My thoughts, and my farewell
by J Sears · 08/27/2007 (6:29 pm) · 38 comments
I've had TGE for several years now, also have TGB and some content packs. But I think at this point I've decided it was complete money wasted for me. I had some fun with TGB but most of the projects I was really interested in would be better off in java or activeX etc. One example would be the card game in my previous blogs. TGB was just overkill for this simple of a game.
But I think I am done working with all the products for at least a long time if not permanently. I'm sure I will still check the forums a bit. I find the discussion in game ideas and industry to be pretty interesting some times. On my way out I'd like to vent a few things.
First I do agree you can make games with TGE if you have the skills. I did not and was hoping to learn them with this engine. I found the learning curve with the lack of documentation and the resources all being several versions old so frustrating it made learning extra difficult.
I also find it baffling that they never directly incorporated some of the resources directly into the engine. I know, not everyone will need every feature so why put it in. Ok that's fine but not everyone will need a crossbow and an orc but those are in there. Also there are certain things, the vast majority will use.
Melee, yes that old arguement, what was the last FPS you played that had no melee in it? Even doom had melee. When was the last time you played an rpg without melee? Far more games will need some form of melee then not need it. There are many other examples like this for other resources.
Why not embrace something like the modernization kit, it makes the engine look so much nicer (which is needed at this point).
Also the community, there are plenty of people that help, but most just pick others apart. The same person who will complain that there's not enough people making games, not enough people putting in the effort etc. Will then turn and pick someone apart who is working hard to make a game, because he doesn't think it's interesting enough. Well great you don't like that type of game don't go play it, but if you don't have comments that are actually going to help someone then just shut up. (ya you know who you are)
Now I understand how a lot of people come into this product and get disappointed fast. They think with no skills, no training they're going to make the next WoW. I feel bad for those people, but there will always be dreamers. I wasn't one of those people. I bought this with the whole goal of learning the parts of game creation and maybe making several small projects eventually come to life. I never figured I'd make tons of money, or any money for that matter, with this engine. Learning with this engine is just too difficult.
I think one of the last straws for me was when for years people have been complaining about the documentation. Several reasons were given, we're working on other documentation right now (yes TGB is well documented, but it's also insanely easier to work with then TGE if all your doing is scripting a little 2d game), if the community is so concerned why don't they make some new documentation (well maybe if some of the money went to the community it would be their job but alas that's not how it works), the list goes on. And anytime people tried to have a reasonable, non flaming, discussion about it the threads were locked. Afraid of bad publicity maybe? Why promote the community as a big selling point and then block any conversations that make you nervous?
But what finally burned was that now they setup a school for people to pay to learn the product they already learned, as opposed to making better documentation. Yes we paid for the game now let us pay in installments for an instruction manual, I know I'd buy any other product in the world knowing that going in.
I'm sure this will get deleted before too many get to read it, despite being a paying customer and using no profanity in the blog. But I had to get that out there. As for me, now that I've been out of the Navy for a year and a half it's time for me to get a degree at night while working during the day (so no real time for game making anyways). I'm going to be working on a programming degree from UMass, it may not be game programming but I'm trying to be realistic in where I can get a job.
I truly don't mind sitting in front of a computer all day, and I like programming so it should fit well. I hope in my spare time to start learning more about game making, mostly focused in directx. I have a book on intro to directx game programming and the directx sdk is very usefull, lots of good tutorials and examples in there.
I pick directx because I feel it is a great tool for game creation and to be honest I've never cared about cross platform tools. I want to create games for windows. Now that Mac makes computers that run Windows so well all the more reason.
So like I said I will be checking in on the general forums from time to time to see any good discussions going on, I hope all the users good luck and that hopefully they'll be able to create a game with the money they've spent.
Flames can begin below
But I think I am done working with all the products for at least a long time if not permanently. I'm sure I will still check the forums a bit. I find the discussion in game ideas and industry to be pretty interesting some times. On my way out I'd like to vent a few things.
First I do agree you can make games with TGE if you have the skills. I did not and was hoping to learn them with this engine. I found the learning curve with the lack of documentation and the resources all being several versions old so frustrating it made learning extra difficult.
I also find it baffling that they never directly incorporated some of the resources directly into the engine. I know, not everyone will need every feature so why put it in. Ok that's fine but not everyone will need a crossbow and an orc but those are in there. Also there are certain things, the vast majority will use.
Melee, yes that old arguement, what was the last FPS you played that had no melee in it? Even doom had melee. When was the last time you played an rpg without melee? Far more games will need some form of melee then not need it. There are many other examples like this for other resources.
Why not embrace something like the modernization kit, it makes the engine look so much nicer (which is needed at this point).
Also the community, there are plenty of people that help, but most just pick others apart. The same person who will complain that there's not enough people making games, not enough people putting in the effort etc. Will then turn and pick someone apart who is working hard to make a game, because he doesn't think it's interesting enough. Well great you don't like that type of game don't go play it, but if you don't have comments that are actually going to help someone then just shut up. (ya you know who you are)
Now I understand how a lot of people come into this product and get disappointed fast. They think with no skills, no training they're going to make the next WoW. I feel bad for those people, but there will always be dreamers. I wasn't one of those people. I bought this with the whole goal of learning the parts of game creation and maybe making several small projects eventually come to life. I never figured I'd make tons of money, or any money for that matter, with this engine. Learning with this engine is just too difficult.
I think one of the last straws for me was when for years people have been complaining about the documentation. Several reasons were given, we're working on other documentation right now (yes TGB is well documented, but it's also insanely easier to work with then TGE if all your doing is scripting a little 2d game), if the community is so concerned why don't they make some new documentation (well maybe if some of the money went to the community it would be their job but alas that's not how it works), the list goes on. And anytime people tried to have a reasonable, non flaming, discussion about it the threads were locked. Afraid of bad publicity maybe? Why promote the community as a big selling point and then block any conversations that make you nervous?
