The State of Things - 3D VTT?

[wrathchild]

So.

MapTool and conduments has been serving me and serving me well for several years now - but I wonder if the end is nearing.

I can't really say that I am up to any kind of speed on where developments are headed around here, but there are shiny new things out there, full of promise.

To wit: Two upstarts has my eye.

One is 3D Virtual Tabletop, now in Kickstarter (which I invite you to consider)

The other is Battle Box 3D

Both are Unity3D based.

Both have demo's out - and both are quite lacking in functionality at this time, but I have the feeling that BB3D has a bit going on behind the scenes, and that the Kickstarter for 3D Virtual Tabletop - which is already well past it's basic funding goals, and presently reaching for funding that will allow browser-based cross-platformness - will see things happening there fast.

GUI improvements over MT are already quite marked, promising much speeded up gameplay. Especially BB3D has my eye in this regard.

So - Thoughts?

[Azhrei]

I looked at the Unity framework a long time ago. I don't like it.

Too proprietary, too many platform issues. From the perspective of functionality it looks good, but when you put all your eggs in a basket owned by someone else...

[Bone White]

I looked at the Unity framework a long time ago.

Not to mention no multi thread capacity.

[Full Bleed]

GUI improvements over MT are already quite marked, promising much speeded up gameplay.

This won't necessarily be true for many games when compared to the power of many MT frameworks. If a VTT doesn't provide all the same functionality in my framework then a beautiful GUI is only going to be faster at doing less. There are already plenty of those VTT's out there. Roll20 being the most popular right now.

In the end, if a VTT is going to be compared to MT it shouldn't be done on the GUI. Most new ones will easily look better. A comparison should be done on what MT is strongest at: Light/Vision/LoS and MacroscripT. Another VTT can beat MT in many other regards, but for most MT users those are keystone features that clearly distinguish it from the crowd... and there is a very good reason why better looking VTT's lag far behind in those categories (because they are hard to do right).

[Cherno]

It's also important that a VTT has the option for user-generated content. In 2D tools, you can just use a basic graphics editing program to create some tokens and terrain. Now, for a 3D tool, you need to be able to create 3d character models (one of the hardest parts) and everything else like props etc. as a 3d models as well. Of course, a 3D VTT xould also be made with isometric backgrounds, but the in the end you'd still have to be well-versed in graphics editing, while for 2D every user can just customize his asset library without much work.

[Bhoritz]

It's also important that a VTT has the option for user-generated content. In 2D tools, you can just use a basic graphics editing program to create some tokens and terrain. Now, for a 3D tool, you need to be able to create 3d character models (one of the hardest parts) and everything else like props etc. as a 3d models as well.

This is true for Battle Box 3D which uses 3D props, but not for 3D virtual Tabletop which uses 2D stand ups (with a white frame now, but with a transparent frame in the future).
Those two VTTs don't seem to have the same aim. One is really about making a 3D environment, whilst the other just aims at moving tokens or props on a flat 2D map.
In a way, BattleBox is the only real 3D VTT (but with the limitations you mention), whilst 3D Virtual Tabletop is more 2.5D (using 2D parts in a 3D view), but with a probably much easier way to generate or include your own stuff (because it is 2D stuff). It is the approach I prefer, but ymmv.

[Cherno]

A fixed isometric perspective would make it possible for people to photograph their painted miniatures at the right angle (30 degrees) in, say, 8 positions and import these images.

[Xaelvaen]

Without a doubt my favorite game of all time is still Final Fantasy 6 (3 U.S.) and that will never change. I've had a PS3 and Xbox 360 and all the latest pc games and frankeboxes and... blah. The 3d means absolutely nothing to me - purely functionality and the ability to make it function exactly as I need it to - not how someone else's vision of its functionality demands it to. Simple as that.

[Full Bleed]

I actually think the best 3D VTT coming out might be this one: http://www.tabletopconnect.com/

It's also got a Kickstarter running: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/840 ... l-tabletop

The lighting and LoS looks very good. And the map building process looks like it would be pretty easy to convert most maps into a useable table pretty quickly... almost as fast adding VBL in MT (so long as you didn't worry about things having to look too pretty).

