The New Magic Word
by Brett Seyler · 11/12/2009 (4:02 pm) · 289 comments
Last week, Epic Games made a pretty big splash announcing the "UDK" or Unreal Development Kit. UDK is based on the *very expensive* Unreal Engine 3, the most dominant game engine in the big budget console games space. There's been a lot of hyperbolic talk about how this is an "end of days" development for Torque and our friendly Copenhagen competitors, Unity. I want to take a while here to talk about what I think this means for Torque and where we fit in the competitive landscape.When the announcement showed up, of course I immediately wanted to dig in and find out what was up. I took some time and looked at the license on the UDK site. Many people here downloaded the UDK to play around with it and see what was what. It turns out that the UDK is basically an up to date set of editors for Unreal Engine 3. There's no source code provided. Instead, as with modding, you can do scripting with Epic's Unrealscript. You can package your project for Windows only. There are docs online, but otherwise no dedicated support. So let's be clear. This is NOT Unreal Engine 3. That would kill a huge source of revenue (supported, source code licensing for PC and consoles) for Epic. It *is* a well-tested, rich set of editors for making stuff based on UE3 games or projects.
What's the license like for this? Well, Epic is slapping up the word FREE everywhere and who doesn't love something for FREE right? It's a magic word. The UDK website grants you (for free) a license to make non-commercial works. If you want to make money, or benefit indirectly somehow from using the UDK (think making a demo to advertise or sell something else or a company who wants to train employees with a simulation), you have to pay. The terms of making something commercial with the UDK are actually a bit murky because Epic does not post the license on their site or allow you to purchase a commercial license on thier site. Instead, they give you an email address to hit up and describe the terms of the license structure.
Option A: You benefit (somehow) from using and distributing UDK projects, but there's no revenue. You can pay $2500 / seat annually for this use of the UDK.
Option B: You sell, advertise on, or somehow directly or indirectly, generate revenue from a project made with UDK. You pay $99 up front and you give up 25% of all revenues exceeding $5000 on that project.
Pretty straightforward options! It would be nice to see the license, but assuming it's reasonable, sounds like a pretty fair deal. So what's the catch? How does Epic make money from this? They don't. Not really. This is a loss leader and an evangelism play and it really doesn't cost them much of anything to do. For years you've been able to spend $60 on Unreal Tournament, Gears of War, or other Unreal titles and use the provided editors to modify the game. You can do a lot with mods and people have created really cool stuff. Epic never monetized this practice before. Instead, they used it as a way to create longer tail sales for their games and to recruit new talent from the modder community. By offering the "UDK," Epic is taking the next step by letting people distribute Unreal mods without requiring ownership of the modded Unreal game. In addition to formalizing what they've always done with the mod communities built around Unreal, Epic is likely to heavily monetize the inevitable step from UDK --> UE3. This is no small step and it will cost small teams as much as Epic can wring out of them, in addition to the 25% royalties they are already on the hook for. My guess is that it will be case by case, but it's guaranteed that most teams will run into barriers not having access to the engine source, just as they do with other binary-only engines.
I'm not going to dismiss this move by Epic. It matters. Here's why...
#1: It's Epic (no pun intended). They are an absolute behemoth in the games industry. They've absolutely demolished all competitors in the AAA console engine space for the last 5 years, essentially since EA acquired Criterion, makers of Renderware, and stopped licensing it to 3rd parties. They have an established business selling very expensive (think 6-7 figures, depending on the royalty rate) licenses for big budget console games and now, they've decided they want indies, amateurs, and hobbyists to use their product too. That's a pretty decent market disturbance.
#2: It's validation. When I wrote about the hyper-competitive, well-served big budget AAA space while discussing the pricing and licensing of Torque 3D back in January, I noted that the AAA middleware market hasn't grown much in the last decade and it continues to be a pretty fixed size market. At the same time, the space Torque and Unity occupy (better accessibility and opportunity via lower licensing costs and more attractive platforms) has grown tremendously. This community here grows by hundreds of users every week. A larger portion of the games industry as a whole is moving away from stagnant AAA console games and targeting super-fast growing platforms like the iPhone, Facebook, and yes, even just regular PC online games. Clearly Epic must see something they like in these markets. They missed the boat on the Wii and they are probably struggling to maintain (let alone grow) revenues in the AAA console space. I'm not sure if this will be a long-lasting commitment on Epic's part, or simply a way to maximize the value of their current tech while the new stuff (UE4) is what they're going to start pushing to high-end clients, right around the corner. Regardless, validation is nice.
