Unity3D vs The World
by James · in General Discussion · 03/20/2010 (1:01 pm) · 50 replies
<rant>
I've been using Torque since the V12 days back in 2001. I got the 1.5 update in '07 and the T3D update a couple weeks ago. In addition to Torque I own (paid) licenses to A6, Blitz3D, C4, Power Render, and Unity. Over the years I've frequented and participated in the communities of all these tools, and as can be expected the Great Engine Debate comes up at least once every season. Obviously there is going to be a bias slant in each product's respective forum, but you typically get pretty balanced discussion on both sides of the argument. Typically.
In the past year that I've been using Unity, however, I've noticed that these discussions always become very polarized and offensive on their forums. They're usually as bad if not worse than the Great PC vs Mac flame wars. I've often seen false impressions, misinformation, and blatant lies spread about their competition by the users, and in some cases even their staff. Unity Technology staff members (and even one corporate officer) have, on occasion, gone to the forums of competing products to further the debate.
Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a huge detriment to the product? Unity is a fine engine, don't get me wrong, but to see such inane babble makes them seem desperate. Add the fact that they make their $200 product free (thereby angering a huge number of users) then gloat about how they've had 90,000 new users since. I've been using Unity for two years now and have released several products with it, but their slowness in adding functionality and apparent lack of desire to make the (now free) Indy version a viable option has got me seriously eying the competition. It's looking more and more that I'll be back to T3D for the next project.
</rant>
__________
james
I've been using Torque since the V12 days back in 2001. I got the 1.5 update in '07 and the T3D update a couple weeks ago. In addition to Torque I own (paid) licenses to A6, Blitz3D, C4, Power Render, and Unity. Over the years I've frequented and participated in the communities of all these tools, and as can be expected the Great Engine Debate comes up at least once every season. Obviously there is going to be a bias slant in each product's respective forum, but you typically get pretty balanced discussion on both sides of the argument. Typically.
In the past year that I've been using Unity, however, I've noticed that these discussions always become very polarized and offensive on their forums. They're usually as bad if not worse than the Great PC vs Mac flame wars. I've often seen false impressions, misinformation, and blatant lies spread about their competition by the users, and in some cases even their staff. Unity Technology staff members (and even one corporate officer) have, on occasion, gone to the forums of competing products to further the debate.
Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a huge detriment to the product? Unity is a fine engine, don't get me wrong, but to see such inane babble makes them seem desperate. Add the fact that they make their $200 product free (thereby angering a huge number of users) then gloat about how they've had 90,000 new users since. I've been using Unity for two years now and have released several products with it, but their slowness in adding functionality and apparent lack of desire to make the (now free) Indy version a viable option has got me seriously eying the competition. It's looking more and more that I'll be back to T3D for the next project.
</rant>
__________
james
About the author
Software engineer by day, game developer by night, eye strain 'round the clock.
#2
That said, I still use Unity. I'm not even complaining about the software itself, it's mainly the attitude of the company and most prominent members of the community. I've voiced my gripes about Torque more than a few times on these forums and it usually turns into a bunch of folks griping about work over beers. In the Unity forums such an offense would escalate to a holy war.
__________
james
03/20/2010 (2:42 pm)
They've had pretty much the same product for at least the past year and a half. Most of the changes from version to version have been things that either should have been in the engine already or updates/fixes to the IDE. The upcoming 3.0 release looks promising, but it appears that all the relevant features will be Pro version only. We are waiting to get something as simple as shadows in the Indy version (no, we still don't have shadows), but it looks doubtful.That said, I still use Unity. I'm not even complaining about the software itself, it's mainly the attitude of the company and most prominent members of the community. I've voiced my gripes about Torque more than a few times on these forums and it usually turns into a bunch of folks griping about work over beers. In the Unity forums such an offense would escalate to a holy war.
__________
james
#3
Sigh ... I wish I worked for beer ... ***droools*** ... I have to buy my own beer ... *sulks*
[/opportunist_joke] end of thread derailment!
03/20/2010 (2:59 pm)
Quote:folks griping about work over beers
Sigh ... I wish I worked for beer ... ***droools*** ... I have to buy my own beer ... *sulks*
[/opportunist_joke] end of thread derailment!
#5
03/21/2010 (2:47 am)
I haven´t seen any of the things you mention on the Unity forums or the company attitude. You are only exaggerating things because you haven´t got the responses you wanted to hear. This same post shows clearly who has actually an ugly attitude: you.
