Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Introducing the uScript Visual Scripting Tool for Unity!

Discussion in 'Assets and Asset Store' started by uScript, Apr 6, 2011.

  1. SquiggleDome_2

    SquiggleDome_2

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Posts:
    84
    Wow thats was a very good tutorial.

    @kshaja
    I believe uScript is focused on logic, trigger oriented with a higher level of abstraction, while in Universe you can do more atomic code execution. It is essentially a visual representation of your scripts managed into blocks.

    Both are powerful yet different in workflow and I like them both.

    I'd like to see if uScript can do functions like Update.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2011
  2. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    I assume you are talking about at run time? This feature is helpful and it's something we are working on, but it probably will not make our free open beta. Due to another unique feature we are announcing at a later date, the run time program flow becomes a more complex addition than would normally be expected in Unity-- though one we thought was worth the additional effort.
     
  3. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Yes, no problem. Things like Update, FixedUpdate, OnGUI, etc are all there.
     
  4. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    This is absolutely possible using nested uScripts (aka Subsequences). You can create a uScript which has the core logic you'd like to share and externally link to it as many times as you'd like. We also support global (named) variables and a few other things to keep things organized/simple.
     
  5. p6r

    p6r

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2010
    Posts:
    1,158
    more and more impressive...

    It's great to see a video which is showingn little by little how to do and what happens... Thank you !!!!!!

    6R
     
  6. sawfish

    sawfish

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Posts:
    314
    A vimeo posted video would be awesome... I can't watch YouTube videos. :(
     
  7. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Apologies SAWFISHUSA. Vimeo on the way!

    UPDATE: Sorry SAWFISHUSA, Vimeo's terms of service does not allow for commercial-related content to be uploaded ("You may access the Vimeo Site and use the Services for non-commercial purposes only.").

    Can you access screencast.com? I just put the videos up there for those who can not access YouTube.

    uScript Screencast Link
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  8. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    This is bad. Really. Such tool is very important IMHO.
     
  9. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Well we never said we were not doing it- it is just not going to be initially available in the open beta. :) I would also argue that point as many AAA games have been made in Unreal's Kismet without this feature. It is a helpful feature however and we won't be ignoring it.

    You also assume that your examples in Universe and Virtools are the only way to do this kind of thing...
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2011
  10. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    It's just the kind of thing we can't live on without it after we have it.
     
  11. crafTDev

    crafTDev

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Posts:
    1,820
    OMG!! $100 or less and I'm there!!! :)
     
  12. pauloaguiar

    pauloaguiar

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Posts:
    700
    Realy cool , that i was looking for long time , Uscript is realy like UDK kismetic clone well done!
    I use udk 1 year, i do lots of thinks in UDK whit out scripting, like he shows in you tube, simple open doors and close, sounds,lights on off etc.., Do this in unity 3d scripting is not easy;)

    Especial for A.I logic kismetic is good and not hard to follow.

    Good work Men;)

    I go save some many, to buy it as soon is realease.
     
  13. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    I have to agree. I've often wanted to do what should've been simple things in Unity and have spent an hour on trying to open a single door.

    I don't know much about scripting, but I hope it'll be able to expand beyond some of the simple things, just incase I do get indepth and want to do something more complex. I hear that it will do more advanced things though.
     
  14. kshaja

    kshaja

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    148
    All right i got my answer :)
    I am also using UDK from the beginning so I am very into the Kismet way.
    So your tool is great to have !!!
    I just wanted to know if there will be some kind of visual run time program flow representation.
    Because it is so easy to program and debug with visual representation of the flow.
    It is like you are seeing algorithm developing in front of your eyes.
    Thanks for the answer :)
     
  15. gordonramp

    gordonramp

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Posts:
    53
    Does UScript have a built in Textfield facility or does it rely on Unity's Gui system?
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  16. bigkahuna

    bigkahuna

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Posts:
    5,434
    Although I don't have any interest in Visual Scripting, I got to say that video may have changed my mind. ;) I'm comfortable enough with Unityscript, but if the price is right I might give this a go.
     