#3: Now everyone can see behind the "AAA" curtain. We've been telling you for years that Torque is top-notch technology. We've said "it's documented up to, and in many cases well beyond the industry standard." Without being able to look at engines like Unreal, that's been a hard claim for you guys to verify. Now you can. Have a look at UDK. Look at the tools. Look at the docs. Test out the support. We think you'll find that Torque 3D stacks up very well in comparison, and all without the licensing burden of big royalties or high-cost access to source. Putting aside source though, it's worth answering the question:
What does Torque currently do better than Unreal?
Rendering - Torque is the first affordable engine with a deferred renderer. You have real-time dynamic lighting and shadows. You can have thousands of dynamic point lights in a scene at almost no hit to performance. You can't do this in Unreal. Torque's Light Pre-pass rendering is the standard for the current era of hardware. CryEngine uses it as do many of the best looking games on the market.
Contrast this with Unreal, which uses a years old forward renderer that does not allow for global dynamic lighting or shadows. In fact, UE3 does not support more than one dynamic light casting shadows on the same object. It will switch shadows automatically to the nearest light. A directional light will allways switch off any light's shadows. With Unreal, all global illumination is baked. Everything you can do in Unreal, you can do with pureLIGHT in Torque 3D, but with Torque, you can combine dynamic global lighting and shadows with beautfully baked static lightmaps that give you realtime iterative results, not an hours long, black box baking process. Looking ahead, we'll probably be the first affordable engine with DX11 support, and I doubt you're going to see that from Unreal until UE4, likely a couple years away from public licensing, at least.
Terrain (editing AND fidelity) - Definitely test out the UDK terrain editors next to Torque 3D's. The UDK terrain tools are several generations behind us. In Torque 3D, you get much nicer terrain fidelity as well. It takes the right artwork to show this (which you'll see with Pacific Demo here in a few weeks), but the advantage for Torque is clear.
Networking - Out of the box, Torque 3D will do things that you'll never get UDK to do without source code access and a LOT of work. It's as simple as that.
Platform support - Capable deployment to OSX machines is increasing a very important component to success for small teams. Torque 3D offers a path to every major platform out there (Windows, Mac, Web, Wii, Xbox 360, iPhone, with PS3 and PSP in the works).
Special purpose tools. - The road and river tools are just the beginning, but there's a lot more coming in 1.1 and 1.2 that you haven't seen before and which you definitely won't find in UDK.Community resources, add-ons, and extensions. This is such a talent-rich and generous community. We do our very best not to take your contributions for granted. Rather, a major focus, particularly on this website in the next year, will be adding features that make the surfacing, sharing, and vetting of community resources and project much easier and much more powerful. There's really a lot we can do here and you're going to see constant improvement.
Now, UDK has some things not currently in Torque in it's favor as well. Nice features like nav meshes for AI, improved animation tools, etc. are all on our roadmap, but not yet in Torque 3D, so we've still got plenty of work ahead of us to keep up and stay competitive.
We want to take Torque much further, allowing developers to unlock opportunities on the best emerging platforms. That's going to take continued work and investment in the product by us, but we run a pretty lean operation, we reinvest nearly every dollar you spend with us back into product development, and we are moving *super* fast.
'FREE' might just be the new SSAO
We realize that staying ahead of the curve on technology is just part of the equation. The licensing model we choose is important and we're paying attention to all this FREE stuff as much as the rest of you. We want to offer something at a very accessible price, or perhaps for FREE as a good entry to learning and using Torque 3D. Currently, our free option is a demo, limited by the number of objects you can place in your scene. This obviously isn't useful to create an entire game, but it does give you a good feel for what Torque 3D's tool set can do, given that it's not feature limited in any way other than not including the source code.
