You Can Do it!
by Joe Maruschak · 06/02/2006 (2:37 pm) · 53 comments
Sorry for being so quiet for so long. It has been almost a year since I started posting my long rambling blogs, and a lot has happened.
I have been head down working hard on a project I cannot mention, and all of that are Torque Game Builder (formerly T2D) owners are getting the benefit of the GG team eating it's own dog food and making a game with the tools we are making and selling. The stress of production really highlights what is working well and what is not optimal and gives us the clear focus to make the tools better and easier for everyone to use so that you can pursue your dreams.
I actually have a bunch of blogs that I started writing. A lot of the information for my 'blogs I am going to write' arose out of the period of adjustment after the acquisition of BraveTree by GarageGames, and the information I had to share with my 'new' team members about how we work, transferring knowledge we had, learning new things from others in my new work environment.
My 'followup' blogs that I had been working on to expand on the the blogs I have posted before became quite rambling and convoluted, so I decided to start reorganizing my thoughts and writing it all down and presenting it in a cohernet way. I have a bunch of content for upcoming blogs that I have been keeping for quite a while, and hopefully soon I will start getting that information out there.
This blog is a little different. It is a reaction to a thread I was involved with a couple months ago that upset me a bit. I was initially surprised by my strong reaction to what was being posted in the thread, and I took a week or so to cool down and gather my thoughts about it so I could fully understand why the thread touched a nerve. It will hopefully be the start of a resurgence in my blogging, as I have turned the frustration into fuel for my fire.
I am not going to link to the thread in question, as the thread actually just brought to a head some feelings that had been gathering for a while around the GG forums (and they devolved into flame threads). I am going to do my part to try to turn the negativity on it's head and attempt to be inspirational.. to turn the badness into a call to action.
So, the thread in question was actually another one of those infamous 'Engine War' threads. They come and go, TGE vs.
It is hurtful to both have the hard work and perseverence of myself and my business partners dismissed do to a incorrect perception, and to have GarageGames made to look as if it is making a product that is not capable of being used to make a game unless someone is speically connected to GarageGames and has 'inside' help.
On both counts, it is upsetting. ThinkTanks made (and continues to make) real money. It was shipped a few years ago and it still has a devoted following and has more than made back what was put into it. It was made with the TGE, and this was done by a small team (3 guys mainly), with a total of 18 man months (6 months for each of us over the span of a year), with one coder and two artist/designers.. It was done before all the engine improvements of the last few years were available, and back when there was next to no documentation. This is a testament to the underlying quality of the engine being robust enough to enable us to do what we did, with such a small team, in such a short time.
It minimizes the effort and sacrifice we at Bravetree put into the game and our company. We were extremely motivated and focused, and we were not going to let anything stand in our way.
It insults the founders of GG (Jeff, Tim, Mark and Rick) for going out of their way NOT to pry in our business more than we felt comfortable with. In terms of respect for us (BraveTree) doing our own thing, they went out of their way to give us our distance, and were there for advice and to help out on the business end of things when we asked for it. I respect that they let us do our own thing, and grab our own little piece of the American Dream.
In terms of monetary help.. from GarageGames, we never asked for any, and never recieved any. Had they footed the bill for ThinkTanks, I do not think I would be as proud of what we built at BraveTree as I am today. We did it, and we did it ourselves, and that is something that no one can ever take away from us.
What GarageGames did offer us was something much more valuable than money.. Honest advice, good feedback, and no bullshit. Jeff always tells it like it is. Did we get help from GarageGames? yes, but it is same help anyone can get if they read Jeff's blogs and take what he is saying to heart.
And this brings me back around to the thread that prompted this blog in the first place. When reading the thread, I got the impression that some here are skeptical about the state of the tools and the technology, the documentation, and the support, and that it would somehow stand in the way of creating and shipping a game. This perception hurts, as GarageGames is doing all that it can to enable YOU to realize your dreams. We may not be doing it in a way that everyone agrees with, or at a speed that everyone feels comfortable with, but we are doing it, and the number of shipped titles with Torque based technology are proof that nothing is standing in the way of anyone shipping a game with the tools in their current state.
