I hope we get a discount
by James Brad Barnette · in Torque Game Engine Advanced · 10/06/2007 (8:36 pm) · 17 replies
Well I have seen some pics popping up here and there that show how wonderful Torque X 3D looks and I must say "I hope they plan on giving people that bought into TGEA a discount since clear more Development effort is going into that product."
at this point I don't really see the point in TGEA. I mean TX is pretty much at a better place that TGEA already.
I don't have a problem with this as long as we are given a discount on Tourque X when it is released. Personally I would rather use Torque X anyway. it has more of a direct path to Xbox 360.
In case you haven't noticed the new front page features everything but TGEA. " a sign?"
dispite everything that has happend on this adventure called TGEA I will buy TourquX but as I said I really feel that people that funded it's development by buying TGEA as a EA and Buying it outright, should get a discount
at this point I don't really see the point in TGEA. I mean TX is pretty much at a better place that TGEA already.
I don't have a problem with this as long as we are given a discount on Tourque X when it is released. Personally I would rather use Torque X anyway. it has more of a direct path to Xbox 360.
In case you haven't noticed the new front page features everything but TGEA. " a sign?"
dispite everything that has happend on this adventure called TGEA I will buy TourquX but as I said I really feel that people that funded it's development by buying TGEA as a EA and Buying it outright, should get a discount
About the author
#2
Second about TGEA well consider how much progress is being made on TorqueX and how your own marketing seems to totally ignore TGEA. hmm you tell me how I got that idea. I mean look at you front page.
2D : use TGB
3D : use TGE
Get your games onto your Xbox 360 with XNA use Torque X
You guys' words not mine.
There is not one word mentioning TGEA. instead you guys still push TGE. WTF is that all about. If you really belived in the product the why does GG have a marketing push for every product except TGEA???
as for the terrain being less capable than atlas. hehe is that some sorta joke? maybe less capable than atlas if atlas worked 100 percent.
It is blatant that you are gearing TorqueX to be you primetime product. I understand that I really do. to be honest with you it is prolly one of the smartest moves GG has made in recent years. All I'm saying is that existing customers that bought into the TGEA pipedream should be given a discount that is all.
I mean if you guys believe in TGEA so much then why wouln't it be your flagship engine for 3D? why would you keep developers working on TGE? why not call TGE feature complete and move all of you resources to TGEA? why not say hey you wanna do 3D use our cutting edge TGEA engine. It has all of the features need to make cutting edge games? But no you guys push TGE STILL! when it looks soo freaking awful it is pathetic.
10/06/2007 (11:44 pm)
Well as for the 360 TorqueX run on it already. As for selling a game on the 360 that is awhole different animal. But having a prototype working on a 360 is gonna go a lot further. Second about TGEA well consider how much progress is being made on TorqueX and how your own marketing seems to totally ignore TGEA. hmm you tell me how I got that idea. I mean look at you front page.
2D : use TGB
3D : use TGE
Get your games onto your Xbox 360 with XNA use Torque X
You guys' words not mine.
There is not one word mentioning TGEA. instead you guys still push TGE. WTF is that all about. If you really belived in the product the why does GG have a marketing push for every product except TGEA???
as for the terrain being less capable than atlas. hehe is that some sorta joke? maybe less capable than atlas if atlas worked 100 percent.
It is blatant that you are gearing TorqueX to be you primetime product. I understand that I really do. to be honest with you it is prolly one of the smartest moves GG has made in recent years. All I'm saying is that existing customers that bought into the TGEA pipedream should be given a discount that is all.
I mean if you guys believe in TGEA so much then why wouln't it be your flagship engine for 3D? why would you keep developers working on TGE? why not call TGE feature complete and move all of you resources to TGEA? why not say hey you wanna do 3D use our cutting edge TGEA engine. It has all of the features need to make cutting edge games? But no you guys push TGE STILL! when it looks soo freaking awful it is pathetic.
#3
Using TorqueX to make a prototype to show on a retail 360 might gain some attention from Microsoft, but exactly one XNA title has been announced for commercial sale--and it's not even TorqueX. Just about any TGE-A game can port seamlessly to the XB360--you don't have to change any code whatsoever--you simply re-build for the 360 once you have the license and code installed. With TorqueX/XNA, as it stands today you would have to start your game over, from scratch, and re-write it in c++ to sell it commercially for 360.
That's not even accurate--we don't have breakdowns like that. TorqueX is mentioned exactly once--for the "New" users (new to game development). TGE-A is highlighted in both the Experienced and Commercial landing pages, where TorqueX is not.
