Playmaker Forum
PlayMaker Updates & Downloads => Pre-release Discussion => Topic started by: mekjal on February 20, 2019, 12:29:29 PM
-
Is there any information on PM 2.0? Potential release...roadmap...features...?
Would love to hear what's next for Playmaker :)
-
Hi.
Here is a link to the Roadmap (https://hutonggames.fogbugz.com/default.asp?W115) :)
-
The roadmap for 2.0 is kind of sparse right now. I hope to post more details soon, and hopefully, some screenshots :)
-
That‘s wonderful news!
-
I can't wait to buy/try/test/debug/work/enjoy <3
Team, just keep the block's flat graphic design, please. :P
Love You!
-
I can't wait to see the Graph View grouping / New Graph View nodes (groups, colors, comments, controls...)
... assuming that is all going to make it in.
-
BEEP
(no pressure)
:D
-
Any news on this?
-
Any news on this?
At this point we can only assume PM2 comes out around the same time as Half-Life 3 ;D
-
Hi,
Yes, don't hold your breath on this please :) 2.0 is still a wip with lots of brainstorming on how to carry out what works, how to improve the flaws, provide new features, finding out the trends and how to mix it succesfully with what makes PlayMaker so great.
Bye,
Jean
-
Sounds good Jean, as long you guys dont stop it.
-
Hi,
Don't worry, we are here to stay. We are actually amongst the veterans of the AssetStore, Litteraly the 368th asset being published since the birth of the Asset Store... Now there are more than 145624 assets...
So PlayMaker 2.0 is totally lurking round the corner.
Bye,
Jean
-
I could use the grouping of actions inside a state just to get more organize.
-
well, i would like to see some feature similar to this
(https://i.imgur.com/ikX215t.gif)
(https://i.imgur.com/2Ira5eA.gif)
(https://i.imgur.com/SMIcTca.gif)
(https://i.imgur.com/cuuIS5V.gif)
ps:all picture from FlowCanvas(another visual script asset), so this means it also possible for Playmaker to make it works right?
-
Hi, I dont think it will be like this, as flow canvas is not a FSM machine and works quite differently than playmaker. However, the first picture you showed I think it about groupings, which has been highly requested for Playmaker 2.
-
Hi.
Actually you can 'kind of' do this already with 'run fsm'
Maybe its an idea to make it possible to select a group of actions and have an option to create a template from it that automatically set up inputs/outputs/events.
-
Any news on this?
At this point we can only assume PM2 comes out around the same time as Half-Life 3 ;D
I wouldn't be too impatient about this. PM2 really ought to be "something" imho, much more than a mere update.
That's the kind of release that could provide a really fresh face to the tool: more modern and dynamic UI, content-changing actions depending on preselected options (they added a functionality tilting towards this in 1.9 with a new UI Attribute but it would require a big overhaul on many actions), extra buttons and floating/collapsing windows/tabs within the graph view,more tools and a better visibility on the management and tracking of events and vars, massively improved Globals, expanded official action packs (some have become classics by now), etc.
-
I wouldn't be too impatient about this. PM2 really ought to be "something" imho, much more than a mere update.
That's the kind of release that could provide a really fresh face to the tool: more modern and dynamic UI, content-changing actions depending on preselected options (they added a functionality tilting towards this in 1.9 with a new UI Attribute but it would require a big overhaul on many actions), extra buttons and floating/collapsing windows/tabs within the graph view,more tools and a better visibility on the management and tracking of events and vars, massively improved Globals, expanded official action packs (some have become classics by now), etc.
With built in visual scripting in unity arriving next year, it would make sense that Playmaker would need to do at least what the built in scripting does but better. They need to be better in every regard to stay relevant. I mean, why would new users choose a paid asset, when the built in one is free, more efficient, has all the 'actions' built in, etc
-
Unitys new visual scripting solution is for ECS, not c#. As well, it is not a state machine. So those are some pretty huge differences. Lastly, if you check out where it is at now (beta is out), its a long ways off from something like Playmaker, Bolt or other assets on the store.
-
I find it interesting that the image on the asset store features rectangles with rounded corners but the states have pointy ones in Graph view.
It's essentially Metro vs iOS, the former being the style used in PM, the latter being featured in the asset store's picture.