  17. pauloaguiar

    pauloaguiar

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Posts:
    700
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  18. jackfish

    jackfish

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Posts:
    29
    Dude! This is like waiting for Christmas to come! I am LITERALLY going crazy waiting to see thing thing.

    uScript, can you PLEASE release this for beta!!!!?????? Please!!!

    At least give us a hint on when it's going to be released... Are we talking days, weeks, months...???
     
  19. IcyPeak

    IcyPeak

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Posts:
    377
    Looking forward to trying this out.
     
  20. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    I'm almost litterally refreshing this page every 30 minutes to see if anything new is posted. xD
     
  21. pauloaguiar

    pauloaguiar

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Posts:
    700
    No stress:)
     
  22. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Thanks jackfish. We are currently having an internal discussion about what is left before the open beta (you might say we're making a task list and checking it twice...) ;-)

    We'll release more details on the beta soon.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  23. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    Cool hams! :) In the mean time, you know you guys can gown head and release taht next video. =D

    No rush though, I understand a good piece of software (or anything) takes time.
     
  24. MaDDoX

    MaDDoX

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Posts:
    764
    Antares plus good interface? Nice initiative :) I've been using Unity for years, coding some C#, and since its beta I've been using Playmaker extensively. I've also checked Universe, although not to the same extent. So I'll make a quick rundown of not only the advantages of the tool but also how I see the whole situation involving OOP/coding, visual coding and FSM editors - from a designer point of view with some solid coding background. Hopefully this is an interesting and mid-ground perspective that might interest some.

    - OOP (Object Oriented Programming). Encapsulation and Properties are great, inheritance and polymorphism suck - for designers trying to read code at least. Having to read cold lines of text is already sufficient to pull a designer's mind away from the code, now having to keep multiples text files open and hopping back-and-forth among them just to understand exactly what a piece of code is supposed to do is something that, even as someone with a degree in the area and used to OOP underlying concepts, I personally despise. If you're used to notepad or notepad++, forget it, things become extremely hard to understand and usage is very susceptible to a plethora of bugs as you struggle with function names and definitions which are "somewhere else". To properly code with OOP you're pretty much *forced* to use Visual Studio and preferably Resharper just to understand what's going on, and as much as coders tout it I still find those solutions awkward and ineffective to fully grasp the power of object orientation. I find I can fragment (factor) code chunks much more while visualizing it much better using Playmaker than with pure Visual Studio + Resharper (and/or Visual Assist X).

    - Visual Coding (Kismet, Antares, uScript). First and foremost, let's get something straight: if you don't know how to create a flowchart to describe game logic you're not a real designer, you're like a writer with good ideas that don't necessarily need to be feasible. So, supposing you are a designer, what's left to do? From a designer/developer PoV, I want to be able to "transcribe" my game logic flowchart to the computer, setting up commands and parameters with drop down menus to get the right fields, instead of typing a name and doubtfully hoping it's the right property or variable. VS/Resharper already gives you that possibility, so all that's left is to know what's the correct syntax to get loops and routines working as we want. Visual Assist does have code snippets that help a lot with this. So, supposing you have the right tools and don't try using the harder OOP concepts, you can describe your logic inside Unity quite easily. That's why some people make fun of Visual Coding claiming "it's already too easy to code in Unity". What they don't realize is how easier it is to create and visualize high-level and complex logics with a visual tool, due to their frequently non-linear and parallel nature.

