Solid Modeling

Feature Requests Studio Features
#1

CSG is awesome :stuck_out_tongue:

TL;DR: Allow us to upload meshes because CSG isn’t working and it can’t be fixed easily (math is difficult) compared to meshes which are already implemented

I have refrained from making any sort of derogatory comments in this post, and generally want to be a more constructive person in general. I hope that you will do the same and not hate on me for posting something like this.

We can slash that part count to an extremely low amount, have more control over repeating textures with CSG, and we can make guns > 10 parts now. However, the math behind CSG is horribly difficult – I can’t even dream of being able to do that math. Unfortunately, our computers feel the same way it seems like. CSG can’t find a solution the majority of the time, I crash almost 100% of the time when taking apart large unions, and it’s generally difficult to build in Studio anyway. If CSG was all that we had hoped it would be, everything would be fine and dandy, but the reality is that CSG really isn’t all that usable. We build things big and can’t scale them down, we can’t union most of the stuff we want to together, and even more.

Honestly, this is at the point where I really don’t care about what happened in the past, how much ROBLOX is against adding in something they removed years ago, etc. CSG is simply not what we had hoped it would be, and a much better alternative is 3D modeling. Sure, there are some downsides to 3D modeling / meshes, but there are also downsides to CSG. Keep in mind that (if I have heard correctly), ROBLOX pulled in outside, expert help for CSG, and it’s still like it is at the moment. CSG is awesome, I’m not going to deny it that, but it’s only going to get better on a case-by-case basis from now on out – that’s the only way it can get better, by the staff going through individual parts and figuring out why they can’t be unioned together. That’s a whole lot of time. I’m at the point where I have just given up on CSG – I’m not even mad about it; I’m not even sad about it. I’ve reached the final phase of grief and just accept that CSG isn’t what I had hoped it would be. I feel as if ROBLOX has a secret grudge against 3D modeling because it results in the same as CSG (you could even import 3D models and CSG them together if CSG worked 100% of the time), but 3D modeling is a heck of a lot easier to work with than CSG – both on our side and the staff’s side.

Downsides to 3D modeling:
[ul]
[li]Most people don’t know how to use 3DS Max / Blender:[/li]
[li]People could upload inappropriate content[/li]
[li]Possible moderation for meshes[/li]
[li]Storage space for storing uploaded 3D models[/li]
[/ul]

Upsides to 3D modeling
[ul]
[li]3D modeling is a lot easier/quicker to work with than CSG once you get the hang of it – I promise. That’s why professional companies (ROBLOX included) use 3D modeling programs over something like ROBLOX’s CSG.[/li]
[li]3D models / meshes already have UV textures (textures on the mesh) built into them – there wouldn’t be any need for ROBLOX to put in the time, money, and effort to allow that for unions if they even decide to do that.[/li]
[li]You won’t be getting any errors when you use a 3D modeling program[/li]
[li]ROBLOX does not have to worry about maintaining, implementing, etc something as large as CSG since the 3D modeler already exists[/li]
[li]Meshes don’t take up as much file space as unions ;)[/li]
[li]3D modeling is a skill that can bank users big bucks outside of ROBLOX – CSG isn’t. I don’t know about you, but I get a warm, tingly feeling inside whenever I think about people being able to join ROBLOX when they’re 10 and be able to use the skills they learned here on ROBLOX all throughout life.[/li]
[li]The use of 3D models is one of those things that once ROBLOX has, will allow us to compete with professional games, greatly increasing ROBLOX’s playerbase (LoL without the assholes!! Thanks for the free moderation >: D)[/li]
[li]In addition to increasing the playerbase, the ability to use 3D models may attract professional developers who would make quality games, increasing the profit, renown, and amount of fun on ROBLOX[/li]
[li]We can scale meshes on individual axes[/li]
[li]We can change the bounding box / mesh sizes without affecting the other[/li]
[/ul]

Allow me to address some of the downsides as well:

People, in general, don’t know how to use 3D modeling programs - I’m perfectly willing to make ELI5 (Explain Like I’m 5) tutorials for using both 3DS Max and Blender, specifically for ROBLOX (usage of the two programs for ROBLOX differs from professional usage greatly, so we would need ROBLOX-specific tutorials anyway)
People could upload inappropriate content - People can do the same with CSG, and parts. I’m not going to include “well not enough people can 3D model to upload inappropriate stuff because no one knows how to use it!!” because my ultimate goal is to make 3D modeling as common as building, invalidating that statement.
Possible Moderation - I’m not going to lie – this is one thing I don’t have a solution for. Should ROBLOX choose to moderate 3D models, there isn’t really anything I could come up to help them out on that. Corporate decisions are always made based on output > input and benefits > risks, so if the benefits outweigh this, then this isn’t an automatic “No” to 3D modeling uploads.
Storage Space - The devs had already stated that they planned on storing unions on their servers and then just having clients download those to decrease file sizes, and as we all know, unions are larger than meshes in size, so this would actually save space.

