Yet another TGB vs TGE thread...
by Chris Pelling · in Torque Game Builder · 09/26/2006 (3:18 am) · 3 replies
Hi there! I've had my eye on Torque for a while, but I'm now seriously considering buying either TGB or TGE. However, I'm not sure which one to get, so I'm going to have to inflict another TGB vs TGE thread on you... (sorry).
Points for TGB:
-------------------
- I mostly intend to make 2D games, and so TGB would seem to be the better fit.
- TGB apparently has better world-building tools than TGE. Is this a big deal as some people seem to be suggesting? I have a good technical handle on working in 3D, so the extra dimension doesn't bother me.
- I'm not sure how moddable TGE's physics is. I'll be wanting to restrict movement to a 2D plane, and I've heard of some physics engines that have problems if you try to do that.
Points for TGE:
-------------------
- There's usually no reason why a 2D game can't be made using a 3D engine. I've done it before using an orthographic camera, and it works fine. Using a perspective camera works fine too.
- I'm pretty sure I'll need to modify the source (to add things like pathfinding that aren't really suited to scripting), and TGE with source ($100) is a lot cheaper than TGB with source ($250).
- It gives me the added flexibility of being able to make a 3D game later, should I so desire.
- I'd like to make networked real-time games (including fast-paced ones like 2D platformers), so the fact that TGB only has "lite" networking support is a bit of a bummer. Sure, I could probably add the extra functionality myself, but the whole point of using an engine like this is to minimise the infrastructure-building that I have to do.
I short, I guess the main question here is: What advantages does TGB have for making real-time 2D games that TGE doesn't, apart from an easier workflow?
Thanks in advance!
Points for TGB:
-------------------
- I mostly intend to make 2D games, and so TGB would seem to be the better fit.
- TGB apparently has better world-building tools than TGE. Is this a big deal as some people seem to be suggesting? I have a good technical handle on working in 3D, so the extra dimension doesn't bother me.
- I'm not sure how moddable TGE's physics is. I'll be wanting to restrict movement to a 2D plane, and I've heard of some physics engines that have problems if you try to do that.
Points for TGE:
-------------------
- There's usually no reason why a 2D game can't be made using a 3D engine. I've done it before using an orthographic camera, and it works fine. Using a perspective camera works fine too.
- I'm pretty sure I'll need to modify the source (to add things like pathfinding that aren't really suited to scripting), and TGE with source ($100) is a lot cheaper than TGB with source ($250).
- It gives me the added flexibility of being able to make a 3D game later, should I so desire.
- I'd like to make networked real-time games (including fast-paced ones like 2D platformers), so the fact that TGB only has "lite" networking support is a bit of a bummer. Sure, I could probably add the extra functionality myself, but the whole point of using an engine like this is to minimise the infrastructure-building that I have to do.
I short, I guess the main question here is: What advantages does TGB have for making real-time 2D games that TGE doesn't, apart from an easier workflow?
Thanks in advance!
#2
I didn't realise TGB had pathfinding, thanks for clearing that up. It does sound like TGB would be better for my needs, except for the networking and price issues; neither of which is insignificant, but I guess I can work around them.
Thanks for the advice!
09/27/2006 (1:24 am)
Well, sprites and tiles are just flat images after all, and those can be rendered using textured quads, provided the 3D hardware has alpha support (and everything short of Voodoo and TNT cards does). And scrolling (parallax or otherwise) isn't exactly difficult in 3D; just move the camera. :-) Animated sprites would probably be the biggest problem.I didn't realise TGB had pathfinding, thanks for clearing that up. It does sound like TGB would be better for my needs, except for the networking and price issues; neither of which is insignificant, but I guess I can work around them.
Thanks for the advice!
#3
1. TGE is realtime multiplayer/client server to the core.
2. TGB has much superior particle fx engine
3. TGE has scene lighting
4. TGB can render .dts 3d objects but without lighting, and uses orthographic projection
5. TGE has terrain model, and interior/building objects'
6. They have completely different world/level builders.
1 & 3 means TGB games launch much , much faster in my experience.
Just buy TGB it's more fun. Make fun games fast, as they say!
09/27/2006 (8:09 am)
Hi other differences not pointed out1. TGE is realtime multiplayer/client server to the core.
2. TGB has much superior particle fx engine
3. TGE has scene lighting
4. TGB can render .dts 3d objects but without lighting, and uses orthographic projection
5. TGE has terrain model, and interior/building objects'
6. They have completely different world/level builders.
1 & 3 means TGB games launch much , much faster in my experience.
Just buy TGB it's more fun. Make fun games fast, as they say!
Torque Owner Sam M
I reccomend that you buy the version of TGB without the source. If you still want it later it's only $150. Also when you feel you are ready for 3d TGB is a great stepping stone into TGE, which is much much more complicated.