#6
03/21/2010 (8:22 am)
I haven't seen this happen. The only thing I did see is the then CEO of this company make a blog post about 'free' engines, only to jump ship and take a job at Unity. Brett Seyler was his name I think.
#7
Here's a quote from the Unity CTO talking trash about Shiva. It's been a while so I don't remember if he said this on the Unity forums or on GameDev:
developer.stonetrip.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=2&func=vie...
Here's a thread where Unity users are bashing UDK, Torque, etc.
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=36040
Here's a few that basically say you can't make anything unless you rewrite the source:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=43016
Here's another similar one:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=36663
Here's one another one that misinforms about UDK:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=35805
Here's one where they say everything from TorqueScript us crap to Unity has better quality graphics. Someone also states that Unity has all these features like path finding and ai (which it doesn't). My personal favorite is how they accuse GG of "milking" their users by releasing an incomplete tool only to charge more for addons:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=33092
This one opens early with, "unity3d is much more expandable torque 3d has a lame excuse for a networking...":
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=25609
Here's one with "honest" mistakes:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=19987
03/21/2010 (9:51 am)
To clarify, I'd never say the whole community behaves poorly. It's a lot of the more prominent members. I just did a simple search for Torque and got some examples below.Here's a quote from the Unity CTO talking trash about Shiva. It's been a while so I don't remember if he said this on the Unity forums or on GameDev:
developer.stonetrip.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=2&func=vie...
Here's a thread where Unity users are bashing UDK, Torque, etc.
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=36040
Here's a few that basically say you can't make anything unless you rewrite the source:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=43016
Here's another similar one:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=36663
Here's one another one that misinforms about UDK:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=35805
Here's one where they say everything from TorqueScript us crap to Unity has better quality graphics. Someone also states that Unity has all these features like path finding and ai (which it doesn't). My personal favorite is how they accuse GG of "milking" their users by releasing an incomplete tool only to charge more for addons:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=33092
This one opens early with, "unity3d is much more expandable torque 3d has a lame excuse for a networking...":
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=25609
Here's one with "honest" mistakes:
forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=19987
#8
Unity has a full PhysX implementation in their free engine..
Where as the T3D team can't even add it to their $1k engine.
03/21/2010 (10:14 am)
Not trying to add any flames here..just some input..Unity has a full PhysX implementation in their free engine..
Where as the T3D team can't even add it to their $1k engine.
#9
@James - Always glad to hear the perspective of some of our longest users. I'll try to weigh in on this.
Kind of depends on your perspective, but I have noticed a bit more inflammatory comments on their forums compared to our's. I've seen plenty of "Torque is trash" kind of comments and even posts that attack our staff. On our forums, I still see people downing Unity but it's usually slightly less aggressive language. However, the worst ones are typically driven by licensees with little working knowledge of both engines...not employees or really experienced users.
I've only ever seen one or two employees from both sides post in a rival forum. These are usually some of the most level headed responses you will find. Take our very own David Montgomery-Blake. He owns licenses to both Torque and Unity, as well as a few other engines. If he posts, it's always neutral and right on since he has working knowledge. This is not always the case with licensees, unfortunately.
Now, you don't always see an employee jump in and say "whoa now, be nice to <insert competition engine here> on their home turf. Can't really expect them to. Do I wish engine vs engine threads did not exist? Just the ones that get ugly and contain false information. The neutral ones (at least the ones that start off neutral) can contain useful information that will help someone make a decision.
On the other hand, I think 3rd party forums not attached to an engine product are open game for an employee to go post. He has full rights to say whatever he wants at Unity or on GameDev.net. If he were to come over to our forum and down Torque or another engine, then that's a different story. May not be the best idea, and I'm sure he is not interested.
However, you will not see me jump to the Unity forum to correct information or defend our engine. Their community is their responsibility, and the user actions in their forums only reflect on their community. In one of your examples, HiggyB (excellent moderator and cool guy) wrote a misinformed statement (sort of). Mark Schaerer (very good example of a community member from both forums) corrects him quickly. Great.
03/21/2010 (10:15 am)
@Jason - Brett wasn't CEO of our company. Louis Castle is.@James - Always glad to hear the perspective of some of our longest users. I'll try to weigh in on this.