Ultimately, CSG is a lot harder to upkeep for ROBLOX than a 3D modeling program professionally maintained by another company, and once a person learns how to use a 3D modeler, it’s a heck of a lot easier and faster to use than CSG + Studio. CSG would have been a better solution for ROBLOX if they had managed to get it working the majority of the time, which is why I assume they chose it in the first place, but this isn’t a perfect world, and that’s not what happened. 3D models, unlike CSG, do not require a huge implementation that has to go through a half-month approval period from Apple – ROBLOX already has mesh functionality built into it. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying CSG should be removed. It has its purposes – it can be used for merging a bunch of bricks together to have the texture/color repeat instead of split up, and for general building / keeping part counts low, but it is not the best solution for any advanced type of modeling. CSG and the already-implemented 3D models can go hand in hand just as they do now. Adam and Khan have spent countless hours of headache working on CSG. Let’s give them a well-deserved break :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes
#2

I kind of agree, today I’ve come to the conclusion that 9/10 unions will fail. I was even pushing trying to union a sphere to the top of a cylinder, that took a good bit of fiddling to union. I do believe it will improve, or so I hope, so I’m willing to give it a little more time.

I am a little unsure about importing models, I like that everything is crafted within Roblox. it’s interesting to see how everyone utilizes the primitive shapes we have available. If however CSG doesn’t work out for some reason, then I see this as the next best option.

2 Likes
#3

Based on the times I’ve used CSG (quite a bit actually), it makes me wonder if it can ever get better. Math is math, and I don’t think they can improve the algorithm for CSG except by making it work for separate selections on a case-by-case basis. If that’s the only way they can fix it, it’ll take some time – a lot of time. Meshes are a much more hassle-free and low maintenance alternative. I’m surprised ROBLOX chose CSG over meshes – it’s less cost-effective at least from what I understand.

2 Likes
#4

If user meshes were re-added I think they should definitely bring it back similar to how Audio was, an upload fee would make moderation less taxing and definitely cut down on the storage uptake, I figure a lot of people might disagree with me on that though.

In any case I can definitely share the grief you experience with CSG, for the amount of time that you’re constantly experimenting with trying to find a solution to unions it never really feels like you’re actually ‘modelling’ anyway so to speak.

2 Likes
#5

I am confused as to why you speak of CSG as if you have seen its code. I am sure there are many adjustments they can do to make it better, other than just “the math”.

Also, CSG is fantastic for quick additions such as wanting a seamless hole in a wall or a seamless staircase. Trying to use Solid Modeling as a mesh-maker is foolish.

2 Likes
#6

[quote] I am confused as to why you speak of CSG as if you have seen its code. I am sure there are many adjustments they can do to make it better, other than just “the math”.

Also, CSG is fantastic for quick additions such as wanting a seamless hole in a wall or a seamless staircase. Trying to use Solid Modeling as a mesh-maker is foolish. [/quote]

Agreed

but, @bold: foolish right now

2 Likes
#7

[quote] I am confused as to why you speak of CSG as if you have seen its code. I am sure there are many adjustments they can do to make it better, other than just “the math”.

Also, CSG is fantastic for quick additions such as wanting a seamless hole in a wall or a seamless staircase. Trying to use Solid Modeling as a mesh-maker is foolish. [/quote]

As I stated earlier, I’m not asking for CSG to be removed – CSG is awesome. As for other ways that they can make it better, I’m almost sure those are slim to none. The reason CSG can’t find solutions is because the math is too difficult – I know you’re new here, but go search up some CSG posts by the devs please.

As for CSG being used as a moderler. Yes, I know it’s ridiculous, but some of us want to make professional looking games thank you! :smiley: Right now, the CSG modeler is our only option.

2 Likes
#8

Also meshes have some versatility/ usability which make them kind of more simple to handle. Things like placing them in tools, scaling them, offsets would be nice, and VertexColor kind of make them the more “simple” approach to a lot of things.

2 Likes
#9

When people talk about 3rd party authored content, my persisting question is why not Unreal or Unity? Why is there not a ROBLOX style website portal that uses Unreal or Unity? Does Steam count? What is it about authoring tools that creates the shared experience needed for the community to develop in the first place?