By comparison, UDK also gives you everything for free, no features limited by the free version other than the source code, but you cannot use it to make anything commercial without payment. The cost, at minimum, is $99 + 25% of your revenues (after $5k total). Unity strips a great deal of their features out of their free version. These can drastically handicap development for some teams, but there's no reason why you couldn't finish some games with it either. The license is liberal, so it's a good stepping stone to make your first game, solo, if you're willing to live with some of the feature limitations.
So where does Torque 3D fit in all of this? Our "Professional" version, which includes source code, access to beta builds, private forums, etc is just $1000 / seat. We don't currently have an option between this and our free demo, but we want one. I think the recent developments by Unity and Epic and all the new developers trying their hand at 3D games warrants a low-priced option for Torque 3D, as well.
At the end of September, when we released Torque 3D 1.0, I included a poll contemplating an full-featured, binary-only version of Torque 3D to go for $500 / seat. Though the results were overwhelmingly in favor of this option, I think we can do better. In the past, I've been really happy with the feedback you've given us making decisions like this, so I want to enlist your help again.
What should we do?
What would you be happy with?
What do you think would be best for the community the future of the product?
Do we want a more elite, experienced community of programmers here?
Do we want to create a more balanced mix of great artists too?
I have my instincts on these questions, and we've discussed them a great deal internally, but I've always come back to this community as one of the big reasons to choose Torque for a new developer. It's one of kind and I want to keep it together and help it grow as much as possible. That won't happen if we don't have a competitive offering in Torque. This means we need enough income to feed the developers and keep the product blazing ahead full speed. But at the same time, if every new beginner cuts their teeth on UDK or Unity because they have viable free option and Torque doesn't, well, I don't like the position that puts us in for the long run either.
So please, let us know what you think! I promise I'll listen and weigh all feedback carefully. I hope to make a decision on this by the end of the month, so let fly with the suggestions and opinions. It's all welcome.
About the author
Since 2007, I've done my best to steer Torque's development and brand toward the best opportunities in games middleware.
#142
At the end of the day a middleware for $300-500 is a great idea,I think the UDK thing will die down and the people who will use the UDK are already doing just that.making UT mods.
Torque followers will stick with Torque,even after a fling with UDK and Unity,Unity followers will stick with that meh,
What would be cool tho is a special price for use TGEA owners that missed the main launch,so we can get a small money off deal with the "Artist" version.
At the end of the day I've sat dicking about because i felt GG had done me down with the whole TGEA/T3D thing,I even bought a Unity indie license LMFAOLOLOLOLOL only because GG,in my mind had abandoned me and outprice me in their new blitz.Unity really was the same deal as the proposed T3D "basic" remember that one,a cut down stripped version without all the tools to do the job,unity free is still this,cut down stripped version and there was no real option and I was p***** off.
Now though GG is going to release (hopefully)a middleware version which is affordable to whiny t**** like me who are just hobbyists but are going to include the shiny toys too,WELL DONE for listening.
So someday soon I can develop something instead of sitting on the fence owner operating due to extreme boredom
11/15/2009 (10:47 am)
I was joking,At the end of the day a middleware for $300-500 is a great idea,I think the UDK thing will die down and the people who will use the UDK are already doing just that.making UT mods.
Torque followers will stick with Torque,even after a fling with UDK and Unity,Unity followers will stick with that meh,
What would be cool tho is a special price for use TGEA owners that missed the main launch,so we can get a small money off deal with the "Artist" version.
At the end of the day I've sat dicking about because i felt GG had done me down with the whole TGEA/T3D thing,I even bought a Unity indie license LMFAOLOLOLOLOL only because GG,in my mind had abandoned me and outprice me in their new blitz.Unity really was the same deal as the proposed T3D "basic" remember that one,a cut down stripped version without all the tools to do the job,unity free is still this,cut down stripped version and there was no real option and I was p***** off.
Now though GG is going to release (hopefully)a middleware version which is affordable to whiny t**** like me who are just hobbyists but are going to include the shiny toys too,WELL DONE for listening.
So someday soon I can develop something instead of sitting on the fence owner operating due to extreme boredom
#144
@Andy: I don't necessarily believe in seniority in the community, because that breeds elitism (and when that happens I'm required to start replacing vowels with numbers and calling people "noob" and it all goes downhill from there).