Quote:I've noticed that these discussions always become very polarized and offensive on their forums.
Kind of depends on your perspective, but I have noticed a bit more inflammatory comments on their forums compared to our's. I've seen plenty of "Torque is trash" kind of comments and even posts that attack our staff. On our forums, I still see people downing Unity but it's usually slightly less aggressive language. However, the worst ones are typically driven by licensees with little working knowledge of both engines...not employees or really experienced users.
I've only ever seen one or two employees from both sides post in a rival forum. These are usually some of the most level headed responses you will find. Take our very own David Montgomery-Blake. He owns licenses to both Torque and Unity, as well as a few other engines. If he posts, it's always neutral and right on since he has working knowledge. This is not always the case with licensees, unfortunately.
Quote:Unity Technology staff members (and even one corporate officer) have, on occasion, gone to the forums of competing products to further the debate.
Now, you don't always see an employee jump in and say "whoa now, be nice to <insert competition engine here> on their home turf. Can't really expect them to. Do I wish engine vs engine threads did not exist? Just the ones that get ugly and contain false information. The neutral ones (at least the ones that start off neutral) can contain useful information that will help someone make a decision.
Quote:Here's a quote from the Unity CTO talking trash about Shiva. It's been a while so I don't remember if he said this on the Unity forums or on GameDev:
On the other hand, I think 3rd party forums not attached to an engine product are open game for an employee to go post. He has full rights to say whatever he wants at Unity or on GameDev.net. If he were to come over to our forum and down Torque or another engine, then that's a different story. May not be the best idea, and I'm sure he is not interested.
However, you will not see me jump to the Unity forum to correct information or defend our engine. Their community is their responsibility, and the user actions in their forums only reflect on their community. In one of your examples, HiggyB (excellent moderator and cool guy) wrote a misinformed statement (sort of). Mark Schaerer (very good example of a community member from both forums) corrects him quickly. Great.
#10
I was of the impression that T3D is designed to allow a developer to integrate his/her choice of physics solution rather than give them a solution. They have provided a sample integration for PhysX and there are resources that cover various other solutions as well. Personally, I like this approach because it gives me more choices.
03/21/2010 (10:27 am)
@Eb - what's missing? I haven't done an inventory of the API, but there is a PhysX sample that comes with the $1k (perhaps with the Indy) version. Seems to work ok....I was of the impression that T3D is designed to allow a developer to integrate his/her choice of physics solution rather than give them a solution. They have provided a sample integration for PhysX and there are resources that cover various other solutions as well. Personally, I like this approach because it gives me more choices.
#11
The human factor is very important. We spend nearly a year competing online, then we get to be face to face at a conference like GDC. It's very surreal. We will visit each other's booths, watch presentations, and occasionally talk one on one. I know when I'm talking to the competition, but I never feel any animosity.
Example: At last week's GDC, Nicholas Francis (Unity CCO and co-founder) came to our booth for a visit. I actually enjoyed talking to him. After some small talk about tech, he wanted a tour of iTorque 2D. Was he performing recon? Well, I don't think he was getting info so he could license our tech =)
I was happy to give him the high level tour, and we talked about 2D technology for a bit. Primarily from the user-experience and art side. We were both able to admit shortcomings and pluses of our engines. All in and all it was a great meeting, and I got the same level of respect and courtesy when I wen to their booth for a Unity 3.0 tour. As I said, surreal. I even ran into Brett, but I will not get into those details for obvious reasons.
So what's my overall point? After watching and participating in engine vs engine threads and actually performing hands on research with the competition, this my stance:
1. I truly believe in our tech. I have seen great games made with Torque, so I think it is proven engine technology. It kicks ass, but you can call me bias if you want =)
2. I have used the competition's engine technology. Just like Torque there are a lot of cool pros, obvious cons, and sometimes hidden shortcomings. You discover these when you spend enough time on each product. There is no "silver bullet engine".
3. My best advice to people who license 3rd party middle-ware: use what works best for your project. I would love it if you only ever used Torque and continued to license our products. However, if you have good reason for using another engine my feelings will not be hurt. Again, there is no perfect game engine.
4. Sometimes you just need to step out of the forums. Honestly, what is more productive? Participating in flaming engine wars or working on your game? What's more positive? Helping users out with their tech problems or spending countless time arguing with users of another engine?