1 Like
#10

Thanks for posting Adam – I recall this being a sticky situation.

I’m not sure if I got this wrong or not, but I think this is what you’re saying “Why not use Unreal/Steam/Unity instead of ROBLOX if you want to use things like 3D models?”

ROBLOX provides all of the multiplayer infrastructure and the playerbase, and it’s just beautiful – I’m at a lack of words to describe it. With Steam, sure, you have a playerbase, but none of those games are related to Steam. On ROBLOX, I can have one clan game (i.e.a fort, etc) that relates to the actual site – it isn’t a standalone game, and I know I’m going to make tons of people happy when it’s done. With Steam, it’s more for profit, and less about fun for the community, and I’m not out for profit. With Unreal/Unity, sure, you can do neat things, but what happens when I want to make my game multiplayer? What happens when I want to get players for my game? ROBLOX does all of this for us and it’s absolutely amazing. Not only that, but development on ROBLOX is a lot easier than on other platforms from what I understand.

As I stated in the OP, I get that nice, tingly feeling inside whenever I see someone being able to take away what they learned on ROBLOX and apply it to their real lives. It kind of makes me sad when I see all of these great builds on ROBLOX, but come to realize that what they make here can’t be applied anywhere else. With scripting, we get exposed to programming, and what I’ve gained from ROBLOX in this matter has saved me numerous headaches dealing with the same issues in the real world, but for builders, they really can’t take anything away. If they were able to use 3D models in building, not only would showcases look better, then general aesthetics of games look better, but they’d also be able to take that skill away and use it in real life. I used to be ashamed when people saw me on ROBLOX, but now, I proudly say that without finding ROBLOX, I would never have become a programmer, and would still be lost as to what I wanted to do in real life without it. It’d be nice if builders could do the same. I realize that this isn’t likely the same goal the ROBLOX staff has in mind (in general – I know everyone has a different opinion), but 3D modeling is all-around good. It would save you the many headaches that come with CSG since it’s already perfectly implemented and another company does the maintenance on the modeling software for you :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like
#11

I much prefer using ROBLOX than Unity, even though I am quite confident with it now. My only issues with ROBLOX really are the lack of server control as well as the ability to host your game on your own website, so you can chuck in a play button on your site and it launches ROBLOX.

1 Like
#12

My question is more along the lines why has no one created a platform around Unity or Unreal that is like ROBLOX? You’re asking us to add features that would allow 3rd party asset creation. There’s already game engines out there that allow you to do this, and more, but they don’t have the same community of creators that ROBLOX has. Why is that? What is it about ROBLOX as a platform that has created its community?

#13

You advertise as your own game. ROBLOX is a game. Unity is not a game. So you attract gamers, Unity attracts developers. Not to mention, you launched as a Lego sandbox pretty much, the intention never was to become a game engine, so your original player base was built around that USP, which Unity and such do not have.

#14

The ease of developing, how easy it is to learn how to develop, how hard it is to quit ROBLOX, etc.

Making a game isn’t hard, so once you play a couple games on ROBLOX, and then realize “hey, I can make this too!”, you’re hooked. It’s really hard for people to quit ROBLOX because of this. (Every time I see someone quit they almost always come back – me included) On top of that, ROBLOX now has groups that give people a sense of purpose, and are always an arm’s reach away from a way to get better and improve themselves – no matter how experienced/inexperienced they are. It takes serious stuff to be able to make a game in Unity/etc – you can’t go from 10 years-old and nothing to famous person there.

#15

I used to work at Industrial Light and Magic, a film efx company, and the difference between the artists there and your average 3D artist is night and day. The production cost of developing quality art is also a giant resource sink that is currently escalating in the game industry. ROBLOX development costs are currently very small and the development itself is achievable by non-game industry veterans. That in itself, is amazing.

I’m not saying that we allow 3rd party asset creation and suddenly ROBLOX will be flooded with quality art, but it will most likely be flooded with copies of quality art. So we’ll have a lot of content that was made by artists who have no interest in ROBLOX, getting their work copied, and providing no community interaction or investment. I don’t see how this helps the community grow.

1 Like
#16

That is true :frowning:

Is CSG only going to get better on a case-by-case basis fairly slowly, or is there a major plan you guys have for it to succeed more than not? I would love 3D model uploading, but I do see that it would cause huge issues now due to people stealing other 3D models :frowning:

#17

The plan for Solid Modeling is that it will just work. No corner cases, no unsolvable configurations of parts. We’re going to do our best to get there however we can and as fast as we can.

#18

So slowly, right?

#19

Don’t be a jerk, Echo. If it was easy, it would already be done.