I'll agree with the need for more "community volunteers" to help people, but I see that as something that is somewhat separate from the Associate, because those helpers should probably be dedicated to the community, where Associates are being recognized for several reasons (helpfulness, moving the ball forward, just being Ted, etc).
That said, I think that no matter what color your tag is, you need to stay professional, but people are human and therefore will eventually get into it or have a bad day or be misconstrued. Considering the crap that GG takes from some of the people that pop up on this site, I find it hard to understand sometimes how they can maintain composure.
11/15/2009 (12:46 pm)
+10 for Josh from me as well...@Andy: I don't necessarily believe in seniority in the community, because that breeds elitism (and when that happens I'm required to start replacing vowels with numbers and calling people "noob" and it all goes downhill from there).
I'll agree with the need for more "community volunteers" to help people, but I see that as something that is somewhat separate from the Associate, because those helpers should probably be dedicated to the community, where Associates are being recognized for several reasons (helpfulness, moving the ball forward, just being Ted, etc).
That said, I think that no matter what color your tag is, you need to stay professional, but people are human and therefore will eventually get into it or have a bad day or be misconstrued. Considering the crap that GG takes from some of the people that pop up on this site, I find it hard to understand sometimes how they can maintain composure.
#145
Cause if that is still the case, the middleware version is only really going to let you test out art assets, which is fine if it's an artist version, but that still leaves us without an indie version.
11/15/2009 (1:12 pm)
There's so much talk about middleware, and a version without source. But I gotta honestly ask, because I don't know. Is T3D vastly elite, feature-wise to TGE/A. Cause I know with TGE I couldn't do a single thing that I wanted to do without changing the source drastically.Cause if that is still the case, the middleware version is only really going to let you test out art assets, which is fine if it's an artist version, but that still leaves us without an indie version.
#146
For teaching, the 2D+3D in Torque and TorqueX are compelling. When the announcements came out for free Unity and UDK I downloaded both and went to look to see how I would teach my 2D and 3D programming classes.
So far it looks like I will stick with TorqueX. But the tools for TorqueX better improve. So far I don't see any point to my upgrading to TorqueX 3D. Since it added nothing over TorqueX 2.0. Other than giving GG a way to charge twice for what I got in TorqueX 2.0.
Complaints aside. A huge selling point of Torque and TorqueX is 2D and 3D. Use that as a selling point. I can use the same skills to make both types of games.
I use TorqueX because its hard enough to teach coding, I don't want to teach TorqueScript. Kismet looks very nice for non-programmers to use. Behaviors and Components are on the right track.
I think you went in the wrong direction when you split the products in two. You should provide 2D and 3D in one set of tools. And make that your value add over the more 3D focused engines. Focus on Behaviors/Components proved a ton of pre canned ones, like KIsmet seems to have.
And Please, Please get a real editor for TorqueX 3D.
11/15/2009 (1:49 pm)
Has anyone pointed out the 2D tools that Torque Offers? T2D + T3D makes up a great set of tools. Neither unity or unreal seem to have the tools for 2D.For teaching, the 2D+3D in Torque and TorqueX are compelling. When the announcements came out for free Unity and UDK I downloaded both and went to look to see how I would teach my 2D and 3D programming classes.
So far it looks like I will stick with TorqueX. But the tools for TorqueX better improve. So far I don't see any point to my upgrading to TorqueX 3D. Since it added nothing over TorqueX 2.0. Other than giving GG a way to charge twice for what I got in TorqueX 2.0.
Complaints aside. A huge selling point of Torque and TorqueX is 2D and 3D. Use that as a selling point. I can use the same skills to make both types of games.
I use TorqueX because its hard enough to teach coding, I don't want to teach TorqueScript. Kismet looks very nice for non-programmers to use. Behaviors and Components are on the right track.
I think you went in the wrong direction when you split the products in two. You should provide 2D and 3D in one set of tools. And make that your value add over the more 3D focused engines. Focus on Behaviors/Components proved a ton of pre canned ones, like KIsmet seems to have.
And Please, Please get a real editor for TorqueX 3D.