If it were to sum up my overly verbose rant: Engine vs engine threads happen. The ones that ugly are typically driven by users, and not employees. This has no bearing on the tech progression. How the engine progresses, is not based on engine fights. The rep of a company does not rest on the community unless an employee acts in an inappropriate way while posting.
03/21/2010 (10:30 am)
Let's be direct. An engine's community is a large part of what makes it successful. However, what non-employee say in the forum should not reflect on the actual staff. I have only ever seen one Unity employee put her foot in her mouth, and her blog was taken down within minutes. THAT reflects on the company. Me getting defensive in a forum reflects on my company.The human factor is very important. We spend nearly a year competing online, then we get to be face to face at a conference like GDC. It's very surreal. We will visit each other's booths, watch presentations, and occasionally talk one on one. I know when I'm talking to the competition, but I never feel any animosity.
Example: At last week's GDC, Nicholas Francis (Unity CCO and co-founder) came to our booth for a visit. I actually enjoyed talking to him. After some small talk about tech, he wanted a tour of iTorque 2D. Was he performing recon? Well, I don't think he was getting info so he could license our tech =)
I was happy to give him the high level tour, and we talked about 2D technology for a bit. Primarily from the user-experience and art side. We were both able to admit shortcomings and pluses of our engines. All in and all it was a great meeting, and I got the same level of respect and courtesy when I wen to their booth for a Unity 3.0 tour. As I said, surreal. I even ran into Brett, but I will not get into those details for obvious reasons.
So what's my overall point? After watching and participating in engine vs engine threads and actually performing hands on research with the competition, this my stance:
1. I truly believe in our tech. I have seen great games made with Torque, so I think it is proven engine technology. It kicks ass, but you can call me bias if you want =)
2. I have used the competition's engine technology. Just like Torque there are a lot of cool pros, obvious cons, and sometimes hidden shortcomings. You discover these when you spend enough time on each product. There is no "silver bullet engine".
3. My best advice to people who license 3rd party middle-ware: use what works best for your project. I would love it if you only ever used Torque and continued to license our products. However, if you have good reason for using another engine my feelings will not be hurt. Again, there is no perfect game engine.
4. Sometimes you just need to step out of the forums. Honestly, what is more productive? Participating in flaming engine wars or working on your game? What's more positive? Helping users out with their tech problems or spending countless time arguing with users of another engine?
If it were to sum up my overly verbose rant: Engine vs engine threads happen. The ones that ugly are typically driven by users, and not employees. This has no bearing on the tech progression. How the engine progresses, is not based on engine fights. The rep of a company does not rest on the community unless an employee acts in an inappropriate way while posting.
#12
However, when someone wrongly says that a product absolutely can not do something I have to clear the air. Maybe it's an OCD. :p
03/21/2010 (12:09 pm)
Well said Mike. The only point I try to get across in these debates is exactly what you said. Nothing is perfect, nothing works for everyone, nothing works for everything, evaluate each option for yourself and for the task at hand.However, when someone wrongly says that a product absolutely can not do something I have to clear the air. Maybe it's an OCD. :p
#13
Nothing wrong with this at all. Don't get me wrong at all. We love it when Torque users defend our product, the company, and our community. Sometimes misconceptions just have to be addressed, and if you guys are backing us up we can spend more time in the tech and less time in PR battles.
03/21/2010 (12:51 pm)
Quote:However, when someone wrongly says that a product absolutely can not do something I have to clear the air.
Nothing wrong with this at all. Don't get me wrong at all. We love it when Torque users defend our product, the company, and our community. Sometimes misconceptions just have to be addressed, and if you guys are backing us up we can spend more time in the tech and less time in PR battles.
#14
03/21/2010 (1:05 pm)
Hahaha, yes, please do. I read that you'd be addressing the docs after GDC. You're under the microscope now.
#15
As for other notes: I like all engines for their own genre of performance.
I wish i could rid the world of fanbois like St. Patrick did the druids of Ireland. (yet, I bet the druids weren't bad people either..but let's face it, they were probably fanboi-preachy!) ;)
:P
03/21/2010 (5:05 pm)
meh, I don't care to reply Richard. It may cause more problems than do any good...yet anyone who is deeply involved in community chat/IRC, debates, discussions and followings may understand where those words of mine derived.As for other notes: I like all engines for their own genre of performance.
