Synapsys new lighting pack
by Ori Cohen · in Torque Game Engine · 04/29/2004 (8:15 pm) · 56 replies
Hi,
To be honest, i thought i was the first to buy the lighting pack.
i figured synapse wont sell if over 25$, i was shocked today when the price was set at 50$.
with tse around the corner. i cant realy shell out that much money these days.
you might say "tse and the light pack has nothing in common", in my opinion gg will eventually add lights to tse.
i am pretty much disappointed. well, thats life for you.
care to share your 2 cents ?
Ori.
To be honest, i thought i was the first to buy the lighting pack.
i figured synapse wont sell if over 25$, i was shocked today when the price was set at 50$.
with tse around the corner. i cant realy shell out that much money these days.
you might say "tse and the light pack has nothing in common", in my opinion gg will eventually add lights to tse.
i am pretty much disappointed. well, thats life for you.
care to share your 2 cents ?
Ori.
#2
If you are going to start a (complaint) thread, take a moment to at least get the name right.. it's Synapse Gaming...
I believe the price is more than fair for a handcrafted enhancement which improves one of TGE's weakest features... it's lighting. Worth is of course relative... is what you are doing with Torque worth having better lighting?
-J
04/29/2004 (8:46 pm)
$.02 If you are going to start a (complaint) thread, take a moment to at least get the name right.. it's Synapse Gaming...
I believe the price is more than fair for a handcrafted enhancement which improves one of TGE's weakest features... it's lighting. Worth is of course relative... is what you are doing with Torque worth having better lighting?
-J
#3
Pretty sweet.
That's not even touching other parts that I understand John has added, like halos and light beams.
And all this without the use of shaders. We are proud to be testing Synapse Gaming's Lighting Pack in TZ. :)
-Eric F
04/29/2004 (9:01 pm)
I've got to say that I was quite impressed with how much better the lighting looked in Trajectory Zone. It wasn't just a matter of raising the stock TGE light levels to higher. It included a specular-like highlighting of hills and objects, as well as all objects having pre-rendered terrain shadows, including .DTS! That means you can put DTS trees into the game and it will now look just that much more realistic because of the baked-in shadows. Pretty sweet.
That's not even touching other parts that I understand John has added, like halos and light beams.
And all this without the use of shaders. We are proud to be testing Synapse Gaming's Lighting Pack in TZ. :)
-Eric F
#4
04/29/2004 (9:10 pm)
Heh sorry for the typo.. it was 6 am for me.
#5
yes i know about the technology improvements, and you cant realy set a price on technology, etc.. etc..
this was more of a disappointment thread rather than a complaint/bitch.
Ori.
04/29/2004 (9:16 pm)
Jushua & Eric,yes i know about the technology improvements, and you cant realy set a price on technology, etc.. etc..
this was more of a disappointment thread rather than a complaint/bitch.
Ori.
#6
As for TSE around the corner... what corner is that? There's been no release date announced for TSE.
(BTW: No need to be defensive. You asked for people's $.02 - did you expect it to be edited at that price? I'm an Indie - offer me $50, and I might consider editing myself. After you put the cash in my hand ;-)
04/30/2004 (12:19 am)
For anyone who reads this and wonders - is it worth $50? Yeah, it's worth it. Every bit. I'm still not making use of part of what it can do, and it still made Trajectory Zone look awsome! And after you integrate it into your project, you'll never be able to look at another Torque project that uses the standard lighting model and think either "damn, that screenshot is too dark" or "man those models look faded out." It's just that damned good, and it's completely worth the investment if you need your models to be perfect, and your terrain to have flawless color, etc.As for TSE around the corner... what corner is that? There's been no release date announced for TSE.
(BTW: No need to be defensive. You asked for people's $.02 - did you expect it to be edited at that price? I'm an Indie - offer me $50, and I might consider editing myself. After you put the cash in my hand ;-)
#7
I am sure it has its advantages, but in comparison to many other things in the market, like physics sdk that cost 95$. tge which cost 100$. i cant help thinking its too pricey. beside the fact that you can make wonders with those light shows. also TZ prob got it for free :P (heh). i am sure i'll get my share of flames. but i am sure someone out there agrees with me somewhat.
i did ask for people's 0.02$ so keep them coming folks.
As for tse.. i am willing to bet those 50$ its going to come sooner than you think ;)
Like i said i feel pretty much disappointed i cant get it.
Ori.
04/30/2004 (12:26 am)
Davis, I am sure it has its advantages, but in comparison to many other things in the market, like physics sdk that cost 95$. tge which cost 100$. i cant help thinking its too pricey. beside the fact that you can make wonders with those light shows. also TZ prob got it for free :P (heh). i am sure i'll get my share of flames. but i am sure someone out there agrees with me somewhat.
i did ask for people's 0.02$ so keep them coming folks.