    That said, whenever I see some "real production" example of VC only one thing comes to my mind: Graph Maze. I've yet to be proved wrong (and that's not even possible since it's completely subjective) that coding something in Visual Studio + RS/VAX isn't easier than assembling the same logic in Antares Universe. Existing Visual Coding tools don't "scale up" well, when that should be specifically their number one advantage, helping the dev have a higher level control of what's happening and when. Too many games nowadays work okay during Prototype stage and fail to become real games simply because they've been built "from the leaves to the trunk". Developers focus too hard on getting the core mechanic(s) of the gameplay prototyped and fail very hard to integrate it smoothly into a higher level control of the gameflow. When that happens iterative development becomes prohibitive since you haven't planned for scale and modification. It's like trying to define a basketball game starting from the weight and size of the ball, instead of from the size of the field and number of players. You might eventually make it, but it's completely upside-down. In that critical aspect the current visual coding tools approach doesn't help at all, since it's mostly focused on small-scale behavior which is more adequate for traditional, linear coding.

    - Visual Scripting (Visual FSM). Finally, there's the concept inherited from process engineering, of Visual composition of Finite State Machines. That's what playmaker uses, and it's definitely a game changer for game developers by the way it makes them think on a higher level and practically "teaches" them to compartmentalize their logic - low level logic blocks in linear text code fashion (actions) and high level logic in non-linear visual blocks (states). They way Playmaker encapsulates and present those actions in each state is ingenious, the more you work with it the more you feel like that's how an OOP editor should work. Nevertheless, it's a paradigm shift, takes some time to grasp, yet the more developers get used to that new way the more they'll realize how superior it is to the "old way". That's not to say that specific tool it's devoid of flaws though, it still lacks some nested/subFSM entity to better encapsulate tiny dependent states and clean up the view of larger FSMs, it lacks some more intra-state algorithm-ish actions (which, although demoted by the author for breaking the concept of FSMs, can be quite handy when used wisely) and better visualization tools. For instance, there's no way to open two FSMs side by side right now, so for any larger design you'll definitely want to use some pencil-and-paper or visio-like tool before implementing anything in PlayMaker. There could be more helpers like event/transition shortcuts (although it has 'global events' which can be used for that) and the ability to selectively turn some transition lines to circuit and others to bezier - currently there's only a global setting for that.

    I'm not afilliated with Hutong games in any fashion btw, but imo if you can only afford one visual logic plugin for Unity, Playmaker is the right option for any serious Unity developer. If you want/need sidekick products to help it as action-generators, great, but really consider checking Playmaker's built-in action code samples, how clean and readable they are. Trying your hand at a bit of copy+paste coding shouldn't hurt, not to mention the public actions library is only going to increase as time goes on.

    Now, not saying I'd expect that to actually happen since I know how hard that is, but if uScript has a function to convert its logic graph to standard C# code ready to be used as an action.. I WILL fricken buy this thing :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  25. Frank Oz

    Frank Oz

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,560
    Awesome post MaDDoX!
     
  26. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    Agreed. I took a look at PM, but I guess I'm still a bit confused as to how to do some basic things. And anyhow, I dont' think any of my projects are large scale. .

    Well we'll see what happens.
     
  27. MaDDoX

    MaDDoX

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Posts:
    764
    Thanks guys. Yeah, I completely agree that although the online docs are nice, with useful comments and pointers to the Unity documentation when relevant, the actual "usage flow" of PlayMaker isn't properly shown anywhere just yet. I know the dev is working on more in-depth tutorials (and actually I'm thinking about making one myself), but right now your best bet is analyzing the built-in examples and following the forum discussions attentively.
     
  28. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    I guess so... I looked at it and was wondering (This is great,but how do I set up some simple triggers that would be useful ingame) and other stuff. uScript answered that question right off the bat.

    And I still think I have to buy PM to try the examples. I should talk more about that in a PM thread. This one's about Uscript... we're still waitin' by the way guys.
     
  29. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    I just replied in another thread regarding a uScript question. I thought I would share it here for those interested (click the image for bigger version):


     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2011
  30. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Can we hold you to that? More info soon... ;-)
     
  31. holyjewsus

    holyjewsus

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2011
    Posts:
    624
    wa wah wah?
     