I wish i could rid the world of fanbois like St. Patrick did the druids of Ireland. (yet, I bet the druids weren't bad people either..but let's face it, they were probably fanboi-preachy!) ;)
:P
#16
I'm sure Torque could post a much more impressive irrelevant number, but what is the point of that.
@eb - As always your "input" its based on your own needs and point of view.
Unity lacks force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids. Also they don't have any networked physics support... does that make them incomplete compared to Torque which does?
You should keep an eye out for more about physics and Torque very soon. I hope we continue our long standing tradition to personally disappoint you. ;)
03/21/2010 (5:33 pm)
Quote:then gloat about how they've had 90,000 new users since.That line always cracks me up.... you all know they really don't have 90,000 users. They took their download numbers of the free version of Unity and called them users.
I'm sure Torque could post a much more impressive irrelevant number, but what is the point of that.
@eb - As always your "input" its based on your own needs and point of view.
Unity lacks force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids. Also they don't have any networked physics support... does that make them incomplete compared to Torque which does?
You should keep an eye out for more about physics and Torque very soon. I hope we continue our long standing tradition to personally disappoint you. ;)
#17
I am curious as to how those words were chosen ? ..seems like a put-down used in haste.
- Now, I can understand the mild-retaliation if you felt offended by the words of my initial post. Not quite sure why you would bother with such a thing. Consider this for part of my POV here:(and please read the remainder of the post before gathering an opinion)..your own man James tossed the source for the exporter that would support the very tool your man Russell asked me to create. I'm perplexed by that..extremely perplexed by that. Yet it is nice to know that T3D has support for, "force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids" ..so where is that support ? ..forthcoming I would assume.
- I have to say that I find it ironic that you claim something to be "based on my own needs and my POV" and then state that very same something is available.. ..if it were so specific to me, then I am flattered by the specific attention you give me. Yet I know this to not be true ..so of course, I jest/kid/joke. :P
I am not trying to offend you Tom. I'm trying to get to the bottom of the situation in a website where, at times, people only reply to bad remarks. So, thank you for the information.
//edit in: I am not disappointed by any of this but I understand your context when you stated something along the lines of me being continually disappointed. In reply I can offer this: I would not have these expectations if they were never given to me.
@Richard,
By Tom mentioning force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids.. that kind of shows you the very subject point I wanted to portray but avoided. It was not an advertised feature because then they would HAVE to complete it. Yet they are working on it..which makes this a grey-subject area IMO.
//
The unity page states "Unity contains the full capabilities of the Ageia PhysX next-gen Physics Engine.".
ok, did some research..
Unity (preversion 3.0) has PhysX 2.5..their website uses the terminology "Aegia PhysX" which was probably bought from Aegia around v2.5. No Nvidia PhysX features in pre3.0 Unity.
//edit in#2. I realize my words may sound harsh in spots, I don't mean them with ill-regard.
03/21/2010 (6:25 pm)
"as always" ? ..interesting words you chose Tom.I am curious as to how those words were chosen ? ..seems like a put-down used in haste.
- Now, I can understand the mild-retaliation if you felt offended by the words of my initial post. Not quite sure why you would bother with such a thing. Consider this for part of my POV here:(and please read the remainder of the post before gathering an opinion)..your own man James tossed the source for the exporter that would support the very tool your man Russell asked me to create. I'm perplexed by that..extremely perplexed by that. Yet it is nice to know that T3D has support for, "force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids" ..so where is that support ? ..forthcoming I would assume.
- I have to say that I find it ironic that you claim something to be "based on my own needs and my POV" and then state that very same something is available.. ..if it were so specific to me, then I am flattered by the specific attention you give me. Yet I know this to not be true ..so of course, I jest/kid/joke. :P
I am not trying to offend you Tom. I'm trying to get to the bottom of the situation in a website where, at times, people only reply to bad remarks. So, thank you for the information.
//edit in: I am not disappointed by any of this but I understand your context when you stated something along the lines of me being continually disappointed. In reply I can offer this: I would not have these expectations if they were never given to me.
@Richard,
By Tom mentioning force fields, cloth, soft bodies, and fluids.. that kind of shows you the very subject point I wanted to portray but avoided. It was not an advertised feature because then they would HAVE to complete it. Yet they are working on it..which makes this a grey-subject area IMO.
//
The unity page states "Unity contains the full capabilities of the Ageia PhysX next-gen Physics Engine.".
ok, did some research..
