Google Answers / Experts Exchange For Torque
by Faraz Ahmed · in Torque Game Engine · 01/16/2006 (10:57 pm) · 6 replies
Having recently purchased torque for evaluation and prototyping of a game concept I soon realized that as you try to do real things with the engine, the documentation starts to fragment into forums, random tutorials and the new upcoming wiki. Although a clear effort has been made to support and enable knowledge sharing within the general community, i feel that it is way too unreliable, incomplete and full of assumptions for someone investing real project based time and money into a torque based development.
That said, if GarageGames were to introduce a service like Google Answers or Experts Exchange where professional development companies or serious individuals are willing to invest a bit of money for comprehensive answers to questions, it would take the entire auto-documentation concept to the level it needs to be at and also introduce a revenue stream for GarageGames and the experts that will now jump in to upgrade the knowledge base in depth.
I would rather see this service prioritized over the wiki initiative.
What are your thoughts?
That said, if GarageGames were to introduce a service like Google Answers or Experts Exchange where professional development companies or serious individuals are willing to invest a bit of money for comprehensive answers to questions, it would take the entire auto-documentation concept to the level it needs to be at and also introduce a revenue stream for GarageGames and the experts that will now jump in to upgrade the knowledge base in depth.
I would rather see this service prioritized over the wiki initiative.
What are your thoughts?
#2
This sounds to me like a privilege system.
It would damage the Garage Games community by alienating existing license holders and preventing new users from joining the fold because they'd see it as a money grabbing community.
Currently, the community is one of the most attractive things about using the Torque engine.
The only differences in the level of privilage for torque users should be in the distinction between License holders and everyone else.
Private, product based information to those who've purchased the product in question is fine.
More effort should be spent getting the Wiki up to speed and then questions will be answered quicker. To undermine this effort undermines the entire community and I fear, the reputation of Torque.
I'm concerned that people who pay for a special information service would be less likely to contribute to the community as a whole. They would not update the wiki, they would just get on with their work feeling that they've paid for a service ...thank you very much... and no more thought would go into it.
At the moment people contribute to the wiki and the forums as they see fit. Often on response to a particular question they feel qualified to answer. I've seen people post resources based soley on a question raised by someone else. This community is empowered because of acts of generosity like this.
Support contracts with GG are available for a fee and they are more than qualified to answer any questions on a project by project basis. This way, all the money goes back into GG so that they can continue to develop an affordable engine.
I'm a devoper by trade so occasionally I have to search the web for answers to particular problems and I hate it when I get to one of *Those* sites where they list a load of questions and you have to subscribe for $$$ to see the solution. Often the problem isn't a particularly challenging one, just frustrating and when up against tight deadlines. Time spent searching everywhere for a solution is wasted, so the temptation is there to pay up and get the answer quickly. But more often than not, I search to find a free answer andfind that the answer is very simple. Not worth the money.
Generally I've got no problem with people making money from a service, but not when it's suggested that it detracts effort from a community service like the TDN Wiki.
If I've missed the point (as I often do), I apologise.
01/17/2006 (2:37 am)
I'm sorry but I don't agree. This sounds to me like a privilege system.
It would damage the Garage Games community by alienating existing license holders and preventing new users from joining the fold because they'd see it as a money grabbing community.
Currently, the community is one of the most attractive things about using the Torque engine.
The only differences in the level of privilage for torque users should be in the distinction between License holders and everyone else.
Private, product based information to those who've purchased the product in question is fine.
More effort should be spent getting the Wiki up to speed and then questions will be answered quicker. To undermine this effort undermines the entire community and I fear, the reputation of Torque.
I'm concerned that people who pay for a special information service would be less likely to contribute to the community as a whole. They would not update the wiki, they would just get on with their work feeling that they've paid for a service ...thank you very much... and no more thought would go into it.
At the moment people contribute to the wiki and the forums as they see fit. Often on response to a particular question they feel qualified to answer. I've seen people post resources based soley on a question raised by someone else. This community is empowered because of acts of generosity like this.
Support contracts with GG are available for a fee and they are more than qualified to answer any questions on a project by project basis. This way, all the money goes back into GG so that they can continue to develop an affordable engine.
