When will Constructor ship?

Submit your own resources!

Brian Wells   (Nov 08, 2005 at 03:21 GMT)

So when will constructor be done?

;)

Jerane Alleyne   (Nov 08, 2005 at 03:50 GMT)

Thanks a lot for the update. I do have a question regarding Constructor if it can be answered at this time. I did notice that 3D World Studio was capable of importing .3DS files and was curious if Torque Constructor did anything similar, either with .3DS or another format. I've been doing structures in 3DS Max with hopes of transferring them over to the level designer that I plan to purchase. This is probably one of the deciding factors for me, along with price. I appreciate any information you can share, thanks :)

David \"Fulcrum\" Wyand   (Nov 08, 2005 at 03:58 GMT)   Resource Rating: 5

Oooo...I can see this .plan getting a lot of comments! You trying to go for some kind of record, Matt? :o)

- LightWave Dave

Josh Moore   (Nov 08, 2005 at 04:08 GMT)

Quote:

---

It is going to be the foundation for a rewrite of the built-in Torque tools (like the Mission Editor) and will eventually be mergable into Torque itself (1.0 will be a stand-alone application).

---

Oh
Hell
Yes
:D

Tim Muenstermann   (Nov 08, 2005 at 04:13 GMT)

It will be well worth the wait... Thanks for the update

Jesse (Midhir) Liles   (Nov 08, 2005 at 04:27 GMT)

*droool*

Dave D   (Nov 08, 2005 at 05:41 GMT)

Kinda settles it with me, I'll be holding out for Constructor.

Quote:

---

he is not getting any sort of support/love from GarageGames (he hasn't even purchased a TGE license) nor is he even getting support from the creator of Pipeline (Tom Spillman)

---

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 06:38 GMT)

Quote:

---

At this point I can tell you that, while we respect the creator of Cartography Shop for shipping a brush editor, he is not getting any sort of support/love from GarageGames (he hasn't even purchased a TGE license) nor is he even getting support from the creator of Pipeline (Tom Spillman) so it is hard for me to recommend Cartography Shop or 3D World Studio as any long term solution.

---

Pipeline was a short term solution, and there is no need for it with 3dws, as it builds a dif directly.

At least someone got off thier asses and built something that worked with the community here ( Josh and the Sickhead games guys) , it took GG 4 years to a decent CSG editor rolling, and its not even done.

GG depends on the community for so much of their products. They even list 3rd party tools as "Features" of TGE... Kinda shady IMO.

Quote:

---

Interior exporters for QuArK, Cartography Shop, and any Valve220-compatible map editors

---

Edited on Nov 08, 2005 06:49 GMT

Ben Garney   (Nov 08, 2005 at 06:55 GMT)

Well, we sort of figured that someone would write a good CSG editor. There are good modelling packages (Max, Maya... Blender, other things, too), and good 2d art tools (Photoshop, Paintshop Pro, Gimp), and good sound tools (SoundForge, Audacity), and even good video tools (iMovie, Premiere). So why shouldn't there be a good CSG editor out there? :)

Is it depending on the community for us to let discreet or alias make a kick ass modelling package? They make buckets of money from it. :)

How about letting Adobe make Photoshop? It's a great tool, and they make money from it, too.

Or audio editing - SoundForge is a pretty solid app, and well worth the money.

Would it be smart of us to try to write our own versions of those tools?

CSG editing isn't unique to Torque, so there's no reason to expect that _we_ would have to write it. We've gone out of our way to try and give the community ample opportunity to capitalize on this opportunity. This is a product that will sell, and we'd sort of like to a) not have to spend time on this and b) let somebody make a fortune off it. Quark is OK, but not that good. Radiant is too expensive, Hammer has licensing issues (and neither of them are all _that_ wonderful - we've looked at licensing them for our own projects and decided not to).

But apparently no one really wants that, so we've ended up having to do it ourselves. Is it bad? Well, not really, it'll be a great product and very useful to people, but it's not exactly critical to our business to do it. But it would have been better if someone had capitalized on the opportunity. ;)

I guess by your argument we should be writing our own C++ compilers, IDEs, and graphics card drivers, too. :)

(Incidentally - 3dws just calls map2dif, like every other CSG tool that supports Torque, except Pipeline.)

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 07:04 GMT)

Wow, totally missing the point, and not even close to the same thing.

"Is it depending on the community for us to let discreet or alias make a kick ass modelling package?"

Saying a FEATURE of TGE is ability to use maps from Cartshop is an underhanded attempt to make people think you can directly move from Cshop to TGE, when in fact you cannot. That would be like a car sales man saying this car can go 250 MPH, when it only goes 150 without buying some addon crap from another company.

Acting like your editor is going to be the holy grail of TGE editing is very presuptous, as ever editor I've seen for a GG product is buggy, and underfeatured. Track record says thats in Constructors future.

Dreamer   (Nov 08, 2005 at 07:16 GMT)

Ok, so is there a target price for it? If so can I place an early order for it? Please!!!!
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 07:16 GMT

Ben Garney   (Nov 08, 2005 at 07:33 GMT)

@Chris - That seems pretty pedantic. :)

But yes- I suppose you're right, you do have to buy an addon to get Cartography Shop to talk to Torque, ie, Mr. Spilman's excellent Pipeline product. For $12.

Unless you use 3dws, in which case, it will... ah... export automatically to DIF with no additional products or work. Although you'd then be paying $15 extra for the privilege.

In any case - if you don't like Constructor, or don't expect it to be good, don't feel obligated to be excited about it or buy it when it comes out. Dollars vote louder than words. :) Meanwhile, we like it, and it seems like there's a fair number of people here excited about it, so we'll probably keep on developing it.

James Laker (BurNinG)   (Nov 08, 2005 at 07:48 GMT)

Quote:

---

...so we'll probably keep on developing it.

---

I can not help to laugh at this :)

You betta keep at! ;)

Matt Fairfax   (Nov 08, 2005 at 08:39 GMT)

Quote:

---

Acting like your editor is going to be the holy grail of TGE editing is very presuptous

---

Woah buddy...starting to get a little personal aren't you. When did this go from being a friendly discussion to something nasty? We've never made any claims like that. We've just been working hard to provide the best possible product we can. I think we've been very open and honest about what you can expect from GG and Constructor.

Quote:

---

as ever editor I've seen for a GG product is buggy, and underfeatured. Track record says thats in Constructors future

---

As I mentioned in my .plan:

Quote:

---

We want Constructor to launch as a very solid tool that you guys can jump right onto and be productive with immediately (no fighting bugs, no missing core functionality, no unintuitive workflow).

---

Obviously, it is difficult to release completely bug-free code but we try our best.

Honestly I am not sure where all of your bitterness is coming from? If you don't like GarageGames and our products, then why are you hanging around?

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 08:50 GMT)

Did I say I didn't like GG or your products?

Dreamer   (Nov 08, 2005 at 08:58 GMT)

@Chris, I think you may be missing the point here, Constructor IS the Holy Grail of GG editing products, thats why I for one am so excited about it. Even if it were a buggy demo, at this point I would sell my own mother to get a copy. It's the final piece missing from the whole GG equation, it IS the Holy Grail.

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 09:02 GMT)

LOL, and you know this how? The demo you used? Thought so. You are mearly assuming it will be the holy grail.

