Is .webm maps in the development pipeline?

[Zephyros]

I'm a loooong time FG user. But now that I'm DMing Curse of Strahd and with the amazing work that Beneos (https://www.patreon.com/BeneosBattlemaps/posts) is doing for his animated maps, I had to migrate for another VTT that supports his .webm files.

I still use FG for mechanics, but for combat and presentation I had to migrate until FG support .webm for battlemaps and scenes. Is this support on pipeline for Unity? I'm afraid that FG is getting behind in the technological improvements that others VTTs are doing =/. I invested so much in FG and want it to reach the state of the art!

[Dire Weasel]

Vote for it here:
https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=135712

[Dudin]

I would be lying to say I am not jealous of seeing these kind of cool animated map packs being created for Foundry that are convenient to get and use. I do suspect the wow factor of such maps would fade relatively quickly though. Either way, I hope to see SW get there one day too.

[Primo]

I would be lying to say I am not jealous of seeing these kind of cool animated map packs being created for Foundry that are convenient to get and use. I do suspect the wow factor of such maps would fade relatively quickly though. Either way, I hope to see SW get there one day too.

mainly for immersion, like sounds - imagine a ship map where the water is actually moving (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfTzdBOHSdk) (or the ship) rather than just an immovable water. So damn cool!

but we'll get there eventually, one does hope

[Trenloe]

mainly for immersion, like sounds - imagine a ship map where the water is actually moving (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfTzdBOHSdk) (or the ship) rather than just an immovable water. So damn cool!
Do that in FGU with image effects. The big plus side of FGU here is that you can add this to your normal static maps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxhetJASbD8

[Primo]

Do that in FGU with image effects. The big plus side of FGU here is that you can add this to your normal static maps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxhetJASbD8

nah, that's a pool effect. I want parallax - move stuff physically, generate movement. Doesn't even come close - but it's a cool effect nonetheless.

the water background isn't big, it just keep parallaxing in and out of the screen (on the video i've shown). Think that combined with the pool effect it would make a dope sensation

[Trenloe]

Yeah, I know it's not *exactly* the same. I was just illustrating that FGU can do some cool visual things as well. It's not getting behind as the OP suggested.

[Mytherus]

Animated maps as well as built in sound would be great for immersion. Animated maps, especially a very well made one, blows away anything fgu can do visually..period. anyone saying otherwise is simply not being factually honest. I dont care who they are. Truth is truth.

Seeing the feature for animated maps not yet have even 70 votes is a bit of a bummer...as that suggests quite a while away for fgu if ever.

Now having said all that FGU is still my favorite and preferred vtt and the fx filter with los and ligthing features xan make sime very cool looking maps. I add sound with an audio pipe and discord and well it works for me.

I have foundry btw , still learning it, but i can tell you even after i master foundry my 5e games will still be fgu. Ive yet to see a vtt that supports 5e better with official products and automation than fgu.

[Trenloe]

Animated maps as well as built in sound would be great for immersion. Animated maps, especially a very well made one, blows away anything fgu can do visually..period. anyone saying otherwise is simply not being factually honest. I dont care who they are. Truth is truth.
I'm not disagreeing. I was just pointing out some functionality that a lot of people aren't aware of in terms of making static maps more dynamic.



Seeing the feature for animated maps not yet have even 70 votes is a bit of a bummer...as that suggests quite a while away for fgu if ever.
What it suggests is that this isn't a big requirement for a lot of FG users. Votes doesn't necessarily translate to what gets developed on FG. I'm sure the core FG graphics developers are aware and considering supporting other media than what's supported today. They'll set their own priorities based off fixes, graphics engine functionality, etc.. There's just been a re-write of a lot of the FGU image engine - it's now in testing: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?69749-FG-Unity-Beta-Release-v4-1-5 I'm just mentioning this to give an idea of what the devs have been working on recently and the stage that they're at in terms of development.

[YAKO SOMEDAKY]

I know I'm going to sound rude, but the reality is that FGU will always be compared to Foundry and yes I think it's healthy!
They may think I'm crazy, but I don't think that both companies will always seek to evolve, equalize and even improve things, and we are the ones who gain from this!
I'm passionate about visual effects, sound effects, animations and hope that FGU will have them one day, hopefully not too far away, but I look forward to it and I can say that I like both platforms and that I have fun every session in each of them, but I confess that my true passion is and always has been FG and my wishes and wishes are that it will always surprise!