But what finally burned was that now they setup a school for people to pay to learn the product they already learned, as opposed to making better documentation. Yes we paid for the game now let us pay in installments for an instruction manual, I know I'd buy any other product in the world knowing that going in.
I'm sure this will get deleted before too many get to read it, despite being a paying customer and using no profanity in the blog. But I had to get that out there. As for me, now that I've been out of the Navy for a year and a half it's time for me to get a degree at night while working during the day (so no real time for game making anyways). I'm going to be working on a programming degree from UMass, it may not be game programming but I'm trying to be realistic in where I can get a job.
I truly don't mind sitting in front of a computer all day, and I like programming so it should fit well. I hope in my spare time to start learning more about game making, mostly focused in directx. I have a book on intro to directx game programming and the directx sdk is very usefull, lots of good tutorials and examples in there.
I pick directx because I feel it is a great tool for game creation and to be honest I've never cared about cross platform tools. I want to create games for windows. Now that Mac makes computers that run Windows so well all the more reason.
So like I said I will be checking in on the general forums from time to time to see any good discussions going on, I hope all the users good luck and that hopefully they'll be able to create a game with the money they've spent.
Flames can begin below
About the author
Recent Blogs
• <edit>• some progress on cards
• teaching my computer to play cards
• I'm not dead
• time to learn networking
#2
Good luck J Sears. I envy you being a Mass. citizen, as I long for the days when I was a Bostonian...God trust me I loved living in Boston =)
You may be making a wise choice about choosing general programming over game programming. The burn out rate in the industry is high, regardless of your abilities. I've come close many times (and am close at the moment); it just takes a certain inner fire to saddle up and keep moving forth.
Your self-reflection is enlightening, so don't invite "flames" and deletion if what you are saying is what you believe. If this were a cry for help, I would not respond.
Again, good luck in your ventures and life. Should you come back to Torque Tech, like I did, you may have a new perspective after your adventures =)
08/27/2007 (7:02 pm)
I've come out of my hole of seclusion to say this:Good luck J Sears. I envy you being a Mass. citizen, as I long for the days when I was a Bostonian...God trust me I loved living in Boston =)
You may be making a wise choice about choosing general programming over game programming. The burn out rate in the industry is high, regardless of your abilities. I've come close many times (and am close at the moment); it just takes a certain inner fire to saddle up and keep moving forth.
Your self-reflection is enlightening, so don't invite "flames" and deletion if what you are saying is what you believe. If this were a cry for help, I would not respond.
Again, good luck in your ventures and life. Should you come back to Torque Tech, like I did, you may have a new perspective after your adventures =)
#3
The modernization kit is very nice, but integrating that into the engine could cause compatibility problems. For modern graphics the best approach would be to move to TGEA unless portability to Mac/Linux and support for older hardware are important. TGEA is of course more expensive, but it also renders much more efficiently. Alex has done an awesome job on the modernization kit btw, but its still being built on top of a graphics architecture that is not really up to snuff for current hardware. I've ported projects from TGE to TGEA and seen triple the frame rates despite having more complex video features.
I think your also a bit confused on a few things. Torqueschool may have GG's blessing, but its from Dream Games. It's a third party product. That having been said, Torque's documentation could definitely use improvement, the TGEA documentation in particular.
08/27/2007 (7:14 pm)
One of the reasons that a lot of those features aren't integrated is because they are so game specific. You sight FPS's all having melee now, but what percentage of Torque based games have been FPS games? Very few. And of those that are there are many different ways to implement it. The melee resource for example is way more than most people need. To do a simple form of melee all you need to do is a quick raycast at a short range in front of your character, its a few lines of code.The modernization kit is very nice, but integrating that into the engine could cause compatibility problems. For modern graphics the best approach would be to move to TGEA unless portability to Mac/Linux and support for older hardware are important. TGEA is of course more expensive, but it also renders much more efficiently. Alex has done an awesome job on the modernization kit btw, but its still being built on top of a graphics architecture that is not really up to snuff for current hardware. I've ported projects from TGE to TGEA and seen triple the frame rates despite having more complex video features.
I think your also a bit confused on a few things. Torqueschool may have GG's blessing, but its from Dream Games. It's a third party product. That having been said, Torque's documentation could definitely use improvement, the TGEA documentation in particular.
#4
I spent years trying to do it and what I got out of it was an education and experience with Torque that has turned into a full time career working for people with money to make commercial games. Someday I'd love to make an indie game, but after years of work with Torque I still think that is years away.
My advice, if I can give it, is to spend your time with Torque learning to make games but without trying to make a game. Then use that to get one of the numerous jobs that are available in the jobs area here on the website. There is a regular stream right now and I think it will keep coming as more and more studios realise what a great choice Torque is for making commercial games... if you have the money for the right people. Then work hard and some day work your way to making your own game.
Torque is the single best choice for any studio that is looking for a Game Engine with the single exception that it's hard to find developers with Torque experience. Cost and Benifits... Torque is a clear winner. Maybe I'd say that for a super high end interior FPS to go with the FEAR engine since it's pretty inexpensive. But for everything else... there isn't a better choice.
Now here's the funny thing about documentation and Torque... it's supply and demand... for those of us who spent the time to learn to work with Torque despite the documentation... we are now a very hot commodity. And that is a good thing in my opinion.
If you want to learn to make 3d games as a hobby... get the HL2 sdk or get the upcoming UT3 sdk. But if you want to join the game industry as a pro... get Torque and get ready for a few years. It's the only way. Take it from someone who's been thru it all.