And the ability to deploy standee type tokens/objects from 2d images is the way all of these 3D programs should work.

Of course, without a turn tracker and a macro language I'd be hard pressed to jump ship from MT, but this is the most promising implementation that I've seen yet.

[Bhoritz]

It seems like a blend of the other two mentioned previously.

And the ability to deploy standee type tokens/objects from 2d images is the way all of these 3D programs should work.

Indeed, because 2D images are going to be plentiful and easy to find whilst 3D models of adventurers in any periods...
2.5D should also be an option.

But except for the map presentation in 3d, those VTTs are not very advanced. If Maptool was like that, it would be a simple witheboard with a few dices. The idea is fun, but they still have a long way to go.

[Lee]

TableTop Connect is really pretty and seems to have sound production details. I did a quick search through the forums and was surprised no one mentioned kLooge Werks.

It's a direct MT parallel, albeit on the opposite side of the model spectrum (subscription and locked clients I think).

[Bhoritz]

TableTop Connect is really pretty and seems to have sound production details. I did a quick search through the forums and was surprised no one mentioned kLooge Werks.

It's a direct MT parallel, albeit on the opposite side of the model spectrum (subscription and locked clients I think).

Is kLooge Werks developing a 3D presentation?

[Full Bleed]

TableTop Connect is really pretty and seems to have sound production details. I did a quick search through the forums and was surprised no one mentioned kLooge Werks.

It's a direct MT parallel, albeit on the opposite side of the model spectrum (subscription and locked clients I think).

It's not 3d, so it's not really pertinent to this discussion though...

And, as far as I know, Klooge Werks is pretty much in the same state as it has been for the last 3-4 years. Granted, if it wasn't for MT's macroscript, nearly the same thing could be argued of MT.

As for Klooge, a quick look at their forums shows about 1 new thread and maybe a handful of replies to old threads every month. Virtually nothing from the developer.

I looked at it long and hard back in the day (along with Battleground RPG, Fantasy Grounds, & iTableTop), but ended up using MT.


As for 3D, what I see with TableTop Connect is about the best I've seen so far. But, as I mentioned earlier, I really think a macro language is essential for me now. TableTop Connect might be handling the light/vision/LoS better than any 3D VTT I've seen so far... but it just isn't really going to help me run my games like MT does.

Still, I might purchase a player license to throw them some support and update it later if it comes through with more advanced game management features (like a turn tracker, targeting, movement management, token properties, tables, states, and some meaningful scripting).

[Lee]

Apologies for going off-topic. Too many 18 hour work days. Believe it or not, I was reading an older thread and ended up posting my thoughts on that to this thread.

No, it's definitely not 3D. I brought it up thinking of the discussion regarding other VTT systems comparable to MapTool. MapTool is definitely better, though there are a lot of nifty ideas to be gleaned from the other.

Of the 3 mentioned, I think 3dVTT's approach is the one which is most relative to MapTool. The comment about fixed isometric perspective, "2.5D" et al, holds true. TTConnect's map building looks the most promising, however. It should be one of the main methods of how VBL and light gets put on the map, through the objects that get placed in it e.g. light sources, walls, doors etc. Jamz and wolph's work on the VBL macros helps with some of this, but it'll be nice in the future to have everything done at once by dropping an object with specific attributes that cause on-map effects instead of dropping an object and drawing VBL around it and assigning light where necessary.

[Bhoritz]

After some thinking, and having looked hard at the 3D VTTs, I don't think that the 3D view would have any use for the gamemaster, a 2D view is easier to interpret, gives better information and is easier to manipulate. But, it would be quite fun for the players, because it gives a better immersion experience, it filters the information they receive from the point of view of their characters,...

So, imho, I think that the best use of 3D in a VTT would be something like Maptool for the GM as a server that would calculate changes in the situation, which would be rendered in a 3D view on the client side (or better a 3D view made from 2D parts, which would make it easier to add or customize new stuff).