TGEA vs Unity 3D in 2009
by Staples · in Torque Game Engine Advanced · 01/14/2009 (3:43 pm) · 73 replies
I decided to post this on both forums in order to get a proper result taking into account any bias. There is some good info comparing these on this forum already, but I want people to have a clear cut comparison, with the Windows Developer coming out for Unity, this opens it up as an option for many people who otherwise would have to use Torque.
These are basically the two engines we are deciding between.
Our game will be a multiplayer rpg with a client/server setup similar to what you would get in a MMO, but on a much smaller scale.
I have found *some* info on people comparing the two engines, however a lot of that information is largely out of date and quite a few things have changed since. Unity 2.5 is nearly out, and this means that we will be able to develop on windows and publish for BOTH windows and mac with the Indie version.
As I see it there are a couple of major feature differences. I understand that you have the source with TGEA, meaning anything is *technically* possible, but from what I've read some of it is a lot of work to implement.
If I miss anything please let me know. I'll start comparing the Indie versions, then the Pro/Commercial versions
Unity Indie vs TGEA Indie:
- TGEA is $295 USD, Unity Indie is $200 USD.
- TGEA gives you source code, Unity does not.
- TGEA has dynamic shadows from players and I believe you can get it working on other stuff with some effort. Unity Indie is restricted to blob shadows.
- Unity has PhysX, Joints and Ragdolls built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has Seamless terrains built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has much better documentation, tutorials and resources than Torque
- TGEA works alot nicer with external svn software.
- Unity has a much better scene editor
- Unity has a much better and more efficient art pipeline
Unity Pro vs TGEA Commercial:
- TGEA is $1495 USD, Unity Indie is $1499 USD.
- TGEA gives you source code, Unity does not.
- Unity seems to have all of the features that TGEA has
- Unity has self shadows and overall more shadow options (is this true)
- Unity has PhysX, Joints and Ragdolls built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has a much better
- Unity has much better documentation, tutorials and resources than Torque
- TGEA works alot nicer with external svn software.
- Unity has a much better scene editor
- Unity has a much better and more efficient art pipeline
It is a bit hard to compare since TGEA has the advantage of having the source, but I have included what is out of the box and not 'quickly and easy' to implement even with the source in TGEA.
Having the Source code can be good and bad. When you do have the source you CAN fix bugs yourself and implement other things which is good, however as you see with TGEA, this can mean the developers aren't particularly quick to release any fixes. When you don't have the source as with Unity, it is up to the engine developer to fix the bugs, something the Unity team apparently do pretty damn quickly - this of course will not be the case with all engine developers.
Let me know if I have missed anything or if there are any suggestions. I have to allegiance to either product (yet) so I am just putting it as I see it with what information I have gathered.
These are basically the two engines we are deciding between.
Our game will be a multiplayer rpg with a client/server setup similar to what you would get in a MMO, but on a much smaller scale.
I have found *some* info on people comparing the two engines, however a lot of that information is largely out of date and quite a few things have changed since. Unity 2.5 is nearly out, and this means that we will be able to develop on windows and publish for BOTH windows and mac with the Indie version.
As I see it there are a couple of major feature differences. I understand that you have the source with TGEA, meaning anything is *technically* possible, but from what I've read some of it is a lot of work to implement.
If I miss anything please let me know. I'll start comparing the Indie versions, then the Pro/Commercial versions
Unity Indie vs TGEA Indie:
- TGEA is $295 USD, Unity Indie is $200 USD.
- TGEA gives you source code, Unity does not.
- TGEA has dynamic shadows from players and I believe you can get it working on other stuff with some effort. Unity Indie is restricted to blob shadows.
- Unity has PhysX, Joints and Ragdolls built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has Seamless terrains built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has much better documentation, tutorials and resources than Torque
- TGEA works alot nicer with external svn software.
- Unity has a much better scene editor
- Unity has a much better and more efficient art pipeline
Unity Pro vs TGEA Commercial:
- TGEA is $1495 USD, Unity Indie is $1499 USD.
- TGEA gives you source code, Unity does not.
- Unity seems to have all of the features that TGEA has
- Unity has self shadows and overall more shadow options (is this true)
- Unity has PhysX, Joints and Ragdolls built in, TGEA does not.
- Unity has a much better
- Unity has much better documentation, tutorials and resources than Torque
- TGEA works alot nicer with external svn software.