-
Unitys new visual scripting solution is for ECS, not c#. As well, it is not a state machine. So those are some pretty huge differences. Lastly, if you check out where it is at now (beta is out), its a long ways off from something like Playmaker, Bolt or other assets on the store.
https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity3d-getting-visual-scripting-in-2019-2.577084/
Unity was initially planning to push hard for ECS, but they put it on a back seat for now. In a distant future I can even see them switching from C# to their DOTS (in-house ECS) once and for all. C# will be legacy stuff.
The moment they'll reach a situation where both their C# and DOTS are equally efficient, you know this will last only a few years before they make ECS their main coding backbone.
There's probably up to two years tops for them to finely tune DOTS before a proper stable release, and maybe four to six years for DOTS to reach some kind of technical parity with C# after said release.
The 'Big Switch' might happen in a decade or so, or maybe two years earlier, but not before.
If Unity pushes for DOTS, it's just a question of time before devs feel "forced" to move on.
Then the C#-based VS tools could start to become irrelevant, but that will take several more years because of all the workers who have accrued experience on C# and will have a hard time changing their habits. Only promises of greater performances will eventually force people to jump.
But nobody will create an ECS VS tool within Unity since it will already be available. Only new nodes and functions will be sold in the store, under VS.
Best case scenario? They drop ECS altogether. Okay lol not gonna happen.
Realistic best case scenario for third party Unity VS tools? I'd say a large decade of profits before being shadowed.
-
That is a surprisingly fair and detailed response. I'd say your scenario seems extremely likely for Visual Scripting tools.
-
Switching from C# to DOTs only, would mean .. well.. the end over everything in the asset store that is not a shader or model just about. The asset store is clearly a large source of income. It will be a long transition.
-
That is, if their homemade ECS variant (like C# Unity was their variant of C#) proves to be that much of a gain, but it really looks like a paradigm breaker.
Although the change will be gradual and progressive, obviously the people remaining on the "old" tools will dwindle in numbers, but the real question is if this will only be a reduction towards a more focused niche or a pure and simple extinction.
I'm not sure if I will want to bother learning a new set of tools in 15 years from now. A super solid and matured Playmaker (or else, like Bolt) will be equally nice.
Third party VS tools might as well try to furnish their own sets of ECS-compliant nodes/actions and a lot of the support will come from their respective users. But I suspect many coders will flock to Mother Unity and pamper her with new scripts to enhance her own VS tool.
Now Unity has something that plays against itself; its business model. They largely provide a core system but you need to buy tons of options to make it palatable for proper devlopment. Which means a tool acting as a superior layer and providing more functions than the vanilla system will certainly have an edge, especially if done early, that little extra something to sell.
This is where tools like Playmaker, Bolt, FlowCanvas, etc., can find a solution to their survival, but they really need to provide that extra thing that Unity will likely not provide, and think of it now and quickly.
Like, for example, providing greater cross compability with more external tools/libs, but that's a hard thing to do and requires money. Usually it's the devs of these assets who chose to build those bridges back towards VS tools. Or perhaps an easier output of WYSIWYG semi-interactive videos for test and other statistic-related outputs. Just throwing ideas here, but I think it's fair to say that the threat is pretty real.
If the VS tools we have now get closer to perfection and find something to leverage right now, they can become essentials and maybe secure themselves alongside Unity. That's all the best we can wish them, right?
Playmaker was built as a FSM system, but creating new actions requires coding.
What if they actually provided a node-based Action Creator?
Bolt is moving in a way as to allow the creation of metanodes that literally act as states. In other words, soon enough Bolt will have a large catalogue of metanodes (implied states) to download from. Playmaker already has this catalogue but no way to create actions in Visual Scripting.
Then, only robust parallelal "co-engines" (sort of) such as Playmaker, uNode, FlowCanvas or Bolt will survive if they have a massive community, are powerful and up to the task, with also a massive selling point that Unity could not hope to obtain. Bolt (Ludiq's) are very organized and aggressive in their business plan and communication (https://ludiq.io/bolt/compare ). You just need to take a look at their website or their tool's interface, it smells dedication, money and modernity. Yet not even that guarantees that they'll survive in 10 years from now.
-
Hi.
The Comparison is inaccurate to push their app in front :
Reusability :
PM has Templates.
