I was talking about the list on the left-hand side. If you want to, for example, move several items into or out of a group, then you have to do that one at a time. You cannot simply select multiple items and drag them to where you want them. I know all about selecting multiple items in a view port.



Again, you misunderstand. I did not complain about the offset settings that you can set under Preferences (even though this doesn't always work all the time. Mine are set to zero and sometimes a copy/pasted item will still be offset by a margin to one side or the other, etc). I was talking about using the move tool with SHIFT to duplicate an item. When using snapping, the newly duplicated item may be off by a quant (GameStudio's internal unit of measure) and thus prevent accurate snapping unless you turn snapping down to some very low number like 1 or 2. I normally have snapping set to 8 or 16 quants for most of the work I do.



Sorry, but for 50% of your post I would have to say RTFP (Read the F***ing Post).



No, the problem is not solved. The view ports are slow no matter which DLL you choose for rendering. Again, compare what is going on in WED's view ports to other game editors (Unity's comes to mind) and/or 3D applications like modo, MAX, etc. In modo, for example, I an manipulate over 9 million polygons in real time. In WED? Forget it. I created a town level in modo and was able to zoom through the level in its view ports without issue. In WED? Slow as syrup. It didn't matter which DLL I chose for display.



It's not just the key bindings, though changing them can help. It's more how they camera controls work. They are clunky and difficult. Again, compare the controls to other 3D related applications.



Yes, it is a problem. The 3D view, for example, needs to give enough information so that the end-user has a pretty good idea of what the level is going to look like BEFORE going into the build process. If I have to waste 10 minutes (an example only) waiting while WED compiles the level only to find out that I need to readjust the level's ambient value, readjust the sun lighting and position, readjust static and dynamic lighting, etc, then what good did the 3D view port do for me? Other 3D editors and 3D modelers give me views that are pretty damned close to what you get in the final game.

Sometimes what you see in the views is NOT what you get in the final rendered game. Gaps that show up in the game geometry may not show up in the view port (this mainly affects BSP geomtry, but its there from time to time). I don't consider this "good enough".

The wireframe view of the 2D view port is substandard and it makes it difficult to work with from time to time, especially with complex levels. Other 3D applications have some methods of dealing with this. WED does not.

Frankly, the editor is fairly unreliable. It takes too much experimentation to get the job done and, as a result, a lot of time is wasted working in and/or around WED.

No, I maintain that WED stinks and that it is not "good enough," it does not work "well enough." But that's my position (and, apparently, the position of others here as well ).

i actually had nightmares from WED. i find it totally unusable and haven't touched it since years.

WED is heavily based on Worldcraft and Valve Hammer Editor, which shared/share many of WED's problems (all except for the awful gridsnapping system). My opinion: if it was/is good enough for valve, it's good enough for everyone else.

Nonetheless, nobody can deny that Gamestudio would be more attractive if it had a powerful, streamlined editor like all the other toolkits.

"Sorry, but for 50% of your post I would have to say RTFP"

Fair enough.

Glad you have a sense of humor! I was hoping my snarky post would not backfire.



Actually, WED was based on QOOLE. Here's a screen shot:



QOOLE was a third-party game editor made for Quake (and Quake related games). QOOLE stands for Quake Object Oriented Level Editor. I believe that Quake came out in 1996 or so. QOOLE was not far behind. Do we really want to be working with an editor that, for all intents and purposes, is over a decade old? Look at the UI image above! Has WED changed all that much? They updated the icons (twice, I think), but really nothing much has changed.

But WED is NOT based on Worldcraft/Hammer at all. Nope. Again, it is based on QOOLE. And even if it was, just because Worldcraft was adequate 15 years ago does NOT mean it is anywhere near adequate TODAY. I have a copy of 3D Studio MAX 2.5 laying around somewhere. Man, was that a sweet application (and expensive, too) back in the day. Not only is it a pain to get up and running on today's modern computers and OS's, but the application, once one of the best on the market, totally SUCKS by today's standards. It is clunky, lacking in features, slow as hell, visually underwhelming, and can't handle an appropriate amount of geometry, etc. Even today's free and inexpensive software run circles around that old "top of the line for the time" app. I will, in no wise, return to using that program (even with a gun to my head). Why should I have to settle for WED, based on an editor from even earlier (MAX 2.5 was around 1999, I think)?

Valve has come a long way since the days of Worldcraft/Hammer. I very much doubt that they would settle for using either tool in their studios today. I very much doubt that they would find the software "adequate" in any way, shape or form.

Oh, a Model A Ford was more than an "adequate" mode of travel in the early 1900's. And while it might be fun to take one for a spin from time to time, I am certainly not going to find it "adequate" for most of my daily needs requiring travel (not if I want to travel comfortably). So, yes, WED is quaint, a reminder of the past (and what a constant reminder it is!), but it is NOT a decent tool to use for TODAY.

Thanks, finally I can continue to work on my level with more than 1-2fps (using DX8A).

Hiya.

Yes, WED is a bit, uh, "long in the tooth". I'm not sure how it would work for A8, but what about 3D World Studio? It's up to 5.6 I believe, and no longer has the "working on it" note to the .wmb import/export capability. I just bought it on a whim, but haven't tried it out yet. I'll do a test to export and import to 3DGameStudio later.

I'd like to see Conitec get in touch with the guy who made the program "Freeworld3D" and collaborate on an import/export (or full-fledged 'create in Freeworld3D') capability. I bought that program a few years ago and LOVE how it handles terrain creation and it's potential for writing-in your own import/export using, IIRC, XML. Alas, the creator was working on his Doctorate and had to take a year or two off to focus on that. I'm not sure if he ever finished or came back to FW3D. *sigh* Too bad...such potential!

I had to buy a different terrain editor, so forked over the dough for GROME II. I am still *blown away* by it's capabilities! Now, if Conitec could get a full-on plug-in going with that! Or, better still, implement their render engine as well.... *eyes tear up and lower lip starts to quiver*...**angels sing and golden light beams down from the heavens**....

I tried some 3D World Studio Demo (with Darkbasic) and it was by far worse than WED! An atrocity.

Well.... Well....
You guys sure do whine a lot..... Hahaha...
One things's for sure...
It's good that a sense of humor isn't lacking here in the 3DGS forums...

But seriously... Could it be that you guys "Hate WED" because you don't use it enough to get used to it's quirks?
Or maybe you havn't spent enough time working with 3dsMax to get to the point where your really good working with true ortographic projection...
I'm a level builder... I love WED! It's that dam code that drives me absolultly in-frickin-sane.... (How's that for "Ranting"?)

Anyways... you are right that WED does have a few problems the worst of being... moving around...
But, there is always a "Work around"...
Have you ever thought of locating objects that are just used for "Go To Object"ing...
Just set them to invisible and passable and you can get around in very huge levels very quickly.
(A must have in my huge levels when WED moves as it does.)

So...all in all, I applaud JCL and his team...
They have come a long long way in the last 5 years... A8 - WED, Med and SED are wonderful tools...
We should never forget that such software was only a dream just some 15 or so years ago...

I do love to stir the pot now and again...
BTW JustSid...
Here's a shot from WED...

http://www.terrasame.com/Images/MarquetteWED.jpg

the problem is the last part... wed was not just a dream 15 years ago,WED is basically a 15 year old program with icon updates. 13 years ago very similar tools were used to build half life. as far as work around, the point is that you shouldnt need a bunch of work arounds just to make it work. I can design the same thing in blender in .01 the time it takes to make anything in wed, and yes I used to use WED constantly, but then i realized there were simply better tools out there.