Hacker News

points by OtherShrezzing 1 day ago | 0 comments

If you're working on a small game project without an existing framework/platform, you usually build a really bargain-basement game editor alongside it. That editor takes a long time, and it's often spent in arranging UI stuff.

If you're already using Blender to make assets, there's some benefit to stuffing Blender's UI into your game editor too.

[–] SkiFire13 1 day ago

In that case it would be competing with imgui, egui and similar libraries, but the submission is comparing it to GPUI.

[–] throwaway27448 1 day ago

Do imgui/egui have comparable numbers of interface objects and parameters to adjust their look and behavior? I certainly wouldn't suggest either as an alternative to QT-level interfaces—which seems to be what's offered here.

[–] nonethewiser 1 day ago

>If you're working on a small game project without an existing framework/platform, you usually build a really bargain-basement game editor alongside it. That editor takes a long time, and it's often spent in arranging UI stuff.

Not in an age of AI.

I mean if you want to code all this stuff by hand, I get it. But that's a choice. And since it's a choice that means shoehorning a Blender UI into a "bargain-basement game editor" (and having a "bargain basement game editor) isnt really needed. You absolutely don't need to spend a lot of time arranging UI stuff.

Game tooling is pretty trivial now and it's not user-facing. Again, I fully understand why someone would want to do this themselves still but let's not pretend thats not a choice at this point.

[–] jasomill 1 day ago

Depending on what you and the other poster mean by "arranging UI stuff", AI could either solve the problem for you or create larger problems, especially if you're not opinionated on either technical or UI matters.

[–] beepbooptheory 1 day ago

Just curious: if this is really the case, why are you even spending time commenting on and thinking about one particular UI framework or not? As a dummy still writing code and making games by hand, I know why it interests me, but isn't this like an archaic topic for you? What is there to actually gain or learn from one library or another? Can't you just think about high level concepts and pure ideas now? Spend money to do the rest?

[–] nullstyle 1 day ago

I think it’s just about as weird as questioning somebody’s motives on an Internet comment thread. I certainly share GP’s opinion about game tooling, but i’m here because i still care about making good software and that involves learning about and navigating technological developments as they happen. Is that sufficient reason for you?

Edit: the snark I’m responding to has been edited out

[–] beepbooptheory 1 day ago

But in this case, isn't the precise conceit that dev tools themselves don't need to be "user facing"? Why do you need to follow UI development for dev tool type things if you don't actually ever need to use the tools anymore? Why would you even spend the money getting the AI to add the slider it's never going to use?

[–] nullstyle 1 day ago

You are reading them wrong. I think they mean “customer facing” instead of user facing i.e. the player doesnt care if the level editor has some jank: they never see it.

For the types of tools that your coworkers are paid to use, vibing a first draft and developing from there is so much more time and money efficient than writing by hand that you would be dumb to spend your tooling budget differently.

Thats how i read it. Someone still needs to use tools, no one is saying that claude is going to one shot mass effect 4 yet.

[–] archerx 1 day ago

After trying blender for about 20 years I still find the UI/UX awful. I think a lot of the new blender generation has baby duck syndrome.

[–] mejutoco 1 day ago

Blender had a very different ui before and a big redesign, so most people have different opinions between the old and the new design. It sounds like you find all of them awful. I find that surprising and wonder what 3d program you find have good ui.

[–] archerx 1 day ago

I have used every version of blender and it has always felt harder than it should.

I have used 3Ds max, maya, lightwave, cinema4D, milkshape, wings, Houdini, unreal engine 1 - 5, Hammer, Threejs editor and probably more. The Blender UI is worse than all of the above.

[–] mejutoco 1 day ago

At the time of blender's old ui 3Ds max had menus nested 5-6 level deep in an ui that would make gimp very good design. Between that 3Ds max praise, conflating old blender ui and new blender ui, and not providing any specifics on what makes blender so bad (I just provided some about 3D max) I have to assume there is no truth to it. We will agree to disagree. I think blender ui is excellent, but a 3d editor is a specialised app.

[–] bacheaul 1 day ago

The question was which one do you think has a good UI... I'd be keen to know your opinion on this as well, what you think the current high water mark is in 3D design software UI is, or do you think they all suck, but Blender just sucks the most?

[–] throwaway27448 1 day ago

I learned on blender and now all the other editors are ruined for me. I wonder why they haven't added a blender mode at this point for people who want more expressive use.

Zbrush is ok.

[–] miniupuchaty 1 day ago

With 3Ds Max listed as good UI we really must just have different tastes, hah! :D

You've given quite a list of tools with different purpose.

