Contents
Collaborative Game Editing
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 


Part of:



[More information...]
 

Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Video Game Watchdog National Institute On Media And The Family Shutting Down [11]
 
Modern Warfare 2 Infinity Ward's 'Most Successful PC Version' Yet [13]
 
New Tech, Design Details Of Project Natal To Emerge At Gamefest In February
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Trion Redwood City
Sr. Environment Artist
 
Trion Redwood City
Sr. Evnironment Modeler
 
Sucker Punch Productions
3D Environment Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Network Programmer
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Texture Artist
 
Sucker Punch Productions
Character Artist
 
Crystal Dynamics
Sr. Level Designer
 
Monolith Productions
Sr. Software Engineer, Engine - Monolith Productions - #113767
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
arrow Upping The Craft: Susan O'Connor On Games Writing [6]
 
arrow Small Developers: Minimizing Risks in Large Productions - Part II [7]
 
arrow iPhone Piracy: The Inside Story [50]
 
arrow And Yet It Grows: Analyzing the Size and Growth of the European Game Market [5]
 
arrow NPD: Behind the Numbers, October 2009 [13]
 
arrow Reflecting On Uncharted 2: How They Did It [5]
 
arrow Sponsored Feature: Rasterization on Larrabee -- Adaptive Rasterization Helps Boost Efficiency
 
arrow Postmortem: Wadjet Eye's The Blackwell Convergence [2]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
November 22, 2009
 
Time Fcuk - A Postmortem [2]
 
Accepting the Inherent Value of Games
 
Planckogenesis, Part II: Song Structure & Gravy Train [1]
spacer
About
spacer News Director:
Leigh Alexander
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Editor At Large:
Chris Remo
Advertising:
John 'Malik' Watson
Recruitment/Education:
Gina Gross
 
Features
  Collaborative Game Editing
by Mick West
12 comments
Share RSS
 
 
May 20, 2009 Article Start Previous Page 2 of 4 Next
 

From Code to Data

Traditionally, level editing is done using some kind of standalone tool that is not part of the game engine. The level designer loads the level, makes changes to it, and exports it to see how it plays in the game.

This level-editing tool might be a commercial product, such as 3ds Max, or it might be an engine-specific tool that comes with a third-party engine, or it might even be a custom in-house tool.

Level editors can be integrated with the game engine, allowing the designer to view and play the level as it's being edited. This is ideal from the point of view of rapid feedback, but the problems of edit conflicts and bottlenecks still remain. If two level designers want to edit the same part of the level, they usually will have to check out the entire level from the VCS.

With code, multiple checkouts of the same file are less problematic because it's relatively easy to merge text files automatically, as the changes are usually on well separated lines. Conflicts that cannot be resolved automatically are usually taken care of very easily manually, as the nature of the conflicting changes is readily apparent to the programmer who makes the merge.

Unfortunately, this solution does not work with level data, which is often stored in a binary format that's impossible to merge, especially if the level editing tool is some thing like 3ds Max.

Even if the level is stored in a text-based format, such as XML, it's much harder to merge as there are many internal dependencies and automatically generated data that create a broader mesh of changes that are difficult for a human to read. What we get are more conflicts, which then are much harder to resolve without breaking something.

Splitting Data

The difficulty in merging changes in level or world files would inevitably lead to bottlenecks if no steps were taken to mitigate it. Various solutions have arisen to handle the problem. The simplest is to break the level down into the smallest chunks possible, so that individual level designers can check out only the sections of the level they need.

Using small chunks improves matters by reducing edit bottlenecks, but adds complication in how the level is split up and subsequently pieced together. Implementing high-level changes to large sections of a level also becomes difficult.

Though bottlenecks are reduced, they're not eliminated, as there will still be merge work needed at the borders of the areas assigned to individual level designers. Edits here must still be manually coordinated. The large number of individual parts that make up the divided level now places an undue organizational burden on the level designer.

Sometimes more ad-hoc solutions are used. A level might still be stored in one large file, but when two people need to work on it at the same time, it is manually split into two sections. The work is done (with some discussion to avoid conflicts), and then the two sections are visually merged back together.

Sometimes, special merge tools are written just for this purpose. This technique is fraught with problems, as the merging process is rarely simple, and can take some time.

 
Article Start Previous Page 2 of 4 Next
 
Comments

Bryan Bibat
profile image
Some VCSs are already following the "paradigm split" you mentioned. For example, the Linux kernel has been using one of those (Git) since 2005.

