Blender Interactive Mode

Will the design for the new logic system be nodal or a python api or bricks?

Please try and keep the api user friendly, I have seen many people enter coding through blender game.

None if this has been decided yet, and the idea of an interactive mode itself is still under discussion.

A combination of nodes and the existing Python API seems logical to me.


I was thinking, we could have each sensor object send all it’s data as a tuple down the pipe, and this data is the positive pulse,

negative pulse mode would send a empty tuple,

this way each node down the line would have access to said data,

(Sensor, Attributes = { attribute:value})


Radar sensor-------------------Set property target and swap state (chase mode)

able to be done just using dropdowns and no python.

(sensor send Attribute)

If you have ideas for a new logic system, it’s best to make a proposal and link to it once. Brainstorming here about quite specific details of the logic system is not so useful, let’s keep discussion on this forum focused on practical development problems and solutions.

1 Like

I understand how all this works, I am not some newb.

I have made logic nodes myself, sliders, checkboxes, UI, bvhtree, kdtree etc.

I code in the engine, this is still coding.

I don’t think there is a BGE user out there whom uses more of the engine.

I use parts in the engine not even designed for it.** (every bit of mathutils)

Try not to look down on us?

where should we have a practical discussion?

with my proposal unread in a trash can?

speak with facts, and merits, don’t dismiss me.

so we are here not to discuss things?

are users disposable or something?

I don’t get it.

There’s a right place for everything, this particular site’s purpose is to help new developers with questions they may have about the codebase, or help them with issues they run into while developing. Brecht shutting this conversation down has nothing to do looking down on you or any group of users, you are merely trying to use this place for something other than it’s intended purpose.

Things like hey i’m trying to build X could use some pointers! that’s welcome here

hey developers i know you hang out here, what’s the plan with …
i have a great idea! i just need someone to build it

less welcome

1 Like

I can code it in python**

(for instance my python/game object based UI is far faster than BGUI)
I do things in bge most people can’t do in unreal**

point me at a problem and I will do battle**

once more, it’s not personal, it’s not your lack of skills, it’s the conversation (“hey wouldn’t it be a great idea to have X”) that you are trying to have that is not appropriate for this site.

well if it’s a method to design the engine so that more of it can be ran in python than yes, yet it will,

(we can take up some slack)

for instance - with the mesh editing api

making this work with KX_MeshProxy -
or even write .blends we could make dynamic retopo
sculpting / weathering / anything in the GE and save it*

making bge far more valuable

Let me clarify that I think it’s fine for users to occasionally post a link to a design proposal, or to ask questions about how the development process works, or to ask where to find the latest information about some development topic. We don’t want to be super strict.

But this forum is not for brainstorming type posts about many different ideas, so if you want to do that, please use other channels.

1 Like

where are those channels?


A. No coders typically hang out on BA except youle who feels pretty out in the cold I think, and LordLoki (or at least they are not commenting)

B. Right click select is not used by the BGE community

C. social media / facebook users and I touch base every day.

D. I use EVERY last bit of UPBGE and bge.

I know it’s flaws and even work around for those flaws,

maybe we could touch base sometime somewhere and discuss?

[I have used unity, ue4, godot, and blender and I know bge’s strengths vs weaknesses and have designed systems to dispel some of these issues]

maybe we could have a official date / time before the code sprint?

1 Like

As a user you can write a proposal for where you want the BGE to go and submit it to the developers in this post. If you can find a developer to take it on, great. But at the moment there is no developer actively working on the BGE within the Blender project, so there is no point in asking about all kinds of specific ideas.

If there are developers that want to have a meeting about the BGE / interactive mode for Blender 2.8, I suggest they mail bf-committers to arrange it.


I do not see this as a productive conversation.
On one hand BGE users feel they are being abandoned and are quite passionate about the state of things…
On the other hand we are clearly not being represented very well ( sorry Jacob…and Youle) for that matter…(they have good intentions)
Please remember that while most BGE users do feel neglected…we also realize no one has actually stepped up to take control of this situation in a tactful manner. Or have been unwilling to work within predefined guidelines.

I worry that future threads with similar topics will simply be overlooked, since most of them seem to have the same tone and BGE users are being ‘somewhat’ misrepresented. “the boy who cried wolf” scenario maybe…or just too much noise.

Since the code quest has not really taken off yet…it is probably too early to get concerned about everything and as stated this conversation feels non productive, if not, counter productive. I will leave you(any dev/module owner) with this and avoid any further noise to these discussions.

In a vacuume any voice sounds loud.

we have no champion, no voice.

If I sound angry, it’s probably because I have been watching this all play out for almost a decade.

I already forked UPBGE,
this discussion (about the design and function of the new engine)
should include the power users. (sdfgeoff, hadmi, Martinish, myself, etc)

and Justin, If you don’t think I speak for you, why?
(you in love with the BF like stockholm?)

Maybe you think you will gain favor by dissing us?
Youle has every right to be pissed. so does panzergame.

At the moment discussing details isn’t so useful mainly because we don’t have near term plans to work on interactive mode.

Most likely this starts after the code-quest since we need to get 2.8 stabilized before we start building on top of it.

Once a developer has plans to work on this, they can write a more detailed design and get feedback on that.

There was more news that Interactive Mode is going forward since this discussion was started. I was wondering if the work being done would be included in the daily builds and if there was a location online where I could follows it’s development. Thanks!

Development has not started yet, once there is a plan it will be announced.

I hope the interactive mode will not be just built for making games or game-like environments but also provides a good API so that roboticists can seamlessly can use it to do their research for manipulation and planning. I’m confident that Blender 2.8+ has the potential to address some of the major limitations of current popular 3D frameworks used by roboticists.

I have posted my opinions here in this post in length.