#147
What would you be happy with? I'd be happy with putting a little more publicity on the free version.
What do you think would be best for the community the future of the product? What you've been doing has been great.
Do we want a more elite, experienced community of programmers here? Do we want to create a more balanced mix of great artists too? Both of these things would be nice, but not necessarily necessary. If you want expert programmers typically you go look at C++ and find that the concepts are easy to carry over into Torque.
11/15/2009 (2:01 pm)
What should we do? I think that two things should be done... First I think that a slight marketing change should be made advertising the "demo" as a free, but limited version of the product... Like you said, UDK is UE3 Modding... But by calling it free, they've gotten lots of buzz and people know that its an option. Second, I think that that middle option should be made for like a learning addition or an addition that the artist or level designer can use so that the programmer can showcase it to them at less of a cost than the programmer seat.What would you be happy with? I'd be happy with putting a little more publicity on the free version.
What do you think would be best for the community the future of the product? What you've been doing has been great.
Do we want a more elite, experienced community of programmers here? Do we want to create a more balanced mix of great artists too? Both of these things would be nice, but not necessarily necessary. If you want expert programmers typically you go look at C++ and find that the concepts are easy to carry over into Torque.
#148
I can see the engines sharing a launcher, and when you drop in both products the Toolbox gives you more options. Perhaps even a merged engine for the really adventurous who target desktop products. Click a button, choose 2D, 3D or both, get relevant toolset to the task, build Torque Project and launch your fave IDE if any customisation is needed.
Anyway, back to the rails: I dunno what price is the best for the less-than-full T3D. I suspect that Brett and the rest already have some plans in store which will please the majority, and are just working us up to have a discussion to gather our opinions and tweak the numbers.
*** END SPECULATION ***
11/15/2009 (2:13 pm)
@Doug: I mostly agree. Yes, they should wield their 2D tools like a club in this war of engines. I don't think they should be the very same engine, though. We are struggling enough with memory footprint on the iPhone to have both a 2D and a 3D engine. There is a heck of a lot of code unique to each side of things. They are merging the platform foundations, though, so basically the renderer and unique objects+supporting script functions will differ. Still, I don't see them getting under 2MB for the binary if everything 2D+3D is in one engine ;)I can see the engines sharing a launcher, and when you drop in both products the Toolbox gives you more options. Perhaps even a merged engine for the really adventurous who target desktop products. Click a button, choose 2D, 3D or both, get relevant toolset to the task, build Torque Project and launch your fave IDE if any customisation is needed.
Anyway, back to the rails: I dunno what price is the best for the less-than-full T3D. I suspect that Brett and the rest already have some plans in store which will please the majority, and are just working us up to have a discussion to gather our opinions and tweak the numbers.
*** END SPECULATION ***
#149
11/15/2009 (2:23 pm)
@Ronny: I like the split they have of 2D and 3D modules. Didn't meant to imply they should create a monolithic engine with undo bloat. Just sell them as a Single suite. And you can publish 2D, 3D or a mix. Which is where I thought all this was headed at one point. And that is something most other engines don't have, if any. 
#150
With decent understanding of c++ you can move this platform to a suitable level,that satisfy your needs.
There are tons of free resource that await to be ported.
The community is very good,there are many knowledgeable engineers,that always take notice of the serious questions.
The engines we comment here (Vision,Unreal,CryEngine..),they are NOT suitable for 5-15 person companies.
Their prices (including source code + console licenses) are 6-7 digits long,they are suitable for big companies with 200-1000 employees.
And the license is "per title". For the next game you have to pay the same money again.
Zero support there.
If you start a thread at the Gamebryo forum,you'll receive the answer (may be) after 2 months.
11/15/2009 (2:25 pm)
Despite the usual bugs,T3D is a good engine with a good price.With decent understanding of c++ you can move this platform to a suitable level,that satisfy your needs.
There are tons of free resource that await to be ported.
The community is very good,there are many knowledgeable engineers,that always take notice of the serious questions.
The engines we comment here (Vision,Unreal,CryEngine..),they are NOT suitable for 5-15 person companies.
Their prices (including source code + console licenses) are 6-7 digits long,they are suitable for big companies with 200-1000 employees.