08/27/2007 (7:36 pm)
You can't make a commercial game with Torque without money to pay for people to work on it. That's just simply the truth. There are a handful of exceptions to this rule, but they are almost all ex game industry professionals with experience. I spent years trying to do it and what I got out of it was an education and experience with Torque that has turned into a full time career working for people with money to make commercial games. Someday I'd love to make an indie game, but after years of work with Torque I still think that is years away.
My advice, if I can give it, is to spend your time with Torque learning to make games but without trying to make a game. Then use that to get one of the numerous jobs that are available in the jobs area here on the website. There is a regular stream right now and I think it will keep coming as more and more studios realise what a great choice Torque is for making commercial games... if you have the money for the right people. Then work hard and some day work your way to making your own game.
Torque is the single best choice for any studio that is looking for a Game Engine with the single exception that it's hard to find developers with Torque experience. Cost and Benifits... Torque is a clear winner. Maybe I'd say that for a super high end interior FPS to go with the FEAR engine since it's pretty inexpensive. But for everything else... there isn't a better choice.
Now here's the funny thing about documentation and Torque... it's supply and demand... for those of us who spent the time to learn to work with Torque despite the documentation... we are now a very hot commodity. And that is a good thing in my opinion.
If you want to learn to make 3d games as a hobby... get the HL2 sdk or get the upcoming UT3 sdk. But if you want to join the game industry as a pro... get Torque and get ready for a few years. It's the only way. Take it from someone who's been thru it all.
#5
08/27/2007 (7:42 pm)
J, read all of what you said ... sad to see you feel that way and sad to see you go -- wish you the best of luck with your future ventures.
#6
08/27/2007 (10:04 pm)
Uh well too bad. I think everythings changing right now so hopefully you'll come back later.
#7
Anyways. Since I am starting to understand this engine from tutorials here and there I am just slowly working on a game while learning the basics at the same time. No point in complaining about lack of documentation or more 'artists friendly' features in the engine. I am sure most of us would love to have MDK/RPG features/MELEE features merged in TGE (rather than buying TGEA) which are available in the resources section but that won't happen since the free resources are.. free, you just have to do it all yourself.
08/28/2007 (12:16 am)
Agree with what you said here. This is the reason why I decided to step away from even thinking about wasting money on TGEA or TGB (that's just costly). It's not really an 'indie' game engine unless you are just talking about the price here since you end up learning and doing a lot more than what you have imagined. It's definitely good for a 3-10 people Indie team though, with good programmers. I find it funny that when asked for help in the forums most people usually forward you to buy the books on TGE. Well if the person was interested in spending so much money he/she wouldn't have really bought the TGE, right?Anyways. Since I am starting to understand this engine from tutorials here and there I am just slowly working on a game while learning the basics at the same time. No point in complaining about lack of documentation or more 'artists friendly' features in the engine. I am sure most of us would love to have MDK/RPG features/MELEE features merged in TGE (rather than buying TGEA) which are available in the resources section but that won't happen since the free resources are.. free, you just have to do it all yourself.
#8
It's very common though for people to buy Torque (or other low cost engines) and then just be overwhelmed by how much they need to learn to get going. There's really no easy solution to the problem. With time though it gets a lot easier, unfortunately many do not have the time to allot to it.
08/28/2007 (12:26 am)
@Nikhil: Indie encompasses a pretty wide range. I agree completely with what Anton is saying, if you have some money to throw around then you can get things done a lot easier. Contracting out artists or programmers (depending on your need) makes things a lot easier. The problem though is that there is a huge jump in price from the indie engines such as Torque (or other low cost quality engines like C4) and the big engines. It's a big jump from $150-300 to $10,000 and beyond that to $250,000.It's very common though for people to buy Torque (or other low cost engines) and then just be overwhelmed by how much they need to learn to get going. There's really no easy solution to the problem. With time though it gets a lot easier, unfortunately many do not have the time to allot to it.
#9
I've posted on a number of forums for several lower end engines and questioned why engines can't function more like animation software. Maya is arguably far more powerful than any low end engine and I'd say even the high end engines yet you only need limited scripting to do insanely complex functions. I was repeatedily told it either wasn't possible or at the very least not practical. Well I found that wasn't true. There is an engine out there I think the Torque people need to take a hard look at and that's Unity. It's extremely easy to use and within minutes I was modifying the test game and doing things I couldn't do after many months with Torque. Even many AI functions could be set by changing number values in the interface. If you have to access a script it's a simple click to open a panel within the interface and make your adjustments and see the tweaks in seconds without closing the interface. Importing models is childsplay and you can interactively tweak animations within Maya without closing Unity. It comes with build in physics and shaders as well as ragdoll. The next upgrade that comes out any day now has a landscape generator that can handle thousands of trees. It also has self shadowing and will be able to map videos onto objects or use them as part of a UI display. The new UI features look stunning as well. There's an ocean of other advantages I won't go into. I'm not trying to do a sales pitch and it's Mac based so most couldn't make the switch anyway. The real point is it's possible to make a game engine that doesn't require an army of programmers and is stable. Also the documentation is some of the best I've ever seen. It assumes no prior knowledge. Now with a limited user base, remember it's Mac, and only a slightly higher cost they have an engine with drastically more power, far easier to use and well documented. There are a few things I like better in Torque, particles for one, and I'm going to miss the kits and content but there are a few things in Lightwave I prefer to Maya. Does it mean Lightwave is better than Maya? Not a question that requires an answer.