- Unity has a much better scene editor
- Unity has a much better and more efficient art pipeline
It is a bit hard to compare since TGEA has the advantage of having the source, but I have included what is out of the box and not 'quickly and easy' to implement even with the source in TGEA.
Having the Source code can be good and bad. When you do have the source you CAN fix bugs yourself and implement other things which is good, however as you see with TGEA, this can mean the developers aren't particularly quick to release any fixes. When you don't have the source as with Unity, it is up to the engine developer to fix the bugs, something the Unity team apparently do pretty damn quickly - this of course will not be the case with all engine developers.
Let me know if I have missed anything or if there are any suggestions. I have to allegiance to either product (yet) so I am just putting it as I see it with what information I have gathered.
About the author
#62
Anyway.. I've been wandering around this site the past 2 years. And all I see are new releases of an unfixed engine. It may be a "Look Good" engine and has been used in a few games but it has issues that have been carried over from one version to the next version.
Also, the demo's would be most peoples selling point.. Well, if they actually worked.. The grid system or geo terrain needs work. The rendering system although now in an API still doesn't take advantage of newer technology.. TGEA still loads extremely slow when compared to older engines like Unreal 2 Runtime. TGEA just seems like a hacked up Quake style engine.. A .dll system with assest importing or being able to package your contents would have been usefull. Being able to use CEGUI and Stackless would be nice.. But there is so much hard coding that TGEA is getting to the point where it looks like it needs a complete rewrite..
By now, TGEA should be comparable to rendering like Farcry or the 1st Crytek Engine or alleast along the lines of UniEngine.. But it's not.. TGEA doesn't even have half the features that those engines have.. Since 1.0 in 2007 to now, most changes have been in the UI, directory layout and overall design changes.. The GFX, Geo Terrain and other features would have made this a better overall engine.
04/03/2009 (10:28 pm)
Aside from T3D and Unity3D.. You also have Shiva 1.7, DX Studio and Esperient Creator. Those are the others that I know of. But most importantly, those game creators are using up to date renderers and incorporating popular features.Anyway.. I've been wandering around this site the past 2 years. And all I see are new releases of an unfixed engine. It may be a "Look Good" engine and has been used in a few games but it has issues that have been carried over from one version to the next version.
Also, the demo's would be most peoples selling point.. Well, if they actually worked.. The grid system or geo terrain needs work. The rendering system although now in an API still doesn't take advantage of newer technology.. TGEA still loads extremely slow when compared to older engines like Unreal 2 Runtime. TGEA just seems like a hacked up Quake style engine.. A .dll system with assest importing or being able to package your contents would have been usefull. Being able to use CEGUI and Stackless would be nice.. But there is so much hard coding that TGEA is getting to the point where it looks like it needs a complete rewrite..
By now, TGEA should be comparable to rendering like Farcry or the 1st Crytek Engine or alleast along the lines of UniEngine.. But it's not.. TGEA doesn't even have half the features that those engines have.. Since 1.0 in 2007 to now, most changes have been in the UI, directory layout and overall design changes.. The GFX, Geo Terrain and other features would have made this a better overall engine.
#63
04/04/2009 (3:30 am)
@xGamer: From 2007-2009 you got a huge performance boost, polysoup, groundcover, opengl, anti-aliasing, gfx2 and megaterrains. From TGEA 1.03 to TGEA 1.7 we saw speed improvements in one project 30fps on my system to over 100 fps, while rendering a more complex scene. Clearly though a lot of the later gen rendering stuff was going instead into T3D, but to say that from 1.0 to 1.81 that TGEA has mostly had UI changes, etc is not true. 
#64
Not quite sure what that's supposed to mean. I just did a test, and it took almost exactly the same amount of time to load the TGEA Stronghold demo as it did to load the UE2 demo on a mid-range system, and Stronghold is loading twice as much data. The only slow part of the loading process is hardware discovery and enumeration, which is something UE2 probably should have spent more time on.
Granted UE2 is loading data from compressed packages while Stronghold is loading uncompressed files, but to say that TGEA is 'extremely slow' in comparison is just not true.
04/04/2009 (4:36 am)
Quote:
TGEA still loads extremely slow when compared to older engines like Unreal 2 Runtime.