[YAKO SOMEDAKY]

I have many friends who started to criticize the FGU and migrated to the Foundry, this is their right...
But I have many who migrated to Foundry because it's friendlier, because it has appealing features, because it's more intuitive, because it doesn't need an installer, but who claim that if FGU had Foundry's sound and visual features they would never have abandoned it. ..that would overlook its scary UI (For newbies of course) and the fact that you have to install a program on your machine and have an account to play...
For me this is no problem and it never was....

[Primo]

I have many friends who started to criticize the FGU and migrated to the Foundry, this is their right...
But I have many who migrated to Foundry because it's friendlier, because it has appealing features, because it's more intuitive, because it doesn't need an installer, but who claim that if FGU had Foundry's sound and visual features they would never have abandoned it. ..that would overlook its scary UI (For newbies of course) and the fact that you have to install a program on your machine and have an account to play...
For me this is no problem and it never was....

I get your feeling. I love both, sure - but still i'm 3k hours on FGU and counting, even playing a lot weekly on Foundry. Both are great, but i'm passionate about FGU and SW as well. So there aren't wrong choices, only fun. Well, sometimes..

É nóis! :D

[Dudin]

I was tempted to pick up Foundry to give it a shot, but I am heavily enough invested in FGU that I talked myself out of it. I agree it is good for customers of SW that Foundry now exists as it will drive healthy competition to improve the platforms. In my mind they are the only real VTT options out there with high levels of functionality (hence why I don't consider Roll 20).

[Mytherus]

I'm not disagreeing. I was just pointing out some functionality that a lot of people aren't aware of in terms of making static maps more dynamic.



What it suggests is that this isn't a big requirement for a lot of FG users. Votes doesn't necessarily translate to what gets developed on FG. I'm sure the core FG graphics developers are aware and considering supporting other media than what's supported today. They'll set their own priorities based off fixes, graphics engine functionality, etc.. There's just been a re-write of a lot of the FGU image engine - it's now in testing: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?69749-FG-Unity-Beta-Release-v4-1-5 I'm just mentioning this to give an idea of what the devs have been working on recently and the stage that they're at in terms of development.

Fair points and like you i was just being honest in my assessment of other vtts like foundry over fgu 8n terms of visuals.

Indeed i also know votes of a feature isnt how dev priorities are set..nor should it be. In truth id probably crack a joke about if devs just went by things voted on for how they work.

My comment was more along the lines of being surprised more people aren't interested in the animated maps.

I'm actually hoping a great deal the auras feature makes it in fgu (last time i checked that had a lot of votes) for example.

Im hundreds of dollars invested (excluding the ultimate lic cost) and very fond of fgu for 5e so yeah im not slamming it just again being honest.

[Mytherus]

I have many friends who started to criticize the FGU and migrated to the Foundry, this is their right...
But I have many who migrated to Foundry because it's friendlier, because it has appealing features, because it's more intuitive, because it doesn't need an installer, but who claim that if FGU had Foundry's sound and visual features they would never have abandoned it. ..that would overlook its scary UI (For newbies of course) and the fact that you have to install a program on your machine and have an account to play...
For me this is no problem and it never was....

This is weird, well funny to me, because im very comfortable with fgu and as a newcomer to learning foundry ..i am not having such a fun time with it. But i dropped my 50 bucks on it so im pushing through but as foundry is great with visuals my fgu brain is still saying ""i would have this all done in fgu by now"

I want to learn it for non 5e stuff especially homebrew game systems...i..if i had no interest in that I'd never would had even tried foundry.

[Zephyros]

My comment was more along the lines of being surprised more people aren't interested in the animated maps.



I think only a small percent of users really invest time in a software community. The majority only interact with forums when they have a personal problem (myself included). I'm active now because I had purchased Foundry because FG let me down in its technologic improvements (it is taking way too much time).