I was very excited with Torque but the more I used it the less I liked it. I was really enthusiastic about TGB 1.5 but I've yet to see a final release. There was a big anouncement about it nearly two months ago but the copies I downloaded were still the betas and were largely unuseable. I was told weeks ago that the Mac final release would be coming out in days but there's been no word. At this stage I hope to find a programmer in a few months to finish up the one game that was nearly finished six months ago but that will probably be the only one done with Torque. It's a nice idea and there are some cool functions. I had fun with TGE building landscapes and I did figure out a system for importing models but the menuing for importing was really crude and took a lot of trial and error just to get the items to even show up in the interface. Placing them was easy it was getting them to show up in the menu tree that was tricky. I hope they one day get the issues with the engines fixed but there are newer more powerful engines out there and Torque is still based off a very old engine. They need a team working on an actual interface and not depend so much on coding basic functions. Behaviors was a move in the right direction with TGB and the interface is far more evolved than TGE but both still pale compared to Unity. The terrain generator and MMO kit had me debating about sticking around but the new release of Unity will have far more power and it's a lot friendlier for doing on-line games.
In November we'll be gearing up for game production and I have to say we'll be buying Macs and installing Unity. Being able to have the artist do 90% of the game development rather than the programmers is just too attractive. Add to that power and stability and there's no choice.
Well this went down the rant road but after spending many thousands of dollars on engine licenses I have to say Torque was a major disappointment. Most of the people making finished games with Torque seem to have figured out the quirks and come up with workarounds. For a novice in the programming world it's often hard to figure out if it's your code or a bug. I really do wish them well with the engines and I hope they can address the issues. Torque opened my eyes to what was possible in the low end but it's far from practical. It is possible to make a game engine function more like an animation program and that should be the goal. In the early days of CG animation you needed to be able to program in order to animate. Eventually the software got user friendly enough so that anyone could use the programs. CG didn't explode until animation was in the hands of artists and animators. Game engines are going through a similar evolution. Programmers may not want the change to happen but it will happen none the less. There will always be a need for programmers but why have a programmer script or hard code a function that can be set in the interface in seconds? It really shouldn't be this hard to make a game. In Unity you can literally copy and paste characters and with a few changes in number values tweak things like speed, rate of fire, turn speed and such without opening a script. In the first hour I had a half a dozen characters running around with unique behaviors. Try that with Torque. Changing physics are just as easy. Make it stable and make it so artists have a fighting chance to at least rough out a game. I hate to say it but the Torque team really needs to buy a copy of Unity and give it a hard look. If you take into consideration things like the shader engine being a separate purchase Unity is nearly half the price and Torque still doesn't have a physics engine or many of the basic functions of Unity. Look at the documentation and your jaw will drop.
Well enough trolling. I hadn't made a post in months. I just think if more people do speak up then maybe they'll get the message. I hate sounding so negative but I did devote a lot of hours and cash to Torque and I was stunned to find there was an engine doing things the way I said they should be done. I have checked into some high end engines that have more friendly interfaces but a half mill to a mill for a single game license will buy a lot of software and hardware not to mention man hours.
08/28/2007 (2:39 am)
I hate to pile on but I have to agree. After spending a bundle and getting commercial licenses for most of the products I found it tough to complete a game. Part of it was the fact that even TGB is very script driven and I come from the art side but the far bigger issue was bugs and quirks in the engine that made it tough to learn and nearly impossible to finish a game. Some things got addressed but others were ignored in spite of a large number of posts. One glaring bug in the particle system, the files corrupt, is supposed to be finally on the list to be fixed but apparently it's been around since day one of TGB's release. I also had miserable luck finding a programmer/scriptor even with money.I've posted on a number of forums for several lower end engines and questioned why engines can't function more like animation software. Maya is arguably far more powerful than any low end engine and I'd say even the high end engines yet you only need limited scripting to do insanely complex functions. I was repeatedily told it either wasn't possible or at the very least not practical. Well I found that wasn't true. There is an engine out there I think the Torque people need to take a hard look at and that's Unity. It's extremely easy to use and within minutes I was modifying the test game and doing things I couldn't do after many months with Torque. Even many AI functions could be set by changing number values in the interface. If you have to access a script it's a simple click to open a panel within the interface and make your adjustments and see the tweaks in seconds without closing the interface. Importing models is childsplay and you can interactively tweak animations within Maya without closing Unity. It comes with build in physics and shaders as well as ragdoll. The next upgrade that comes out any day now has a landscape generator that can handle thousands of trees. It also has self shadowing and will be able to map videos onto objects or use them as part of a UI display. The new UI features look stunning as well. There's an ocean of other advantages I won't go into. I'm not trying to do a sales pitch and it's Mac based so most couldn't make the switch anyway. The real point is it's possible to make a game engine that doesn't require an army of programmers and is stable. Also the documentation is some of the best I've ever seen. It assumes no prior knowledge. Now with a limited user base, remember it's Mac, and only a slightly higher cost they have an engine with drastically more power, far easier to use and well documented. There are a few things I like better in Torque, particles for one, and I'm going to miss the kits and content but there are a few things in Lightwave I prefer to Maya. Does it mean Lightwave is better than Maya? Not a question that requires an answer.
I was very excited with Torque but the more I used it the less I liked it. I was really enthusiastic about TGB 1.5 but I've yet to see a final release. There was a big anouncement about it nearly two months ago but the copies I downloaded were still the betas and were largely unuseable. I was told weeks ago that the Mac final release would be coming out in days but there's been no word. At this stage I hope to find a programmer in a few months to finish up the one game that was nearly finished six months ago but that will probably be the only one done with Torque. It's a nice idea and there are some cool functions. I had fun with TGE building landscapes and I did figure out a system for importing models but the menuing for importing was really crude and took a lot of trial and error just to get the items to even show up in the interface. Placing them was easy it was getting them to show up in the menu tree that was tricky. I hope they one day get the issues with the engines fixed but there are newer more powerful engines out there and Torque is still based off a very old engine. They need a team working on an actual interface and not depend so much on coding basic functions. Behaviors was a move in the right direction with TGB and the interface is far more evolved than TGE but both still pale compared to Unity. The terrain generator and MMO kit had me debating about sticking around but the new release of Unity will have far more power and it's a lot friendlier for doing on-line games.