Unity (preversion 3.0) has PhysX 2.5..their website uses the terminology "Aegia PhysX" which was probably bought from Aegia around v2.5. No Nvidia PhysX features in pre3.0 Unity.
//edit in#2. I realize my words may sound harsh in spots, I don't mean them with ill-regard.
#18
for instance watch me defend my choice =)
in regards to Unity, IMO Torque is the beter engine for professional game development. Its a more mature and more sophisticated technology.
theres 5 things that make torque an engine superior to most indie choices:
1. terrain - torque has always had the best terrain rendering hands down superior to any indie-priced engine. the terrain is huge and can be tweaked for any kind of performance/quality ratio easily using editor. terrain is essential if you want an open-world game and torque has the best around.
2. torquescript - some people may not like proprietary languages but torquescript is a very easy to use and representative of most programming languages. if youve done any kind of programming, there's no surprises here. in fact, writing games in torquescript is an excellent way of introducing beginners to programming in general.
3. networking - this feature isn't useful to me but it's great to know that if I ever decide I want to make a multiplayer game, I'll have access to one of the fastest solutions around.
4. engine source - if there's anything that needs to be added or supported for your game, it's always possible to add it with source code access. it's not always easy, but it's possible. any kind of performance optimizations, or middleware solutions, or custom solutions are possible with access to the source code. the sky's the limit here.
5. built-in game and environment objects - torques got built-in support for many kinds of game and world objects including rain, sky, clouds, physics objects, controllable players, mounted player weapons, land and air vehicles, projectiles, particles, explosions, etc. Torque goes way beyond many other engines which are really just renderers with a few simple classes available for extension.
I do agree that it does look a bit unprofessional when the creater of a product is defending it in comparison to competition. I don't think it's that big of a deal though.
03/21/2010 (6:29 pm)
people are always going to want to defend their choices and preferences. for instance watch me defend my choice =)
in regards to Unity, IMO Torque is the beter engine for professional game development. Its a more mature and more sophisticated technology.
theres 5 things that make torque an engine superior to most indie choices:
1. terrain - torque has always had the best terrain rendering hands down superior to any indie-priced engine. the terrain is huge and can be tweaked for any kind of performance/quality ratio easily using editor. terrain is essential if you want an open-world game and torque has the best around.
2. torquescript - some people may not like proprietary languages but torquescript is a very easy to use and representative of most programming languages. if youve done any kind of programming, there's no surprises here. in fact, writing games in torquescript is an excellent way of introducing beginners to programming in general.
3. networking - this feature isn't useful to me but it's great to know that if I ever decide I want to make a multiplayer game, I'll have access to one of the fastest solutions around.
4. engine source - if there's anything that needs to be added or supported for your game, it's always possible to add it with source code access. it's not always easy, but it's possible. any kind of performance optimizations, or middleware solutions, or custom solutions are possible with access to the source code. the sky's the limit here.
5. built-in game and environment objects - torques got built-in support for many kinds of game and world objects including rain, sky, clouds, physics objects, controllable players, mounted player weapons, land and air vehicles, projectiles, particles, explosions, etc. Torque goes way beyond many other engines which are really just renderers with a few simple classes available for extension.
I do agree that it does look a bit unprofessional when the creater of a product is defending it in comparison to competition. I don't think it's that big of a deal though.
#19
03/21/2010 (8:40 pm)
@eb, I took Tom's comment to mean, "One's input is based on his/her own needs," not a dig at you directly, but of course I'm not Tom so who knows. ;)
#20
It's a shame when inflammatory posts like that get replies, yet a thread about the inherit problem of normal maps in T3D and the odd shaking of PhysX objects, well, that thread sees no attention for those causes.
I have stirred flames before to get attention to issues that are quite important. It's a shame that such a thing has to be done, but as you see, shamefully, it works.
03/21/2010 (9:12 pm)
Thanks James. I think Tom is a good guy..and I doubt he's taking a dig..I think he's trying to point out to me that my words are simply not appreciated. Here's my opinion on it:It's a shame when inflammatory posts like that get replies, yet a thread about the inherit problem of normal maps in T3D and the odd shaking of PhysX objects, well, that thread sees no attention for those causes.
I have stirred flames before to get attention to issues that are quite important. It's a shame that such a thing has to be done, but as you see, shamefully, it works.
Torque 3D Owner Joshua Halls (Xerves)