But as I said in original post, I'm way invested in FG, with more than 2.5k hours, and I'm looking forward to FG get back and improve, and don't just lose the "race of features". Of course, as a developer myself, I understand that in the end is a marathon and not a race in terms of endgame quality, but we can't kid ourselves in thinking that marketing wise, is a race and you may lose costumers on it.

EDIT: BTW, I was amazed by what some modules from the Foundry Community achieved. I was stunned by how easy is to a player explore complex maps by itself using "routes": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5N7J_NxEgA. This is a example of feature that I didn't know that I needed, but now... I know lol.

[Darkrin]

As much as I want FGU to have the animated maps tokens spells etc. I'm not sure it ever will. I was watching an interview where Doug was asked about making the fireball spell show on the screen. his answer was no then it becomes a video game. I was really disappointed by that answer. its like they have no interest in doing animated anything. I love the mechanics of FGU but I love visuals of Foundry. if foundry ever gets the books/lic. I may have to jump ship. I have put a lot into FG/SW hopefully their thinking has changed since Foundry has come out but I'm not holding my breath that's for sure.

[Springroll]

As much as I want FGU to have the animated maps tokens spells etc. I'm not sure it ever will. I was watching an interview where Doug was asked about making the fireball spell show on the screen. his answer was no then it becomes a video game. I was really disappointed by that answer. its like they have no interest in doing animated anything. I love the mechanics of FGU but I love visuals of Foundry. if foundry ever gets the books/lic. I may have to jump ship. I have put a lot into FG/SW hopefully their thinking has changed since Foundry has come out but I'm not holding my breath that's for sure.

It might be an age thing but I'm with Doug on this, yes animated maps are fun, but I'm fine with smaller map adjustments, actually I prefer them for that Theater of the Mind feel, Foundry is popular (in my opinion), not because it is better than other VTT's but because it speaks to certain users, users that want the "computer game" feel, with sound effects, cool visual effects, graphics et al. In my opinion, what RPG's has that no other game has is the possibility to paint a picture and play a movie in the minds of the players, the more graphics we put into our games the more we spoon feed the players and impact their imagination negatively, but again, It might be a conservative boomer thing ;)

[vegaserik]

Animated maps are cool, but I'd rather have the automation of FGU any day. Foundry does some stuff really well, but others it lacks quite a bit in. I like I can load up a pdf character sheet and basically play the game off of it, but if I'm going to play any of the big games - 5e, PF2, Savage Worlds etc ... FG beats it hands down.

[Nylanfs]

#Getoffmylawn #OldEntityyellsatcloud :D

[Springroll]

#Getoffmylawn #OldEntityyellsatcloud :D

Haha! :D

[seycyrus]

i think the "adds to the immersion" argument is being misapplied. It is a misnomer that is often applied to special effects. What immersions is it adding to?

The immersion of watching a video game - sure?

Because it certainly does not add to the immersion of being in dark cavern, hunkered down behind a rock and dodging spears thrown by orcs.

Let's just call it what it is - "cooler". And "cooler" is subjective.

[Zephyros]

It might be an age thing but I'm with Doug on this, yes animated maps are fun, but I'm fine with smaller map adjustments, actually I prefer them for that Theater of the Mind feel, Foundry is popular (in my opinion), not because it is better than other VTT's but because it speaks to certain users, users that want the "computer game" feel, with sound effects, cool visual effects, graphics et al. In my opinion, what RPG's has that no other game has is the possibility to paint a picture and play a movie in the minds of the players, the more graphics we put into our games the more we spoon feed the players and impact their imagination negatively, but again, It might be a conservative boomer thing ;)

While I understand the opinion/felling, I think that is a dangerous one to have while developing a product that now have competition on the market.
This feature is something that ADD and not REPLACE something in the product. The addition will not remove playerbase like yourself, but the lack off will for the ones that seek the feature. I myself doesn't use FGU in localplay anymore because of it, thereafter I don't buy modules anymore.

[Zephyros]

i think the "adds to the immersion" argument is being misapplied. It is a misnomer that is often applied to special effects. What immersions is it adding to?

The immersion of watching a video game - sure?

Because it certainly does not add to the immersion of being in dark cavern, hunkered down behind a rock and dodging spears thrown by orcs.

Let's just call it what it is - "cooler". And "cooler" is subjective.

