6:27:37 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 6:38:39
Yes, I get that Godot has an editor/dev-system, which is pretty normal for engines like that. It doesn't mean that developers have to actually use it on AmigaOS 4 to make porting the engine worth it. I see porting just the engine itself as worth doing.
I also have no issue with developers using a PC for development, if that works better for them. Oh, and I do NOT expect PC devs to write anything for AmigaOS at all. Incidentally, we already have multiple programs on AmigaOS that cannot be built natively (e.g., Odyssey). Not ideal, but the programs work, so I don't mind at all.
I also understand that you think our hardware is slow, anemic and that Godot is simply too heavyweight to be usable on our system. I'm not convinced. For sure, Godot's renderer is NOT yet at Unreal 4's level.
Regarding dependencies, we have up-to-date OpenSSL, so that one is NOT an issue. I doubt that libudev is used on the Windows version, so that's not necessarily a requirement, and I don't see having to write a native audio backend and other native code as a show-stopper.
It's clear you think it's so bad that it's not worth even trying. I disagree. Any OS shortcomings that are enountered are opportinities to improve the OS (and/or our GLES2 lib, Warp3D Nova, and drivers).
It looks like we'd better just agree to disagree, because you're clearly getting annoyed.
No, I DON'T think it's bad. I just think it's a very difficult task and would take a "team" of coders and a large chunk of time to port the engine and the interface to OS4. It isn't a one-man job at all and I think it would be a pity to port the engine and not port the dev interface. In my opinion, the dev interface is the easier of the two pieces to port.
It's just tiring to see non-coders always asking questions like, "Why don't we have Crysis for the Amiga?" or as in this case, "Hey, Godot is cool, let's just spend a week or two porting it over to OS4 since it's open source and we have the source code!". I know I'm exaggerating, but you get the gist.
I'm just trying to educate them as to why these types of projects aren't taken lightly and why they take so much time and resources and why the outcomes aren't always optimal when compared to the system that the software was natively developed for. I'm not annoyed with you but with non-coders who don't understand that these ports don't happen overnight.
I really respect your work. You've fought an uphill battle for years and exceeded the expectations of many people so please don't ever take my comments as criticism of your work. You deserve a medal in light of the closed source road blocks you've had to navigate in updating the 3D subsystem of OS4.
We can argue the speed of the X1000 and X5000 CPUs till the cows come home. For most applications, I will agree that the CPUs in those systems are "good enough". But they certainly aren't my first choice for any heavy lifting or modern gaming. I hope that OS4 survives and gains a more capable CPU soon as all the PPC variants seem to have died off or have become so scarce and expensive that they simply aren't practical.
Porting the engine would be a great first step, but ultimately I think the goal in porting the engine would be to get people interested in coding for OS4 again by showing off the games. When folks find out that the games were developed on a PC and transferred to OS4, their first response will be, heck, why not just get a PC and be done with it.
Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 7:23:14 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 7:26:26 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 7:35:50 Edited by ferrels on 2019/3/24 7:56:55
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
Among many others we got
, will be in the upcoming version 2.3.