TorqueX has had exactly one official point release (not counting beta) since it was first announced more than a year ago. There is another feature release coming up soon, sure, but there have been four TGE-A releases in the same period, and 3 in just the last 6 months.
We don't "push" any product. We have different products for different experience levels, as well as different products for different end user target markets. TorqueX is an excellent engine for those new to game development, and it gives a good path for people to learn game development. It can even be used for commercial windows games if the purchaser wishes.
TGE is a great learning path for developers as well, and is an excellent choice for games that must run on a very wide variety of end computers. TGE-A is an excellent choice for experienced developers that want to push the limits of modern hardware.
Each of the engines have strengths, and weaknesses, and each require different skill sets for success. In direct conflict with your statement, TorqueX is the only engine that doesn't have multiple commercial products already on sale in the retail space, so I honestly and truly don't see where you feel that "It is blatant that you are gearing TorqueX to be you primetime product".
10/07/2007 (12:49 am)
All due respect man, but I seriously have no idea where you are coming from.Using TorqueX to make a prototype to show on a retail 360 might gain some attention from Microsoft, but exactly one XNA title has been announced for commercial sale--and it's not even TorqueX. Just about any TGE-A game can port seamlessly to the XB360--you don't have to change any code whatsoever--you simply re-build for the 360 once you have the license and code installed. With TorqueX/XNA, as it stands today you would have to start your game over, from scratch, and re-write it in c++ to sell it commercially for 360.
Quote:
2D : use TGB
3D : use TGE
Get your games onto your Xbox 360 with XNA use Torque X
You guys' words not mine.
There is not one word mentioning TGEA. instead you guys still push TGE. WTF is that all about. If you really belived in the product the why does GG have a marketing push for every product except TGEA???
That's not even accurate--we don't have breakdowns like that. TorqueX is mentioned exactly once--for the "New" users (new to game development). TGE-A is highlighted in both the Experienced and Commercial landing pages, where TorqueX is not.
TorqueX has had exactly one official point release (not counting beta) since it was first announced more than a year ago. There is another feature release coming up soon, sure, but there have been four TGE-A releases in the same period, and 3 in just the last 6 months.
We don't "push" any product. We have different products for different experience levels, as well as different products for different end user target markets. TorqueX is an excellent engine for those new to game development, and it gives a good path for people to learn game development. It can even be used for commercial windows games if the purchaser wishes.
TGE is a great learning path for developers as well, and is an excellent choice for games that must run on a very wide variety of end computers. TGE-A is an excellent choice for experienced developers that want to push the limits of modern hardware.
Each of the engines have strengths, and weaknesses, and each require different skill sets for success. In direct conflict with your statement, TorqueX is the only engine that doesn't have multiple commercial products already on sale in the retail space, so I honestly and truly don't see where you feel that "It is blatant that you are gearing TorqueX to be you primetime product".
#4
But I would like to point out that the "number of releases" comparision is a quite bad one.
TGEA did get 4 releases, thats right.
But so far, all they did were bug fixes in place one (on 1 patch per 3 months base which is quite low) and adding features beeing advertised since 1.0 release on the page.
From that point of view, it should be called only four releases where as there should have been more as it is still not up its own advertisement 8 months past launch. (Don't have a problem with it, I have more or less anything I need beside working editors for TGEA as that are still TGE editors which are fairly broken. But thats why I am fully revamping them to become TGEA editors and support the 16 texture layers on legacy for example)
But your Q&A guy explained why the progress slowed down recently and I hope that hole in the team can be filled up so TGEA gets real attention and a speedup in development again.
10/07/2007 (2:12 am)
I see that TX and TGEA are meant to take different paths most likely and I think its a great thing as both technologies can benefit of each other. (similar as TGB and TXB did of each other)But I would like to point out that the "number of releases" comparision is a quite bad one.
TGEA did get 4 releases, thats right.
But so far, all they did were bug fixes in place one (on 1 patch per 3 months base which is quite low) and adding features beeing advertised since 1.0 release on the page.
From that point of view, it should be called only four releases where as there should have been more as it is still not up its own advertisement 8 months past launch. (Don't have a problem with it, I have more or less anything I need beside working editors for TGEA as that are still TGE editors which are fairly broken. But thats why I am fully revamping them to become TGEA editors and support the 16 texture layers on legacy for example)
But your Q&A guy explained why the progress slowed down recently and I hope that hole in the team can be filled up so TGEA gets real attention and a speedup in development again.