Not quite sure what that's supposed to mean. I just did a test, and it took almost exactly the same amount of time to load the TGEA Stronghold demo as it did to load the UE2 demo on a mid-range system, and Stronghold is loading twice as much data. The only slow part of the loading process is hardware discovery and enumeration, which is something UE2 probably should have spent more time on.
Granted UE2 is loading data from compressed packages while Stronghold is loading uncompressed files, but to say that TGEA is 'extremely slow' in comparison is just not true.
#65
Where's the Kool-aid guys because I might want to try some. ;)
04/04/2009 (12:00 pm)
... never in my life have I ever heard a developer make a statement to the effect that source code is a bad thing.. until this thread, and of course on one other site. Where's the Kool-aid guys because I might want to try some. ;)
#66
What I've seen is based solely on the demos.. I normally run WinXP Pro x64 and this is what I ran the demo's on. But in those demo's, I found about 20 bugs but may just be from those being moved from one version to another. There is no new, written only for TGEA 1.8 demo's available. Maybe this is why I've noticed so many of the possible issues that i'm talking about.
On another note, I'm working with DX 11 on Win 7 Ulti. x64. The 1.7 demo loads much faster on Vista/7 than it does on XP Pro x64. Also, TGEA doesn't support OpenMP and there are only 32 bit demos. So all of this could have an affect as well.
UPDATE:
It would appear by some screenshots that a lot of the newer development on TGEA was done on Vista machines? Maybe this was the cause for the slowness on Xp Pro x64..
I just found the collada demo (Tgea 1.8.1) and it loads amazingly fast on Windows 7 x64.. Even running it with Osakit is screaming fast.. http://i44.tinypic.com/20sizpe.jpg
Wow.. Guess Xp x64 has been the cause of many issues.
In responce to the original author.. I've been an editing junkie on tgea demos. But the bigger games using TGEA like Buccaneer and the Dreamlords RTS MMO? had to be using Grome or maybe 3DS Max.. There is no possible way that they used the built in TGEA editor to do those levels.. I've learned the editor by heart now but it will crash to easy and way to many times in even the course of an hour.. The built in editor just isn't stable enough to use unless you want to keep redoing the same thing over and over again until you actually save before it crashed.. Unity on the other hand, has never crashed at all.
04/04/2009 (5:45 pm)
Hello,What I've seen is based solely on the demos.. I normally run WinXP Pro x64 and this is what I ran the demo's on. But in those demo's, I found about 20 bugs but may just be from those being moved from one version to another. There is no new, written only for TGEA 1.8 demo's available. Maybe this is why I've noticed so many of the possible issues that i'm talking about.
On another note, I'm working with DX 11 on Win 7 Ulti. x64. The 1.7 demo loads much faster on Vista/7 than it does on XP Pro x64. Also, TGEA doesn't support OpenMP and there are only 32 bit demos. So all of this could have an affect as well.
UPDATE:
It would appear by some screenshots that a lot of the newer development on TGEA was done on Vista machines? Maybe this was the cause for the slowness on Xp Pro x64..
I just found the collada demo (Tgea 1.8.1) and it loads amazingly fast on Windows 7 x64.. Even running it with Osakit is screaming fast.. http://i44.tinypic.com/20sizpe.jpg
Wow.. Guess Xp x64 has been the cause of many issues.
In responce to the original author.. I've been an editing junkie on tgea demos. But the bigger games using TGEA like Buccaneer and the Dreamlords RTS MMO? had to be using Grome or maybe 3DS Max.. There is no possible way that they used the built in TGEA editor to do those levels.. I've learned the editor by heart now but it will crash to easy and way to many times in even the course of an hour.. The built in editor just isn't stable enough to use unless you want to keep redoing the same thing over and over again until you actually save before it crashed.. Unity on the other hand, has never crashed at all.
#68
04/05/2009 (6:46 pm)
@Andrew Brady: I think you are missing the point...
#69
I'm not a fan of camps.. especially when it serves everyone else except developers.
04/05/2009 (7:35 pm)
Guys.. I'm not missing the point. I'm also not being critical of Unity.. far from it actually. I was taking issue with afew specific comments in reference to the source/no source business. While I take exception to a line or two of things you both (Ryan Zec and Alexander Gaevoy) have said, both of you have been fairly even handed, in both forums. I'm not a fan of camps.. especially when it serves everyone else except developers.