Types :
Custom types can be accessed
Variables :
Object Variables can be used
Scene Variables (Global Variables?)
Saved Variables (playerprefs although this is very limited)
Data Binding (get/set properties)
Performance
Lambda Optimization : Playmaker does not need this as it uses dedicated actions which are faster than mirroring (except for Get/Set Properties actions)
JIT Compilation : Same as above
Debugging
Data Visualization : debug mode shows data inside the actions and you can also set variables visible in inspector.
Predictive Analysis : Required fields show red when not used, also when components are not found you get a warning.
Especially the performance part is so deceiving...
In 2.0 they are working on a solution tho, which generates scripts.
Which is actually interesting, as maybe its possible to have something similar in PlayMaker to create custom actions (if generating works with 3rd party assets)
-
https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity-visual-scripting-2017.462181/
Check the 2017 video
Beegees Space Pirate says:
"There are a lot of different visual scripting solutions out there, but none of them really work well all the way from prototyping, maintaining, debugging and deploying high performance shipping-quality visual scripts."
I know this was a statement made in 2017 but back then PM already provided a good option for prototyping.
Maintaining is highly dependent on Unity's own set of tools regarding team collaboration. PM's internal issues regarding the management of Global variables could be held against PM though, but it's not that hard to maintain a PM project. In fact with something like FSM log, PM provides a native tool to follow the evolution of a script. FSM timeline is a nice tool although I think it could need an extra option to filter FSMs that talk to each other (it would need to parse the get/set actions, send event to X, goto y state in z FSM, etc.), maybe even presented under the form of some horizontal branching tree too. So that would be a little overhaul of the Timeline tool.
Debugging is rather transparent and quite easy to do, for the same reasons explained above. Several autohelpers are present too. When PM is fully deployed there is just no way you cannot find the little nagging bug that's creating a problem.
As for shipping-quality content, ready for deployment, it boils down to what you understand by that. Is it a 100% made in VS app (game or not btw), or is it something that integrates VS to some extent? Obviously a large "made with [name of VS tool]" catalogue would help bring confidence into the possibilities of VS based development, but a lot of this relies on PR and heavy communication, from web site to video content, fairs, webinars, etc.
Also, regarding Unity, they did announce a big move into VS back in 2017 and then postponed it. We're in 2019 and they sort of seem to imply a renewal of the interest in VS but are again pushing it to a later date.
Finally, to see what was being said on the other side of the river, a reply (https://ludiq.io/blog/unity-vs) about this VS tool Unity is working from Bolt's main coder.
I'm wondering what kind of beast Unity will become, they are literally working on two engines right now, the classic one that's in the DNA of the tool since its inception, and the new ECS based one that's friendly towards multithreading, which would usually concern large budged indsutry games or software, to manage countless entities at once. They want to get out of the indie zone.
-
It's also possible that node-based VS is a fad for gullible morons. ;D
-
Hi,
c# is not going anywhere anytime soon :) ECS is not for the mere mortals amongst us, it's a beast, it's completly out of any visual elements to help you, so only hardcode devs and studios with big budgets and AAA goals will afford ECS for their projects. Unity might in the coming years leverage the editor interface with ECS.
Bolt is in trouble, despite their amazing look and UI, because it basically doesn't perform as expected since everything is using reflections, they work on Bolt 2 which will create scripts, but their take is basically a visual c# editor which completely misses the point of visual scripting for artists and unity dev who don't know c#. So I don't see that as going anywhere in terms of concurrent as to what PlayMaker offers.
Visual scripting solution that generates scripts will always struggle with workflow because it takes extra compilation time to hit play, that's annoying and break the flow of development, even now I tend to just do things in PlayMaker just to avoid the compilation of a small change in a script. You get used to this and forget all the amazing things playmaker brings on the table, other then the visual aspect of it. Burst compiler may help, but only time will tell, right now, it's a big nop...
It boils down to this:There is no perfect solution, but there is a sweet spot for everything and Alex nailed it, almost 10 years ago now!!! with its hybrid approach of visual fsm and c# custom actions. It's the best possible combination for NO performance penalty and visual scripting. But it means extensive support to provide custom actions, proxies for third parties etc, that's the downside and a real problematic one, which is why I think Unity can't provide its solution, because it knows about this above dilemma ( perfs vs man power ), they can't settle for any of the two. The only thing I could see happening is a custom action wizard, on steroids, that artists could use to maximize the reach for third parties without coding. But when I work on Cinemachine api, I understand this is isn't going to work across the board... some api are too complex for wizards.
