Current EA viability for production use
by gamelab · in Torque Game Builder · 06/16/2005 (4:04 pm) · 14 replies
Hi,
I understand this question has been asked in many different ways, but I'm going to ask it in a new and more demanding way anyway...
Is the EA release of Torque2D called "EA" mainly because
1) many features are currently absent that are still in development/planning stages
2) the currently implemented features need further testing/refinement to be ready for production use
3) Garage Games wants people to understand the current version is 'as-is' and not to expect support or bugfixes on any predictable timetable
4) other reasons?
5) all of the above?
Let's see... if 4), please elaborate... if 5), please estimate the mix... The reason I'm asking is that if it's primarily 1), that's totally fine, but 2) and especially 3) would be more of a problem. Or, to put it another way, is there any basic subset of the currently implemented functionality, however small, that is tested well enough that GG will provide support for that subset if anything goes wrong using it, and is there any provision in the license about that? Going even further, is there any frequently-updated document saying which features are stable/tested and which ones are still in flux? I'd hate to find out that a feature I'd been using and depending on actually wasn't quite done yet and since I was under an "EA" license, I didn't have a right to expect it to work or even exist in a future version.
Aside from all that pickiness, it looks great.
I understand this question has been asked in many different ways, but I'm going to ask it in a new and more demanding way anyway...
Is the EA release of Torque2D called "EA" mainly because
1) many features are currently absent that are still in development/planning stages
2) the currently implemented features need further testing/refinement to be ready for production use
3) Garage Games wants people to understand the current version is 'as-is' and not to expect support or bugfixes on any predictable timetable
4) other reasons?
5) all of the above?
Let's see... if 4), please elaborate... if 5), please estimate the mix... The reason I'm asking is that if it's primarily 1), that's totally fine, but 2) and especially 3) would be more of a problem. Or, to put it another way, is there any basic subset of the currently implemented functionality, however small, that is tested well enough that GG will provide support for that subset if anything goes wrong using it, and is there any provision in the license about that? Going even further, is there any frequently-updated document saying which features are stable/tested and which ones are still in flux? I'd hate to find out that a feature I'd been using and depending on actually wasn't quite done yet and since I was under an "EA" license, I didn't have a right to expect it to work or even exist in a future version.
Aside from all that pickiness, it looks great.
About the author
#2
06/16/2005 (5:10 pm)
Ok, so in your experience how well do you feel GG is keeping you informed on which things are working and/or staying in T2D as currently implemented vs those that may or may not work, might change or be removed, etc.? Do you get clear information on which things you can and can't count on, or is it mainly trial-and-error on your own?
#3
There is no GG provided support for any of the Torque Application Products unless you purchase a Commercial Support Agreement from us. If you are specifically interested in that, send me an email, but please note that "commercial" in this case means appropriately funded, as well as using commercial licenses. For the indy products, you have the forums (and the incredibly valuable community that is here!), as well as the various tutorials and knowledge articles that are submitted as resources.
Melv and Josh are pretty good about describing what is in progress--you can look at Melv May's .plan files for summaries of current states of the code, and up and coming changes. As people get used to the code base, there are always going to be areas that haven't been reported in a specific status conversation, and generally much more time is spent in development than in status reporting.
06/16/2005 (5:34 pm)
Just to step in here:Quote:Or, to put it another way, is there any basic subset of the currently implemented functionality, however small, that is tested well enough that GG will provide support for that subset if anything goes wrong using it, and is there any provision in the license about that?
There is no GG provided support for any of the Torque Application Products unless you purchase a Commercial Support Agreement from us. If you are specifically interested in that, send me an email, but please note that "commercial" in this case means appropriately funded, as well as using commercial licenses. For the indy products, you have the forums (and the incredibly valuable community that is here!), as well as the various tutorials and knowledge articles that are submitted as resources.
Melv and Josh are pretty good about describing what is in progress--you can look at Melv May's .plan files for summaries of current states of the code, and up and coming changes. As people get used to the code base, there are always going to be areas that haven't been reported in a specific status conversation, and generally much more time is spent in development than in status reporting.
#4
06/16/2005 (7:32 pm)
Just to be clear - we LIKE to help the community, and many of us spend a lot of time DOING so, but we don't HAVE to, so we don't ALWAYS... 
#5
We have a clear roadmap of where we want to take T2D but we don't always anticipate everything nor would we expect to. That's the reason for the EA release. We're getting valuable feedback on what could be easier, what we've done well and can develop the product seeing everyone having fun which believe it or not, is a wonderful motivation when developing a product long-term.
We're pretty open about what's going to be in T2D but we tend to hold back on the exact dates for release primarily because if we slip, we'd be held over the coals and as I'm sure you can appreciate, this doesn't help development. With that said, we're very motivated in seeing T2D become the product we promised in a timely manner.