^ months ago, the GGs were poo pooing anyone complaining about QuArK, and telling them to get Cshop as an alternative... Now, all of a sudden "it is hard for me to recommend Cartography Shop or 3D World Studio as any long term solution". Seems now that their tool is on the horizon, all of a sudden other options cease to be a decent option.

Jeff Gran   (Nov 08, 2005 at 09:05 GMT)

Nice .plan, Matt. I am seriously looking forward to Constructor and I know it will be the best product that it can be.

I do feel that TGE's mission editor is still f'd up..... but I haven't used 1.4 yet, and I know for a fact that some things are better, if not fixed.

Keep on truckin - most of us appreciate your work. :)

EDIT:

CW: Yes, I have used the alpha demo. And it is SWEET.

Months ago, Cshop was the best thing available, and the only tool that the Community had contributed, so of course GG was pimping it. They were trying to help the community initiative and letting people know what their best choice was. What the hell do you expect? If they had said "No, wait for Constructor" you would have had an even more violent response. In your mind, is there a right answer, or are you just looking for things to complain about?
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 09:11 GMT

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 09:23 GMT)

---Enough. GG Admin.---
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 21:04 GMT

Andrew Kerr   (Nov 08, 2005 at 10:49 GMT)

Will Constructor be usable for engines other than Torque, including commercially? Does it export to "standard" .map format(s)? If so, I'm assuming it could be appropriately customised for whatever game or engine using TS.

Andrew Kerr   (Nov 08, 2005 at 11:04 GMT)

@Chris - as you know from this thread, there clearly was some kind of falling out between the Leadwerks and Sickhead guys. Obviously this is unfortunate for the indie community. I assume that is what Matt was alluding to in his above .plan. Whether it is wise to publicly allude to it is another matter.

Tom Bampton   (Nov 08, 2005 at 12:04 GMT)

@Chris W,

You complain now, but it is just jealousy because you don't have it yet. When it ships, we all know you will be the first sweaty palmed geek with slightly moist underwear in the line to get it. There is no point trying to deny it, there is no other explanation for your continued unwarranted attacks on various fine people of this community.

T.

John Kabus (BobTheCBuilder)   (Nov 08, 2005 at 12:29 GMT)

@Chris Wilson,

Allow me to educate you, because you're clearly missing a lot of key information...

Quote:

---

Saying a FEATURE of TGE is ability to use maps from Cartshop is an underhanded attempt to make people think you can directly move from Cshop to TGE, when in fact you cannot.

---

Yes, you can. GarageGames first said Cshop was an option when my CShop map2dif resource was released. At that time there was a complete and free resource for importing Cshop files directly into Torque.

At the point when I stopped supporting Cshop (I'll explain why below) Tom asked to build his pipeline based on the resource, seeing as I had no intention of ever supporting Cshop again I said sure why not.

So as of Cshop 4.1 if you want a solid exporter you can buy Tom's pipeline, if you want to save $12 you can mod the resource - I've done it here, it take about a minute.

Quote:

---

GG depends on the community for so much of their products. They even list 3rd party tools as "Features" of TGE... Kinda shady IMO

---

All engines do this - people want to know what tools they can use to create content. Even tools do this to show the other tools you can migrate from.

Quote:

---

^ months ago, the GGs were poo pooing anyone complaining about QuArK, and telling them to get Cshop as an alternative... Now, all of a sudden "it is hard for me to recommend Cartography Shop or 3D World Studio as any long term solution". Seems now that their tool is on the horizon, all of a sudden other options cease to be a decent option.

---

Actually Cshop was recommend for a long time during development of Constructor and the reason for not recommending it now is far more complicated, as I'll explain now...

So why did I stop supporting Cshop, and why did Tom drop his pipeline? Josh Klint the creator of Cshop.

Supporting Cshop was a mine field bugs, under-supported features, and threats to remove key features from the product. Josh made it clear early on that he envisioned Cshop as an indie Max, but without all the useful features - in short Milkshape. Every release consisted of threats to remove key features such as brushes and CSG operations - features that are required for interior editing.

Clearly dealing with this wasn't worth the effort for a free resource, so I dropped support for Cshop. When Tom contacted me about his Cshop pipeline I thought it was a great idea, but warned him about Josh. Though I can't comment on what happened between Tom and Josh, based on what I've heard he likely when through the same sort of things, and ironically all in an effort to support Josh's product.

That is why Cshop/3DWS is not a reliable option, and that's why I won't use and no longer support the products.

-John
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 08:55 GMT

Gary Preston   (Nov 08, 2005 at 12:31 GMT)

Andrew: Check out some of the older plans on constructor, I'm not 100% sure but I seem to remember reading that Constructor will be able to output in standard .map format so that it will be compatible with other engines that support that format or provide conversion tools. But as I say check out the plans to be sure :)

Chris:

Quote:

---

Saying a FEATURE of TGE is ability to use maps from Cartshop is an underhanded attempt to make people think you can directly move from Cshop to TGE, when in fact you cannot. That would be like a car sales man saying this car can go 250 MPH, when it only goes 150 without buying some addon crap from another company.

---

Alternativly it could be an honest mistake on behalf of the person who wrote that page, that forgot to include a mention that you can export from CShop to Torque directly with TomSpillmans Pipeline plugin for CShop.

Not everything done has ulterior motives. GG are allowed to change their opinions on products as new products or internal projects develop. If they no longer want to point people to CShop because Constructor is looming on the horizon which will be a fully supported TGE product, then thats their choice. There are plenty of people on the forums that will inform newcomers of all their options, so really does it matter?

Edit: Based on what John has posted above, if true I think thats a perfectly sound reason for not recommending CShop in the long run. Who knows how much work you'll have to do to get new versions working with TGE or whether the application will still be around in a usable format.

Bring on constructor :)
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 12:34 GMT

Billy L   (Nov 08, 2005 at 12:50 GMT)

Keep up the good work Matt.
I believe the constructor gonna be a lovely tool when it comes out .
I rather see a working , non crashing tool , then reverse.
Some things that would be lovely to have, is working movers, and the translucent function working.
Otherwise i think this is worth waiting for.

Joe Bird   (Nov 08, 2005 at 13:07 GMT)

Thanks for the update on Constructor! Sounds like it should be done by the time I finish school next fall. Until then I'll be developing my level design skills using UnrealED anyway, although I am not sure the skills will be completely transferable since my recent maps are being built using Static Meshes with CSG primarily being used to block the levels out.

I like that GG is focusing on their pipeline and tools. In particular I am excited about tools like Constructor becoming a part of Torque, "It is going to be the foundation for a rewrite of the built-in Torque tools (like the Mission Editor) and will eventually be mergable into Torque itself". This is great news! I would love to have the ability to iterate levels including scripting from directly within Torque. Tools like these will also give me some extra incentive to upgrade to TSE when it is complete.

Also, I hope Texture Compression will be implemented into Torque by then so that I can make use of the hi-res texture collection I have been creating. I had my fingers crossed for it getting into 1.4.

Keith Frampton   (Nov 08, 2005 at 13:32 GMT)

.
Edited on Apr 04, 2007 14:43 GMT

Brian Wells   (Nov 08, 2005 at 14:08 GMT)

I just think Chris needs a hug...I am not big into hugging other men, but I will take one for the team *hug*

That oughta calm him down :)

Denis Linardic   (Nov 08, 2005 at 14:14 GMT)

As I stated in the thread that was practicly moved here, Constructor is Holy Grail...
Why? Simply becouase it has to work with TGE (no matter what version, or what update hit TGE, constructor will have to be promptly updated becouase it is developed FOR TGE!