#70
I predict that Garage Games will see a potentially substantial loss of market share (users/developers) to Unity. It looks as though, due to me not being a programmer, I will never be able to create a game with TGEA. But I already have a Unity iPhone game just about finished (with several more in the works). I guess what I'm saying is, GG's products are for developers who are more akin to being programmers while Unity is more geared for artist types.
I did see GG's GDC Tourque3D demo and had the opportunity to chat with the devs (very nice people!). But it was not enough to bring me back to the fold...
06/01/2009 (2:40 pm)
Well, as both a TGEA and Unity 2.5 pro user I can say this:I predict that Garage Games will see a potentially substantial loss of market share (users/developers) to Unity. It looks as though, due to me not being a programmer, I will never be able to create a game with TGEA. But I already have a Unity iPhone game just about finished (with several more in the works). I guess what I'm saying is, GG's products are for developers who are more akin to being programmers while Unity is more geared for artist types.
I did see GG's GDC Tourque3D demo and had the opportunity to chat with the devs (very nice people!). But it was not enough to bring me back to the fold...
#71
Why is this? I'm curious because I'm developing some middleware for game developers and I'd like to hear an artists take on what makes Unity easier to use than Torque.
Is it that Unity takes less programming, or is because it's easier to program C# than it is to program C++ and TorqueScript?
Or is it something else altogether?
06/02/2009 (8:03 am)
@GI_JOEJK - Thanks for the insight.Quote:... I will never be able to create a game with TGEA. But I already have a Unity iPhone game just about finished ...
Why is this? I'm curious because I'm developing some middleware for game developers and I'd like to hear an artists take on what makes Unity easier to use than Torque.
Is it that Unity takes less programming, or is because it's easier to program C# than it is to program C++ and TorqueScript?
Or is it something else altogether?
#72
Usually a game studio is made up of programmers and artists, not one or the other.
Granted, very small teams (or hobbyists) that are just artists will probably have a hard time doing much with Torque, and may be better off with Unity, from what I've seen. (Though Stickman Studios did a fine job with Buccaneers.) But I'm not sure that counts for a big part of the market share for game engines.
06/02/2009 (8:26 am)
Quote:
I predict that Garage Games will see a potentially substantial loss of market share (users/developers) to Unity. It looks as though, due to me not being a programmer, I will never be able to create a game with TGEA. [...]
Usually a game studio is made up of programmers and artists, not one or the other.
Granted, very small teams (or hobbyists) that are just artists will probably have a hard time doing much with Torque, and may be better off with Unity, from what I've seen. (Though Stickman Studios did a fine job with Buccaneers.) But I'm not sure that counts for a big part of the market share for game engines.
#73
06/02/2009 (10:11 am)
Historically, the Torque engine art pipelines have been a bear to work with. It's still somewhat of a hassle up to TGEA. That's why we made Collada and many of the new editors a top priority for Torque 3D, to make it much less daunting for artists to get started with Torque.
Torque Owner Funky Diver
If the engine is flexible and allows to do a lot via scripting, then there is no need for a source code unless you are trying to over complicate your game design. Unity is just like that - you have a unified SOLID code base that just works in Windows/Mac OS/WEB/IPhone/Wii. You script in .NET and same script works EVERYWHERE (Torques script runs same way but x10 slower, obviously).
Now, Torque is a different beast - the scripting is a bit limiting and the engine requires you to put your C++ skills (not a bad thing) to a test to create a playable game. While all the previous Torque engines are not really easy to use by an indie developer who's got 40 hour work week of the REAL job that pays the bills, the upcoming T3D version looks very promising. I hope the performance will be really improved especially for the low end card.
On the other hand, Unity is very easy to pick up and make a game prototype running in a weekend without much reading of a documentation if you are a .NET pro. Another fact that Unity is very friendly to the larger variety of video cards (even runs on 10 year old cards), especially on the low end while TGEA has big issues with Intel cards - that's a must for a indie oriented engine.
Dont take my comments as bashing the T3D door - I'm just stating the facts and I still like Torque, it's just a different love :) I just see a lot of people switching from Torque to Unity now and that's the fact... Even GG guys seem to admit that they lost the wave and adopt other established price schemes and feature sets (T3D bits look very similar to Unity now: web publishing, pricing schema, art pipeline) - it's a survival rat race for T3D, which is good for us as GG is trying to be competitive and less slacking in the area of engine development ;)