If an individual cannot get a product to the shipping state, or cannot begin their project because of some perceived 'lack' of tools or documentation or funding or
We work hard to enable people to be part of a movement that is changing the gaming industry for the better. We take it seriously. We can only go so far toward making an individual dream become a reality. We are working to make it even better than it is now, better tools, improvements to the tech, better documentation.. we will never stop to say the tools and tech are 'good enough'... but we cannot do everything for everyone. At some point, those who undertake a project need to take responsibility for what they are attempting and do what it takes to get it done. Not all those who start a project will get it finished, and the blame for it should not be deflected onto us for not attempting to do enough.
This is not to say that we are not looking to improve the tools and tech we are using and creating, we are in fact working very hard on making these tools the best they can be. My dream is to be able to go toe to toe with the 'big boys' for a tenth of the cost. I know that we can do it.. that we can make games of the same quality in a fraction of the time, with a smaller more focused team. The technology we are working on is that enabler.
Again, I don't mean to sound as if I am admonishing people, my hope is not to beat down, but to light a fire.
If there is any doubt that it can be done.. We did it. We created a game, with 3 guys, and no funding. We shipped it, and we used it as the cornerstone of a business that we grew and eventually sold.
We used the TGE, and we did it 3 years ago.
We were smart in terms of what we chose to create, and how we went about. We did it. Anyone reading this can do it too. Andy Shatz did it. Josh Ritter did it. 21-6 did it. MaxGaming did it.
You can do it too. This is not to say that you will do it, but the opportunity is there, and the tools are there and more than adequate.
Joe
as a footnote, I have some things planned to blog about, but I work better with a clear focus on a specific issue. If anyone has any questions about how we did what we did, in terms of developing our products, working remotely with people, how to survive while bootstrapping a business, specifics on my views on game design, ask them here and I will try to address them.
About the author
#22
I've had this same debate with many people myself. From my perspective every tool has a purpose and the most important thing you said was:
Basically, some people aren't smart about what they choose to create period and the real kicker is that some of the other tools out there don't let you know right up front how difficult it will be to actually make a finished product out of your game concept. Torque on the other hand will stop you dead in your tracks if you don't know what you're doing with it. I have to admit that it happens to me with some things too. There are some things that I'm knowledgeable enough to get working with Torque and other things that I'm still clueless about. I guess the important thing is accepting the blame squarely on your own shoulders. However, that can get old after you've spent days on end fighting with a C++ compiler while doing some big custom modification that you know you could have 'working' with another tool in 1/10th the time.
A good way to put it:
Torque can do anything, can you?
Of course this probably isn't the best attitude from a business perspective. People are always looking for the solution, which is most dynamic and easy to use simultaneously.
The way I see Torque is that it's easy to use as it comes stock for certain games. I only began Oust in Torque because I thought I would be capable of doing it "out of the box". I ended up getting into the engine, which wasn't as bad as I initially thought ... but still that's the other side of Torque. That's the truly dynamic side of Torque but it's also the side of Torque that many people will not be capable of changing to suit their needs, not without a lot of education.
There are other tools out there, which give you the dynamic edge of Torque's C++ code but with the abstraction and ease of its script code, not to mention a 'blank slate' which doesn't require you to sift through 500,000 lines of someone else's code. I think it's just up to people to choose which tool is better for the job. Obviously, Torque's a great engine but it's got this clause which basically says "make a game inside the Tribes box, or decipher our 500,000 lines of C++ code in order to make something outside of that box".
I'll tell it as straight as anyone else in case you can't tell. Of course staying true as true can be, every engine comes with a similar clause. I came to Torque primarily because other tools I used came with the clause "make any game you want, so long as it plays on a Windows PC and you don't need to make a single modification to the source code".
At the end of the day it still just comes down to the age-old phrase "use the right tool for the job".
06/02/2006 (8:04 pm)
Man I've missed your blogs Joe! It's good to hear from you!I've had this same debate with many people myself. From my perspective every tool has a purpose and the most important thing you said was:
Quote:
We were smart in terms of what we chose to create, and how we went about.