In November we'll be gearing up for game production and I have to say we'll be buying Macs and installing Unity. Being able to have the artist do 90% of the game development rather than the programmers is just too attractive. Add to that power and stability and there's no choice.
Well this went down the rant road but after spending many thousands of dollars on engine licenses I have to say Torque was a major disappointment. Most of the people making finished games with Torque seem to have figured out the quirks and come up with workarounds. For a novice in the programming world it's often hard to figure out if it's your code or a bug. I really do wish them well with the engines and I hope they can address the issues. Torque opened my eyes to what was possible in the low end but it's far from practical. It is possible to make a game engine function more like an animation program and that should be the goal. In the early days of CG animation you needed to be able to program in order to animate. Eventually the software got user friendly enough so that anyone could use the programs. CG didn't explode until animation was in the hands of artists and animators. Game engines are going through a similar evolution. Programmers may not want the change to happen but it will happen none the less. There will always be a need for programmers but why have a programmer script or hard code a function that can be set in the interface in seconds? It really shouldn't be this hard to make a game. In Unity you can literally copy and paste characters and with a few changes in number values tweak things like speed, rate of fire, turn speed and such without opening a script. In the first hour I had a half a dozen characters running around with unique behaviors. Try that with Torque. Changing physics are just as easy. Make it stable and make it so artists have a fighting chance to at least rough out a game. I hate to say it but the Torque team really needs to buy a copy of Unity and give it a hard look. If you take into consideration things like the shader engine being a separate purchase Unity is nearly half the price and Torque still doesn't have a physics engine or many of the basic functions of Unity. Look at the documentation and your jaw will drop.
Well enough trolling. I hadn't made a post in months. I just think if more people do speak up then maybe they'll get the message. I hate sounding so negative but I did devote a lot of hours and cash to Torque and I was stunned to find there was an engine doing things the way I said they should be done. I have checked into some high end engines that have more friendly interfaces but a half mill to a mill for a single game license will buy a lot of software and hardware not to mention man hours.
#10
I've been in these parts since 2004 and have only seen 3 updates to TGE and all of them added just as many, if not more bugs than were fixed - that drives me insane. And most of the bugs aren't even hard to find, reproduce and fix - in fact most of the time someone from the community will submit a patch on the forums, then one and a half years later that fix will make it into the official distribution.
But how does the bug not get noticed upon release? Take the alt-tabbing bug, the foliage bug, the numerous audio and the dedicated server bug, the particle bounds bug, the problem in main.cc that prevented fonts from being cached, the isServerObject explosion bug, the orbital camera bug, the text input bug in guiTextEditCtrl.cc, the time manager bug that was screwing with dedicated servers, the typos in precipitation.cc, the console error reporting bug, heck even that nasty ambient light bug in 1.51 as an example. All were EASILY noticeable, all you had to do was fire up the starter.fps kit and run around for a few seconds, and all were easily fixed. So why didn't they get noticed before the release was made? Doesn't someone from GG conduct any testing, quality assurance work before submitting the release?
Nowadays all I'm seeing is darn content pack after content pack, everyone's trying to make a quick buck by saying "holy crap, I finally got something to work in Torque - I'll sell it to you if you want!
08/28/2007 (6:20 am)
What I don't understand is how does a company with so many talented employees fail to get things done? I mean the important things, like bug fixing and testing of the Torque range of engines. There's so much redundant, non-working, unused and untested code residing in TGE. I mean, GG started with a complete engine in the year 2000, seven years later and it still contains a high volume of bugs.I've been in these parts since 2004 and have only seen 3 updates to TGE and all of them added just as many, if not more bugs than were fixed - that drives me insane. And most of the bugs aren't even hard to find, reproduce and fix - in fact most of the time someone from the community will submit a patch on the forums, then one and a half years later that fix will make it into the official distribution.
But how does the bug not get noticed upon release? Take the alt-tabbing bug, the foliage bug, the numerous audio and the dedicated server bug, the particle bounds bug, the problem in main.cc that prevented fonts from being cached, the isServerObject explosion bug, the orbital camera bug, the text input bug in guiTextEditCtrl.cc, the time manager bug that was screwing with dedicated servers, the typos in precipitation.cc, the console error reporting bug, heck even that nasty ambient light bug in 1.51 as an example. All were EASILY noticeable, all you had to do was fire up the starter.fps kit and run around for a few seconds, and all were easily fixed. So why didn't they get noticed before the release was made? Doesn't someone from GG conduct any testing, quality assurance work before submitting the release?
Nowadays all I'm seeing is darn content pack after content pack, everyone's trying to make a quick buck by saying "holy crap, I finally got something to work in Torque - I'll sell it to you if you want!
#11
Good luck with your future endeavors!