One suggestion. Maybe is possible to release Constructor as EA (for the same price as final release ) for some of us who just can't wait any longer ;) <-- HINT, HINT
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 14:15 GMT

Vashner   (Nov 08, 2005 at 14:34 GMT)

Woah this post is like a landmine field. I didn't want to step in it but im grizzled so here goes. I purchased 3dws, the guy there does know his stuff but they are missing like primatives and stuff. I should not have to argue over a circle primative. But they did find a 3rd party one I could use (just making a point). 3dws does seem very easy to use so far and I am happy with it. But it's gonna need improvement to make more wild structures. I'll be looking for constructors shipping features and whatever patch level 3dws is at that time to make my final buy decision. As far as being pulled for that marble blast project, I understand the priority and it could help us make game sales off X360/TSE in future just from some of the processes learned etc.

Treb Connell (formerlyMasterTreb   (Nov 08, 2005 at 15:36 GMT)

OMG I have to say that we actually have what might be considered as a date. thats the last thing I thought would happen. I'm not complaining though :).

Chris   (Nov 08, 2005 at 17:34 GMT)

----Enough. GG Admin.---
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 21:05 GMT

Brian Hunter   (Nov 08, 2005 at 18:58 GMT)

Quote:

---

Also, no, I have not attcked any person.

---

Quote:

---

At least someone got off thier asses and built something that worked with the community here ( Josh and the Sickhead games guys) , it took GG 4 years to a decent CSG editor rolling, and its not even done.

---

Quote:

---

Acting like your editor is going to be the holy grail of TGE editing is very presuptous

---

Im seeing a couple of discrepancies here ...

Jerane Alleyne   (Nov 08, 2005 at 18:58 GMT)

Quote:

---

Perhaps, but 3dws is ONLY a CSG editor, not a mini milkshape or max. Kinda makes that point rather moot, doesn't it?

---

Think it was obvious he was making more of a feature comparison, not a literal one...

It never really sounded like there was any real jab at 3DWS or its related products, sounds like Matt is being very matter-of-fact regarding Constructor. No matter how well an outside product works, more likely than not, one from the inner circle of developers will be better, at least having the most potential. If there are bugs, you're certain they'll be looked into. You're more than likely not to run into the issues that CShop developers and those associated apparently did.

Unsung Zero   (Nov 08, 2005 at 19:16 GMT)

Quote:

---

Regardless of anything written in these posts and blog, it is very uncool to make a public jab at another product

---

Is posting on a blog really a public matter? I hadn't seen any anti-Cshop campaigning commercials.

It's little things like This that make us want to look out for GG and the community.

The result of this plan (and comments) has brought me to the decision of just waiting for Constructor.

John Kabus (BobTheCBuilder)   (Nov 08, 2005 at 20:13 GMT)

Quote:

---

Regardless of anything written in these posts and blog, it is very uncool to make a public jab at another product, simply because yours is coming out soon, especially when you were happy to recomend it in the past. Most users will never speak to josh.

---

I'm not sure if this was aimed at me, however I'll respond:

I made it very clear when I stopped supporting Cshop that I no longer dealt with that product. As for making public announcements declaring it - no I didn't do that.

Why? Mainly because Tom was trying to release a Cshop product, but also because the fallout from the problems I had with Josh didn't need to spillover into the community. And before you say something obvious like 'well it's in the community now', rest assured the polite version that I posted above accounts for roughly 1% of the full misery.

Quote:

---

Perhaps, but 3dws is ONLY a CSG editor, not a mini milkshape or max. Kinda makes that point rather moot, doesn't it?

It is NOT more complicated now, very less complicated, as you no longer need the Pipeline. Whether or not you like Josh, or LeadWerks, has no bearing on how well 3DWS works...

---

You seem to totally miss the point. Cshop 3 was only a CSG editor, and after a firestorm on the TGC forums Cshop 4 became one too, but every new version, however minor, required continuous arguing to keep those features in.

The Milkshape/Max comment is about where Josh himself envisions the product, and guess what Milkshape and Max don't support CSG operations.

My point is that the current version of 3DWS might work fine, but don't expect future versions to be torque friendly. I'm sure you say that doesn't make a difference to you, but I care about my indie career and I'm not wasting my time and energy arguing with Josh over supporting common features.


Incidentally Constructor will always support Torque,

-John
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 11:02 GMT

Ed Averill   (Nov 08, 2005 at 20:36 GMT)

I own CShop, it's my interim solution until Constructor ships. Fortunately my day gig pays enough I can get something better (for me) than Quark now, and when Constructor ships move to that.

Thanks for the informative blog post. No thanks for the bandwidth-wasting flames that followed.

Eric Elwell   (Nov 08, 2005 at 20:57 GMT)

Appropriate Educational Illustration
Edited on Nov 08, 2005 21:00 GMT

Tom Bentz   (Nov 09, 2005 at 00:31 GMT)

Im using 3d world studio and I really like it. I havent used many BSP editors but I did have Cart shop before and really liked the workflow. 3dws allows for very quick creation of great interiors. Terrain just got added and will (supposedly) be able to export into torque. It exports map files and can run the included map2dif converter to automatically generate dif files. A feature still to be added is the ability to place .dts objects inside the editor and the ability to export a functional Torque .mis file with interiors, .dts objects, and terrain which is going to be an awesome feature since Im not too fond of the Torque world editor and the 3dws editor is going to be 100x easier to use to place all your objects. It sounds like Constructor will have some (if not all) of this capability also. I do believe what Matt wrote about supporting GG though and will surely buy constructor when Santa comes. 3dws is closed source and Constructor is open through torquescript. We wont have to wait for features to be implemented or requests for features that make your life easier to be shot down. You can change how the SW works by making changes under the hood. Those capabilities with this community is going to blow the lid off of game development using the Constructor/Torque combo. Where else can you get that for $100 + $constructor?

Frogger   (Nov 09, 2005 at 01:40 GMT)

I salute Matt and GG for all of their hard work. From having to listen to complaints about the exporter and how to use Quark, to constant questions (and complaints) about Constructor, Matt has to deal with tons of crap. Hopefully after Constructor everybody will simmer down. I don't know how GG has been able to handle this crap either, as I've seen my share of complete idiots that come on here and act like fools. I'm glad that they have fought through the junk, and continued their inspiration of the indie game development. Go GarageGames, never give up the fight, there are plenty of us who still want this community to become something even greater than it is already!

Tom Bentz   (Nov 09, 2005 at 02:33 GMT)

For everyone slamming GG - take a backseat and let them drive for now or go get 3DWS and fight with the developer for features.
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 02:37 GMT

FruitBatInShades   (Nov 09, 2005 at 08:28 GMT)

I must say the overall impression of the comments was not very good towards other csg editors, probably a case of people being really excited over their product (who isn't responsible of the same behaviour sometimes?). As for QuArK, it is a powerful product but has some fundamental problems that have not been sorted out because the original developers have left the project and its written in a language not many people still code in.

I was supposed to be on the testing team of Constructor and was asked to email once a month to check on progress. Then I stopped receiving replies and have been forgotten and ignored :( Me, upset! Never! I do hope constructor is what we all hope it will be. When I did my research and basic design specs for a CSG editor the problem areas are so obvious its wierd they haven't been filled. I can tell you that CSG is very complicated to understand and even harder to get right on a programming level. I think bugs are going to exist is any CSG product that allows you to do more than use lego blocks.