I think you are letting your opinion dictates what is immersion for others? Maybe immersion is subjective? because I had my local players testify for me that they had more immersion when I used .webm maps with automatic ambience sounds. So yeah, for my group I can't call your quote of "certainly does not add to the immersion" as true =/

[Springroll]

While I understand the opinion/felling, I think that is a dangerous one to have while developing a product that now have competition on the market.
This feature is something that ADD and not REPLACE something in the product. The addition will not remove playerbase like yourself, but the lack off will for the ones that seek the feature. I myself doesn't use FGU in localplay anymore because of it, thereafter I don't buy modules anymore.

I agree, I was merely digressing...:p In my mind though, there's so many more players out there that have yet to use a VTT at all, what they are looking for is something that will simplify their normal game, for me that is not Foundry, and the amount of work that a GM needs to put down into Foundry to make it pretty and have moving backgrounds etc. is rather substantial, not to mention the modules and macros he/she needs to learn and understand. FGU is not simple either, but there are far less moving parts that could potentially hinder players, I'm suggesting that focus should lie on the low hanging fruit and only then start looking into the more flashy things, and when that change comes it will be integrated into the base platform and not hastily tacked on.

[Zephyros]

I agree, I was merely digressing...:p In my mind though, there's so many more players out there that have yet to use a VTT at all, what they are looking for is something that will simplify their normal game, for me that is not Foundry, and the amount of work that a GM needs to put down into Foundry to make it pretty and have moving backgrounds etc. is rather substantial, not to mention the modules and macros he/she needs to learn and understand. FGU is not simple either, but there are far less moving parts that could potentially hinder players, I'm suggesting that focus should lie on the low hanging fruit and only then start looking into the more flashy things, and when that change comes it will be integrated into the base platform and not hastily tacked on.

I agree. That is why I just asked for a pipeline prediction and not to be implemented in the next patch release. While .webm is a feature that I'm needing right now, isn't something that need to be rushed. But the feedback of a possible implementation in the road ahead would be good enough to maintain my attention in FGU once more. For now, I'm using Foundry with success for my current need (but yeah, for automation it sucks, but because I'm using for local play, my players still roll physical dice, that way this part doesn't affect me much, but of course, it is far from being a perfect product )

[seycyrus]

I think you are letting your opinion dictates what is immersion for others? Maybe immersion is subjective? because I had my local players testify for me that they had more immersion when I used .webm maps with automatic ambience sounds. So yeah, for my group I can't call your quote of "certainly does not add to the immersion" as true =/

Again, Immersion of what?

Immersion into the "reality of the scene" - I doubt it. Immersion into the "school of cool" - certainly.

[Zephyros]

Again, Immersion of what?

Immersion into the "reality of the scene" - I doubt it. Immersion into the "school of cool" - certainly.

Just ask random players:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir3sudq83eU

I'm pretty confident that a good number will tell you that it helps in the immersion of the reality of the scene.

[seycyrus]

Just ask random players:
...I'm pretty confident that a good number will tell you that it helps in the immersion of the reality of the scene.

I'm *more* confident that the very first bits of commentary out of their mouths will be something along the lines ... " That's COOL! That's awesome! "

Because it IS cool and awesome.

[Nylanfs]

Honestly, background sounds get me WAY more immersed in a scene than visual.

[Trenloe]

As much as I want FGU to have the animated maps tokens spells etc. I'm not sure it ever will. I was watching an interview where Doug was asked about making the fireball spell show on the screen. his answer was no then it becomes a video game.
How old was the video?

Do you have a link to it?

[Jiminimonka]

If you "need" animated maps in a tabletop RPG you are doing something wrong.

They look nice but walking down a set of slime covered stairs into the pitch black.. is where you brain makes the image.

Having said that, one day it will be a thing on FGU I am sure.

[Zephyros]

Yeah, "need" is a strong word. Let's say I "want" to use those types of assets. It is a 'plus' not a 'replacement' (I still use a lot of theater of the mind to increment the narrative).

[YAKO SOMEDAKY]

More than animations I find more interesting the possibility of new LoS to allow a better construction of maps and more than that I believe that stability and speed are good acquisitions before any extra features that will bring convenience and ease for everyone.

[celestian]

If you "need" animated maps in a tabletop RPG you are doing something wrong.