Basically, some people aren't smart about what they choose to create period and the real kicker is that some of the other tools out there don't let you know right up front how difficult it will be to actually make a finished product out of your game concept. Torque on the other hand will stop you dead in your tracks if you don't know what you're doing with it. I have to admit that it happens to me with some things too. There are some things that I'm knowledgeable enough to get working with Torque and other things that I'm still clueless about. I guess the important thing is accepting the blame squarely on your own shoulders. However, that can get old after you've spent days on end fighting with a C++ compiler while doing some big custom modification that you know you could have 'working' with another tool in 1/10th the time.
A good way to put it:
Torque can do anything, can you?
Of course this probably isn't the best attitude from a business perspective. People are always looking for the solution, which is most dynamic and easy to use simultaneously.
The way I see Torque is that it's easy to use as it comes stock for certain games. I only began Oust in Torque because I thought I would be capable of doing it "out of the box". I ended up getting into the engine, which wasn't as bad as I initially thought ... but still that's the other side of Torque. That's the truly dynamic side of Torque but it's also the side of Torque that many people will not be capable of changing to suit their needs, not without a lot of education.
There are other tools out there, which give you the dynamic edge of Torque's C++ code but with the abstraction and ease of its script code, not to mention a 'blank slate' which doesn't require you to sift through 500,000 lines of someone else's code. I think it's just up to people to choose which tool is better for the job. Obviously, Torque's a great engine but it's got this clause which basically says "make a game inside the Tribes box, or decipher our 500,000 lines of C++ code in order to make something outside of that box".
I'll tell it as straight as anyone else in case you can't tell. Of course staying true as true can be, every engine comes with a similar clause. I came to Torque primarily because other tools I used came with the clause "make any game you want, so long as it plays on a Windows PC and you don't need to make a single modification to the source code".
At the end of the day it still just comes down to the age-old phrase "use the right tool for the job".
#23
I beg to differ on the engine vs. engine thread. I am open to criticism on what I create. I eat that stuff up. Criticism and review makes things better.
Open criticism of the products GarageGames makes and distributes (and what you read on the forums) is actually quite mild when compared to the standards of what we internally want the products to be. I read all of it very carefully so I can better understand the needs of the community and do what I can to help guide things in the directions that I perceive will provide value to the community.
In engine vs. engine threads, it never seems to be an intellgent dicsussion, and from my perspective, the dicussion is often too broad and unfocused to give any constructive input. for a specific application, one application might be better than another.. in a general sense, it seems like just wasted effort. Unless you are trying to do something specific, then to compare an engine vs. another engine does not seem relevant. Particularly when it comes to graphics, it just confuses me. I looked at the screenshot of the pirate game that was posted few days ago and compare it to the Perfect Dark Zero (which looked like they hosed everything down with laquer) and I think, what are people arguing about?
What I did not like in the particular thread was the implication that a game could not be produced with the TGE, in particular, because I was involved with one that did ship using the TGE. After that, I was involved in a product that shipped on the XBox using the TSE. When people cross the line and start making attacks on the intentions or the integrity of those involved making the tools, then it gets personal.
People can compare all they want, and argue about whatever they want. I am too busy making stuff to get into arguements about it.
My main point with this post was not to pimp the engine.. but to fire people up. Our engine(s) will constantly be improving because we want to make games and we want to help other to make games. We want to make things better than they are, and we are going to do it no matter what anyone says or thinks is going on.
It is a call to action, to get people to beleive in themselves and start making cool stuff. I have tried (and will continue to try) to help as much as I can to get people making the games that they want to make, and impart whatever wisdom I have gained along the way in the hopes it might help them.
As for the featureset of the TGE becoming outdated, you are welcome to your opionion. The outdated feature set allowed a very small team on a tight schedule to create the #1 revenue generator on XBox Live Arcade on the 360. Is the featureset a limiting factor for the games I want to make? Not at all. My big problem is finding the time and people to work on all the stuff I want to make, and most of it is acheivable with the technology we have right now.
Is the engine good enough to make a game? yeah.. and then some. Is it as good as I want it to be? no, it is not yet, and we are working on that.
We are working on making the tech better, and part of this process is us using the engines to make games with. We put the engines through the ringer by working on what might be ambitious projects with tight scehdules. We know what works and what doesn't, and what it takes to make games and get them distributed.
If people think this tech does not provide them with what they need to make a game, I have no problem with it. They can go to whatever other technology they want that will help them acheive their dream.