Matt always seems to be getting crap (from me! Nooooooo) and its less to do with the fact its Matt, than he stepped into a very big minefield when he started to look at the brush based side of torque. To be honest, the impression I get from GG is that no-one really understood that side of the engine in great detail and Matt got hoiked in to decipher it all.

The art pipeline has been a headache since I found torque and has driven me away from the product but who can't say its been getting better? It has constantly improved over the last 18 months. Why are there no Tony Hawks, Splinter Cells or Jedi Knight games written in torque? Is it because the engine isn't up to it? No experienced programmers, artists or animators? Nope its because the art pipeline is difficult at best.

At the end of the day Torque isn't a 'Construct'a'game' kit. Its an engine, and a good engine at that, as soon as we all have smoother more flexible pipelines into the engine, game quality, value and diversity will rocket. Hopefully constructor will be part of that process.
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 08:29 GMT

Chris   (Nov 09, 2005 at 08:41 GMT)

Well said fruitinbatshades.

John Kabus (BobTheCBuilder)   (Nov 09, 2005 at 09:15 GMT)

Hey FruitBat, the guys at GG are swamped right now, but I'm sure you're still on the list. Keep in mind that xbox360 project is still going. :)

As for biased comments I think they're mostly in self-defense from the few posted insults and misinformation. A lot of inter-company business goes on behind the scenes when working on these products, and not all of it is good. I don't think anyone considers that before slinging the insults. But anyway that's over and doesn't matter now.


I'm sure you're still on the testing list, chances are we're waiting for the next big update to send out more info, though I'm not involved with the test groups, so I can't say for certain. Don't get discourage though! :)

Weston   (Nov 09, 2005 at 13:23 GMT)   Resource Rating: 5

Even if constructor never ships and the content pipeline never improves, GG is saving all of us 10s of thousands of dollars in development costs. Certain people need to remember what an incredible deal they're getting here.

The lack of perspective I see on these forums is incredible sometimes.
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 15:14 GMT

FruitBatInShades   (Nov 09, 2005 at 14:32 GMT)

Quote:

---

We want Constructor to launch as a very solid tool that you guys can jump right onto and be productive with immediately (no fighting bugs, no missing core functionality, no unintuitive workflow).

---

Put me back on the tester list then ;)

Kirby Webber   (Nov 09, 2005 at 19:06 GMT)

Quote:

---

GG depends on the community for so much of their products.

---

And this is a bad thing?

I personally find it phenomenal that GG allows room for the more knowledgable developers around here to extend their official toolset.

It benefits the community as a whole in the addition of new and much needed tools, the developers by providing a revenue stream, and GG by taking the load "off of their plate" so to speak.

Allowing the community to extend and enhance their flagship product is a strength for GG, not a weakness IMO.

~ Peace

Clint S. Brewer   (Nov 09, 2005 at 21:03 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

Allowing and depending are two different things. I could allow you to feed me, that would be a strength, thank you for the food! But if I depended on you to feed me that would be a weakness, now I'm dead, isn't logic grand? :) anyway, it sounds to me like constructor is still a ways off. Light mapping DTS's sounds awesome, I'll be looking forward to that.

Matt Fairfax   (Nov 09, 2005 at 21:10 GMT)

FruitBatInShades,
You have never been off the list. As I mentioned in my last email to you, when we have something for you to test, we will get back in contact with you.

Stephen Zepp   (Nov 09, 2005 at 21:29 GMT)

I just wanted to reference the "hate" (my term, and used very loosely, no insult intended to anyone at all) seen with the delay of constructor, compared to the excessive demand for "when will it be released" and "what features will it have" we get for everything we mention.

We went out on a limb and talked about Constructor because the community needs it (or did at the time, and we think still does!) early on, and then unfortunately worst case happened: it got delayed due to other committments. That leads to exactly this type of .plan, and responses.

It's why we are so extremely hesitant to ever give timelines, or even feature lists for any of our products.
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 21:30 GMT

FruitBatInShades   (Nov 09, 2005 at 21:48 GMT)

I'm a developer by profession and I can tell you deadlines and release dates are a recipie for disaster. You always end up chopping features, not doing as much bug checking as you should, just hacking something in because you haven't had time to do it properly. Clients become annoyed and don't understand why the interface worked 3 months ago, but still they can't use it! What are those damn programmers doing?

I can't believe I'm going to say this...but... "The longer they spend developing it in a non-stress environment, the better the initial product will be" and the more time I have to get on with my flexible cms before becoming distracted by torque again :0D
Edited on Nov 09, 2005 21:49 GMT

Tom Bentz   (Nov 09, 2005 at 21:49 GMT)

I hope GG knows that ppl are just frustrated with whats available and its not that GG is doing anything wrong (unless announcing the development of this tool was wrong). Its like a bunch of piranhas that havent eaten in weeks and they can smell it coming...

Brian Hunter   (Nov 09, 2005 at 22:05 GMT)

Stephen Zepp

Quote:

---

I just wanted to reference the "hate" (my term, and used very loosely, no insult intended to anyone at all) seen with the delay of constructor, compared to the excessive demand for "when will it be released" and "what features will it have" we get for everything we mention.

We went out on a limb and talked about Constructor because the community needs it (or did at the time, and we think still does!) early on, and then unfortunately worst case happened: it got delayed due to other committments. That leads to exactly this type of .plan, and responses.

It's why we are so extremely hesitant to ever give timelines, or even feature lists for any of our products.

---

Amen. Gospel truth to my eyes.
Then let me be the little voice saying two words you all deserve to hear.
"Thank you."

Dreamer   (Nov 10, 2005 at 06:27 GMT)

/agree

Denis Linardic   (Nov 10, 2005 at 08:00 GMT)

/absolutly <--sorry for spamming but I just had to ;)

Kirby Webber   (Nov 10, 2005 at 14:57 GMT)

Quote:

---

Allowing and depending are two different things. I could allow you to feed me, that would be a strength, thank you for the food! But if I depended on you to feed me that would be a weakness, now I'm dead, isn't logic grand?

---

Clint, with all due respect, logic != hyperbole.

Fact is, noone was 'starving' in this proverbial scenario - far from it in fact, they just didn't like the gruel (quark) that was being offered.

As was pointed out earlier on by Ben, noone ever deemed GG to be responsible for creating a *.dts native modeler or anything of the sort, it was expected that aspiring developers would have to find their own solutions, so why is a BSP editor any different? Because some other substandard engines out there pre-package underfeautred BSP editors with their software? If that IS the case, then again, you had quark from the word go.

Satiating demand for something better is not the same thing as satiating demand for something missing.

Rob Terrell   (Nov 10, 2005 at 19:33 GMT)

Wow, what a .plan.

Look, there's just enormous pent-up demand for this. I agree with the above, the art pipeline is the weakest link. GG has, in the past, "blessed" a few solutions. No one really liked those tools (or, they tools they liked could not be used due to licensing concerns). Now we're in a weird time where GG has recognized publicly (perhaps only implicitly) that these other solutions are deficient, and GG is working on the omigosh-ultimate tool. Everybody wants it. Naturally. I want it. Badly. And I don't even do art.

So... until it ships, how about an open-to-all, no-support, zero-guantees beta? Or how about an early adopter release, along the lines of TSE? I'd pay for it today even knowing the full release wasn't for six months.