As for tse.. i am willing to bet those 50$ its going to come sooner than you think ;)
Like i said i feel pretty much disappointed i cant get it.
Ori.
#8
SHRUG It's defintiely a to each his own sort of thing. For TZ, improving the visuals was important. If I hadn't have beta'ed the Lighting Pack, I'd probably have integrated it anyway (I had given the whole situation up for dead until John Kabus contacted me, and was just going to use it for TZ2 or the next game on my list. I assumed it was going to take too much time and resource adjusting to be a viable use of time based on the timeframe that I wanted to get the project done in. Man was I ever wrong on that one ;-)
But I'll put it in a different perspective - I bill my time to customers at $45 / hour. If it were to take me longer than one hour to program from scratch and / or descriptions in the forums, then I saved money and headache. For me, it would have been a simple choice. To you - well, that's something completely different. I also don't compair it to the cost of the engine - buying the Torque engine already saved my tens of thousands easily, but these are two very different situations. And $50 is also a drop in the bucket compaired to how much of TZ's income is dedicated to the content developers.
As for TSE - Early Adoptor and Ready For Prime Time Shipping Games will probably be two different things, IMO. However, I could easily be proved wrong on that count (as soon as TSE has OpenGL support, I'm buyin'. Then after porting a project over, I'll decide if it's ready for me to release games using the technology - luckly, it's build off of Torque so they do have some solid foundations to work from, but getting all the bugs tweaked out will still probably take a while.) And, as of yet, TSE is a big blank - do we know if it runs on older hardware (IE, older than say a GeForce4 or Radion 9600 as an example)? For me, if it doesn't, then it's going to seriously reduce the size of the market I can reach - only select projects of mine would use TSE (anything aimed at hardcore gamers - but that's a completely different debate that's been hashed many times, you can resurrect one of those threads ;-), the rest would make use of TGE + LightingPack + many resources available.
Have TSE in the equation for the Lighting Pack's current cost when so little is know about it...? Hm. Doesn't seem right to me, but that's just me.
(edit: clarification of one TSE comment)
04/30/2004 (12:44 am)
Davis. The name that appears to the left of the post is Davis. David is someone else ;-) (Just pickin' on ya)SHRUG It's defintiely a to each his own sort of thing. For TZ, improving the visuals was important. If I hadn't have beta'ed the Lighting Pack, I'd probably have integrated it anyway (I had given the whole situation up for dead until John Kabus contacted me, and was just going to use it for TZ2 or the next game on my list. I assumed it was going to take too much time and resource adjusting to be a viable use of time based on the timeframe that I wanted to get the project done in. Man was I ever wrong on that one ;-)
But I'll put it in a different perspective - I bill my time to customers at $45 / hour. If it were to take me longer than one hour to program from scratch and / or descriptions in the forums, then I saved money and headache. For me, it would have been a simple choice. To you - well, that's something completely different. I also don't compair it to the cost of the engine - buying the Torque engine already saved my tens of thousands easily, but these are two very different situations. And $50 is also a drop in the bucket compaired to how much of TZ's income is dedicated to the content developers.
As for TSE - Early Adoptor and Ready For Prime Time Shipping Games will probably be two different things, IMO. However, I could easily be proved wrong on that count (as soon as TSE has OpenGL support, I'm buyin'. Then after porting a project over, I'll decide if it's ready for me to release games using the technology - luckly, it's build off of Torque so they do have some solid foundations to work from, but getting all the bugs tweaked out will still probably take a while.) And, as of yet, TSE is a big blank - do we know if it runs on older hardware (IE, older than say a GeForce4 or Radion 9600 as an example)? For me, if it doesn't, then it's going to seriously reduce the size of the market I can reach - only select projects of mine would use TSE (anything aimed at hardcore gamers - but that's a completely different debate that's been hashed many times, you can resurrect one of those threads ;-), the rest would make use of TGE + LightingPack + many resources available.
Have TSE in the equation for the Lighting Pack's current cost when so little is know about it...? Hm. Doesn't seem right to me, but that's just me.
(edit: clarification of one TSE comment)
#9
i fixed the post hehe..
anyways 45/hw is pretty high. in here i would make that in .. a day, but since i dont realy work (student). this comes as a bigger financial issue.
we just had a small chat on irc. dts object dont cast shadows in the demo. although it is stated in the document. and another thing is that when you move around yourself between 2 spots (in 3rd person) the lights casting looks very blocky..
i still think 50$ for ME is too much.. hehe
Ori.
04/30/2004 (1:09 am)
DaviS,i fixed the post hehe..
anyways 45/hw is pretty high. in here i would make that in .. a day, but since i dont realy work (student). this comes as a bigger financial issue.
we just had a small chat on irc. dts object dont cast shadows in the demo. although it is stated in the document. and another thing is that when you move around yourself between 2 spots (in 3rd person) the lights casting looks very blocky..
i still think 50$ for ME is too much.. hehe
Ori.