  32. crafTDev

    crafTDev

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Posts:
    1,820
    Stop it!! Just stop teasing!! D:
     
  33. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

  34. jackfish

    jackfish

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Posts:
    29
    I can't speak for uScript, but If I knew all the nuances of Unity scripting I probably wouldn't be that interested in a visual scripting tool, except to perhaps speed up production. I would assume if you already knew everything about Unity scripting why would you bother looking at either tool (Universe or uScript). I've spent time looking at Universe and uScript (what limited info they have) and I can tell you as a dev-signer the choice seems easy. Universe looks like the cockpit of the space shuttle, and uScript seems to flow in logical blocks that tend to be easier to comprehend for a designer. In the end, I really don't care if uScript specifically uses "Update", etc., because personally I care about having a scripting tool that is easy to use and comprehend (isn't that the premise behind such a tool anyway?) rather than a block diagram that requires that I know the nuances of Unity scripting.

    I guess it boils down to this... If you want to learn C# or UnityScript I say "go for it"... but for those of us who always find ourselves stuck in syntax (not logic) an easy to use scripting tool with C# reflection capability is much more valuable than a block diagram of my C# code. Besides, if I wanted the cockpit of the space shuttle I'd just open Maya!
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  35. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    Well, if I know Assembly it doesn't mean I'll code using Assembly till the end of my life.
    Productivity boost is very important, if it were not I wouldn't use Unity at all.
    And don't come tell me that scripting by hand is quicker. I'm damn sure it is not.

    But the point of view, "This is not for coders, it is for artists only". That is a total fail.
    How would a coder create tools inside this visual editor if it don't provide an useful API to him?
    You become a slave of the tool creator, waiting for someday they create some stuff you maybe can use.
    That is not a deal for me.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2011
  36. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    I totally agree with you. While it's fun to learn the scripting and C# (I'm learning that for other things) when it comes to creating games, I'd just like to get the game WORKING. That's alway my issue... oh the level and aniations look great and the sound is great... but it doesn't WORK. I'm still going to toy around with Universe, but I'm still really hoping for UScript to be released.

    And I understand that coders want access to the API to create new blocks and have more control. That's totally understandable. That'll also make it good for the designer because then new things can come out... Unity itself is a great example of this... that reason is exactly WHY we have tools like this in the first place.
     
  37. jackfish

    jackfish

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Posts:
    29
    I'm not saying that scripting by hand is quicker... In fact, I'm saying the opposite. That's the whole premise behind tools such as Universe and uScript. I'm just saying for the tool to be effective (in my hands) it doesn't have to be an exact block diagram of the code and syntax (Update, etc.). What is more important to me is that I can logically and easily use the tool, and that I'm not required to know the nuances of scripting. So, for me, I really don't care if the nomenclature of uScript exactly matches Unity's scripting languages... as long as it's easy to use. Furthermore, having played around with Universe I found it to be very close to Unity's nomeclature - this may be fine for you if you enjoy hanging out with low level code blocks linked together... But for me it just didn't work. (To each his own...).

    On a second note, I never said this tool was for "artists only"... In fact my exact phrase was the word "dev-signer", which should give you a hint that I do both... design, and coding. If you're going to throw a dart at me make sure you have your facts first.

    On a final note, I think the argument of Universe vs. uScript is not a valid one, because I suspect they'll both have an audience that loves them. Personally, I think Universe probably attracts an audience that is comfortable with low level coding, while uScript is probably going to appeal more to those less focused on the low level syntax. But they'll both have their fans, and having competition is always a good thing.
     
  38. Neodrop

    Neodrop

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    Posts:
    1,359
    You have passed one main point - Universe has low-level access to everything. Yes. But our main goal is how easy and fast you can create any new Smart Blocks and also, soon, it will be possible to create (and reuse or share) a custom blocks without no one line of code. ;)
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  39. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    "Low level syntax" ?
    Yeah, ok...
    This is a simple block I made to my co-worker artists and friends:


    It works right out of the box, the entire scene just need that block to work, they drag drop the block in the graph and thats it, we have the game's splash-screen. Is that a "low level" block?
    My point is, can I reproduce the same kind of high level functionality for them when using uScript??