Then, it's of course a matter of preferences, and it's great that so many publishers make their own visual scripting system, it's very positive and make things move forward.
Bye,
Jean
-
The only thing I could see happening is a custom action wizard, on steroids, that artists could use to maximize the reach for third parties without coding.
What do you have in mind? Is this for Unity or Playmaker?
Since creating new actions is a roadblock for non-coders, do you think Playmaker might provide a solution to this in the future?
-
I don't think custom action wizard will ever happen, though making actions is quite an easy feat, it's actually complex to make it automatized.
When you already have a script that does something and you have full access to it, making actions is dead simple with only basic coding knowledge.
-
Yes, overall making new actions is limited by the difficulty of the abstract nature of coding itself. At basic levels it is quite straight forward.
When I'll have time I'll give Bolt a look and will see if it is possible to make Bolt (or any other similar tool, perhaps uScript if they're still kicking) recognize the elements that are specific to the Playmaker syntax found in Playmaker actions and have these elements transformed into nodes. Therefore turning Bolt into a custom action tool.
-
Hi,
actually, It is something I am very interested in doing nonetheless, to speed up my process of creating custom actions.
right now, there is a bottleneck still because no matter what it takes time to create actions, if I could simply with simple clicks setup the typical public fields, will all the usual decoration and perks ( cached component, typical everyframe setup, events, and usual routines we find as standard), I would greatly speed up the process.
Bye,
Jean
-
Hi.
I actually use a midi controller (launchpad) with an app (that i build with playmaker) that can place text, do mouse clicks etc ( a bit like programmable G-keys on Logitech gaming keyboards)
It took a little bit of time to setup, but now it saved me a lot of time :)
-
So would it be easy to upgrade our project to version 2 or do we have to recreate all the fsm?
-
Hi,
I am not too sure about that, but I would think that they would be likely incompatible. We'll see.
Bye,
Jean
-
Hi,
I am not too sure about that, but I would think that they would be likely incompatible. We'll see.
Bye,
Jean
@jeanfabre
@Alex Chouls
Hi,
There was a question about that on Unity forums in January.
https://forum.unity.com/threads/playmaker-visual-scripting-for-unity.72349/page-60#post-4108702
I am a big fan of playmaker and I have my projects working very well. My question is when Playmaker 2 comes out, is it retrocompatible with the 1? Or is it just for new projects? Will the 1 continue to be updated?
And here is the reply from Alex
Hi! PlayMaker 2 will be compatible with PM1, you should be able to keep working on your existing projects with it. PM1 will continue to be updated with bug fixes and compatibility fixes for new versions of Unity.
Can you please let us know if this is true or maybe plans have changed since then?
Thanks.
-
Hi,
I think Alex is doing his best to provided backward compatibility.
From what I know, there is right now a lot of work put on the Editor itself, while the runtime remains the same pretty much, so it seems it's heading that way where v2 may be compatible with v1.
But this is very early to turn this into a statement.
Bye,
Jean
-
@jeanfabre Any new updates MAYBE screenshots? :)
-
Hi,
No screenshots yet :) sorry...
Bye,
Jean
-
Hi, Is there any development progress of the latest version?
-
Hi.
I actually use a midi controller (launchpad) with an app (that i build with playmaker) that can place text, do mouse clicks etc ( a bit like programmable G-keys on Logitech gaming keyboards)
It took a little bit of time to setup, but now it saved me a lot of time :)
I'm more and more intrigued by this design. Do you have pictures or a video of how you use this?
-
Hi.
do you have a lauchpad? as im not sure if it works with something else at the moment.
the ui to setup is not very convenient. i have to update it one day.
here's a quick video on the program, the numbers/text you see in the 'MidiBridge' is me pressing the midi buttons.
sorry did not have a camera to show the controller itself with the lights etc.
-
Thanks.
Hi.
do you have a lauchpad?
No but this is a funny experiment.
-
So how's the progress on the new Playmaker so far?
-
I can't wait to see Playmaker 2.0. I am new to PM community and i have been using PM just for couple of weeks. I watched most of the videos (That's true) on Youtube related to PM and it all makes sense. Thank You all developers and contributors. ;)
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
I completely agree with you.