They look nice but walking down a set of slime covered stairs into the pitch black.. is where you brain makes the image.

Having said that, one day it will be a thing on FGU I am sure.

Telling someone they are doing something wrong because it doesn't match your idea of "gaming" is fairly conceited. It's no different than someone wanting sounds in their game and you telling them "you're doing it wrong because you need sound to increase your immersion". Which, is, categorically false. What you need and what someone else needs for their game is specific to them. Gatekeeping is pretty bad form.

Imagine if someone told you the same thing but related it to using a VTT for your games?

For me, I need sounds and "graphics" (be they maps, animated/video maps, tokens, spell effects) for more immersion. It increases my enjoyment of the game to have as much as I can to put me in the situation. Sure, I can "imagine" all of that but it's not nearly as immersive for me.

[Trenloe]

There's no completely correct way of playing RPGs, and there's neither a completely wrong way to play RPGs. Do what works and provides enjoyment for your group. Saying that other RPGers way of gaming is wrong is... well, wrong and not in the spirit of these forums.

Keep all discussions on topic and constructive.

[Kelrugem]

I concur with Celestian and Trenloe. About what Doug may have said: I also remember that he said that very long-term plans are 2.5D and 3D, so, I cannot imagine that there is a categorical "no" to animated maps :) (I have never seen the cited video about what Doug may have said) If I recall correctly some other answers in the forums, then they look at that subject again and again over time but there is no good solution and implementation yet, and other things may have higher priority :)

[Zacchaeus]

I suspect that whatever video is being referenced was one which was done either before Alpha or before Beta releases. And the question was probably would we see fireballs animations in Alpha or Beta. In either case as Kelrugem points out it's hardly likely that anything is ruled.

[JimSocks]

Forgotten Adventures on Patreon just posted their first animated map assets, and they were the first animated map things that actually got me excited. I immediately googled if webm was supported or in the works for FGU which led me to this thread.

I get that it’s an old thread but their new assets REALLY got me pumped. They are subtle but totally awesome, and I could see them reinforcing or even helping to steer my narrative of the scene.

The static reminder to the players that the gems are glittering, or that the air is choked with spores, is such a cool idea. I added my vote to the stack, and I’m glad to see it is at least way more than 70 votes now!

[Will Tomorrow]

I have voted for webm support on the ideainformer feedback site along with a few hundred other folks. I'll necro this thread to bump that I would *love* webm support and immediately begin generating animated maps for use with FGU. I love the software, but being able to replace the immersion of being around a tabletop with people with a little bit of fancy attention grabbing animated assets would really add something to the pure digital experience, IMO. I'd also love more FX overlays, but that is a different thread to necro. lol

[MeepTheChangeling]

Sure, .webp can be animated, but that's not why I would use it exclusively. It's smaller than .jpeg with the quality of a .png. Tiny size, high quality, SUPER bandwidth friendly.

[gaara6666]

With Roll20 announcing their UI revamp, adding in a pipeline for webm animated maps would be a welcome response to generate more revenue for Smiteworks as well as the burgeoning interest in other VTT due to WOTC latest PR nightmare. I would be happy to pay via the forge to enjoy assets and maps animated. Smiteworks got on the forefront with earliest adoption of 5E direct support and would hate to see them fall behind to other VTT and lose momentum.

[Trenloe]

WEBM and WEBP file support is currently being tested in the "test" channel.

Information available here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?77867-Fantasy-Grounds-Beta-Release-v4-4-0

[gaara6666]

Sad times. Says webm and animated webp forrmats not supported... I just wabt cool aninated maps lol

[Moon Wizard]

Did you see the post above yours by @Trenloe?
Support for WEBM and animated WEBP are in the Test channel.

Regards,
JPG

[Jiminimonka]

Sad times. Says webm and animated webp forrmats not supported... I just wabt cool aninated maps lol

44 replies to this thread I am guessing you read the title and not the last few pages ;)

[Agamon]

Awesome! Some other image updates, too, great news! Glad this is possible and that the devs were able to get it incuded!

[gaara6666]

Sad times. Says webm and animated webp forrmats not supported... I just wabt cool aninated maps lol


i have been humbled by new information thank you