08/28/2007 (6:36 am)
Very insightful, Carey. I would tend to agree with most of what was posted here; especially the last bit about the evolution of the engines and how artists have a bit more involvement than often given credit in the grand scheme of things...I tend to think of how the 'hoarding' factor of code writers is a 'true' barrier and how unproductive it is. I, too, as an artist would like to have quite a bit more control on assembling the gameplay and direction of a project, rather than wait for a compiled binary to arrive. I can pop out working art in an instant...too bad the engine/GUI isn't setup up for that, out of box. I don't mind though; as I decided to choose this engine to learn the 'backend' of things, as I hadn't done any computer programming in many, many years...it's been slow; but I feel I really do understand the engine a lot more now, scripting wise, and a can get some objects working and know when/why they stop working[playThread keeping the sequence 'playing'....anyone!? b'ah]. Thanks for the heads up on a working alternative, I haven't purchased a product since v1.4+, for good reasons, ;). Seems more about promotion now[GGE, bloqs]....than game mechanics. Good luck with your future endeavors!
#12
08/28/2007 (7:07 am)
I will agreed Unity is far better than Torque. Torque has to many bugs that the reason I stop use it. It seem to me they just dont care to fix it and do better documentation. I am watching to see if any thing change. Until then Torque will sit on the back burner. I am still waiting to see if the adventure kit will be fix to work with the new TGB. 
#13
Unity is a very nice engine, and quite user friendly. I did have a number of performance issues with the FPS example across different machines. It was nearly unplayable on my Mini and quite nice on my Dual G5. I do love the tutorials, however. Good luck with Unity. It's got a lot of potential, though I ended up scripting a LOT rather than using the predefined GUI elements. Same with Lawmaker. Both fun to use, though Lawmaker is not as friendly as Unity.
@J Sears
Good luck in your endeavors. There is a huge learning curve to Torque, or to any of the engines that come from an industry mindset of segmented production. Hope to see you around in some of the various discussions here.
08/28/2007 (7:26 am)
@CaryUnity is a very nice engine, and quite user friendly. I did have a number of performance issues with the FPS example across different machines. It was nearly unplayable on my Mini and quite nice on my Dual G5. I do love the tutorials, however. Good luck with Unity. It's got a lot of potential, though I ended up scripting a LOT rather than using the predefined GUI elements. Same with Lawmaker. Both fun to use, though Lawmaker is not as friendly as Unity.
@J Sears
Good luck in your endeavors. There is a huge learning curve to Torque, or to any of the engines that come from an industry mindset of segmented production. Hope to see you around in some of the various discussions here.
#14
There needs to come a day and a game engine that has quality on par with Torque, but without code, scripts and symbols - built for people who simply want to make a game, not pull their hair out because their ball bouncing/rolling script doesn't work.
The only advice I have is if you REALLY REALLY want to create a game, that's not enough. If you want to learn programming, even that is not enough. Programming is for programmers, not Texture artists, not 3D modelers, not sound design artists - unless you are multi-talented. You may have the best idea for a game, but chances are that big idea is never going to make it off paper. I hate to sound discouraging, but I'd rather tell you not to waste years of your life trying to do something for nothing. I won't tell you to "never give up", since only the successful people say that. (Just like how the successful people with a hot wife say "The Secret" book and film worked for them even when they were rich before the damn crap came out).
I have learned something very valuable with Torque, don't waste your time. If you can't program because you find it to be a pain in the ass like I do, don't piss yourself off. Just drop it. Go into something else you enjoy learning. Learn a 3d tool, get some music software, or snatch that paint program and start working on textures. Get your content out there in the open. Sure, it's not as grand and huge as your very own game release, but at least it's SOMETHING.
The fact of the matter - computers and technology is a very complicated industry, while the benefits may look appealing, it's not worth over-stressing yourself trying to figure out what the hell, where the hell, when the hell and how the hell. It's made for only certain people. I myself am starting to believe I am not one of those people. Not that we are too dumb, but technology is too dumb. The bigger our imaginations, the more complex information we have to feed into a dumbass computer.
Until the day where computers can read our thoughts and paint the picture exactly as we imagine - that will be the next revolution. It's time computers learn how to understand us, not us to understand them.
08/28/2007 (7:29 am)
I have been having difficulties with Torque as well. While I think it's a great engine, it's also a pain in the ass. If you don't know how to code or do scripting, you are pretty much screwed. It's not a cakewalk. As soon as you learn programming (C or C++), you have to learn TorqueScript and the engine itself, which throws tons and tons of new stuff at you. A bit discouraging. Not for beginners. That's just the way game development works, I guess. I don't see how anybody could aspire to make a game without expecting to run into the hells of cluster fucked computer symbols.There needs to come a day and a game engine that has quality on par with Torque, but without code, scripts and symbols - built for people who simply want to make a game, not pull their hair out because their ball bouncing/rolling script doesn't work.
The only advice I have is if you REALLY REALLY want to create a game, that's not enough. If you want to learn programming, even that is not enough. Programming is for programmers, not Texture artists, not 3D modelers, not sound design artists - unless you are multi-talented. You may have the best idea for a game, but chances are that big idea is never going to make it off paper. I hate to sound discouraging, but I'd rather tell you not to waste years of your life trying to do something for nothing. I won't tell you to "never give up", since only the successful people say that. (Just like how the successful people with a hot wife say "The Secret" book and film worked for them even when they were rich before the damn crap came out).
I have learned something very valuable with Torque, don't waste your time. If you can't program because you find it to be a pain in the ass like I do, don't piss yourself off. Just drop it. Go into something else you enjoy learning. Learn a 3d tool, get some music software, or snatch that paint program and start working on textures. Get your content out there in the open. Sure, it's not as grand and huge as your very own game release, but at least it's SOMETHING.
The fact of the matter - computers and technology is a very complicated industry, while the benefits may look appealing, it's not worth over-stressing yourself trying to figure out what the hell, where the hell, when the hell and how the hell. It's made for only certain people. I myself am starting to believe I am not one of those people. Not that we are too dumb, but technology is too dumb. The bigger our imaginations, the more complex information we have to feed into a dumbass computer.