In terms of features, you can count on practically everything in there, still being there. Backwards compatibility is extremely important to us although this is more of a gratuity and as the recent file-format work proves, we're dedicated to ensuring that this stays that way. We've held-off certain changes as we knew it would break peoples particles/tile-maps etc. With the recent work, we can make global changes with no impact to legacy saves. This has slowed certain aspects of T2D dev down but community is very important!
To sum up the GG / community thing; GG practically is the community. There isn't a big divide between the two, that's how it's always been and hopefully, always will be. I wrote T2D myself but I am just a long-standing community member, nothing more.
In terms of product support, Stephen/Ben said it all.
- Melv.
06/17/2005 (6:01 am)
This also depends highly on whether T2D is going to be used for hobby programming or actual product development. If it's for hobby programming then it may be of particular concern whether $100 is worth it for you. If it's for product development then $100 is a steal for such a rich application and what it will ultimately turn into.We have a clear roadmap of where we want to take T2D but we don't always anticipate everything nor would we expect to. That's the reason for the EA release. We're getting valuable feedback on what could be easier, what we've done well and can develop the product seeing everyone having fun which believe it or not, is a wonderful motivation when developing a product long-term.
We're pretty open about what's going to be in T2D but we tend to hold back on the exact dates for release primarily because if we slip, we'd be held over the coals and as I'm sure you can appreciate, this doesn't help development. With that said, we're very motivated in seeing T2D become the product we promised in a timely manner.
In terms of features, you can count on practically everything in there, still being there. Backwards compatibility is extremely important to us although this is more of a gratuity and as the recent file-format work proves, we're dedicated to ensuring that this stays that way. We've held-off certain changes as we knew it would break peoples particles/tile-maps etc. With the recent work, we can make global changes with no impact to legacy saves. This has slowed certain aspects of T2D dev down but community is very important!
To sum up the GG / community thing; GG practically is the community. There isn't a big divide between the two, that's how it's always been and hopefully, always will be. I wrote T2D myself but I am just a long-standing community member, nothing more.
In terms of product support, Stephen/Ben said it all.
- Melv.
#6
06/17/2005 (9:30 am)
Yeah - it's not even really about the price so much - I think $100 is not so bad for hobby development, same price as a GameCube etc... And, $395 is cheap for a commercial license too - it's just that it's usually difficult to convince a company to buy something without those kinds of details, and then if you do you're kind of responsible for it afterwards if things go wrong. That's why I asked so many pointed questions, sorry if it came off as demanding or annoying. I definitely wouldn't worry about those kinds of things for personal use with the indie license. 
#7
06/22/2005 (9:11 am)
You'll probably get more unofficial support than most products give official support :) Most questions get answered (on the T2D forums) within a couple hours, though theres no guarantee on support, most likely you wont go longer than a day or two with a posted question unanswered, more than likely it will have answers from about three different people within an hour or two lol :)
#8
06/22/2005 (9:18 am)
Is there anything like an issue/bug tracker like open source projects tend to have, so if you run into a problem you can check to see if it's already been reported and/or it's on somebody's todo list, workarounds etc., besides just searching the forums?
#9
06/22/2005 (9:22 am)
There is a seperate bug forum, the site also has an integrated google search engine, so it makes it easy to find information when you want it, whether bug issues, questions, etc :)
#10
06/23/2005 (10:11 am)
Something I overlooked - does T2D support unicode font rendering? I see from other posts that TGE doesn't, but it's my impression that T2D has its own GUI framework, could be wrong.
#11
On the other hand you can use T2D objects to make some fairly advanced Gui's
06/23/2005 (10:17 am)
T2D has the same GUI System TGE has :) On the other hand you can use T2D objects to make some fairly advanced Gui's
#13
It is!
06/27/2005 (7:36 am)
Quote:Ouch... adding unicode support should be a top priority IMO...
It is!
#14
For the next update, we've took a set of features and added them to T2D so you don't have to wait for the merge. Too many things to list here.
- Melv.
06/28/2005 (11:12 pm)
... and as TGE gets features, T2D will merge with it. T2D won't be getting left behind. The next big merge will be with TGE v1.4 which has lots of improvements in all areas.For the next update, we've took a set of features and added them to T2D so you don't have to wait for the merge. Too many things to list here.
- Melv.
Torque Owner Joshua "RegularX" Birk
Whether or not that means you could let something made with T2D into the wild completely depends on what you are doing. Currently, I don't think there's anything in T2D which is seriously holding me back (one thing which may or may not be a T2D bug)... but it should be noted that I'm not really using T2D to it's fullest. For instance, I have yet to abuse any of the editors.