Ben Garney   (Nov 10, 2005 at 19:42 GMT)

We know you guys want it badly but we also want it to be a robust, useful tool. Demand isn't an excuse to release something that isn't ready, especially when there are not-unreasonable alternatives to use. :)

For most of our other EA releases, it's because there's a strong need that only we can fill. Here, there's a strong need that anyone could fill, and that several people have tried to fill. So we'd rather wait till it's solid and release it then - we only get to launch once. ;)

Clint S. Brewer   (Nov 10, 2005 at 20:13 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

@Kirby, I appreciate you think I'm due some respect, and I warn you that I could argue with your last statement, what you said what I said, what you were originally responding to, allowing, depending who the subject is, etc etc... in fact I've been told I could argue with a fencepost on many occasions. But I don't see our argument over words helping anyone. If you did come here for an argument I'd be happy to continue for $5 at ev_NO_oker@un_SPAM_earthedgames.com. I'll spare you and everyone else and try to get back to making my game.

soooo..how about another one of those constructor plans with screenshots and videos of how it's going? :) that'd be nice.
Edited on Feb 01, 2006 19:15 GMT

Denis Linardic   (Nov 10, 2005 at 21:01 GMT)

@Ben...Yes...you are right :( (there is tear in my eye, you just can't see it). Well I hope GG will allocate more time for you guys to work on the constructor.

Kirby Webber   (Nov 10, 2005 at 21:10 GMT)

Point taken... I got a chuckle out of it at any rate - your last post made me laugh. (C:

Chris   (Nov 11, 2005 at 00:45 GMT)

Just thought I'd say that GG gave Josh from LeadWerks a TGE license, and that, IMO, is very cool of them. More than just giving away a 100$ license, its a gift to the community.

Tom Bentz   (Nov 11, 2005 at 06:53 GMT)

Wow. Thats pretty nice. Anyone else get a free license?

Everyone - stop bothering GG about Constructor. For every post they have to read about them taking to long, they have to consider it and possibly respond to it which delays it even more. It isn't ready yet, they aren't going to release it until its ready, so pretend its Doom IV and just wait for gods sake.
Edited on Nov 11, 2005 06:55 GMT

Ben Garney   (Nov 11, 2005 at 06:59 GMT)

We usually try to keep serious 3rd party developers supplied with licenses. :)

Now, shh, we're working. ;)

Tom Bentz   (Nov 11, 2005 at 07:07 GMT)

=)

Tom Bentz   (Nov 11, 2005 at 08:35 GMT)

FYI - Leadwerks is developing a game engine that will be in direct competition...

Ben Garney   (Nov 11, 2005 at 08:39 GMT)

There's plenty of those already, I'm sure everyone will be fine. :)

Jonathan Rose   (Nov 13, 2005 at 22:52 GMT)

Given that I don't even think Leadwerks has made a game engine before, I wouldn't be too worried either :P

Dylan Jones   (Nov 18, 2005 at 07:28 GMT)

Hey Matt! I was wondering how much it would cost? I am going to be getting the TGE, and TSE for in about 2 to 3 weeks. Thats going to be 250++ because i live in Canada. I was wondering if it would be as cheap as Cartography Shop? I absolutely hate QuArk, and I am trying to get Hammer to work so I can get some concept levels done or finished levels, but every tutorial I have for Hammer to setup for Torque has one part missing, so I can never get it working. If you know how to help would make me very happy! :D

Keep up the damn good work!

Matt Fairfax   (Nov 18, 2005 at 11:16 GMT)

Quote:

---

And, it will be very competitively priced ;)

---

We just had a lively discussion about this tonight. Trust me when I say that I am looking out for the indie =)

Jake T   (Dec 13, 2005 at 15:56 GMT)

Ditto to Matt's post: in the meantime, while Constructor is not available - are there any documents/references on how to configure map2dif for Hammer? All the doc links in the foums and wikis are broken, erg... Please help!

Nick Zafiris   (Dec 14, 2005 at 08:05 GMT)

I have a couple docs saved up. Send me your address or include it in your profile and I'll email them to you.

Nick

TheMartian   (Jan 07, 2006 at 19:47 GMT)

So I have only one comment towards 1 thing ben said (at least I think he said) that I dont agree with, you mention that this construtor tool is not really important to your core business.

I think that is potentially short-sighted, Im in the mainstream commerical game industry (ie not really an indie developer except on my own time) so my view is different, and in fact my view might not make sense if your more concerned with indie licenses then fatter paying commerical licenses.

But, every project Im on I push to use torque as hard as I can because I know how well its written, supported, and I know you guys (long story for another discussion) and Torque loses out every
single freakn time. (well there was one time and unfortunately it lost out too just took longer).

why? cause the tools are not that great. *gasp* what do I mean? (k show tool is good, world editor, mission editor, not great) I have to use this 3rd party tool with that third party plugin and this other 3rd party tool for this other thing, and on and on. The 3rd party people dont often support there little torque plugin all that well, they dont keep up with the changes to the torque engine.

You need all the primary tools to be part of torque, supported, feature enhanced, etc by you as you make changes to the engine, they need to be full functional, complete, and easy to modify (which you cant do to most of the 3rd party stuff.)

besides why should those guys get all the money? make your own tools and provide an even more complete solution then just the amazing torque engine.

and you know what sucks? Every time you guys lose, its to freakn Unreal, why? cause everyone drools all over the tools for it that come with the engine. world building, scripting, particle editor etc etc etc.

Even though we who have been forced to work on unreal in the past know what a spaghetti coded pile of crap it is under the covers. But the tools rock. The rock so much and have remained so consistent over the years that lots of people know how to use them(plenty of people to hire for it). They rock so much that executives will spend millions on unreal3 because of the damn tools.

so I think to grow GG, to keep expanding your market, etc you really need profession tools, licensed, supported, and ehahanced by GG.

of course if your strategic vision has nothing to do with being all that big, or really going up against the big boys at a commercial level then dont listen to me :)

Ill continue to ruffle feathers in the commerical world until I can convince another project to use torque but once again on the latest endeavor your going to lose out to unreal3, again. which bums me out because ive been there done that and I know I can do more with torque in a fraction the time with a fraction the programmers, but the artist love the unreal tools, the art pipeline is fast, slick, and well established in unreal which helps define how much time and cost to make the content you want. not so clear and well polished in torque, at least not yet.

so to refresh, I think tools like constructor are important to your business, or at least I hope you change your mind and realize how important to your business they could be.

meanwhile ill fight the good fight no matter how many times I get beaten down. Provide a more complete, polished, streamlined art content pipeline with well defined, tested, supported, polished tools and own all these other chumps.

at least thats what I wish for you guys, take no prisioners.

-peace

Ben Garney   (Jan 08, 2006 at 01:14 GMT)

We totally agree that the tools are what's going to make Torque succesful. But unlike the Unreal guys, we're pretty open to having other people write more general tools. If there's a good .map editor out there people could use, that was affordable for indies - awesome! But there isn't, really, so here we are working on Constructor...

Trust me, we're aiming high, and we recognize that tools are critical to that. :)

Jake T   (Jan 19, 2006 at 18:32 GMT)

@Nick - thanks for the offer for help. We've now got Hammer 3.4 running pretty well. There are occasional probs with very large maps, but generally works ok. Mike's resource at http://home.att.net/~mikey102/worldCraft.html was very helpful.

QuangKim   (Feb 06, 2006 at 09:55 GMT)

Hi Matt,
You seem to be busy...
Are you still looking for Torque's collision??
Will you improve it for next build ??
Best wishes for you!

