This is already being developed by myself and will hopefully be available to the public in around a month. It will be available on github too, so you are more than welcome to contribute once its there, but as for payments… at this moment in time they are only free. Money complicates things and implicates jmonkey on situations we do not have time or legal connections to fully explore. Anyway, its on its way and please do feel free to contribute once its up!
It’s a great news. That’s the missing piece in the whole picture.
I really want to have the preview asset feature. We also having prototype in threejs (also pixiejs) that can “understand” jME3 materials and few parts of j3o model format (since it used jME capsule as a Java object intepreter…)
Developer an artist can quickly corporate using quick project archetype and share with other using Dropbox or Drive. Futher more, like our current workflow in my company, we integrate jME asset folder to one of these API via a SDK plugin. So the asset is even quicker to get in realtime if we want. Versions still saved in git through.
It’s should connect with our forum because conversations in git requests style is not as easy as using Discourse
Commercial section can be a later feature or what ever…
If paid products were added it would most likely help many more JME games get off the ground by providing developers something to, at least partially, fund their game with. It would also allow for someone whose talents are in one area (ie. developing, modeling, texturing, advertising) to hire someone to make their game better even if it isn’t their area of expertise.
Also, the website for MInecraft server owners www.spigotmc.org has something similar with premade resources and a section to hire developers, builders, etc. I think this is very similar because the uniqueness of Minecraft servers makes running one similar to makeing a game in many ways. If paid resources are added here, however, I think something should be done to ensure that the community dosen’t erode into something that exists solely/mostly to make money as many will argue did happen at Spigot.
I think that it isn’t as simple as that. Once you involve money on the equation it just breaks. What I really like about JME is that if you ask for help there is no people saying you: “buy X plugin”. IMO it’s better to try first with forcing users to put it free and see how it goes.
Perhaps to ensure that the “community erosion” I mentioned in my previous post doesn’t happen it would be helpful to ban any discussion/recommendations of paid anything on this forum (perhaps allow them when coupled with other free solutions) and have a separate discussion area on the resource website for things like paid resource recommendations, reviews, etc.
Also, it may help to some extent (I’m not a lawyer) if all payments are made directly to the service provider’s PayPal account rather than going through a JME account.
Aside from the main issues surrounding money, jmonkey is FOSS. It promotes FOSS. It needs to be as far away from money as possible. Personally i hate it when i get into something thats free, and anything vaguely useful to me needs to be bought. The asset authors will have searches by authors at their disposal amongst other things. They will require a hub.jmonkeyengine.org account, so can be PM’d for work if their portfolio warrants such attention.
Personally, as an indie developer, I would LOVE a store where I could buy JME-ready assets. I would throw all kinds of money at that. It does not in any way change the FOSSness of JME.
People who do hard work on assets should be able to sell them. I think ultimately we should provide a store for supporting that and take a cut to maintain the store and our server costs, etc…
If our stance is really that using an open source engine should require that you give your stuff away for free then that’s frankly ridiculous.
It’s fine to start with an asset store for free assets. That’s waaaay easier. But our ultimate goals should be to foster a community of professional assets, also. And pro = $$$… by definition.
I agree with this but we would need some method to prevent everything from going behind a paywall. Perhaps someone must make a significant (significant being roughly the size of their assets in usefulness) contribution to the engine (either via PR or free assets) before they are able to post paid assets? This would also help with preventing scams by requiring a commitment before posting anything paid.
I don’t see a problem with people posting paid stuff right from the start. I don’t know why they should be forced to give away content first. To me, it’s not about getting a bunch of pro assets for free… it’s having some pro assets at all. We have 0 now. ZERO.
Some people will post free stuff. Some people won’t. Just like anywhere else.
If no one buys the stuff then that author can consider other mechanisms. Frankly, I think the extra setup required for an author to collect payments will prevent some folks from doing it just because of convenience.
But one huge hole in JME is the ability to easily acquire quality assets. That forever puts us in the realm of ‘hobbyist’ or people who already have an artist on staff.
In every walk of life I’ve ever tried on, “exposure” that is meaningful is “exposure” that can pay you. The rest is equivalent to dropping fliers in the wind.
Else your quality free asset will be sitting in a pile between the “Look I made a cube in Blender!!11!!” and “Here is a model of dickbutt.”
Requiring people to post free content first means that we might get less quality content. Not at all worth the dubious benefits. We should be 10000% encouraging quality content in any way we can. The “I didn’t think it was good enough” free content will come… and it will also be excellent. The better quality paid stuff you have the better quality free content you will have.
I totally agree with Paul’s vision about paid assets.
And I think that this could also open jme to an entire new kind of user base made of people who don’t have the ambition or time to make a final product, but that can provide assets or plugins.
Primarily by being searchable and navigatable on a browser which is easier to use and friendlier for monkeys to find. It also provides a skeletal structure from which we can branch out to other areas if desired. It also allows us to use better technologies to display the asset and utilize the benefits of a webpage to our advantage so assets are shown in the best possible light with the best exposure we can offer.
When I tried Unity the asset store was the part that I hated the most. I had no clue how to import anything so I had to try find something in the asset store. The fact that most assets were paid made me give up on unity and revert to jME
We’ve started a discussion about payments for assets, but please don’t take this as any kind of roadmap or confirmation - it’s just a discussion. There is a whole lot to it, and it is more than likely to take months just to iron it out let alone implement it.
But - let’s try to stay on track - the free asset store isn’t too far away - which is great! It’s something that’s been long needed and its coming!
When I said force I really meant “force” xD. As it can be seen, the free thing can be launched sooner than if waiting for the “get paid” version. Of course is normal that people that spent efforts on a pro asset want also a revenue from them but I still think that this sould be controlled on the forums on any manner that I don’t really know :S. For the assets this shouldn’t really be a problem but I was thinking more on “plugins” as I said in my answer. Yes, they aren’t assets and I think I had too much in mind the unity’s asset store where you can buy game functionallity (just the point where I think must be controlled to don’t corrupt the comunity) but I don’t really know if this “asset store” is including game “modules/code” too.
Well, there are some assets on the Unity store that are quite awesome and I would pay for them for my game. The fact of having assets to buy is just an advantage for many indie projects as many indie teams lack on art designers (And better bough than not present) and I think is the only thing that has Unity that JME doesn’t that I really miss.
The idea of a assets market is to help developers connect and share much more easier. The game industry is about connecting people and of course making money from it. I don’t know about you guys but I don’t find having commercial section will violate jME philosophy at all.
Anyway, when we look at Unity for example. They have a lot of awesome commercial packages and free also. Developers all join the asset store because there is a market: a place of ideas and money… Well, you may not deny that we also want one?
@jayfella : About developing the asset store. Since this is the opoturnity for every one. Yes, opensource it then there will be tons of helping hands, include mine. Appreciate your willingful efforts.