For 3D work I would personally rate

Modo 3D, Zbrush > Blender, Houdini > Softimage XSI > Maya > space intentionally left empty :P > 3Ds max

Blender UI looks very nice and is very customizable. I think it's "ok" in beginner discoverability (none of 3D softs is great at that really) but when you get experienced with it it's one of the best.

I really like how they managed to keep all the tools and views pretty consistent given how many things you can do in it. Whether you are working on objects, vertices, nodes, movie clips you get the same shortcuts where possible.

[–] tredre3 1 day ago

Fascinating, I would have ranked Softimage XSI above blender (even modern blender), it was just that intuitive to me.

3Ds max being dead last is fitting, people who think it's peak UI just have stockholm syndrome in my opinion.

[–] wtetzner 1 day ago

> I think a lot of the new blender generation has baby duck syndrome.

Maybe some of them do, but even though I disliked the UI at first, I've come to appreciate it as I've learned it. It's simply different from most other software, so that obviously causes friction. However, I think once you learn it, it's quite a good system. There's a tradeoff between optimizing for familiarity/new users, and providing an optimized experience for advanced users.

[–] glimshe 1 day ago

I'm not a professional designer or 3D modeler but I've used Blender quite a bit. I know what you mean but the latest UI post redesign isn't bad.

Blender does a LOT of stuff. Its not an easy product to create an UI for. But I think the problem is much bigger when coming from a different 3D package than when learning from scratch.

My teenage kids use Blender as the first 3D package they've ever learned. I was impressed with how quickly they ramped up through videos and learning from each other.

[–] sehugg 1 day ago

Apparently there is a crowd still using 2.79b, the last version with the old UI (current LTS is 5.2)

My baby duck fingers could probably pick up LightWave 3D again in an hour or two. I could never gel with Blender.

[–] somat 1 day ago

I agree, I don't think blender has changed as much as people say. But I don't think it is baby duck, I think blender always had a good UI, it has just taken the rest of the world 20 years to catch up.

A lot of people go "Blender UI was horrible, but they redesigned the whole thing and now it is good" Having used blender in a minor role for 20 years(i think I started on 1.7), I think this was just a big psyop by the blender team. Sort of how the client goes "Change things" and you change nothing, wait a day, and tell the client "I made the changes you requested" client: "I love it"

I am not saying the blender team has not made substantial improvements to the UI over the years, but the core is still that same quick blender workflow, This is very different from the normal clunky GUI design of 3d modelers of the era and as such blender got a reputation for having a weird UI which was easily translated to blender having a bad UI. So what do you do when you have an unwarranted bad reputation? Especially now that the rest of the world has caught up and is using your flows and they are not so weird anymore. Make a dark mode and put out a big press release "we redesigned everything, it's good now" so people will try it.

[–] thelaxiankey 1 day ago

I feel like the 2.49 to 2.6 update was a bit overblown, but the 2.8 update was pretty damn massive to me eyes

[–] cl3misch 1 day ago

First time I hear "baby duck syndrome".

> Baby duck syndrome is a cognitive bias where people automatically prefer the first system, interface, or product they learn to use, judging all later versions or alternatives by how well they match that initial experience.

That's actually extremely common in scientific (GUI) software. And in any professional setting I guess.

[–] fc417fc802 1 day ago

> That's actually extremely common in scientific (GUI) software. And in any professional setting I guess.

I don't think that qualifies. There's an important distinction to be made between an aesthetic preference versus a professional not appreciating a tool being mucked with. Anything that interferes with my workflow without immediately providing substantial benefit is something that's actively harmful. In fact even if it does hypothetically provide huge benefits I still might not want to deal with it right this second.

[–] conartist6 1 day ago

......huh?

So if it's for an employer it's rational but if you're making the same choice for yourself it isn't? If one of those is baby duck syndrome they all are.

[–] patcon 1 day ago

I think they're noting how the nature of baby duck syndrome might depend on whether the change introduced is within something that is for work or for play.

As in, that people who refuse change in their play activity are in some way different (less rational? more "syndromatic"?) than those who refuse change in their breadwinning activity.

I see the distinction, but am not sure I agree. It's just a neurotype spectrum of the same phenomenon. Baby duck is baby duck

[–] fc417fc802 1 day ago

Not quite. The distinction is between avoiding an articulable and concrete negative impact versus mere aesthetic considerations. For example, this pan is more difficult to use because it is somewhat undersized for what I'm trying to cook versus I don't like this pan because it's the wrong color or has the wrong accents or whatever. I understand baby duck syndrome to refer to the latter - ie having an unsubstantiated bias towards aspects of the thing first encountered.

[–] conartist6 1 day ago

I'd only point out that undersize and oversize aren't purely objective concerns, but are also aesthetics compared to what you're used to.

I wouldn't be arguing about this except that I can't trust my clock app on my phone because some bozo keeps redesigning it to work a different way every 6 months