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
True although a P1 LTS might strain their resources.
-
i would love if playmaker 2 look like this
(https://i.imgur.com/Wjp5VJC.png)
PS:the game engine is Construct3(a very popular engine) if your guys want to see more about this design
-
Hi.
Personally i do not like this way.
Especially if you have more complex fms's i can see this getting very messy.
But everybody is free to have their own opinion :)
-
Hi.
Personally i do not like this way.
Especially if you have more complex fms's i can see this getting very messy.
But everybody is free to have their own opinion :)
I agree. Current way fsm's are shown it's nearly perfect and imo, would fit fsm grouping in a seamless way.
I'm pretty hyped for PM2.0 features :)
-
Hi.
Personally i do not like this way.
Especially if you have more complex fms's i can see this getting very messy.
But everybody is free to have their own opinion :)
Agreed. I used C2(Construct 2, which is not different with event sheet wise compared to C3) and it gets very messy and just plain annoying to deal with real quick.
-
I agree. Current way fsm's are shown it's nearly perfect and imo, would fit fsm grouping in a seamless way.
I'm pretty hyped for PM2.0 features :)
You can already do kind of grouping with 'Run Fsm' and templates
-
i would love if playmaker 2 look like this
(https://i.imgur.com/Wjp5VJC.png)
PS:the game engine is Construct3(a very popular engine) if your guys want to see more about this design
I don't understand what's going on here.
-
i would love if playmaker 2 look like this
(https://i.imgur.com/Wjp5VJC.png)
PS:the game engine is Construct3(a very popular engine) if your guys want to see more about this design
I don't understand what's going on here.
Me neither!
Playmaker provides a function that acts like a map in its Graph view, with arrows, starting points, destinations, etc. But that thing, construct3's UI, is like parsing a whole c script and putting whole regions into collapsable boxes with pretty colours. It is absolutely not intuitive.
Does it provide any kind of advantage?
-
If you guys are aiming to compete with Bolt a huge feature you should try to include is C# code generation
-
That's impossible and a whole other cup of tea, they simply work differently.
-
If you guys are aiming to compete with Bolt a huge feature you should try to include is C# code generation
That's what µScript did and it did not do them any good. The code generated as far from being natural to look at.
-
If you guys are aiming to compete with Bolt a huge feature you should try to include is C# code generation
Bolt has a totally different approach to visual coding, it's not about how it works internally, it's how logic is presented and the level of abstraction from the actual equivalent source code.
On that regards, Bolt is missing the target, like all other visual scripting attempts so far. The competition is actually elsewhere on how Unity is going to support Bolt and if Bolt way was not as widely adopted by devs because of the price or because of something else.
Bye,
Jean
-
i would love if playmaker 2 look like this
(https://i.imgur.com/Wjp5VJC.png)
Construct approach to VS is the best I´v ever seen implemented. Easy to read pick up and manage (at least for small projects, cannot comment on big ones).
C3 business model and browser dependency keep it from becoming more popular, but the VS part is spot on.
PS: Do give it a try (its free to test) the Pics do not favour it.
-
It would need to be backwards compatible, There is too much out there that needs to be supported over time, not just one or two years but many more
-
Hi.
You would still be able to use Playmaker 1.9.x
-
Any new information on Playmaker 2.0? Alfa, beta version...
-
I started to use Playmaker and not Bolt because for me, Bolt is like to learn to code. And if I do that why not go right away with C#?
So Playmaker, even though not a true Visual Scripting tool, is for me the better fit. Actually, for Playmaker 2.0 I would love to see tags for the actions, maybe even user based so they can get up (and down) voted and once a tag has 10+ votes it shows up for all other users too. This way, the action 'add force' might have the tag 'jump', 'dash', etc and if you don't know for what to look for in C# or Playmaker terms, you can as well search for those tags.
It would be a neat feature to make it more designer/artist friendly.
-
I learned to code pretty well in c# with help of Playmaker (c# and unity api are quite simple actually, when you get into it), but man am i FREAKING FAST with Playmaker, things that would take hours in pure code take me minutes in Playmaker. That said, visual scripting stuff like Bolt is the worst combination ever, it gives you neither the speed of Playmaker nor the integrity and robustness of pure code.