#5
Can try to defend it all you like, but honestly, I don't see how anyone can say that the attention given to TGEA is anything more than unacceptable. The engine that could easily have really put Torque up there is now just a collection of bugs and half-baked ideas. The one that works, TGE, is old and dated. The community for TGEA seems much slower than I remember it was before, and development also seems much slower than before, which I thought couldn't be possible.
The part I find most amusing is that things listed in the milestones for release, things that were supposed to be in there before this all got out, we've yet to see and never hear a word on em either.
10/07/2007 (6:30 am)
James, my suggestion to you is to do what I did and just walk away. I've completely stopped working on things would improve the engine itself and now I just keep my work to work more applicable to games overall, such as my procedural animation I'm working on. As far as shaders go, I've pretty much given up because it seems everyone else has given up in TGEA.Can try to defend it all you like, but honestly, I don't see how anyone can say that the attention given to TGEA is anything more than unacceptable. The engine that could easily have really put Torque up there is now just a collection of bugs and half-baked ideas. The one that works, TGE, is old and dated. The community for TGEA seems much slower than I remember it was before, and development also seems much slower than before, which I thought couldn't be possible.
The part I find most amusing is that things listed in the milestones for release, things that were supposed to be in there before this all got out, we've yet to see and never hear a word on em either.
#6
Obviously an engine could always use more features. It would be great if TGEA had improved physics, or polysoup collision, etc, etc. Moreover the documentation and the examples could be improved. But I don't see anything that is a necessary feature that issn't there at this point.
10/07/2007 (8:02 am)
In recent updates we've had constructor support added, lighting and shadow improvements, shadows and lightmapping on atlas, it's not all bug fixes. After those changes, I personally can't see anything that would hold anyone back from shipping a game on TGEA, other than game specific additions. There was a time to complain, but I don't think it is now.Obviously an engine could always use more features. It would be great if TGEA had improved physics, or polysoup collision, etc, etc. Moreover the documentation and the examples could be improved. But I don't see anything that is a necessary feature that issn't there at this point.
#7
I'm just saying take a look at the front page and you will see what I mean
you see all of the others right there on the front page but not TGEA. Looks like you guys are assamed of it like it is the Red headed step child of the GG family.
There is no reason that TGEA should not be pushed as hard if not harder than TGE. there is nothing more complicated about it. the only thing that ads a level of complexity is shaders.wich is nothing a few tutorials couldn't remedy.
If you guys had good starter kits and all of the assets that come with TGE there is no reason that someone could not do with TGEA what they are doing in TGE.
You guys need to let go of the past and let TGE die. it is a horrible looking engine. Even the best looking things on TGE look like they were made 5-6+ years ago.
IMHO without a fully funtional TGEA "I don't mean OGL and all that crap I mean a fully working WINDOWS version" GG is simply going to become irrelavent. at least in serious games. But I guess that you guys are more interest in your browse as a console gimick now anyway.
Oh well I have put my project on hold as I have another contract project to work on and I justdon't think that TGEA is ready.
you know you guys should look at Vicous Engine. This is an example of what can be done in 5 years if you focus on a single product is stead of all of this defferent crap. They are a code once engine that runs on :
PSP
PS2
PS3
xbox
xbox 360
PC
all you have to do is select your target at build time from a drop down list.
Oh by the way they have an indie program too.
It is my hope that by the time I finish this other project and come back to mine that at lest some of this new found money will find it's way into the TGEA program and you guy can get it together.
10/07/2007 (9:13 am)
Ehh why don't you as jeff faust if there are any bugs in TGEA 1.03 lol. There rea still quite a few especially with alpha sorting and that has always been an issue for TGE even. not really sure why it has gone on this long. I have never had the issue when working with any other engine that I have worked with. Unreal 1,2, 2k4 , HL2, Quake3, or even doom 3.I'm just saying take a look at the front page and you will see what I mean
you see all of the others right there on the front page but not TGEA. Looks like you guys are assamed of it like it is the Red headed step child of the GG family.
There is no reason that TGEA should not be pushed as hard if not harder than TGE. there is nothing more complicated about it. the only thing that ads a level of complexity is shaders.wich is nothing a few tutorials couldn't remedy.
If you guys had good starter kits and all of the assets that come with TGE there is no reason that someone could not do with TGEA what they are doing in TGE.
You guys need to let go of the past and let TGE die. it is a horrible looking engine. Even the best looking things on TGE look like they were made 5-6+ years ago.
