The million dollar question

#21 I think what most people are saying about *better* rendering, is more about more recent additions that have been made to hardware.

Personally, I think thats one of the area's that CAN be updated, but its not a massive leap.

I'd say that the lighting in interiors could very well be improved.

Personally, I'm quite quite happy to dive in and add features that I find fun, good looking, whatever. Thats the nature of torque. Hasnt got something you want? code it!

I'm sure everyone will be impressed with Melv's additions to the fluid code.

I'm going to have a look at first shot shader support for models (still wont help any of you who dont have shader support on your video cards, which will be the majority). I'm also going to be adding in a number of effects specific to my project.

Basically, wait a month or two and wait and see what a few fairly hacky additions to torque's core can do for your graphics :))

To the original poster. Nothing is for free. Games take considerable effort. Dont expect ANY game engine to write your game for you. People license Q3 and Unreal Enginers for millions AND spend years developing extensions etc.

Trust me, you have a great deal to be happy with in torque. If your unhappy with something, change it :)) thats what "development" is.

Phil.

#22 Greetings!

Well, I'm always surprised when I see these 'prove to me why I should be using the same thing that the rest of you are' posts. There's more than enough material on this site to see how others are using the Torque Engine to facilitate the creation of their projects. That said, I'll still offer my two-bits for the cause...

I'll start off with BurningRose Studios' (hereafter known as BRS) concern that a game has not yet been released with the Torque Engine. Yup, a true statement. You know and I know that people are working towards this goal and that it takes time to reach it. Most don't. Really, if this is a big concern for you, then wait it out. Follow some of the projects that seem to be on the right track and will likely be released. Let them beta test the whole end-to-end process and then decide for yourself if all this is for you. If you're concerned about the results, then wait for those results :o)

[sarcasm mode on...sorry, I just can't help it...it's probably the head cold I've got]
Now, BSR, I'm a little confused about your reference to an 'agreement'. I don't recall reading any agreement with GG that they would guarantee that I would personally be able to finish a game and turn a profit. Please, point out where this is so that I may get on Jeff's back as to why my game isn't finished yet!
[/sarcasm]

Now, this may be putting words in your mouth, BSR, but perhaps you meant that the delivery method for selling your game doesn't yet exist at GG? Well, AFAIK, that is also true. See above regarding waiting for this if it concerns you.

Now, onto BSR's technology issues with the Torque Engine. I'll take this one point at a time:

Video Card Drivers
OK, I'm honestly not sure if this one was made in jest. No, really. My assumption has always been that the people that are interested in the Torque Engine are not just game designers, but also game players. As a game player, you'd know that any 3D game recommends that the user obtain the latest drivers from their video card manufacturer. And, it is up to the user to do so.

However, the only true requirement for the Torque Engine AFAIK is that the user's video card support OpenGL or DirectX 8.0. Whether the user installs the latest video driver, or one from a year ago, that's entirely their decision. As a game developer (especially an indie one), I'd only offer assistance to a user that has the latest drivers installed. From what I've seen, that's pretty much the de-facto standard for the industry...

OpenAL
As you've already said, this is a non-issue. It's just a library to access the sound system on the computer, just as OpenGL or DirextX is used to access the video system on the computer. And, it is cross-platform compatible. Just install it on the computer when the game is installed. I don't see how this is any different than commercial Windows games including DirectX with their game and asking the user if they'd like to install it as part of the over-all game installation.

Finally, why would you not want to support Linux and Mac computers? As an indie developer, I'd sure want to have as broad a market as possible.

AI
Yup, there's no AI currently in the Torque Engine. I can't argue with that. If that's a show-stopper for you, just walk away now and go feed the dog (poor doggy).

Now, if you're still with me here, then I see two options for ya: write your own AI code (which would need to be done to some extent with any engine as AI is very game specific), or wait for this great community to finish their AI work. Personally, I can't wait to see what they've come up with and how I can customize it for myself. Thanks guys!

Latest 3D Features
OK, I'd have to say that you originally confused me with this one. First you said that it would be a pain for the user to have to install the latest video drivers. Now you want the Torque Engine to support the latest, wiz-bang, trendy 3D graphics features? I think you'll find that historically these two go hand-in-hand.

I'd agree that the Torque Engine does not support the latest developments in 3D video cards. My personal take on this is to initially worry more about gameplay and everything that goes on behind the scenes before I worry about being able to look in a mirror of me looking in a mirror of me looking into a pool of water with true bumpy ripples while simultaneously realizing that the bump-mapping shows that underneath my spandex jumpsuit I forgot to put on my underwear...