Anyway, PM2 please :)
-
...kind of worried about the lack of info in this thread. Is PM soon to be dead?
-
...kind of worried about the lack of info in this thread. Is PM soon to be dead?
I'm sure not, they just don't really release info on it which sucks but their decision.
-
Hi.
Why would pm soon to be dead?
As you can see there are regular updates.
As of PM2, there has not been any official announcement (as far as i know) that there will be a PM2 coming.
But i do know that Alex is working on a PM2 version.
But that does not mean that it will be coming soon.
There will probably a v1.9.1(2,3) before a pm2 will shed the lights.
Once Alex things its ready to officially announce he will announce it :)
-
Is there any news for PM 2.0? It feels awfully quiet in here, with not much mention of PM 2.0.
Is it still being actively worked on?
-
Hi.
As far as i know yes.
As of PM2, there has not been any official announcement (as far as i know) that there will be a PM2 coming.
But i do know that Alex is working on a PM2 version.
But that does not mean that it will be coming soon.
There will probably a v1.9.1(2,3) before a pm2 will shed the lights.
Once Alex things its ready to officially announce he will announce it :)
-
Are there any plans for some closed beta?
-
Hi.
SO far i have not heard about a beta nor alpha, but there should be a 1.9.1 release soon.
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
For me it would be a tragedy. This would close a path toward Playmaker 2.0 for me, cause I've build so much stuff on top with playmaker for past 5 years and I reuse it for my new projects. My new project starts with copy+paste of my old project and this saves me thousands of hours at the start of new project and I don't want to build all those systems from scratch.
-
Hi.
If it would not be backwards compatible, playmaker 1 would probably still be supported for several years.
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
For me it would be a tragedy. This would close a path toward Playmaker 2.0 for me, cause I've build so much stuff on top with playmaker for past 5 years and I reuse it for my new projects. My new project starts with copy+paste of my old project and this saves me thousands of hours at the start of new project and I don't want to build all those systems from scratch.
They may code a wizard that will translate obsolete bits into PM2 compatible ones. I'm sure they'll keep PM1 on LTS for several years too.
-
I'm just saying Hi, and rooting for PlayMaker. It's changed my life, literally.
Here's a big round of applause for the PlayMaker team, and all the dudes on this forum who support us, and make great Actions. Huge respect to you all.
-
PM is a solution that artists need.
It's a pity, management at unity doesn't understand the importance of visual programming, they made DOT based visual scripting with awkward experience. then they bought BOLT which is more anfractuous than C#.
Alex should buy the Unity's Company and fix it.
-
I think Playmaker is fantastic as well. Seriously such an amazing tool.
The actions and the way it's set up is so good and I think a lot of people don't understand or get that Playmaker is different to something like Blueprints or Bolt.
People constantly speak about Visual Coding is worse than code as it's slower, messier and difficult to debug etc. Yeah maybe that holds true for something like Blueprints and Bolt, but not PlayMaker.
The whole visual code abstracting everything from C# maybe makes sense for a coder but then you may as well code. The only difference is syntax essentially.
Playmaker is truly what artists and designers need to bring games to life.
Unity missed the boat by adding Bolt and not Playmaker, but I somehow think Alex is happy with that outcome. This means he can continue to sell Playmaker 2.0 - the community that loves Playmaker are not going anywhere imho and the droves of people I see online that is trying Bolt and still finding it not a good solution for them, will eventually find PlayMaker.
-
Hi.
True, Playmaker works different compared to many other visual scripting tools.
Which is also the reason that unity chose to go for bolt and not playmaker.
Playmaker needs a lot more support than bolt as 3rd party assets can work out of the box.
But the B-side is that its less user friendly for non coders and is slower than playmaker (due to reflection)
Also for coders Playmaker is more interesting that other visual scripting tools as well.
As you can make your own 'custom actions' which can be virtually anything from a simple 'int add' (for example) to a whole parallax system and more.
-
This being said, for newcomers it is important to understand that new actions need to be text coded.
The best way to do that is to watch a few videos about coding, such as Unity's series and a few other ones that might be specific to one's own requirements. Even if one doesn't understand the coding syntax, the tutorial should still be clear enough as to explain what is going on in the code.