#10
I'm very disappointed to see that after all of the communication we had prior to the launch you chose to complain here without voicing your concern to me first. Anyway I certainly respect your position, I know that your project is going to be free and you may not have money to work with, however had the pack been priced at less than $25 someone would still complain that it should be a free resource. There's no way to make everyone happy, but I think most people will find the price fair.
To clear up a few misunderstandings:
-The product page states 'Static DTS objects cast shadows'. The player model is not a static dts, however the pipes and supports in the demo are. You'll notice that these are casting shadows.
-The blocky lighting (I assume you mean on the terrain) is an integration option that you can choose not to change. By default Torque will use the sun as the light source for shading, the change gives a more ambient look and feel.
-John Kabus
Synapse Gaming
04/30/2004 (6:23 am)
Hello Ori,I'm very disappointed to see that after all of the communication we had prior to the launch you chose to complain here without voicing your concern to me first. Anyway I certainly respect your position, I know that your project is going to be free and you may not have money to work with, however had the pack been priced at less than $25 someone would still complain that it should be a free resource. There's no way to make everyone happy, but I think most people will find the price fair.
To clear up a few misunderstandings:
-The product page states 'Static DTS objects cast shadows'. The player model is not a static dts, however the pipes and supports in the demo are. You'll notice that these are casting shadows.
-The blocky lighting (I assume you mean on the terrain) is an integration option that you can choose not to change. By default Torque will use the sun as the light source for shading, the change gives a more ambient look and feel.
-John Kabus
Synapse Gaming
#11
Not that I'm saying your program is buggy or anything like that. I just have no immediate need for it, so I'll wait until it has been perfected. But I do plan on buying it.
Congratualtions guys!
04/30/2004 (6:51 am)
I for one think the lighting pack looks very impressive, and at a reasonable price. Unfortunately, time is my most scarce resource, so I dont really want to pay for a product, then debug it. ;) I'll wait for a month or two until everything is stable, then I'll purchase the pack.Not that I'm saying your program is buggy or anything like that. I just have no immediate need for it, so I'll wait until it has been perfected. But I do plan on buying it.
Congratualtions guys!
#12
i didnt want to bother you with anymore emails. maybe i should have.. its too late now, thanks for pointing it out.
all i can say that i have learned from this mistake.
there will always be someone to complain, and there is no way on earth everyone can be happy. as long as you are happy thats good.
the pack looks impressive, and probably will help many folks out there.
about the shadow casting. i tried putting a crossbow below a spotlight in the corridors. i couldnt make it cast shadows on to the ground.. i have no idea why.
about the blocky player shadow thing. the shadows i was talking about are the shadows the light cast on the player itself, it seems like its jumping from polygon to polygon and not going so smooth. (when you turn around yourself in 3rd person)
Ori.
04/30/2004 (7:09 am)
John,i didnt want to bother you with anymore emails. maybe i should have.. its too late now, thanks for pointing it out.
all i can say that i have learned from this mistake.
there will always be someone to complain, and there is no way on earth everyone can be happy. as long as you are happy thats good.
the pack looks impressive, and probably will help many folks out there.
about the shadow casting. i tried putting a crossbow below a spotlight in the corridors. i couldnt make it cast shadows on to the ground.. i have no idea why.
about the blocky player shadow thing. the shadows i was talking about are the shadows the light cast on the player itself, it seems like its jumping from polygon to polygon and not going so smooth. (when you turn around yourself in 3rd person)
Ori.
#13
Now if Melv would release his particle effects stuff as well...
04/30/2004 (7:35 am)
As soon as I saw that it was available this morning (at about 2:00 a.m. or so), I bought it. While it's not at all required for my project, the visual enhancement THAT I DIDN'T HAVE TO DO MYSELF is easily worth the $50 to me.Now if Melv would release his particle effects stuff as well...
#14
The static dts shadows are based on the object's collision mesh, I don't think the crossbow has a collision mesh (picking up objects is based on bounding boxes), so that may be the issue. If you have any objects from KQ9 that are dts objects and have valid collision meshes you can use those and they'll work in the demo.
Ahh, you're seeing the dts vertex lighting, this is carried over from Torque.
-John
04/30/2004 (7:36 am)
Ori,The static dts shadows are based on the object's collision mesh, I don't think the crossbow has a collision mesh (picking up objects is based on bounding boxes), so that may be the issue. If you have any objects from KQ9 that are dts objects and have valid collision meshes you can use those and they'll work in the demo.
Ahh, you're seeing the dts vertex lighting, this is carried over from Torque.