Just as with AI, there's a great bunch of people that are working on this as we speak, and I look forward to implementing these features once I have the more fundamental aspects on my game worked out. Thanks guys! BSR, here's your choices: walk away, wait for someone else to implement this, or work on it yourself.

Documentation
I'd agree with you that more is needed. However, more and more is being produced through the community resources we see on this site. I suspect, however, that this isn't what you're interested in. If this is the case, I see your only option being to wait and see what comes of the future. No apologies here, just the way it is. And everyone has to weight the pros and cons for themselves.

-----

Well, if you've made it this far, then I'm really surprised! I didn't set out to write all this, but I'm glad I did. Consider it Dave's personal FAQ on the state of the union. And for heaven's sake, go feed the dog!

- LightWave Dave

[edit]
Hmmm, of course in the above, BSR is meant to be BRS. That's what I get for writing this while sick. Aaaachoo!
[/edit]

#23

Quote:The only concern I have about Torque is what happens if GG goes out of business in a year? Are you now stuck with a game you've toiled away at for months but can never release for legal reasons? I checked the FAQ and didn't really find an answer -- I'm sure this has been asked and answered in the forums somewhere but unfortunately the forum search feature on the site is pretty useless (only matches topics?). (And to be clear, I'm not expecting GG to go anywhere soon, but its always good to know the potential risks).

That's a risk, yes, but it's not as bad as it seems.

For the hobbyists, if GG goes kaput, they lose some invested effort...or they shift over to Tribes 2 modding (which is where a lot of Torque users came from, anyway).

For the more professional projects, if they have a solid idea, and they've put together enough to be a demo, then there are options even if GG disappears.

First off, GG licensed Torque from Sierra, so that would be an obvious place to pitch your project.

Secondly, you use Torque to get your demo to a presentable level, and then use the demo to pitch to a different publisher, with the understanding that you'll have to find another 3D engine.

Finally, most resources like art, levels, and sound can be converted from one engine or set of tools to another. So it's not like there would be anything irrevocably lost.

The biggest risk as I see it is for those who have invested heavily in modifying the Torque source code. But even that is somewhat mitigated by the realization that porting those extensions into another engine is not as hard as the initial effort to create them from scratch.

I don't expect GG to go away anytime soon, however. Merely pointing that in some cases, your eggs really aren't all in one basket--even if they look like they are... ;-)

-David
Samu Games

#24 Our plan for the worry about GG going out of business is this:

1. We won't go out of business. Our burn rate is low, and we are covered. But, in case a comet hits our office, here is the second part.

2. Next October, once all of our restictions with Sierra go away, we will change our license to put the Torque source in the public domain if GG goes out of business.

Jeff Tunnell GG

#25 George: Yeah, after posting that it came to me. One of those "duh" moments.
Torque MAY even have additive lighting and it's just that the lights aren't at the same settings. UT also uses alot more tricks, like a single sprite/particle flare to give the light that sparkly look. As a matter of fact, the more I play with the T2 particle engine, the more I'm impressed.

Torque has Quake3, UT, WT, and more beat in many areas. And perhaps there is something to maturity of a product and Torque is yet only a teen. ;)

#26 Garage Games gave us the tools, it's our job to build the house. They've given us, as a gaming community an unsurpassed opportunity here. They made it possible for us to work with one of the most powerful gaming platforms in the world as far as I'm concerned. The more I work with the engine the more I am absolutely amazed by what it can do. If it won't do it then IMPROVISE.

AND IT's AFFORDABLE!

I'm not sure what all the commotion is about. Once you have the engine, and have the inspiration, ambition and talent, what you do is YOUR responsibility.

I'd also like to note that I've never seen a core of people more dedicated to their 'product' in the gaming community than Garage Games. If you habit the forums enough you'll see that the GG crew is everywhere, offering assistance, inspiration and support. What more do we need.

And as far as advancements in the engine's capabilities in the ever evolving - and wallet deflating - graphic card world (Which is becoming a tedious issue in my opinion), I think the engine already has the capabilities to keep any gamer happy. At some point it's got to be said that the most STUNNING graphic displays DO NOT substitute for great gameplay and good immersion into a game. Cutting edge graphics DO not make the game guys.. Yes, they make it more realistic and dramatic. But as I said before...IMPROVISE. As far as I'm concerned it does everything and anything that we need to create our visions, and more.

They can't hold our hands...alot of this is up to us. Thank god cause I'm having a blast figuring it out.

Just my two cents

#27 True, Kirk...