And the license is "per title". For the next game you have to pay the same money again.
Zero support there.
If you start a thread at the Gamebryo forum,you'll receive the answer (may be) after 2 months.
#151
Emergent does offer something along those lines, but it's more of a little known thing and they don't license it to just anybody. Mich and I looked into using it during the Zombie Shortbus days. As I remember it their terms were a bit more restrictive than even those of the UDK, and I don't think source was included.
11/15/2009 (2:51 pm)
@PaulEmergent does offer something along those lines, but it's more of a little known thing and they don't license it to just anybody. Mich and I looked into using it during the Zombie Shortbus days. As I remember it their terms were a bit more restrictive than even those of the UDK, and I don't think source was included.
#152
Rebrand the demo. Change it from a "demo" to T3D's "free for non-commercial use, non-source code version" (of course something like “learning/hobbyist edition” would sound better). Your chart implies that the demo is already comparable with the other free version, so why not just make it official? Very little, if any, programming changes would need to be done. You could still have the watermark, the popup prompting users to purchase the other versions, and a limited number of objects (but maybe just a few more objects than the current demo).
But you should still have a cheap, non-source version for commercial use. Maybe you could try giving a partial discount to people that already own Torque engines. Some random example numbers: The artist/designer edition could be $300. But if you already own a previous 3D Torque engine, you would get a discount of 50% of its value (about $150 off for owning TGEA and about $50 off for TGE owners).
It would still be fairly inexpensive for new customers, current Torque owners would still get some kind of a discount, and you'd still make a little off of the upgrades. At some point you’d probably have to switch to partial discounts anyway (that or continue to raise your prices indefinitely or give out all of your upgrades for free).
11/15/2009 (5:06 pm)
+1 for Peter "2Corin517"Rebrand the demo. Change it from a "demo" to T3D's "free for non-commercial use, non-source code version" (of course something like “learning/hobbyist edition” would sound better). Your chart implies that the demo is already comparable with the other free version, so why not just make it official? Very little, if any, programming changes would need to be done. You could still have the watermark, the popup prompting users to purchase the other versions, and a limited number of objects (but maybe just a few more objects than the current demo).
But you should still have a cheap, non-source version for commercial use. Maybe you could try giving a partial discount to people that already own Torque engines. Some random example numbers: The artist/designer edition could be $300. But if you already own a previous 3D Torque engine, you would get a discount of 50% of its value (about $150 off for owning TGEA and about $50 off for TGE owners).
It would still be fairly inexpensive for new customers, current Torque owners would still get some kind of a discount, and you'd still make a little off of the upgrades. At some point you’d probably have to switch to partial discounts anyway (that or continue to raise your prices indefinitely or give out all of your upgrades for free).
#153
One is that recent events would definitely make this news become echoed by a lot more sources. The newsworthiness of Torque 3D being the third game engine within a few weeks to go for free would be very high this way. It would reach a lot more people than it would normally.
The downside is that if that would happen, there's no way to keep these sources from mentioning Unity and the UDK.
I'm not sure which one would outweigh the other though.
11/15/2009 (5:46 pm)
I think that - concerning news and hype value - there are two sides to making a free Torque 3D version. One is that recent events would definitely make this news become echoed by a lot more sources. The newsworthiness of Torque 3D being the third game engine within a few weeks to go for free would be very high this way. It would reach a lot more people than it would normally.
The downside is that if that would happen, there's no way to keep these sources from mentioning Unity and the UDK.
I'm not sure which one would outweigh the other though.
#154
I think that if these sources mentioned Unity and UDK (inevitable, really), then many would also mention something about the higher price-points and the differences in moving beyond just tinkering. Or maybe I'm just overly optimistic... ;)
11/15/2009 (6:26 pm)
Quote:I'm not sure which one would outweigh the other though
I think that if these sources mentioned Unity and UDK (inevitable, really), then many would also mention something about the higher price-points and the differences in moving beyond just tinkering. Or maybe I'm just overly optimistic... ;)
#155
seems to me that the fact that you said the "basic" version would be available many times in the past, and that the community is overwhelmingly in favor of it should be enough justification for the low-priced option, not what your competitors are doing. Why isn't there already a "basic" version? Oh yeah I remember now:
Did the recent move by Epic somehow magically change this fact?
