Refund for somebody who this goes way over there head
by Nana-an-hu · in Torque Game Engine · 09/23/2003 (3:15 pm) · 25 replies
I have been trying to get started with the engine for a couple of weeks and have still got no idea how to achieve anything (Not for lack of effort). And would like to know how to request a refund as I am completly unable to put this to any use. :-(
#22
DCF
02/03/2004 (5:17 am)
One more thing to add to the above, I feel that most people are looking for something that is a cross between Macromedia Director or Flash, and has the horse power of a Quake-like engine. Closest to that ideal that I've seen is 3D Game Studio by Conitec. But even with such tools, you still gotta work plenty hard to get things to happen.DCF
#23
I am sure you know that the cost of Torque Engine is only a fraction of Macromedia Director or Flash, but Torque does much more :)
Yes, Director and Flash may be easier to use, but it's because they have better documentation.
In term of 3D capabilities, they cannot achieve what Torque can do. Director 3D has a 50 000 polygons ceiling which makes it impossible to make a nice looking FPS. Flash simply fakes the 3D (not rendered in realtime). The 3D quality in 3DGS sucks, which is why there are some making the switch from 3DGS to Torque. Making a good game takes a few years, if you stick with Torque, you will have better chances of success.
I am trying to do more basic tutorials. But I have to juggle with my busy workloads, like many people here is doing.
My advice is this,
3 choices
1) You read every possible tutorials, resources you can find here. It is just that it isn't well organised.
2) For those who wants a step by step documentation, you just have to wait.
3) Donate some $$$$ to GG, they will be glad to use the money to hire people to beef up the documentation.
I am a newbie, but I love the everyday I learn new things about Torque ;-)
James Yong
02/03/2004 (8:51 am)
Hi David,I am sure you know that the cost of Torque Engine is only a fraction of Macromedia Director or Flash, but Torque does much more :)
Yes, Director and Flash may be easier to use, but it's because they have better documentation.
In term of 3D capabilities, they cannot achieve what Torque can do. Director 3D has a 50 000 polygons ceiling which makes it impossible to make a nice looking FPS. Flash simply fakes the 3D (not rendered in realtime). The 3D quality in 3DGS sucks, which is why there are some making the switch from 3DGS to Torque. Making a good game takes a few years, if you stick with Torque, you will have better chances of success.
I am trying to do more basic tutorials. But I have to juggle with my busy workloads, like many people here is doing.
My advice is this,
3 choices
1) You read every possible tutorials, resources you can find here. It is just that it isn't well organised.
2) For those who wants a step by step documentation, you just have to wait.
3) Donate some $$$$ to GG, they will be glad to use the money to hire people to beef up the documentation.
I am a newbie, but I love the everyday I learn new things about Torque ;-)
James Yong
#24
I can't agree with you more, and that is the very reason I dropped $100 for the engine. I have evaluated many engines, and have worked with companies that developed games in Flash and Director. That work could only be described as painful. Torque may have a steep learning curve, but of all the engines out there it offers the most bang for your buck.
DCF
02/04/2004 (9:52 am)
James,I can't agree with you more, and that is the very reason I dropped $100 for the engine. I have evaluated many engines, and have worked with companies that developed games in Flash and Director. That work could only be described as painful. Torque may have a steep learning curve, but of all the engines out there it offers the most bang for your buck.
DCF
#25
I was originally attracted to 3DGS by the "you can start out slow and work up" concept, but I found I hit the wall with what I wanted to do fairly quickly.. and given that I need decent-sized outdoor environments with decent quality, it rapidly became obvious to me that There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (lol). It's a darn sight easier to go ahead and analyze the Torque code and make adjustments to my way of working than it is to write my own code (having tried that), it's a far easier thing to spend man-months learning "the Torque way" than man-years trying to reinvent the 3D engine wheel Yet Again. Having been involved in the distant past with some Genesis3D modification projects, I'm kind of used to this.. so I give up on trying to find an easy way, there isn't one! :O
Thankfully aspirin and tums are cheap, and with a nice free tool like Source Navigator I can find my way around the codebase fairly handily. ;)
02/04/2004 (10:50 am)
I have to admit I'm one of those that dropped 3DGS in favor of Torque! I was originally attracted to 3DGS by the "you can start out slow and work up" concept, but I found I hit the wall with what I wanted to do fairly quickly.. and given that I need decent-sized outdoor environments with decent quality, it rapidly became obvious to me that There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (lol). It's a darn sight easier to go ahead and analyze the Torque code and make adjustments to my way of working than it is to write my own code (having tried that), it's a far easier thing to spend man-months learning "the Torque way" than man-years trying to reinvent the 3D engine wheel Yet Again. Having been involved in the distant past with some Genesis3D modification projects, I'm kind of used to this.. so I give up on trying to find an easy way, there isn't one! :O
Thankfully aspirin and tums are cheap, and with a nice free tool like Source Navigator I can find my way around the codebase fairly handily. ;)
Torque Owner David Freeman
We have a few schools of thought which breaks down to this:
-Folks who want to make games, but have no programming experience.
-Folks who have lot's of programming experience, but have never seen a complete engine, and must therefore mold themselves to this environment.
-Folks who have developed in such environments, and have no problem getting around.
Those that are adept can wade through the logistics without much of a problem as the territory is familiar. Everyone else must conform to the engine and its idiosyncracies. Is that bad? Well, let's just say if you try to do all that has been implemented in Torque from scratch, then you are in for some pain.
If you want to create an FPS/RTS with all the amenities, then you are best served with Torque and the script. If you want to do something else like screen savers, or simple "Visualizers" well maybe you should try some of the more basic tools. From what I can see it is not simply an SDK in which you can mold an application from scratch with tools like Fastgraph or Power Render. If this is an erroneus assessment then please forgive me (please correct me), but I have been at this for a while and this is my own simple observation.
Must you mold yourself to the environment? Yes. That is the way things are done. Is it the best way? Well, in my life as a game programmer in the past, I have found that this implementation is the better way. The Torque engine is a great structure, but you will not find it easy to navigate in the fact that it does not lend itself to being easy for novices to learn. In fact, I feel that even with DOCs, it will be a "bear". Why? Simply because it is rooted in computer science, and on-the-fly development. Simply put, "This ain't no 'Klick and Play'". You really have to study.
DCF