What gets me is when people start blaming others (and in particular the company I now work for) for standing in the way of their dream by not providing what they need to make their dream a reality. The success of anyone who reads what I write depends on them, not on me, and not on GG.
The Torque teams (and GG in general) will continue to take on ambitious tasks. We do it because it needs to be done, and no one else is attempting to do it. Our hope is that we will allow others to get through a door that was once closed, and allow them to create the things they want and share them with the world.
06/02/2006 (8:15 pm)
@ Alexander, I beg to differ on the engine vs. engine thread. I am open to criticism on what I create. I eat that stuff up. Criticism and review makes things better.
Open criticism of the products GarageGames makes and distributes (and what you read on the forums) is actually quite mild when compared to the standards of what we internally want the products to be. I read all of it very carefully so I can better understand the needs of the community and do what I can to help guide things in the directions that I perceive will provide value to the community.
In engine vs. engine threads, it never seems to be an intellgent dicsussion, and from my perspective, the dicussion is often too broad and unfocused to give any constructive input. for a specific application, one application might be better than another.. in a general sense, it seems like just wasted effort. Unless you are trying to do something specific, then to compare an engine vs. another engine does not seem relevant. Particularly when it comes to graphics, it just confuses me. I looked at the screenshot of the pirate game that was posted few days ago and compare it to the Perfect Dark Zero (which looked like they hosed everything down with laquer) and I think, what are people arguing about?
What I did not like in the particular thread was the implication that a game could not be produced with the TGE, in particular, because I was involved with one that did ship using the TGE. After that, I was involved in a product that shipped on the XBox using the TSE. When people cross the line and start making attacks on the intentions or the integrity of those involved making the tools, then it gets personal.
People can compare all they want, and argue about whatever they want. I am too busy making stuff to get into arguements about it.
My main point with this post was not to pimp the engine.. but to fire people up. Our engine(s) will constantly be improving because we want to make games and we want to help other to make games. We want to make things better than they are, and we are going to do it no matter what anyone says or thinks is going on.
It is a call to action, to get people to beleive in themselves and start making cool stuff. I have tried (and will continue to try) to help as much as I can to get people making the games that they want to make, and impart whatever wisdom I have gained along the way in the hopes it might help them.
As for the featureset of the TGE becoming outdated, you are welcome to your opionion. The outdated feature set allowed a very small team on a tight schedule to create the #1 revenue generator on XBox Live Arcade on the 360. Is the featureset a limiting factor for the games I want to make? Not at all. My big problem is finding the time and people to work on all the stuff I want to make, and most of it is acheivable with the technology we have right now.
Is the engine good enough to make a game? yeah.. and then some. Is it as good as I want it to be? no, it is not yet, and we are working on that.
We are working on making the tech better, and part of this process is us using the engines to make games with. We put the engines through the ringer by working on what might be ambitious projects with tight scehdules. We know what works and what doesn't, and what it takes to make games and get them distributed.
If people think this tech does not provide them with what they need to make a game, I have no problem with it. They can go to whatever other technology they want that will help them acheive their dream.
What gets me is when people start blaming others (and in particular the company I now work for) for standing in the way of their dream by not providing what they need to make their dream a reality. The success of anyone who reads what I write depends on them, not on me, and not on GG.
The Torque teams (and GG in general) will continue to take on ambitious tasks. We do it because it needs to be done, and no one else is attempting to do it. Our hope is that we will allow others to get through a door that was once closed, and allow them to create the things they want and share them with the world.
#24
TGE and TSE do things the "right way". What it boils down to, is you need a skill programmer to make something that works with it. That is not at all a bad thing, if you have skilled software engineers to program your game. Its not easy though, because you have to handle everything yourself when you code a custom game object for TGE / TSE. You have to do the movement code, animation code, networking and so on manually. You are given a very nice framework to work with, and a lot of helper functionality to make your development experience easier, but you really need to know what you are doing.
TGB is on the other end of the spectrum. Its designed to allow you to make a game as quickly as possible. It does make sacrifices in some aspects to make that possible. You do not have full control of the movement, the interpolation of movement and so on out of the box. So in the end you have a lot less control over how the whole system work. Its possible to modify the code, in order for it to operate differently, but in a way that's defeating the point of how TGB is designed.