I'm a devoper by trade so occasionally I have to search the web for answers to particular problems and I hate it when I get to one of *Those* sites where they list a load of questions and you have to subscribe for $$$ to see the solution. Often the problem isn't a particularly challenging one, just frustrating and when up against tight deadlines. Time spent searching everywhere for a solution is wasted, so the temptation is there to pay up and get the answer quickly. But more often than not, I search to find a free answer andfind that the answer is very simple. Not worth the money.
Generally I've got no problem with people making money from a service, but not when it's suggested that it detracts effort from a community service like the TDN Wiki.
If I've missed the point (as I often do), I apologise.
#3
As far as simple answers are concerned, the free discussions can always host such Q/A in parallel. I think that both types of complex and simple information would find harmony and balance within these two areas. Both will offer existing information for free and one will offer answers to *new* complex questions for a small fee.
01/17/2006 (3:43 am)
An important point here is that, unlike the "$$$ to see the solution" services, the answers on Google Answers are fully searchable by the public. So all of this information will always be available to the community for free. Yes, trivial amounts of cash will be spent by some individuals but, in the long run, this approach will save money for the community because they will be spending less time to find better information. As far as simple answers are concerned, the free discussions can always host such Q/A in parallel. I think that both types of complex and simple information would find harmony and balance within these two areas. Both will offer existing information for free and one will offer answers to *new* complex questions for a small fee.
#4
I have a question. I pay for the answer. If someone comes up in the forum asking a similar question, I'd think twice before answering that for free, since I paid for that answer. Maybe I'd post a "click here to buy the answer" link, or I'd simply answer that, and nobody would need to buy the answer again, because I "pirated" it into the forums. It complicates the system too much.
Having GG themselves offer extended support for a fee is much better. Also, GG themselves could recruit other developers that have proven themselves to know enough of Torque to provide quality support.
01/17/2006 (8:27 am)
The problem is:I have a question. I pay for the answer. If someone comes up in the forum asking a similar question, I'd think twice before answering that for free, since I paid for that answer. Maybe I'd post a "click here to buy the answer" link, or I'd simply answer that, and nobody would need to buy the answer again, because I "pirated" it into the forums. It complicates the system too much.
Having GG themselves offer extended support for a fee is much better. Also, GG themselves could recruit other developers that have proven themselves to know enough of Torque to provide quality support.
#5
I think Farad's original point was, an Answers-like system could help developers for whom the forums aren't helping, and also give developers with some know-how a little extra scratch. Certainly there's nothing keeping Farad from asking his questions on Google, and nothing keeping developers from here going there to answer the questions.
Of course plenty of questions on GA go without answers, too. So, keep in mind, GG does offer support contracts...
01/17/2006 (8:46 am)
In Google Answers, somebody pays for an answer, but the whole world gets to read it for free. (Go check out Google Answers, it's nifty.) The forums are a great resource, sure, but sometimes questions don't get answered. It's easy to get frustrated. I think Farad's original point was, an Answers-like system could help developers for whom the forums aren't helping, and also give developers with some know-how a little extra scratch. Certainly there's nothing keeping Farad from asking his questions on Google, and nothing keeping developers from here going there to answer the questions.
Of course plenty of questions on GA go without answers, too. So, keep in mind, GG does offer support contracts...
#6
Things are certainly chaotic, at the moment; but I think that things will calm down significantly when GG's plans for TDN get out of beta. Then, the flood of duplicate questions in the forums will be handled by permanent (and constantly growing) TDN resources. This will leave the forums free to cover emerging specialized questions and answers; which will grow into becoming TDN resources (once they've been fleshed out a bit - AI threads are a good example of this).
The last thing people need right now is yet another type of documentation; especially a for-pay type, which could fragment the community. I'm as frustrated with the current situation as the next guy, but I see more problems than solutions with this approach.
01/17/2006 (11:16 am)
My 1 1/2 cents...Things are certainly chaotic, at the moment; but I think that things will calm down significantly when GG's plans for TDN get out of beta. Then, the flood of duplicate questions in the forums will be handled by permanent (and constantly growing) TDN resources. This will leave the forums free to cover emerging specialized questions and answers; which will grow into becoming TDN resources (once they've been fleshed out a bit - AI threads are a good example of this).
The last thing people need right now is yet another type of documentation; especially a for-pay type, which could fragment the community. I'm as frustrated with the current situation as the next guy, but I see more problems than solutions with this approach.
Torque 3D Owner Peter Simard
Default Studio Name
-Pete