I work for Valve (http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/). We would like to make our digital distribution platform Steam (www.steampowered.com<http://www.steampowered.com>) one of the places where you can download Blender. The long-term goal would be to make it easier for people to build their own mods for PC games with Blender and share these mods with other gamers.
So I was wondering if there are any Blender users on this list who are interested in PC games and could see themselves working on an integration between Blender and PC games that offer official modding support such as DOTA 2.
Valve is a company that is built on modding. The original Half-Life was built on a modified version of the Quake engine. All our major games since then started out as mods which we found cool, hired the people who built them and released them as major game titles. This is true for Counter-Strike, the original Team Fortress, Day of Defeat and DOTA 2 (Portal was not technically a mod but a student project - but you see the pattern).
Similarly, one of the most successful features of our Steam platform is the Steam Workshop (http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/), which is an interface for users to share, discover and install mods for their games. Essentially, you can publish your mod there and other gamers can bring your mod into their games with a single mouse click.
This is something that we think would be a cool feature for Blender to tap into. Like modeling a sword in Blender, pushing a button and having it available to all users of Skyrim. But we bet there are more creative ideas out there than this one.
What we are currently looking at is offering a completely vanilla version of Blender as a free download on Steam that is completely the same as that offered on other websites. We'd hope that this will get enough of our users exposed to and interested in Blender so they will be inclined to work on Blender plugins that would talk to Steam's backend services such as Workshop.
If you think you might be interested in being part of that, we'd be happy to hear from you!
http://readable.tastefulwords.com/ is nice too, but doesn't properly wrap <pre> lines.
Blender does not and will not have official FBX support because of the GPL. That's unfortunate and actively harms users. Providing support for user generated content is a lot of work. Trying to support Blender is extremely painful and adds to that pile of work.
I'd argue that one of the single biggest issues with Blender right now is it's GPL license.
On the other hand, the format does not appear to actually be that complicated, so integrating the SDK probably wouldn't save that much programming time compared to just reimplementing it.
Let's say it is Autodesk's fault and they don't care. Now what? Blender is the tool that's a pain in the ass to use so the onus is on them to make their tool not suck. Meanwhile the rest of the world will continue to use FBX because it's an awesome format to work with.
You are the one who was all "GPL hurtz dem users!!"
You're probably right with your assumption that FBX is awesome, but this wasn't part of the debate.
Free Software's there for a reason. Let's not forget that. And if we stick to that (i.e. not trade freedom to whatever feels comfortable at the moment), there's a good reason to not use LGPL instead of GPL: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
Blender’s next release (2.69) will support binary FBX file reading as well.
Really? To me it looks like what Autodesk have managed to do is convince loads of people make their software depend on Autodesk's proprietary binary blob, which is a genius move on their part.
(bet you've never seen your wonderful "just drag and drop" work on anything non-x86)
If blender want to redistribute Autodesk software, they would need a license. The FBX SDK looks to be under a restrictive, individual, non-transferable and non-shareable license which also expires after 30 days. That would make any redistributing of said Autodesk software a crime (copyright infringement).
The only way blender could legally give users access to the proprietary FBX SDK, is to provide a download mechanism where users themselves download and agrees to the license, and then have their software being disabled after 30 days.
So I must ask, what does this have to do with GPL? It would still be equally impossible under BSD, MIT, or add-your-own-license-here license.
And possibly adjust how the linking works to avoid issues.
This is just asking the blender community what they think about some distribution and upload scripts.
doesn't sound like a modification to you?
And even if it was, I don't see why BSD changes wouldn't get shared back here.
"If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the requirements for the licenses of a plug-in? (#GPLAndPlugins)
It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. If the program uses fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them.
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means the plug-ins must be released under the GPL or a GPL-compatible free software license, and that the terms of the GPL must be followed when those plug-ins are distributed.
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication between them is limited to invoking the ‘main’ function of the plug-in with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline case."
"Can I sell plug-ins for Blender?
Yes you can, but only if you provide the plug-in and the sources to your clients under the GNU GPL license. The client then benefits from all rights the GPL offers; free to use it, or even distribute it when they wish.
Only if the plug-in doesn't work within Blender as "acting as a single program" (like using fork or pipe; by only transferring data and not using each others program code) you have the full freedom to license the plug-in as you wish."
Anyway, we're talking about plugins that upload files to steam with a simple interface, so they could easily be independent code, sharing no internal data structures.
A friend once suggested that outside of licensing pressure, maintainership is a huge driving force behind open-source contributions: you find something that does almost what you need, then you make the changes you require, and if you get these accepted upstream, they're maintained for you for free, pretty much forever. In many situations, that's far more important than any IP you're trying to conceal.
The SDL developer works at Valve, and he just released 2.0. I don't see why they would do such a move on Blender...
40 Days without Booze - Alcohol Abstinence or Node.js Framework?
Steam powered Blender - 3d Modeling Software or Steampunk kitchen tool?
A new perspective on Coffee and Tea: “Building” Coffee Match - Again, Beverages or Web Frameworks?
Someone should write a site akin to
or http://steakhouseorgaybar.com/ regarding HN post titles.
(but can someone explain to me the jet powered kettle???)
(Pulse jets are sort of primitive jet engines, though they operate on a different principles. Most famous for being used by the Germans with their V-1 "Flying Bomb".)
I should perhaps have added "3D" somewhere to make it more clear, but at least there are words to make it sound software-related.
Too bad the submission sank.
I suppose the strategy is to get the devs currently working on blender to look closer at making blender more compatable with the formats DOTA 2 is using, and putting a little more focus on the UX for that.
Then again, steam is basically a content distribution system, and windows doesn't have one of those (or at least doesn't have one that anyone wants to use. I'M SORRY http://chocolatey.org/ I LOVE YOU, DON'T BE MAD)
Blender is pretty much the only choice of 3D package for Valve's portfolio, being multi-platform, stable and costing less than $3000.
I'd really love to see this, but only if it comes with a character narrated walk through of the blender ui... it would do a lot for the future blender userbase.
What happened to the tools developed by Valve for HL2 and the integration with Lightwave and their facial animation tool ?
Those were awesome and already proved their usefulness.
How does it fit with Hammer and the fact that... well... modding is never going to be what it was in the 90's again ? *
* I am looking at all those modders that got folie des grandeurs and turned into studio with 7 years dev. plan.
I'm not sure about papermail, i.e. whether it supports "format=flowed" or not. Perhaps the mail lacked it anyway.
Use gmane for your own sake and sanity:
We'd hope that this will get enough of our users
exposed to and interested in Blender so they will
be inclined to work on Blender plugins that would
talk to Steam's backend services
I have absolutely no idea what you're complaining about or how this could be a bad thing.