IMHO without a fully funtional TGEA "I don't mean OGL and all that crap I mean a fully working WINDOWS version" GG is simply going to become irrelavent. at least in serious games. But I guess that you guys are more interest in your browse as a console gimick now anyway.
Oh well I have put my project on hold as I have another contract project to work on and I justdon't think that TGEA is ready.
you know you guys should look at Vicous Engine. This is an example of what can be done in 5 years if you focus on a single product is stead of all of this defferent crap. They are a code once engine that runs on :
PSP
PS2
PS3
xbox
xbox 360
PC
all you have to do is select your target at build time from a drop down list.
Oh by the way they have an indie program too.
It is my hope that by the time I finish this other project and come back to mine that at lest some of this new found money will find it's way into the TGEA program and you guy can get it together.
#8
10/07/2007 (11:11 am)
Out of curiousity, I wonder what the price run's.
#9
For a majority of the community, the big change many many releases ago of not having a CVS/SVN presence to pull brand new changes from, was a largely negative change. It is understood that it was done because of some QA requirements, although at some point, the community is having to do QA anyways for the most part so it should be utilized. (Such as bug fixes taking months and months to get into the official codebase, despite being completely confirmed many many times).
The "quietness" of GG is related to the amount of negativity and whining that has went on in the forums and the thought that by being quiet things would just be shielded, but I think while it works to some extent, it has begun to negate the benefits.
I like the look of those TX screenshots and look forward to the 3D side of it, but at the same time, wish there were a few demos like that made for TGEA other than the one that is with the SDK which is pretty old and while it does show off some stuff, its still pretty outdated. Some of the early demos that existed for TGEA were pretty sharp, but the problem with most of that is as a community, we'd like to know how some stuff was made or not made.
The same thing goes for the TX stuff, those screenshots while may not offer anything that TGEA doesn't, they still look better than most of the stuff that has ever been shown.
If that hybrid terrain implementation is solid and working, then might as well just throw it in TGEA, at least it'd be working alot better overall, including maybe better collision or such.
10/07/2007 (11:39 am)
It is obvious there are issues with TGEA, as a whole, but I think more of the anxiety over it all stems from just not knowing what is going on with the engine.For a majority of the community, the big change many many releases ago of not having a CVS/SVN presence to pull brand new changes from, was a largely negative change. It is understood that it was done because of some QA requirements, although at some point, the community is having to do QA anyways for the most part so it should be utilized. (Such as bug fixes taking months and months to get into the official codebase, despite being completely confirmed many many times).
The "quietness" of GG is related to the amount of negativity and whining that has went on in the forums and the thought that by being quiet things would just be shielded, but I think while it works to some extent, it has begun to negate the benefits.
I like the look of those TX screenshots and look forward to the 3D side of it, but at the same time, wish there were a few demos like that made for TGEA other than the one that is with the SDK which is pretty old and while it does show off some stuff, its still pretty outdated. Some of the early demos that existed for TGEA were pretty sharp, but the problem with most of that is as a community, we'd like to know how some stuff was made or not made.
The same thing goes for the TX stuff, those screenshots while may not offer anything that TGEA doesn't, they still look better than most of the stuff that has ever been shown.
If that hybrid terrain implementation is solid and working, then might as well just throw it in TGEA, at least it'd be working alot better overall, including maybe better collision or such.
#10
I know that sounds abrupt, but it's reality--game development is hard, and technology can only go so far--at some point, the responsibility is yours to focus on accomplishing goals in steps.
We can't give demos that show you how to make high quality commercial art--which is all the difference is between the screen shots above, and what can be accomplished in TGE-A. As I mentioned above, the reason those screen shots look so nice is because talented artists produced the art--it has nothing to do with the engine itself--in fact, the lighting model in TorqueX isn't even as capable as that in TGE-A, and there is no tech within TorqueX that turns the source art into something incredible.
A "demo" for TGE-A similar to what you see in the screenshots above would consist of simply handing you the art assets, and a mission with those assets in place. How could this be something to learn from? I can see where you may be going with wanting learning examples, but when it comes down to it there is only so much that can be taught from the engine perspective--how to set up materials, how to place objects in a mission, and how to use lighting techniques--but at some point a demo stops teaching, and starts simply demonstrating the skills of the developers/artists behind the demo.