    They now have such extremely easy to use block only because Universe has power enough to allow to create that block for them... I just want to know if I change to uScript, would I be able to do the same?
    If the answer is "yes", than it is great. I add it to my tool set.

    And yes, thats why I encourage this kind of debate. Competition is good for us, users of these tools.
     
  40. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    Very nice. Did you use Universe's other nodes to create this? may I see the graph you used to make this?

    Again, this is very good and useful, but I think you've SLIGHTLY missed Jackfish's point. Yes, for you (more on the programming side) it is great because you can create these simple blocks... but on the design end if we don't have these blocks to begin with... then we're stuck at the same place we were before. So unless we have a person like yourself or unless a lot of nice smart blcoks come out... we're still kind of stuck.

    But I have a good feeling that lots of smartblocks will be popping up though.

    Note, I'm not bashing this in anyway or I'm not saying it's REALLY hard to make this type of block. That's why I asked to see the graph you used to make it. Maybe it's not so complex where a designer CAN make these simple blocks.
     
  41. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232

    A lot of passionate discussion going on. I've tried to gather up the above comments and reply here.

    The Short Answer:
    The beta is on it's way soon and will speak for itself. I have heard nothing asked that uScript doesn't do. We are currently going through an internal closed beta that will be wrapped up shortly and the open beta is next up. You will then be able to see if you like uScript's implementation. We think most people will.


    Detailed Answers:
    Q: In first instance, programmers need to work with those tools to produce blocks that artists can just "drag&drop and the job is done". At the moment the easiest tool I found to do that is Universe. After your team have some good blocks done by a programmer, artists can have a lot of fun with extremely easy to use tools, in fact I see I can make for them Smart Blocks that does a lot of stuff all by itself, no need for spaghetti.

    A: uScript follows this philosophy in allowing programmers to support their teams and extend uScript (we even have our upcoming community website, uscript.net to allow the uScript community to support each other!), but we feel that we have a more powerful backend for programmers to support artists and game designers for custom node block creation in uScript than what others provide. We also have the ability to create custom node blocks through the visual scripting interface as well-- the choice is up to the user and the specific solution that is needed. For ultimate flexibility I would personally do a combination of the two in product development. Let designers and artists visually create new node blocks as they need to, then a programmer can go in later and optimize them if required (on the code level if desired).

    uScript's version of your Universe block example:




    Q: They now have such extremely easy to use block only because Universe has power enough to allow to create that block for them... I just want to know if I change to uScript, would I be able to do the same?
    If the answer is "yes", than it is great. I add it to my tool set.


    A: The answer is yes- both visually in uScript and via code directly. The choice is yours.


    Q: How would a coder create tools inside this visual editor if it don't provide an useful API to him? You become a slave of the tool creator, waiting for someday they create some stuff you maybe can use.

    A: uScript does not suffer from this problem. As a programmer you can extend uScript in any direction you need it to go to support your teams and projects.


    Q: And I understand that coders want access to the API to create new blocks and have more control. That's totally understandable. That'll also make it good for the designer because then new things can come out... Unity itself is a great example of this... that reason is exactly WHY we have tools like this in the first place.

    A: As mentioned in the answers above, uScript has this topic handled very well. As Dreamcube017, jackfish and many others have been saying, we agree with the philosophy of an extensible tool for artists and designers to put the ability to craft their visions more directly in their hands. Empowering them is our primary goal. Our other major goal is to also empower the technical people to both be able to extend the tool as they need and to keep them focused on important technical work and not busy work. We see it as a win for everyone.

    We feel our approach is perfect for the individual developer as well who may not have technical/engineering support and still want to create games (or non-games!). uScript is great for that as it is easy to understand what is going on and is very readable. With uScript, someone can learn exactly how to recreated a visual script by a screenshot alone-- because it is so easily readable and understandable at a glance.