Until the day where computers can read our thoughts and paint the picture exactly as we imagine - that will be the next revolution. It's time computers learn how to understand us, not us to understand them.
#15
--TorqueSchool is not a GG initiative. It was thought up, structured, and is being run by a 3rd party.
--Game Development is not a "one person can do everything, all the time" concept. Think of it as being a part of a band--the guitar player probably isn't going to be playing drums as well, and while the base player may sing, it's probably supporting a lead singer who is able to focus on that portion of the "job".
When a singer with a really good voice (or an extremely talented artist) wants to make music(make a game), he doesn't argue that he should have an instrument (game engine) that does all the work of playing the instruments (writing the code)--he goes out and finds other like minded people that have talent (programming, story development, design) in other areas of making music (developing games), and they work together as a team to make music (finish a game).
Torque is a game engine, not a suite of game mechanics. It is the game developer's job to make game mechanics, and the very definition of innovation means that no matter how hard someone tries, they won't be able to "pre-implement" all possible game mechanics for you...and it's not the purpose of a game engine to try.
In some ways, Torque goes overboard in providing example/reference implementation game mechanics, and unfortunately that leads to a market expectation that a game engine should already implement their project's game mechanics--but that isn't the path to either a successful game, or a successful game engine.
I'd like to suggest some follow-on reading, from a round table at GCDC of 4 major engine developers:
GCDC: Epic, Cryptic, Crytek, Vicious Cycle Talk Engine Tech, and finally an interesting quote from Ken Levine of Bioshock/System Shock fame (full interview here):
------------------------------------
Now you used the Unreal Engine 3, any issues?
[Laughs] One thing the Unreal Engine is, it's kinda hard to explain to someone who isn't a game developer. Engines aren't monolithic things. Like our version of the Unreal Engine are things we put in with our own work. It's turned into this Frankenstein monster ... people did some amazing things to the render and performance. Of course, it's an engine, engine's are always a bear. Developing games is really hard, I think the mistake that a company like Epic might make is to say, "Oh yeah, it's simple, we give you the engine and you go do it fellas, it'll be a breeze." Development is hard, it gives you a leg up, but if you don't have a great technology team you're going to run into trouble. Even if you have a great technology team you can run into trouble. An engine is a starting point, and you always have trouble, always have trouble, whether it's our engine or someone else's engine. Life is very difficult for a game developer to make games.
08/28/2007 (10:50 am)
I think this is a valuable discussion, and would like to interject two thoughts and one minor counterpoint:--TorqueSchool is not a GG initiative. It was thought up, structured, and is being run by a 3rd party.
--Game Development is not a "one person can do everything, all the time" concept. Think of it as being a part of a band--the guitar player probably isn't going to be playing drums as well, and while the base player may sing, it's probably supporting a lead singer who is able to focus on that portion of the "job".
When a singer with a really good voice (or an extremely talented artist) wants to make music(make a game), he doesn't argue that he should have an instrument (game engine) that does all the work of playing the instruments (writing the code)--he goes out and finds other like minded people that have talent (programming, story development, design) in other areas of making music (developing games), and they work together as a team to make music (finish a game).
Quote:
Seems more about promotion now[GGE, bloqs]....than game mechanics.
Torque is a game engine, not a suite of game mechanics. It is the game developer's job to make game mechanics, and the very definition of innovation means that no matter how hard someone tries, they won't be able to "pre-implement" all possible game mechanics for you...and it's not the purpose of a game engine to try.
In some ways, Torque goes overboard in providing example/reference implementation game mechanics, and unfortunately that leads to a market expectation that a game engine should already implement their project's game mechanics--but that isn't the path to either a successful game, or a successful game engine.
I'd like to suggest some follow-on reading, from a round table at GCDC of 4 major engine developers:
GCDC: Epic, Cryptic, Crytek, Vicious Cycle Talk Engine Tech, and finally an interesting quote from Ken Levine of Bioshock/System Shock fame (full interview here):
------------------------------------
Now you used the Unreal Engine 3, any issues?
[Laughs] One thing the Unreal Engine is, it's kinda hard to explain to someone who isn't a game developer. Engines aren't monolithic things. Like our version of the Unreal Engine are things we put in with our own work. It's turned into this Frankenstein monster ... people did some amazing things to the render and performance. Of course, it's an engine, engine's are always a bear. Developing games is really hard, I think the mistake that a company like Epic might make is to say, "Oh yeah, it's simple, we give you the engine and you go do it fellas, it'll be a breeze." Development is hard, it gives you a leg up, but if you don't have a great technology team you're going to run into trouble. Even if you have a great technology team you can run into trouble. An engine is a starting point, and you always have trouble, always have trouble, whether it's our engine or someone else's engine. Life is very difficult for a game developer to make games.
#18
@Stephen Zepp - Very well put. I totally agree.
If that day comes it will be the day I quit trying to make a game. What fun would it be to make a game that is already made for you? If your script isn't working it's because you coded it wrong, take a step back, go have a smoke, think about some logic and make it work.
Not every engine is going to have everything you want.
I also agree with Anton Bursch about the documentation. It really is better that less people know how to program in torque. I used to do graphic design using photoshop... now every kid with a computer or laptop knows photoshop and the market for graphic designs is so over-saturated. I have plenty of graphic desginer friends who have a hard time freelancing or even landing a full-time graphic design position. Although I'm not looking for a job programming in torque, I have received offers from other people. It's a good thing to have a rare talent that people need.
Game programming isn't for eveyone.
08/28/2007 (12:27 pm)
@J Sears - good luck with whatever you go with.@Stephen Zepp - Very well put. I totally agree.