Even if no more core features were added to Torque (which isnt the case), it would still be a great platform. As a developer, ask yourself why you need wizbang feature X, Y and Z... Especially considering the top selling games for PC:

1 / The Sims: Vacation
2 / Dungeon Siege
3 / Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast
4 / Heroes of Might and Magic IV
5 / The Sims
6 / The Sims: Hot Date
7 / Medal of Honor: Allied Assault
8 / Freedom Force
9 / Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Desert Siege
10 / Starcraft Battle Chest

With the arguable exception of Dungeon Siege, none of these games have particularly advanced engines, even by the standards of a year ago (since any game started with Torque now would be released about 8 months to a year out, I'd guess, on average). Now, I realize that not everyone here is out to make 'mainstream' games, but the idea that gameplay is more important than super graphics still holds...

Going from 2D to 3D opens up new avenues of gameplay... Going from 3D to 3D with advanced lighting, pixel shaders, etc, sure can make things look nicer, but does it really open up new avenues of game play?


And to restate the obvious...People might be a little disappointed when they look at the latest Doom3 screenshot and then look at some Torque screenshots in the Dev Snapshot, but:

A) Doom3 is not released and when it is it's going to need a GF3 to run comfortably. How many indies out there would be comfortable releasing to an audience that is GF3+ only for all practical purposes?

B) Even if you were given all of the technology behind Doom3, is your indie team up to the task of creating visuals like those seen in Doom3? For the vast majority of us working in our spare time (or just getting started) the answer is absolutely not.

#28 I couldn't agree more George, as far advanced gaming engines go, how long did the Q2 engine stay alive in all it's mods and evolutions?

I think that Torque will be alive and kicking for a long time to come. Especially with the ability it has to handle HUGE distances and massive terrain expanses. That's one of the biggest reasons we're using it.

And though it's a bit off the point here, I know my team would be more comfortable releasing something that looks really good and can be played marginally wall on a 450mhz with some kinda GF1 or 2. Than something that will make some kid who wants to play a game blow his whole summer job paycheck on the newest incarnation of GEForce video cards that will be outdated in 2 months.

At some point the issue of technology substituting for good gameplay has to come to a head. I hope we as a community at Garage Games can open some eyes, because I think we have a chance to make the way the gaming industry looks at its releases.

I have no facts to back this up but I've wondered why it seems as if the big name game makers are hand in hand with the hardware manufacturers. It's frustrating to be excited about the release of a title and then find out that your video card that you just shelled out 150-170 bucks for 2 months ago will barely run it.

If someone can steer this thread back on target please do =) Sorry.....

#29 I think if theres some one to get this thread to line is me , because I started it. hehe.

First of all, Like I explained (or maybe I didnt) most of this opinions arent mine they come from an investor (a guy who sees games as business only ) and I didnt post them expecting to attack GG or Torque. Is more of a "hey guys I think we need to fix this" message. Actually I intended for it to be a "Hey guys is this already fixed, or is something being done yet?" message.
So to all those who got upset about this, I apologize.

However the truth remains there arent commercial/indie projects using torque out there, and the fault (like you have read) is Ours and without those they wont be investors (or at least as many) interested in funding games in this system.

The exception to the rule, (looks like) is "Dog of Prey", so kudos to the people on the DarkHand team, for their effort! =)

Just as a final note, what is the position of GarageGame about mini games and using other engines for their business model? making a complete large scale game can be too time/effort expensive for a small studio supporting themselves. (Im not whining Im doing by big game as well =))


May the torque be with you.

#30 just so you are not paranoid!

I think that every business venture involves RISK!

You RISK $100US when you buy the TGE that you might never actually finish anything with it.

I have only spent 3 evenings with the code, but it was spent reverseing it with Together Control Center and examining WHY things were done the way they were.

I have been doing OOP/OOA for 10 years, I have been doing Large Scale Distributed Programming using CORBA/J2EE on some extremely large complex projects, I look at everything from a practical standpoint.

I have to say, my first impressions are the DESIGN standpoint the TGE is probably one of the better if not best pieces of code I have seen in a while, that I did not Architect :)

There are compromises in the code, most good ones that are appropriate. There is lots of sophisticated things that none of the other commercial engines have, and some things that they have that Torque doesn't have.

One thing I am planning is implementing a GHOUL-like system that Raven developed for SoF and SoF2. It will be MUCH easier in Torque than in Quake derived I can tell you that much already!

The ONE thing that I DO think the CORE TGE engine should provide you did not mention, and that is Voice Communication support.

I would say BASIC voice comms is a must have for every multi-player game, even TURN-BASED games!

Most of the things you mention not EVERYONE will need or want, or like the implementation of.

Also things like AI are VERY game-play specific.
By AI I don't mean pathfinding, and other "bot" like movement only behavoirs, I mean the actual logic that the "bots" execute to make decisions and appear to be intelligent.