    Q: You have passed one main point - Universe has low-level access to everything. Yes. But our main goal is how easy and fast you can create any new Smart Blocks and also, soon, it will be possible to create (and reuse or share) a custom blocks without no one line of code.

    A: uScript also supports both these methods currently (low-level access and visually creating node blocks).


    In closing:
    uScript is not limited by its approach at all. We just have different philosophy and goals than other's. We do not see uScript as a programmer's primary tool for programing game logic-- though programmers are very welcome to use uScript of course and I am sure will very much enjoy extending it to their wants and needs! We just hope all you guys will share yor awesomeness with the rest of us on uscript.net when we open it!
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  42. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    @uScript
    This is amazing! Now I see, it is going to be a great tool.
    I must be honest, I really don't like the Kismet visual style, but the different shapes and colors for different type of blocks are very good features.
    Now, if you guys provide us solid documentation, it is going to be a key strategy IMO.
    And you could give us an estimated date of when this is coming out. We can't organize schedule to try out uScript if we don't know when it comes out. :rolleyes:


    @Dreamcube017
    As Neodrop pointed, Universe at the moment don't allow you to create custom blocks visually. You can create a "skeleton" using the wizard, but the functionality itself goes by hand scripting. So that is not made up by another blocks.
    It is a plus that pushes me to uScript, but Universe will provide that too, so it's not a very strong point at all.
    Now, putting some fire in the whole... The one I'm not too much satisfied is PlayMaker. Lots and lots of bugs in there, but I hope they fix most of them soon.
     
  43. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    I need a time machine so I can fast forward to the day the beta's released.

    ...where's that second video?

    Thanks a lot for the post, uScript. I (and I'm sure many others) really appreciate it.
     
  44. Dreamcube017

    Dreamcube017

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    253
    Ah ok. Thanks for the reply WolfOx. And I agree, with some nice solid documentation (and video tutorials are always welcome too) this will be so awesome. Then I'll really have NO excuse to make a decent and fun game.
     
  45. RichBosworth

    RichBosworth

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    Posts:
    325
    Will it export to C#?
     
  46. rmele09

    rmele09

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Posts:
    712
    Will it be possible to setup networked multiplayer gameplay with Uscript?
     
  47. WolfoX

    WolfoX

    Guest

    Ok, I must to admit its not like that. There ARE bugs of course, but not that much. Don't get me wrong, it's another great tool too!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2011
  48. uScript

    uScript

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Posts:
    232
    Sorry for the wait Dreamcube017! We have been trying to balance information sharing with getting the open beta out the door for you all! We'll be getting part 2 of that video out this weekend.

    For those who may have missed it, part one is on YouTube and Screencast.
     
  49. Landern

    Landern

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    Posts:
    354
    uScript: This product actually has my wife excited, can't wait for the beta, following you guys on the twitter.
     
  50. twitchfactor

    twitchfactor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Posts:
    356
    I just watched your latest uScript video (alarm doors). Seems like you've mimicked Kismet to a tee. This is actually a good thing, since it makes ramp-up time a lot shorter and widen the talent pool (a LOT of people have been using Unreal3, for a while, me included on my last AAA product).

    I heard you mention sub-sequences somewhere. This was essential to getting readable and nicely-contained script on my last game. Will it have similar input/outputs, like Kismet? Will you have "Remote Events" (which are actually dangerous if abused in Kismet).

    Also, in the video, I noticed you hooked everything up through the Toggle Component -> Out (Toggle On) Out (Toggle Off). Aren't the "Outs" on the Actions like a "Thru"? I ask, because they also have "Finish", which I assume waits until the command is complete versus "Out", which would just be a pass-through. I just hate long strands of spaghetti going all over my screen, so anything to minimize it, without breaking down the logic, the better.

    One last thing, can you do Object Variable references or do you have always reference the original Variable? Again, trying to eliminate the spaghetti, also thinking about sub-sequences and how they'd reference variables.

    Great looking stuff, so far. Looking forward to more and the open beta. I'd love to get in there and put it through its paces.