James Brad Barnette   (Feb 14, 2006 at 05:25 GMT)

@Ben I think the point is, this was not always the GG attitude. you guys pushed hammer and quark up until recently. I joined this community in May of 2001 and bought the sdk in Sept of 2002. It is now 2006 and you are just now working on and interior editor that is still not done.

I like most, are glad your guys are starting to come around. that being said. It doesn't matter if Torque is the greatest engine ever written. It will NEVER see industry acceptance if there are not user friendly easy feature rich tools for it.

and as for a lot of the reasons that threads like this get so flamed is becasue of GGs constant "comming soon" and "we are not gonna set a release date" if you are gonna do thing that way then don't even tell people what you are working on. Just release it. But PLEASE stop saying thing are gonna release soon. Soon is not months away soon is days or weeks. you tell people soon and it is something they need and then a few months go by and you are gonna piss them off. It is just a fact.

I for one will be buying Constructor. But that is not to say that I have not been pissed by the infinate delays of GG in the past and in the present "somtimes".

Ben I'm not trying to give you guys a hard time just trying to give some advice on how you avoid irritaing the community the way you guys sometimes do.

IMHO: you guys need to put getting this thing done ASAP as your top priority. I can't really think of anything more pressing facing the GG comunity than this.


Now a question: I notice at the top it said that the windows version would be ported to linux and mac. but the way it was stated made it sound as though it would not be released until all platforms were complete. is this the case? I hope not seems terribly unfair to hold up projects on platforms just for the minority of users that want to use linux and mac to dev.
Edited on Feb 14, 2006 05:27 GMT

Tom Bentz   (Feb 14, 2006 at 08:20 GMT)

Ben and GarageGames - Take your time to do it right. I want something that is solid and not rushed because it is demanded.

John Spivey   (Mar 07, 2006 at 20:00 GMT)

This post is four months old now. Any new info on Constructer? MB is on Xbox live now so I am hoping that the fellas are back in full swing with the Constructer build. PLEASE OH PLEASE!

Keith Frampton   (Mar 07, 2006 at 20:18 GMT)

.
Edited on Apr 04, 2007 14:43 GMT

Ben Garney   (Mar 07, 2006 at 21:24 GMT)

I bet you're right. ;)

Tyrone Morris   (Mar 12, 2006 at 08:09 GMT)

Hi Matt! This is Tyrone!

Mincetro   (Mar 19, 2006 at 08:27 GMT)

A version of Constructor on Marble Blast Ultra would be awesome... How it would work, I'm buggered, but it would be cool to say "Hey, I can make Quake maps - ON MY 360!"

Gregory Dickhute   (Mar 28, 2006 at 20:20 GMT)

I have seen that Constructor and TSE were demoed at GDC this month, and I am wondering if there is a plan to have any posts made on the subject or perhaps information of any kind. I can't believe there aren't better screenshots or a new feature list, or something. Jay Moore has told me on more than one occassion to expect a May or June Release 1 of TSE, which I am looking forward to, but with the art pipe so frocked with roadblocks and a million little undocumented workarounds to discover for TGE and TSE I am honestly looking forward to the Constructor more. It doesnt matter if Epic was giving away the Unreal3 engine if we dont have a good way to get art into it, it is just a lump.

John Spivey   (Mar 29, 2006 at 02:53 GMT)

Well I went and bought 3D World Studio. I just got so darn tiered or Quark and its ummmm "quarks". 3D World Studio does some amazing things that I just could not pull off with quark without taking tons more time to get it in there. So unless Constuctor is the second comming for brushed based modeling. That money has been spent and so far I can say that it was good money spent.

Bardur Mikladal   (Apr 01, 2006 at 16:17 GMT)

so.. when will constuctor be released?...

Regards

Maylock DeathTwister Stansbury   (May 10, 2006 at 16:58 GMT)

Hay all,

Lets see if I can do this in a short post. There are so many quotes I would like to make it would be to long a post just by itself, so I will just tell you guys my EXP with 3WS and such. But I will agree with the fact that 3dws has so many bugs (swiss cheese comes to mind) even after they have just now released a final version that quit frankly blew my mind.

I originally heard about it here on the forums and thought wow cool, good idea, so I went out and plunked down the high price of $84.00 bucks for the privilege of being a EA user of the software. at first I loved it, it was head and shoulders above Quark and hammer & many of the other editors. But it is way to much many for the product I might add. In many ways it was a superior to all other products that had been there to date. But there the road ended over the last few months for so many reasons for me at any rate.

First and foremost I am a award winning 2 & 3D artist who believes in his tools to make what he envisions. All I know is I need to have my needs met to create what people love to see that I can create. The better the tools the better the end result, and the best tool for the right job is needed.
I do not want to have to learn programming just to create art for video games and that is why more true artists do not come over to the dark side Oh obi won. That is not my job is it to learn programming?
The idea of EA is to have a say and be part of the progress of the software to see ours and other peoples needs met right? Well 3dws thinks that is wrong and I believe where the whole thing started to fall apart in the end with Leadwerks, err falling apart as they can still fix this.
I think the biggest problem is young ego's that don't understand constructive criticism which is very different from coming down on peeps. I was trying to help and yes I don't exactly say programming stuff right sometimes so I can sound kinda like a idiot, but no one was even interested in solving a few of the problems that in my mind kill that program big time. You need to understand when I went to school in college for art, you learn how to Critique art and try to make it better and take Critiques as well, I was trying to do that with 3dws, they didn't get it at all. Maybe Josh needs more schooling or something if you are going to EA, one really needs to learn to check ones ego at the door so to speak.
One way they are killing themselves is the .map2dif, .map is a 8bit format and cannot get more then 256 bsp's in them right? well that sucks right there, and as a contrast Constructor will go strait out to .dif, I mean no .map unless you export it out to a .map, why would someone want to go back to an antiquated file format when we have 32 and 64 bit math to work with now? and now I see he shot himself in the foot with working with GG and can't get the updated code to work with GG, which explains why in the final release map2dif is not working at all now from what I am reading in the posts both here and there. such a shame../hangs head in sorrow.
A good example is I was also one of the people that had wanted a Geo sphere to create buildings. They said it couldn't be done and I didn't need to make them in a .map editor. Use .dts for roofs. That didn't set well with me as in real life architecture does not follow rules with just squares in buildings, how lame is that? They gave me as the reason if I remember it right as a 256 bsp limit. My response was I think that we need to quit using 8bit math then, and that would solve that problem once and 4 all. Josh didn't like that post. Ops my bad.../chuckles.
Also Joshes light leak trouble is horrible and anyone can see the light leaks inside his program when using lighting on the mesh you cut up. Leadwerks kept telling me it was GG TGE &TSE and the map2dif which I guess in part he was right, the .map part anyway. Again I believe it is based on 8bit math as well and needs reworking big time. You can't even spin the mesh around in 3dws without it falling apart and the light leaks get worse. The more you cut into the mesh the more the light leaks abound until the mesh is so messed up it is unusable. And there is no way to go to find the exact spot in the mesh that the map2dif exporter says is messed up. So all in all it was a huge boondoggle for me. It seems the better (later versions) he made the worse the program has become for Torque users and others as well. What's more is there is no mesh tree to track down any of the mesh problems like in other editors. Even QuArk has a feature that can do that and I hate QuArk with a passion as a artist.
I sure wish I could bring Max's .3ds files directly in to a editor and make it work well, hope the big C does some of that but I won't be disappointed if it don't at first as long as I can make stuff with no light leaks, instead of getting comments like well even the best editors and the best artists have that light leak problem in the best of games. Not me if I can help it with my art anyway, so my money is on Constructor.
I have had to revert to a lower 3dws version (4 versions below the final release) to even be able to export to Torque and have 3dws even work half way decent. If you go look at the posts on the 3dws forums, he seems to have gotten the largest part of his support (Torque users) against him as he is shutting down features and trying to control his textures to just the Dark basic engine as they can't be exported out to any other games engines so far over the last few days. Shesh, what a lousy content pack and his graphics's he was giving away weren't that good anyway. We at ATOMIX give away all kinds of goodies/game resources with no strings attached and they should as well, especially if they are giving it as part of the whole package you buy, what is up with that anyway?
I think the team that has been working on Constructor has in fact been well aware of all this and have been quietly making sure that what happened to 3dws won't happen to the big C, and I for one can't farging wait for it to come out. and think that Constructor will meet the bar and then some that we all need very badly as artists and 3D world building engineers. Haha screw the programmers, it is there job to get us good software to work with in my opinion and I think many agree with me. Just kidding programmers we need ya bad to make us stuff to work with..../strokes the programmers for all hes worth back peddling haha.