So in otherwords there are tools provided by Garage Games that serve both design philosophies. The tools aren't the biggest problem with people getting games done. Its really easy to say something like "I want to make games" or "I want to be a rock star". Its a lot harder to actually do the work to actually make those things happen. There are so many people that make games full time, and you are competing against them (whether you have a full time job or not). If you want to create something as high quality as lets say Think Tanks, its really really hard. It took three highly skilled individuals a year to complete. That is a massive undertaking.
Right now you as a developer have better tools than anyone in the history of video games has ever had. I am serious about this too. Do you have to program your own software based 3D rendering engine? No. Do you have to program in pure assembly for a platform that has just enough cycles to diplay sprites on the screen? No. Do you have to do weird optimizations where you use bit shifting instead of multiplication and division? Once again the answer is no.
As long as you keep the scope of you game small, and you are will to spend six months of hard work, with a couple of people on your team, you will complete your game. Will your first game sell a million copies and make you enough money to be on easy street? Most likely the answer is no. If you keep cranking out games, and never give up, will you be able to quit your day job? The answer is definitely. But are you willing to put in the effort, that is the question.
06/02/2006 (8:29 pm)
This is the big problem with a game development tool. There are two ways to go about implementing a product that allows someone to make a game. You can do things 100% correctly, but have a huge learning curve in order to be able to use the product. On the other end of the spectum, you can side step certain issues to some extent, to create a platform that is easy to use.TGE and TSE do things the "right way". What it boils down to, is you need a skill programmer to make something that works with it. That is not at all a bad thing, if you have skilled software engineers to program your game. Its not easy though, because you have to handle everything yourself when you code a custom game object for TGE / TSE. You have to do the movement code, animation code, networking and so on manually. You are given a very nice framework to work with, and a lot of helper functionality to make your development experience easier, but you really need to know what you are doing.
TGB is on the other end of the spectrum. Its designed to allow you to make a game as quickly as possible. It does make sacrifices in some aspects to make that possible. You do not have full control of the movement, the interpolation of movement and so on out of the box. So in the end you have a lot less control over how the whole system work. Its possible to modify the code, in order for it to operate differently, but in a way that's defeating the point of how TGB is designed.
So in otherwords there are tools provided by Garage Games that serve both design philosophies. The tools aren't the biggest problem with people getting games done. Its really easy to say something like "I want to make games" or "I want to be a rock star". Its a lot harder to actually do the work to actually make those things happen. There are so many people that make games full time, and you are competing against them (whether you have a full time job or not). If you want to create something as high quality as lets say Think Tanks, its really really hard. It took three highly skilled individuals a year to complete. That is a massive undertaking.
Right now you as a developer have better tools than anyone in the history of video games has ever had. I am serious about this too. Do you have to program your own software based 3D rendering engine? No. Do you have to program in pure assembly for a platform that has just enough cycles to diplay sprites on the screen? No. Do you have to do weird optimizations where you use bit shifting instead of multiplication and division? Once again the answer is no.
As long as you keep the scope of you game small, and you are will to spend six months of hard work, with a couple of people on your team, you will complete your game. Will your first game sell a million copies and make you enough money to be on easy street? Most likely the answer is no. If you keep cranking out games, and never give up, will you be able to quit your day job? The answer is definitely. But are you willing to put in the effort, that is the question.
#25
Jeremy,
we are not trying to fully place the burden back on people.
We are trying to make the best tools, make them the easiest to use, make them robust, make them so they work on as many platforms as possible, document all of it, and have them work with as many tools as we can (often looking to support free or open source tools). It is a tall order, and we are aware of the magnitude of the task. We think we have broken it down into reasonable chunks, and we are doing what we can as fast as we can to get there.
We are working to make it easier. We are not drawing a line in the sand and telling people to do it themselves.. what we are trying to say is that we are working on it.. and it will take time, and at some point, we can only do so much to enable. Eventually we will get there.. someday, we will have a toolset that anyone can use to make anything they desire. That day is not today. We are not asking for forgiveness, we are just hoping that people will understand this and take some initiative to make it happen. You certainly have done this.