Building a real-time collaborative game asset editor will take time, especially if you consider the computing, storage, and bandwidth problems that would be encountered in the process. In the meantime, it would be more practical to reduce the amount of edit conflicts by reducing the dependencies and increasing the orthogonality of modules (as fine grained module division is usually not enough), and by improving the communication between team members.

When you think about it, VCSs shouldn't take the blame for most of the problems in version control (unless, of course, we're talking about VSS :P ).

Joshua Bouscher
profile image
And then there are things like HeroEngine, which supports collaborative real-time editing AND rollbacks.

Darrin West
profile image
In second life, you tend to edit your own "land". It is rare to have a second content developer banging on the script you are working on, or deleting the objects you are moving.

Consider two *entwined* editing sessions, then ask yourself how you are going to "undo" some changes. Do you undo your own edits? The other guy's? The other guy's that happen to touch the objects you touched?

I'm betting these hard questions would result in the same solutions we have today. Keep out of my backyard.

I understand that in Hero, the recommendation is to put up yellow police-tape around the area you are working in so these collaborative-conflicts don't happen.

Thanks for the thoughtful and balanced analysis of this problem. I'm trying to keep an open mind about it, but there is a lot of disagreement about where it lands on the usefullness scale. And what size team it makes sense for, what genre of game...

Eric Slick
profile image
I'm shocked that this article fails to mention HeroEngine (heroengine.com), which is a 100% live, collaborative, real time editing environment. The development environment IS the game. It has version control, the ability to rollback changes and elegantly handles as many developers building the game world at the same time as you want. This engine has been out in the wild now for a number of years and is being used for several high profile MMO projects.

Mike Smith
profile image
So pretty much all this article seems to be suggesting is to lock or checkout files before working on them so only one person can change a file at a time. Nothing really earth shattering there.

Mike Smith
profile image
Oh, yeah, and keep your files small and modular.

Aaron Eastburn
profile image
I think better advice would be use some of the newer version control techniques. Look at Subversion and the client TortoiseSVN and it's branching and merging capabilities. It's great for text based editing and when you check in or check out code if there is a discrepancy it gives you the option of accepting the code change or not after using a text diff program to show you the changes. Now this wouldn't work for most asset files but for scripting and programming it works great.

Mick West
profile image
@Mike Smith, not that's not what I'm suggesting. That's just the *current* methods discussed on thef irst page, the next two pages discuss the collaborative options.

@Eric Slick and others, The article was actually written for Game Developer a few years ago, this is a reprint, so HeroEngine was not so well known back then. But it does sound just like what I was suggesting.

James Hofmann
profile image
I did some investigation on this with respect to public-access collaborative projects. I think that granularity is basically the only significant variable; with file-based VCS you're working on the file level, and with databases you work on individual entries, whose size and complexity may vary. You can implement rollbacks in both, but files are more convenient since the data model is already established.

Different granularity comes with tradeoffs, as the article describes; with low granularity, conflicts are hard(people problem), and with high granularity, scalability is hard(computer problem). Note that DVCS mostly arises of the "people problem," and horizontal-scaling, non-relational databases arise from the "computer problem." Most of the obvious ground seems to have been covered by a VCS or database system in some form, so unless there's a radical improvement in our concepts, probably the best working practice is to go for the maximum level of granularity and then work out ways to optimize it, given that computers are cheaper than people.

Simon Carless
profile image
To clarify, this was indeed written a little while ago (February 2008), perhaps before HeroEngine was more famous, though I honestly think that HeroEngine is similarly famous now as it was then, and it's more a condition of the tool's slight lack of profile. Which is hopefully being addressed by comments.

Felix Frank
profile image
> @Mike Smith, not that's not what I'm suggesting. That's just the *current* methods discussed on thef irst page, the next two pages discuss the collaborative options.

I politely disagree. On the last page, you stress that "We are in the latest version. We don't need to check things in or out, as we simply start editing them, and they get locked."

That is in my eyes a very simple source control paradigm. Subversion-like systems perform better than that, and the concepts behind distributed systems such as Git are even more flexible.

Granted, those systems lend themselves better to code control. Merging changes to binary data is all but impossible in most cases, so in game development, the criteria are mostly different from many other software projects.

Thomas Holden
profile image
Mick, you might be interested in the Sauerbraten game engine: it is a first-person shooter that features an ingame editor (you tap "E" to switch into Editing mode), and the editor can function perfectly well online with multiple people working simultaneously. http://sauerbraten.org/


none
 
Comment:
 


Submit Comment