-John
#15
John is also correct in that anything less than free will get complaints, and people generally want paid-level support for free too (been there, done that... and I'm sure Joshua, Davis, and others can also likewise attest). As I said before, I'm very happy with how the levels look, even though it means I have to go back and tweak them. :)
I paid $50 for just one of the tools to help me make better night skies w/planets. Paint Shop Pro retails for $99. Terragen runs for $99. I can't help but wonder how many tools we've lost out on because there just was no financial incentive to further develop them.
It's a nice pack, and I'd hate to guess how many hours John has in it, but I certainly hope the return is good for him. IMHO, it makes the sand in one of our levels (Dunes of Ra) jump out and say, "hello". There's just something kickin' about it being so much brighter, and on the sides of dunes facing the sun almost glaring. He should offer a free pair of sunglasses with it!
-EricF
04/30/2004 (7:43 am)
The DTS (as John mentioned, above) has to be a static object (actually defined as "Static" in the engine, IIRC). This can also be Melv's FXObjects (which are now standard in TGE), for things such as trees. It is baked into the terrain just like an interior (DIF) is. It will not move if you have the sun moving, but it looks great.John is also correct in that anything less than free will get complaints, and people generally want paid-level support for free too (been there, done that... and I'm sure Joshua, Davis, and others can also likewise attest). As I said before, I'm very happy with how the levels look, even though it means I have to go back and tweak them. :)
I paid $50 for just one of the tools to help me make better night skies w/planets. Paint Shop Pro retails for $99. Terragen runs for $99. I can't help but wonder how many tools we've lost out on because there just was no financial incentive to further develop them.
It's a nice pack, and I'd hate to guess how many hours John has in it, but I certainly hope the return is good for him. IMHO, it makes the sand in one of our levels (Dunes of Ra) jump out and say, "hello". There's just something kickin' about it being so much brighter, and on the sides of dunes facing the sun almost glaring. He should offer a free pair of sunglasses with it!
-EricF
#16
A suggestion. I would like to see from the demo more demostration of the Lighting Code Pack features. This is because when I compare the 2 missions in the demo, the only difference I can see is the light beam from the overhead lamp (which is great feature).
Not sure about this one, though. I changed to 3rd person view near the fire pit, and I found the player's shadow is casted in the wrong direction.
I wondered if there is another demo for this lighting code pack that I can see?
Regards,
--james yong
04/30/2004 (7:59 am)
Just to say that the Synapse Gaming Lighting Code Pack is interesting. A suggestion. I would like to see from the demo more demostration of the Lighting Code Pack features. This is because when I compare the 2 missions in the demo, the only difference I can see is the light beam from the overhead lamp (which is great feature).
Not sure about this one, though. I changed to 3rd person view near the fire pit, and I found the player's shadow is casted in the wrong direction.
I wondered if there is another demo for this lighting code pack that I can see?
Regards,
--james yong
#17
Stop that, no one complained in the first place.
He said he didn't find the price attractive, that's his opinion for gods sake.
Back on topic I'm going to probably invest in this pack, as soon as I see some screenshots, it sounds really great!
04/30/2004 (8:03 am)
Joshua RitterStop that, no one complained in the first place.
He said he didn't find the price attractive, that's his opinion for gods sake.
Back on topic I'm going to probably invest in this pack, as soon as I see some screenshots, it sounds really great!
#18
Just looking for clarification on this statement. The lightmap file doesn't have that high of a resolution, so baking .dts object shadows into the terrain and having them have anything more then a blob shape doesn't sound possible. (Note: I haven't looked at the lighting demo yet)
04/30/2004 (8:08 am)
Quote:
"It is baked into the terrain just like an interior (DIF) is"
Just looking for clarification on this statement. The lightmap file doesn't have that high of a resolution, so baking .dts object shadows into the terrain and having them have anything more then a blob shape doesn't sound possible. (Note: I haven't looked at the lighting demo yet)
#20
The volume lights are a Torque resource here on the GG site. I created the two missions to show that the pack can be used with or without the resource.
You're correct, the dynamic dts shadows are still based on the sun's position (same as stock Torque and UT2K3 style). Static dts lighting and shadowing is where a lot of new dts flexibility has been added.
Hi Harold,
That's correct, the terrain shadows are great for trees and rocks (larger objects) and smaller objects can be used very effectively in interiors.
-John
04/30/2004 (8:26 am)
Hi James,The volume lights are a Torque resource here on the GG site. I created the two missions to show that the pack can be used with or without the resource.
You're correct, the dynamic dts shadows are still based on the sun's position (same as stock Torque and UT2K3 style). Static dts lighting and shadowing is where a lot of new dts flexibility has been added.
Hi Harold,
That's correct, the terrain shadows are great for trees and rocks (larger objects) and smaller objects can be used very effectively in interiors.
-John
Torque Owner Chris