Quote:There needs to come a day and a game engine that has quality on par with Torque, but without code, scripts and symbols - built for people who simply want to make a game, not pull their hair out because their ball bouncing/rolling script doesn't work.
If that day comes it will be the day I quit trying to make a game. What fun would it be to make a game that is already made for you? If your script isn't working it's because you coded it wrong, take a step back, go have a smoke, think about some logic and make it work.
Not every engine is going to have everything you want.
I also agree with Anton Bursch about the documentation. It really is better that less people know how to program in torque. I used to do graphic design using photoshop... now every kid with a computer or laptop knows photoshop and the market for graphic designs is so over-saturated. I have plenty of graphic desginer friends who have a hard time freelancing or even landing a full-time graphic design position. Although I'm not looking for a job programming in torque, I have received offers from other people. It's a good thing to have a rare talent that people need.
Game programming isn't for eveyone.
#19
Your comment wreaks of a programmer scared of artists taking your job just because what 90% of what you will be asked (read=paid) to do is going to be built-in the engine already. Just like those graphics designers who are facing competition from kids with l33t Photoshop skills.
08/28/2007 (2:05 pm)
Quote:If that day comes it will be the day I quit trying to make a game. What fun would it be to make a game that is already made for you?How exactly does creating an engine without crappy interface and integrating features that will aid artists = "game that is already made for you" ?? So I suppose adding support for more terrain tiles is also = "making the game for you"?
Your comment wreaks of a programmer scared of artists taking your job just because what 90% of what you will be asked (read=paid) to do is going to be built-in the engine already. Just like those graphics designers who are facing competition from kids with l33t Photoshop skills.
#20
After being corrected, twice, I will retract most of my statement that involved torque school, I thought it was a joint venture between the two.
@Anton, I have used many of the mod programs out there, that was one of the things that helped grow my desire to make games, which in turn led to me buying these tools to try and learn more. I think the mod sdk for most of the major titles out there are amazing tools.
I agree that not every tool, feature can be premade in. But some are very basic, even having multiple starting weapons implemented to show how to handle inventory/weapon switching would be fantastic. You can have a game that's entirely your own based off of others premade mechanics as well. Counter strike is probably the best example of that, made by a few guys as a hobby as a mod for HL, turned into a monster and is one of the most played games on the internet (both 1.6 and CSS). Yet this game was built off of features already implemented in HL. Not every game has to be created purely from scratch.
They don't reinvent a new care engine everytime they make a new car, there are several good car engines that are put in many different cars, the outside wrapping is what helps make them unique.
@stephen I agree to make a good quality, finished product, you need a solid team. That's why I never had that goal. My goal was to make some very simple games, without some of the polish of great sound effects and music, to learn from. Then once I had knowledge maybe join a team with a true finished game goal.
@cary (also known as longest blog comment ever ;-) ) I can agree with that view, but there is also issues. I've looked at Unity myself, I use a PC and their huge price tag for a PC version was a bit out of my hobbiest price range. Also I think they way they have it setup is a lot easier to use, but the downside is performance. I don't think you could make a triple AAA graphic intense game in unity without one insane system to run it. That isn't necessarily a big problem though. If a person's goal is to make a game that is fun and to make it as a hobby then you wouldn't need as intense of graphics so the ease of use would certainly be worth it.
I also hope that the middleware market continues to grow with more, as you put it, artist approach to creation. Look at level editors. I made levels in doom and it was far more difficult then the real time creation tools that exist today. I think game engines for hobbiest/indie users will continue to go in this direction as well.
And to everyone else I appreciate the intelligent feedback, like I said much better then I expected.
08/28/2007 (2:38 pm)
Well I am surprised at the responses so far. I didn't expect good discussions to come out of this to be honest.After being corrected, twice, I will retract most of my statement that involved torque school, I thought it was a joint venture between the two.
@Anton, I have used many of the mod programs out there, that was one of the things that helped grow my desire to make games, which in turn led to me buying these tools to try and learn more. I think the mod sdk for most of the major titles out there are amazing tools.
I agree that not every tool, feature can be premade in. But some are very basic, even having multiple starting weapons implemented to show how to handle inventory/weapon switching would be fantastic. You can have a game that's entirely your own based off of others premade mechanics as well. Counter strike is probably the best example of that, made by a few guys as a hobby as a mod for HL, turned into a monster and is one of the most played games on the internet (both 1.6 and CSS). Yet this game was built off of features already implemented in HL. Not every game has to be created purely from scratch.
They don't reinvent a new care engine everytime they make a new car, there are several good car engines that are put in many different cars, the outside wrapping is what helps make them unique.
@stephen I agree to make a good quality, finished product, you need a solid team. That's why I never had that goal. My goal was to make some very simple games, without some of the polish of great sound effects and music, to learn from. Then once I had knowledge maybe join a team with a true finished game goal.
@cary (also known as longest blog comment ever ;-) ) I can agree with that view, but there is also issues. I've looked at Unity myself, I use a PC and their huge price tag for a PC version was a bit out of my hobbiest price range. Also I think they way they have it setup is a lot easier to use, but the downside is performance. I don't think you could make a triple AAA graphic intense game in unity without one insane system to run it. That isn't necessarily a big problem though. If a person's goal is to make a game that is fun and to make it as a hobby then you wouldn't need as intense of graphics so the ease of use would certainly be worth it.
I also hope that the middleware market continues to grow with more, as you put it, artist approach to creation. Look at level editors. I made levels in doom and it was far more difficult then the real time creation tools that exist today. I think game engines for hobbiest/indie users will continue to go in this direction as well.
And to everyone else I appreciate the intelligent feedback, like I said much better then I expected.
Torque Owner Dan -
Good luck to you.