AssetPacks - possible naming conflicts?

Hello,

I just downloaded some AssetPacks to test the AssetPackBrowser.
What happens when there are two assets with the different name and category?
I guess naming conflicts will occur pretty soon - for instance the WorldForge pack contains many common names.

However, this is critics on a very high level - the functionality is already quite nice.
I plan to convert some Blendswap models and even upload my own stuff in the future.

:slight_smile:

Of they have the same name or category thats no issue, asset packs themselves are extended with the use name that uploaded it. The only issue is if theres actually the same file names, they won’t be overwritten when added to the project.

Hm, okay, I mean the AssetPackBrowser itself - all assets are expanded under the root node “Assets”.
Will this not cause trouble when I upload my AssetPack and one of its assets has the same name like one of the WorldForge AssetPack?

And am I right, are there only about 4 or 5 AssetPacks at the moment?
Will the AssetPackBrowser have scroll bars when there are more?

Btw, what’s this WorldForge? And is the AssetPack updated when WorldForge is updated?
I could try to do this, because I like juggling with assets.

Looks to me like you’re asking the same question again so idk how I’m supposed to answer. The browser already has scrollbars, yes. WorldForge doesn’t see many updates anyway. You can google it easily.

Okay, let me clarify it with an example:

You can have 7 times “spider” in category “characters” in the AssetPackBrowser.
But the user sees 7 times “spider”, which might be confusing. Better would be:

“spider (WorldForge)”
“spider (Fantasygame)”
“spider (BioSim2020)”
“spider (Cyberpunk)”

Currently this is no problem. Might become a problem later and can be fixed then.

@normen said: If they have the same name or category thats no issue

Even if a search results in 5 “spiders”, you select the asset and see its properties, including license, extended info and everything, you double-click it and can look at it. I don’t see the problem.

Properties currently don’t include AssetPack name and User name, the rest is too similar.
Double-Click and model inspection needs more time (Light-Bulp off+on in 3d window needed).
Different AssetPacks with different styles - not all models fit together (e.g. cartoon style versus realistic style). Workaround: Uninstall unwanted AssetPacks (possible?)

Idea for faster browsing: Thumbnail images (this is currently standard). Level designers and artists are “visual people”, not “text people”.
Idea for faster browsing: Allow sub-nodes with AssetPack name (+“see all” option to browse all, like it is now).
Idea for faster browsing: See my last post (AssetPack name in brackets).

It’s about user-friendliness, basically the same reason why you made the jME SDK in the first place. :slight_smile:
Workflow is better when you have a userfriendly system.

I think this is a thing that should be improved, but I know that devs don’t have all the time in the world + at the moment there are only few asset packs anyways…

Your initial question was about collisions/conflicts. There are none and it seems you can’t point out any other than those I mentioned either. Of course you are free to extend the browser as you like.