Lower the price of your tech. And stop pretending like community feedback is going to have any affect on the business decisions GG makes in the future. People arent buying it anymore.
11/15/2009 (7:17 pm)
Quote:
I think the recent developments by Unity and Epic and all the new developers trying their hand at 3D games warrants a low-priced option for Torque 3D, as well.
seems to me that the fact that you said the "basic" version would be available many times in the past, and that the community is overwhelmingly in favor of it should be enough justification for the low-priced option, not what your competitors are doing. Why isn't there already a "basic" version? Oh yeah I remember now:
Quote:
frankly, the number of people who've jumped on the "Professional" license has convinced us that a "Basic" version is not really needed.
Did the recent move by Epic somehow magically change this fact?
Quote:
What should we do?
What would you be happy with?
Lower the price of your tech. And stop pretending like community feedback is going to have any affect on the business decisions GG makes in the future. People arent buying it anymore.
#156
11/15/2009 (7:17 pm)
I'm agree whit a free option to make chance to new possibles customers come to Torque tech, now I really think GG need to unify their engine in ONE package compatible whit multiple platforms and do not have many engines to different purposes, and unify different targets too, example 2D+3D one package, and in that order we have TORQUE (3D/2D) (Windows, Mac, Web, Wii, Xbox 360, PS3 and PSP) "<- this would be awesome", and iTorque for iPhone 2D+3D one package too, I think to have all different versions is a nightmare... (integrate 2d and 3d one package will make torque something really unique to offer compare to unity or udk.) 
#157
I kind of get the feeling that T3D isn't what it would have been if say Tribes 3 and 4 etc had been made by Dynamics.
But anyway back to my main point, people want GG to survive and so people really want to give a hand and help GG.
I think T3D is very good, at rendering and stuff, but the tools is where it lacks. Getting content in to the engine using either engine tools or CHEAP third-party tools should be the aim. We don't have loads of cash and a lot of us spent a fair bit on the engine it self, we need to be able to get content in to our games as easily and cheaply as possible. We need the animation system to be improved, or replaced by a generic system so any animator can create content for us.
We need everything to be normal and not require any extra tools or learning to export to T3D so to not make any artists unavailable to us. With UDK, the amount of art content they can easily get created for them is ridiculous. And I hope GG realises this, because for a long time the content pipeline for Torque engines hasn't been very nice. And still seems dated.
We used to have a lot of people back in the TGE early days really creating great resources and really helping to improve the engine. The community did a lot for this engine. That has dropped off a fair bit, the cheaper the engine gets the more of that we get. People are more likely to share when its free or very cheap.
The community is what is important, and you'll see GG trying to sell the engine as if we, the community are an included feature. But we won't be there if the engine can not stand up to its new challenges.
Think of this, people generally start off modding. They get used to those tools and then they want to make a game. 8 years ago, you didn't have much choice. But there was V12/TGE, where you ahd to learn new tools and everything. But now you can just go, oh I'll use UDK and you're already familiar with it.
Why would people who are new to the scene want to use T3D?
11/15/2009 (7:18 pm)
I kind of get the feeling that a lot of people are really wanting to stick with GG because they gave us V12 and TGE back in the day. But have been slipping since with TGEA, and now T3D is very good but missing some things.I kind of get the feeling that T3D isn't what it would have been if say Tribes 3 and 4 etc had been made by Dynamics.
But anyway back to my main point, people want GG to survive and so people really want to give a hand and help GG.
I think T3D is very good, at rendering and stuff, but the tools is where it lacks. Getting content in to the engine using either engine tools or CHEAP third-party tools should be the aim. We don't have loads of cash and a lot of us spent a fair bit on the engine it self, we need to be able to get content in to our games as easily and cheaply as possible. We need the animation system to be improved, or replaced by a generic system so any animator can create content for us.
We need everything to be normal and not require any extra tools or learning to export to T3D so to not make any artists unavailable to us. With UDK, the amount of art content they can easily get created for them is ridiculous. And I hope GG realises this, because for a long time the content pipeline for Torque engines hasn't been very nice. And still seems dated.