10/07/2007 (12:30 pm)
I think it's really important to realize that at some point, people need to simply start learning how to squeeze the most out of their core project, and realize that they have the tools and capabilities to grow with--they do however need to learn, increase skills, and focus on interacting with their chosen tools (including engine) to accomplish.I know that sounds abrupt, but it's reality--game development is hard, and technology can only go so far--at some point, the responsibility is yours to focus on accomplishing goals in steps.
We can't give demos that show you how to make high quality commercial art--which is all the difference is between the screen shots above, and what can be accomplished in TGE-A. As I mentioned above, the reason those screen shots look so nice is because talented artists produced the art--it has nothing to do with the engine itself--in fact, the lighting model in TorqueX isn't even as capable as that in TGE-A, and there is no tech within TorqueX that turns the source art into something incredible.
Quote:
wish there were a few demos like that made for TGEA
A "demo" for TGE-A similar to what you see in the screenshots above would consist of simply handing you the art assets, and a mission with those assets in place. How could this be something to learn from? I can see where you may be going with wanting learning examples, but when it comes down to it there is only so much that can be taught from the engine perspective--how to set up materials, how to place objects in a mission, and how to use lighting techniques--but at some point a demo stops teaching, and starts simply demonstrating the skills of the developers/artists behind the demo.
Quote:It's written (just like the rest of TorqueX) in C#. Not going to happen.
If that hybrid terrain implementation is solid and working, then might as well just throw it in TGEA, at least it'd be working alot better overall, including maybe better collision or such.
#11
10/07/2007 (3:24 pm)
I hope we get a discount, too. But for me, it's just because I am cheap, and like to spend as little as possible. 
#12
10/07/2007 (4:15 pm)
I hope you get a discount for your cool Constructor plugins Jaime :) 
#13
10/07/2007 (4:45 pm)
Vicous only allows a limited indie license(6 months) and you have to been approved to get one. Also, Vicous works on all of the systems because of it's limits. You use a gui based scripting system, similair to TGB Behaviors. It may be easier for artists to use, but it's incredibly limiting for programmers.
#14
I'm sorry, maybe it's due to me not having my reading glasses on... but I don't see anything in those pics that stand out and apart from TGEA.
10/07/2007 (4:51 pm)
Quote:the reason those screen shots look so nice is because talented artists produced the art--it has nothing to do with the engine itself
I'm sorry, maybe it's due to me not having my reading glasses on... but I don't see anything in those pics that stand out and apart from TGEA.
#15
10/09/2007 (12:54 pm)
Speaking of getting good art is Torque... may I add that exporting models to DTS is (IMO) the single area that requires the most work for update to date, comprehensive documentation and examples.
#16
speaking of the ART pipeline What is really needed for TGEA is a TGEA version of showtool pro. But that is not really GGs fault I'm pretty sure that was made by user.
I tried making a shader editor but I just don't have the skill at programming and gave up. Actually a TGEA version of ShowTool Pro with the ability to edit materials and save out the material.cs file for the character would be the holy grail.
10/09/2007 (7:21 pm)
And maintained utilities and exporters. at least for the 2 or 3 major apps. these should be maintained and kept current by GG.speaking of the ART pipeline What is really needed for TGEA is a TGEA version of showtool pro. But that is not really GGs fault I'm pretty sure that was made by user.
I tried making a shader editor but I just don't have the skill at programming and gave up. Actually a TGEA version of ShowTool Pro with the ability to edit materials and save out the material.cs file for the character would be the holy grail.
#17
The biggest dissappointment with the consumer package is lack of real
tutorial scenes and examples to work from.Plus you get no content really to
get you started,but what the hell,lets go install and look,YARRR
11/20/2007 (8:25 pm)
Quote:Red headed step child of the GG familyI LoL'ed ,been some time I might check out the state of the new 1.3,
The biggest dissappointment with the consumer package is lack of real
tutorial scenes and examples to work from.Plus you get no content really to
get you started,but what the hell,lets go install and look,YARRR
Torque 3D Owner Stephen Zepp
Not true at all actually--there are zero commercial paths currently available for XNA to sell a game on XBox360. TGE-A allows you to immediately port to an Xbox 360 development kit if you purchase the console license, and have a dev kit--and you can actually sell your product to the retail XBox 360 market.
Regarding the screenshots, what specifically are you looking at that makes you think TorqueX has more development than TGE-A?
--All of those shapes are dts. You could just as easily drop them in to TGE-A.
--the terrain is a hybrid of technology developed in TGE-A, and less capable than Atlas in size supported.
--there are multiple resources available for the mini-physics demo, and with just a little polish you could accomplish the same in TGE-A that you see there in your last screen shot.