Then, assuming you want to do something not too complicated, find the already existing PM actions that seem to do things similar to what you want and copy their code for further modifications into your own new actions.
Then, look at Unity's official scripting manual to see how you can talk to Unity in C# and also collect or set certain value types and transform that into Playmaker-friendly code.
-
Hi.
Personally i would not mind if 2.0 is not backward compatible.
I think most important should be the usability.
For example, currently if you make fsms with many states things start to slow down (due to unity limitations)
or if you have a object with many fsms and the are expanded in the inspector
this can also slow down (again due to unity limitations)
so if there is a different way that would be improving this issue but would not be able to be backward compatible, i would definitely choose for not backward compatible.
But it would also mean that Playmaker 1 should be continued supported at least for a year or 2.
agree so much. Seriously!
-
+1 for PM2.
-
Any plans to fix this Non-useful UI?
Maybe adding a searchbar (like how we search actions) so we find the type of Object variable easier?
It is like a nightmare browsing exactly what I am looking for in this mess.
https://imgur.com/XYREjfF (https://imgur.com/XYREjfF)
-
Hi.
That's a part of unity, so i think you need to ask to them :D
Animation/animator search is even worse when you have lost of animations.
(we use sprite based animation and have a lot animations :o :o )
-
hello, long time no see
-
is PM 2.0 still in the work, or isn't pause/discontinued?
-
Hi.
It's still in the work.
-
Wishes
1.playmaker
Stylish ui
Collapsible States
Top and bottom link
(https://i.imgur.com/IfaVZBq.png)
2.fsmmaker
Similar behavior trees
Facilitates control of very many fsm
3.actionmaker
Graph convert action
Graph convert c#
4.framework ,Templates
-
So you guys still working on playmaker 2.0. I have a question that feels dumb is it going to be a like new asset or new version. Also are you guys still working on it. I know your team is small from what I heard of and this subject started in 2019 so just wanted to confirm that it’s still being worked on. Or just like bolt 2 discontinued. Update.
-
Hi.
As far as i know PM2 is still worked on.
But also PM1 is still getting new updates.
I do not know if its going to come out as a new version or a new asset.
-
Hello, thank you for telling me what you know about playmaker 2 but i wanted to know from a developer of playmaker to directly say if playmaker 2 is still in the works.
-
It's my personal opinion, I think PM doesn't need v2 upgrade. PM1.94 is fully enough for me for various tasks, I only need constant minor bug updates, more integrated features like "Ecosystem" inside PM.
Just want to say thank you to Alex and his team for this super logical development solution.
BTW you can communicate with PM world in Discord either
https://discord.gg/ZpdgyffZ
-
Hi.
I have direct contact with Alex, and i know that it is still in the works :)
But for now there is no date set when this will be released.
-
Hello, thank you for telling me that it is confirmed in the works and reassuring it for me. Thank you
-
Is there any news on playmaker 2.0?
-
Hi,
I am also interested in news on this:
Roadmap from your site is:
PlayMaker 2.0
Graph View grouping.
New Graph View nodes (groups, colors, comments, controls...)
New Variable and Events list items (groups, colors, embedded images...)
Native Pooling.
Native Tweening.
Backward compatible with PlayMaker v1 projects.
Also, most new user are complaining about old tutorials (for us long time users of Playmaker this is not a problem).
I think that, from hutonggames company perspective, releasing new version will be source of new income because your huge user base will upgrade to new version.
-
I think new videos and tuts have been in the making and been released already. They are top notch (check the official youtube channel).
Native Tweening and Pooling is already here (I personally don't use them though).
And for Playmaker 2.0, the only thing I actually really would like to see is the Graph View Grouping and some neater UI design similar to bolt.
An additional goodie, if something like this is possible at all, is, if users could add tags to the action (in plain English). So if you search for "jump" or "run" all related actions come up. Sometimes as a rookie it's difficult to know what to search for in Unity or C# terms.
As others have said before though, I am happy with the plugin how it is as long as we get support throughout new Unity versions.
Having said this, I also would pay for version 2.0 in a heartbeat.
-
One essential feature that Playmaker 2 should have is native Jobs System support.
For example, a "FSM Job" or "FSM Job Template", and being able to call these jobs created with playmaker actions from within playmaker itself would be great. :)
-
what's the latest news about PlayMaker2.0？