Having said all this I believe that 3dws could and should get there chits together as they have almost a first rate package if they can set there egos aside of there U Know what, long enough to be a worthy of the said software. As it stands now I give QuArk and most the other editors a complete thumbs down both hands, as we seem to all agree from the posts I have been reading that no one has come up with one yet that is frankly worth a shit, till maybe now with the big C.
Dang I hope I am write, if not my programmer has one hell of allot of work to do till he builds what I need, ahahahahahahahahahaha ROTFL right?????? Actually we have started on one, but it is a long time away and we are looking at the light leak problem first when we do work on it, we have a good idea where to look, and will post later on that subject when we do figure it out for sure and not just theory.
Thanks guys for letting me rant a bit, I have been quiet about all this for a bit now, while I have been reading what other people have been posting and I see I am not alone in this at all. OH by the way they shut me out of their forums in 3dws and I consider it a honor to have been banned. I think I was on the right track and they just didn't want to hear any more about it, haha, I have also noticed they have banned other people that didn't agree with them as well. Not a good way to treat your people who would support you if you would one listen and 2 act on peoples help. They didn't seem to like my posts I guess, and all I was trying to do was get them to raise the bar some on there software.

No offense Leadwerks but you guys need to get your chit together or loose your best client base you have as we will all be using the Big C here when released and you will be a forgotten memory and that is a shame as you do almost have a first rate product. I will never post about this again as I as well think it a waist of my time and I am going on. And have gone on to other things, and I for one got pretty disgusted with the whole thing and wish it could have been different. Check egos at the door and we all get along.

I guess that wasn't so short was it, Oops Oh well I felt it was important to post was all, as it has been bugging me for a while now. I think my standing in the indie community will weather the storm ROTFL hehe /winks at everyone, I ain't going anywhere dudes and dudettes hahaha, not going any whare at all. In fact I and our company plan to be at the top of the heap in the coming years and stay there, so watch out here comes ATOMIX.

By the way a side not. We will be releasing soon the Indi music society (www.indimusicsociety.com & .org) soon on our website. Kinda like what MP3.com used to be like only better, so all you indi musicians get ready for the world market we got a few plans coming soon. ETA we think July or August, and the www.ATOMIXworldmarket.com next month and we will do posts for you people that want to sell your art, software, and crafts if anyone here does that as well like us, and goodies on a large scale we hope. Sorry for the plug but I wanted you to know it is on it's way, it was a side note haha.

OK don't yell at me all at once or agree all at once there is lots of time hahahahahaha.

DeathTwister aka TheVizard & Maylock Stansbury

Tom Bentz   (May 12, 2006 at 07:27 GMT)

Wow. Take a breath Deathtwister.

I got tired of Leadwerks and 3dws also. I bought it when there was going to be .dts and .map support and Josh has been waiting for months for someone to tell him how the .dts format works. I paid extra for the CD with 100+ textures that Josh has since then turned into useless proprietary textures for his proprietary game engine. I havent even received the CD yet while a friend bought the Early Adopter version after me got his weeks ago. Leadwerks has the most horrible customer service and they are fairly unprofessional when handling customers. Tonight I sent an email expecting a refund and mentioned not to ship the CD to me because of the missing features and useless proprietary textures that I refuse to pay extra for. Leadwerks overpromised and underdelivered.

That being said I am extremely looking forward to Constructor because of the quality of GG products and customer service. I know that GG has a product that will kill 3dws.
Edited on May 12, 2006 07:54 GMT

Maylock DeathTwister Stansbury   (May 12, 2006 at 14:44 GMT)

Wow,

I just bought the lower priced one at 84.00 bucks and glad I did it looks like. Besides I make my own textures anyway and I have fun making them, maybe have like 8-12 gigs of textures I have made over the last 12 years or so. So I never needed there content pack to begin with, good choice on my part it looks like.

I think I will work on a good texture pack for all who got U know what some goodies for what they didn't get with 3dws. I have plenty I can share with peeps. Give me a week or 2 and I will post some very good seamless textures for the peeps that got took by 3dws as I as well bought it for what they said was going to be done and at the end they dropped that ball. F.Y.I. That is called bait and switch on the con world by the way.

I as well have gone back to a version that does work until the BIG C comes out and am satisfied with that decision as it seems to be the only one that makes any since right now. Besides I am just one artist in this company ATM, and have way to much on my plate and have way to much to do, so not making building for the next few weeks is OK, have lots of other things to make in the mean time.

It sure is a shame though as they did have something if they would have just listened to their people on what our needs were. I was looking at the percentages of the different programs that people used 3dws, and it was 20 to 1 that used Torque, not Dark basic. That must have really upset Josh I guess.

Anyway I considered it an honor to have been banned on his forums for just trying to help, even though I am dumb at times about programming still, I do have art skills a plenty. I do think I have ideas that could help, and not all forums are like 3dws's forums, some people have real class in how they treat people and know how and when to check their ego's at the door. Oh ya and they won't return my emails either for some reason, and I am being nice when I email them so who know the ways of mortal men, I sure don't /chuckles....

If they ever get a final version that really works for us Torque users that is, I'll probably download it and use it, other then that for now I will limp along with a lower version that does work until C comes out. I'm pretty sure GG won't be putting out a product that is swiss cheese hahahahaha.... sorry bout that Josh.

In closing my heart goes out to others that have tried to help 3dws become great, both programmers and artists. People like Mathew and many others that were trying their damdest to help Josh get stuff done and he simply ignored people and put his buggy versions out almost every time. And it was & is no surprise when people got fed up for the most part, except for the patient ones or ones that as of yet don't know any better and even they are running thin I bet around now. anyway the other people that needed their help and got help, we all say thanks so much guys for trying to help us with getting our needs met. Your the best, Mathew and all the rest Kylon, and so many others of the peeps that have been there for people in their 3dws forums. You guys have my undieing respect for sure.

From what I have seen Timothy Aste make, and screens I have seen, I am so excited sometimes I can't sleep at night thinking of getting my hands on the Constructor software package either, so lets all hang in there, it's a coming, it's a coming soon now guys ,..../smiles hugely at the thought. Or GG will be looking for someplace with huge fences to protect themselves from crazzzy artists who want the BIG C, hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, just kidding guys /tongue in cheek.

