Thanks for reporting this. This “Learn More” button issue has been addressed…
4 Likes
Here are my thoughts about this because I’ve been using CSG for a while now. Both with v1 & v2.
After using both, I’ve always found myself to use blender in the long run. The feature set is way more expansive and unrestricted compared to CSG. With CSG, I literally have to spend upwards of a few hours just to get something to look right & when it fails or exceeds, I’m greeted with the ever so friendly crash message. Losing valuable time & energy which is not something I have a lot of these days.
My advice for this would be to look at the other tools that you’re essentially competing with & try to incorporate that type of workflow into studio. Beveling, vertexes, wireframes, etc. All of those features would make studio much more powerful. All would fill the empty abyss of having to move onto a completely different platform to create & then, import. That also takes a lot of time where you’re basically taking a gamble to see whether or not your mesh will import correctly.
In addition, I don’t know the specifics of how this works but, I’ve noticed over time that imported meshes from other platforms are more performant than CSG generated parts. This is also part of the reason why I strayed away from using CSG. The time spent + the pain + the frustration of using subpar tools has allowed me to use blender in an attempt to get “cleaner” meshes. From a developer standpoint, often times… this is not optimal and distracts from a fluid workflow.
As for face baking as many on here suggest, a cool feature would be to incorporate faces (already functioning surface system) and have a color attribute that could be changed. I’ve ran into issues where automatic face baking posed a problem.
Also, I think that deprecating legacy was the right move. v2 is much, much better.
2 Likes
When will we get a date for the complete removal of the ability to create CSGv1 unions, so that we can know and prepare for it?
7 Likes
uh, why?
csgv2 is very unstable and i don’t think this is necessary.
16 Likes
In my opinion, CSGV2 should be improved and bugs ironed out before CSGV1 is deprecated, with some features incorporated from the latter like @Sasuchily’s suggestion.
10 Likes
Yeah, kind of wish this waited until the bugs of CSGv2 were ironed out before we’re forced to switch to it.
I never use v2 anymore because the disappearing union problem got so bad for me, and as far as I can tell, this has been a problem ever since v2 was introduced. I’d be more fine with switching to it if I didn’t have to worry about huge bugs that ruin my unions forever happening so frequently. I’ve never had this happen in v1, so it’s pretty saddening my one solution to this is being forcibly removed.
I’ll also miss being able to color specific faces like v1 had. Sometimes I prefer v2’s approach, but the option would be nice, because it opens up lots more possibilities.
17 Likes
would be cool if roblox could have its own meshing engine like blender
5 Likes
These are so cute!!! You have a very talented team.
2 Likes
I don’t understand why ROBLOX doesn’t just allow us to use both - there’s no harm in it. Both have great different uses and if either one were removed, it’d definitely affect a lot of creators.
13 Likes
I agree here with doeke, legacy support has been y’alls thing (for most things) for a while now, and I believe CSG legacy support should be included with this new update until truly proven obsolete. There are ups and downs with both systems, I won’t go into great detail (Please don’t ask; I’m not too active, either.), but there are edge cases where solving different operations is less efficient in one algorithm than the next.
Sincerely,
The Motivation Lacking Programmer (IDoLua)
End Summary
CSGv2 has its ups and downs, I personally dislike some of its solving capibilities and opt for CSGv1 in these cases, as do many others. | However, I believe the ROBLOX team will make the proper choice, and will fully support this community as long as my sanity forbids.
Doeke's full post (2020-09-13 07:30:00 CST)
Edits
Formatting
Minor grammar checking
Minor wording changes (x2)
Added doeke's post.
11 Likes
At the moment, I rely on both CSGv1 and CSGv2.
Both versions have their uses. If you are going to deprecate CSGv1, I personally do not think CSGv2 is mature enough to be used without CSGv1. My use case solely relies off of the fidelity of CSGv1, such as pivoted negated wedges around a cylinder to create a cone, then switching to CSGv2 to sculpt out more organic shapes, such as the visible roots in a tree trunk. If CSGv1 would no longer be usable, I would not have the precise fidelity in CSGv2 which would make this possible. I am always switching between the two.
I expressed my concerns regarding this matter, and quite frankly, I personally do not think CSGv2 is mature enough to be used as a standalone option for CSG.
10 Likes
This update is way too early. CSGv2 still has many bugs that need to be fixed with it.
7 Likes
Such as …?
They can only be fixed if you report them.
2 Likes
CSGv2 has been known to corrupt unions and make them invisible on the screen for ages, and multiple times as well. It also takes much longer than CSGv1 because it redos the entire tree during operations.
The union disappearing issue is basically what’s making many of us stay away from CSGv2 because it happens often, and sometimes takes a long, long time to recover.
Unions can only be scaled proportionally, which is not very good, especially considering that there’s a lot of numerical issues with it, and hitboxes are even messed up sometimes.
10 Likes
Oh god… CSGv2… How do I put this… A train wreck. Before you put something out in to the public, Please talk to your developers. Using this myself, It makes everything look too small and just makes it difficult to develop with. A lot of the planes I’ve built in the past now look like some child made them and put them up for 200 robux. It’s seriously scary to me how Roblox can push out this sort of update without investigating with what Devs really do.
8 Likes
@Zeezy2204 and @ Naco88
This does not affect models in-game that were made using CSG v1.
All CSGv1 made models (or old unions) will appear exactly the same in game and in Roblox Studio.
If you perform in-game CSG operations using old unions, the results will also exactly the same because only the new system supports in-game CSG.
If you perform CSG operations in Studio using old unions, old unions will be automatically regenerated using the new system.
2 Likes
The new system is full of glitches and small bugs, besides, you can’t color sides of parts with colored negative parts.
6 Likes
As an aircraft developer myself CSG V2 is actually MUCH better. Just shape the union the same way you did before and choose a good smoothing angle. I’ve made a number of aircraft using this system now and they would’ve been near impossible with V1
Blender is pretty hard to use, I have no idea how to use it, and when I watch tutorials, nothing seems to ever work.
Using CSG is much, much more convenient, as you don’t have to use a program out of studio, it’s easy for everyone, and it’s not really bad. You can make cool things with it. If you’re going to make complicated stuff, Blender is probably better but else, CSG is easier and more convenient.
Replacing CSG with blender would cause a big gap between games that have a professional mesher and those who don’t, and make many games look way more primitive, and overall, just complicate things when making basic shapes, such as a curved ramp.
5 Likes
i didn’t even know you could still use the old one lol