We used to have a lot of people back in the TGE early days really creating great resources and really helping to improve the engine. The community did a lot for this engine. That has dropped off a fair bit, the cheaper the engine gets the more of that we get. People are more likely to share when its free or very cheap.
The community is what is important, and you'll see GG trying to sell the engine as if we, the community are an included feature. But we won't be there if the engine can not stand up to its new challenges.
Think of this, people generally start off modding. They get used to those tools and then they want to make a game. 8 years ago, you didn't have much choice. But there was V12/TGE, where you ahd to learn new tools and everything. But now you can just go, oh I'll use UDK and you're already familiar with it.
Why would people who are new to the scene want to use T3D?
#158
Sean, I see you like to put your head in the sand. Let me be the first to enlighten you about what's going on.
A good business decision - which, incidentally, is something Brett was asking our help with in this very blog - is one that the customer is satisfied with.
I hope this got through. Let me know if you need me to explain in detail. And quit flaming, you're pretty much alone with that intent here.
11/15/2009 (7:28 pm)
@Sean H.:Quote:
Lower the price of your tech. And stop pretending like community feedback is going to have any affect on the business decisions GG makes in the future. People arent buying it anymore.
Sean, I see you like to put your head in the sand. Let me be the first to enlighten you about what's going on.
A good business decision - which, incidentally, is something Brett was asking our help with in this very blog - is one that the customer is satisfied with.
I hope this got through. Let me know if you need me to explain in detail. And quit flaming, you're pretty much alone with that intent here.
#159
11/15/2009 (7:28 pm)
@Sean: Does someone burn your toast every morning? Always so hostile...I don't get it.
#160
This Move by Epic is smart and beneficial for all. Paying out %25 of your game sales and or related items is alot, however this is not unheard of or unwise. What they have done is made a way for indies to get into an industry that is very tough to break into. The reasons are mostly financial as game engine and other technology like modeling packages are very expensive and make it impossible for some people to do anything. Epic is basically taking their fees on the back end instead of the front.
Whats does T3D do better than Unreal 3? Did you really ask that? Come on man thats crazy! Unreal 3 boasts some of the best graphics you can ask for. It may not have some of the features of T3D but I would not compare the two engines as T3D is really not proven and if there is a team or company that has a game in the works that plays and looks like Gears of War or Unreal Tournament or the other countless games that have used the Unreal engine let me know. Bottom line is get some software, get a team, get a plan and make a game. Is it easy? Never! Is it expensive? Yes! Will u succeed? Who knows... T3D nor Unreal 3 ensure success. So why give reasons about why people should buy T3D when its really makes no difference. Engine selection is a matter of preference and so I say each to his own. DL out.
11/15/2009 (9:24 pm)
Edited by moderator - SBThis Move by Epic is smart and beneficial for all. Paying out %25 of your game sales and or related items is alot, however this is not unheard of or unwise. What they have done is made a way for indies to get into an industry that is very tough to break into. The reasons are mostly financial as game engine and other technology like modeling packages are very expensive and make it impossible for some people to do anything. Epic is basically taking their fees on the back end instead of the front.
Whats does T3D do better than Unreal 3? Did you really ask that? Come on man thats crazy! Unreal 3 boasts some of the best graphics you can ask for. It may not have some of the features of T3D but I would not compare the two engines as T3D is really not proven and if there is a team or company that has a game in the works that plays and looks like Gears of War or Unreal Tournament or the other countless games that have used the Unreal engine let me know. Bottom line is get some software, get a team, get a plan and make a game. Is it easy? Never! Is it expensive? Yes! Will u succeed? Who knows... T3D nor Unreal 3 ensure success. So why give reasons about why people should buy T3D when its really makes no difference. Engine selection is a matter of preference and so I say each to his own. DL out.
Torque Owner Richard Preziosi
WinterLeaf Entertainment
Engines are a dime a dozen to find, a lot free or open source. The thing about garage games has always been the helpful community, small as it may be, and the amount of free resources. As someone more from the designer spectrum, I wouldn't have learned to use TGE if not for the community being so helpful.