DeathTwister
ATOMIX Productions
Klamath, Ca.
www.theatomizer.com

George Humphries   (May 12, 2006 at 15:22 GMT)

I purchased the full EA 3dws. At first, the development looked promising. After a few revisions though, things began to fall apart. I offered Josh my professional criticism on a couple of issues and got blown off. Things went rapidly downhill from there.

As an IT professional, I can tell you that listening to your customers is the number one way to make it. There are far too many "technical" people that go into a project and attempt to "armchair" it. How many of you have worked with the IT "guy" who thinks he knows everything about your application and there is nothing you can add...and...when you get your project back, it does not look or behave in any way that you desired? I have been brought in to straighten out big corporate projects and found entire teams of non-listeners that spent hundreds of thousands over a couple of years and have nothing the client wants. That is inexcusable!

Garage games at least appears to be listening to its customers. I can see that in the preview shots of the Constructor application. One of the features I requested from 3dws was Lightwave center of view pivot and look ability...apparently the Quark people though different. I see that feature in Constructor, and it only got there because somebody listened.

I know this string of posts may be a little off the topic of Constructor, but I feel as though the community needs to know other's opinions of what is going on and why. Let it also be a lesson to those doing projects for others... "You are in a customer oriented service; therefore, serve the customer as you would like to be served at a fine restaurant."

--
George Humphries
Business Systems Analyst

Tom Spilman   (May 12, 2006 at 16:30 GMT)

Leadwerks Josh is a good guy, but he can be really moody. 3D World Studio is his baby and he seems to get personally insulted when someone critiques it. We stopped working on the Torque exporter planned for it after one such outburst. I by chance met him and Annika at GDC this year and in person he's not like that. I wish him the best of luck with 3D World Studio and his game engine, but we're sticking to Torque and Constructor.

Quest Johnny   (May 14, 2006 at 14:03 GMT)

People do tend to be like that online, even when in person they are quite reasonable.

Nathan Huffman   (May 27, 2006 at 20:49 GMT)

Been awhile since anyone posted...

So whats the status on this baby? :D

Ben Garney   (May 27, 2006 at 21:32 GMT)

Constructor Functional Beta Ships!

Nathan Huffman   (Jun 18, 2006 at 10:00 GMT)

In regards to 3d world studio, I decided to order the bundle which comes with the physically shipped 'extras' about 2 months ago. Of course I recieved the downloadable application without mishap, however to this date I've yet to obtain my 'extras'. I sent a couple e-mails, but no responce. I'm not really saying I'm mad because I 'got ripped off'... I don't think I really care and money isn't too tight for me right now so the time spent on trying to straighten that ordeal out is worth more to me than the money lost.

All this leading up to... I want my Constructor. :\ For Torque, "by Torque", and no apparently shipped goods that'll probably finally be delivered after my project is complete. heh. if that... :(

can I have a tracking number or anything? geesh

GarageGames -- remedy my plight... with a great force, I call forth thee: Constructor!

edit: i kan speel gewd
Edited on Jun 18, 2006 10:03 GMT

Leadwerks   (Oct 09, 2006 at 20:09 GMT)

Hi Nathan,

I don't have any record of an order with your name. Can you please contact support at leadwerks dot com if there is a shipping problem? Thank you.

James Brad Barnette   (Dec 22, 2006 at 17:23 GMT)

well another year has come and gone. and still nothing on Constructor other than empty promises.
What is the deal with you guys. Do you not get paid or something? is this a side job for you? I know if I missed deadlines and pushed things back the way GarageGames does I would get my @** fired so fast it would make my head spin.

I hope you are punishing they windows users by making them wait for constructor to be finished on all platforms.

Ben Garney   (Dec 22, 2006 at 17:54 GMT)

Well, we've been running a pretty succesful beta program for Constructor, as well as having launched Torque 1.5, TSE MS4, and written a totally new engine from scratch in a new language on a new platform, TorqueX. We've also done a significant amount of work on TGB, releasing several new versions as well as rolling out a significant amount of new demos and docs for it.

And we launched a new social game site, the Great Games Experiment, as well as signed a bunch of new games to our game store, and even developed one ourselves.

I dunno where you work, everywhere I've been would be pretty happy with that level of productivity and innovation. :)

CDK   (Jan 22, 2007 at 13:38 GMT)

Hi there Matt/Ben.

Now that TGE 1.5, TSE MS4 is out, is there any progress on Constructor?
Edited on Jan 22, 2007 13:38 GMT

Stephen Sinclair   (Mar 22, 2007 at 13:14 GMT)

Can I download the beta and provide feedback?

-Steve

Malcolm   (Mar 23, 2007 at 12:31 GMT)

Matt,
I just want to say that I support what your doing 100%. Comming from one developer to another it is extreemly hard to bring out a bug free product. Testing is the most important part of the SDLC if you want
to release a quality product.
For those who are giving you greif I would have to say are just inexperienced and don't understand life as a coder. Living in production in a successful company means, shifts and changes in priorities, you have to put time into other projects.
Clients, well, they tend not to understand and just want their products without realising good things come to those with patience.
Good stuff guys keeping your integrity and quality.
Edited on Mar 23, 2007 12:33 GMT

Clifford Brock   (Mar 25, 2007 at 00:50 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

@ Ben
"Well, we've been running a pretty succesful beta program for Constructor, as well as having launched Torque 1.5, TSE MS4, and written a totally new engine from scratch in a new language on a new platform, TorqueX. We've also done a significant amount of work on TGB, releasing several new versions as well as rolling out a significant amount of new demos and docs for it."

You posted this in December of last year. Glad to see you are still around. wish I had gotten a reply to the email I sent you in October. when I bought TGE and was getting my feet under me.

Not that I ma bitter that I didn't hear from you. I was lost, confused and really needed the help. As it is, I found MyDreamRPG.com, started learning and am enjoying trying to make content.

Mr. Barnette simply was pointing out is has been a while since Matt posted his November 7th, 2005 "Personally, I'd estimate I have about a month to a month and half worth of work left to do on Constructor (and of course you should always double a programmer's estimate ;) but there is still a month left on MBU and I am unlikely to be cycled off it in any real capacity before it is nearly done."

17 months later. I would like to ask the same question. Is there any kind of update on Constructor? It has been in shipping in beta since May of 2006. Rather than telling us what else you have been doing? would you be kind enough to give us an update on the Blog topic "Constructor, when will it ship?"

Thank you for your attention in this post. I look forward to any reply.

Respectfully,

Cliff

Brian Peal   (Apr 08, 2007 at 02:39 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

IT IS RELEASED TODAY!!! HOORAY

Clifford Brock   (Apr 09, 2007 at 03:16 GMT)   Resource Rating: 3

WOOHOOO....

Downloaded, installed.... and promptly am lost..

Is there a NOOB how to build a box that a toon can walk into?

What a cool Easter egg. Thank You Matt and team


Cliff

James Brad Barnette   (Apr 11, 2007 at 04:45 GMT)

well I don't know if I agree with how you went about getting it made but I gotta say good job guys.

You must be a member and be logged in to either append comments or rate this resource.

Home | Products | Solutions | Downloads | Support | Search | About Us
Copyright © GarageGames.com 2000 - 2008 All Rights Reserved