I hope to get people to understand and embrace the concept. Sometimes we have to go a little further, and sometimes the individual has to do more to get their idea more in line with their abilities and resources. Sometimes it is a little of both.. it is a grey line. We are getting there, but it will not happen all at once.
06/02/2006 (8:56 pm)
Quote:Of course this probably isn't the best attitude from a business perspective. People are always looking for the solution, which is most dynamic and easy to use simultaneously.
Jeremy,
we are not trying to fully place the burden back on people.
We are trying to make the best tools, make them the easiest to use, make them robust, make them so they work on as many platforms as possible, document all of it, and have them work with as many tools as we can (often looking to support free or open source tools). It is a tall order, and we are aware of the magnitude of the task. We think we have broken it down into reasonable chunks, and we are doing what we can as fast as we can to get there.
We are working to make it easier. We are not drawing a line in the sand and telling people to do it themselves.. what we are trying to say is that we are working on it.. and it will take time, and at some point, we can only do so much to enable. Eventually we will get there.. someday, we will have a toolset that anyone can use to make anything they desire. That day is not today. We are not asking for forgiveness, we are just hoping that people will understand this and take some initiative to make it happen. You certainly have done this.
I hope to get people to understand and embrace the concept. Sometimes we have to go a little further, and sometimes the individual has to do more to get their idea more in line with their abilities and resources. Sometimes it is a little of both.. it is a grey line. We are getting there, but it will not happen all at once.
#26
When it comes to documentation though, I can see both sides of that fence. First off I think the collection of information you can find here at Garagegames, in the forums and resources, trumps any other engine in existance at this point. A few years ago it was hard, now it's easy. Indie coders with limited knowledge can piece together parts of resources and build a decent product in relatively short time just by researching this web site. What I think it is though, is a cop out. If you can't create what you want to create, it's easier to blame the documentation, or the engine, or someone else on your team, than to man up and say what needs to be said, "I don't yet have the skills to create what I want created." And that will only improve with practice and perseverence.
06/02/2006 (11:16 pm)
My two cents... I've worked with many engines over the years. I'm an impulse buyer. I take a look at a new engine, if it looks interesting I want to dissect it, so I buy a license if its reasonable. Over the years I've licensed pretty much every low cost engine on the market, ranging up to $1250 for a license. Of all of them I can say with no hesitation that Torque is the best deal out there. The TGE renderer is outdated as compared to something like C4, which is a fantastic renderer. When people do the comparisons to C4 or other engines, what they usually forget is the full package. Torque is the full package. You won't find another engine in the price range that has the level of features, quality of networking, GUI, vehicles, indoor/outdoor rendering and in-game editors that can match Torque. It's a hands down, no brainer in my opinion. I'm not mentioning TSE, because it just isn't ready yet. When it comes to documentation though, I can see both sides of that fence. First off I think the collection of information you can find here at Garagegames, in the forums and resources, trumps any other engine in existance at this point. A few years ago it was hard, now it's easy. Indie coders with limited knowledge can piece together parts of resources and build a decent product in relatively short time just by researching this web site. What I think it is though, is a cop out. If you can't create what you want to create, it's easier to blame the documentation, or the engine, or someone else on your team, than to man up and say what needs to be said, "I don't yet have the skills to create what I want created." And that will only improve with practice and perseverence.
#27
...and the focus is not yet on the tools or engine, that's why people are getting frustrated...
That's understandable that GG should stay afloat, that's why GG is busy with it's own game projects, "procrastinating" with the featureset/toolset. On one hand it makes people (GG customers) nervous (gives them impression of uncertainty in platform's future), on the other hand, it bulletproof the engine (it's been developed in usage). Not enough marketing was done by GG to keep people updated. I just noticed that the number of unsatisfied customers is growing in GG community. It's a sad fact.
It's repeated over and over that games can be done with TGE and TSE. That's true, BUT what indie has enough time to patch bugs, add features (that are standart by this moment, e.g. BSP is so last centure technology -> I would like to have octree in my arsenal to optimize perfomance, I want to support non-shader and shader video cards in ONE application to save my development time) to the core platform? Few. Indies better concentrate on game dynamics then that, otherwise he/she should go fulltime to acomplish the idea, very very few can do that.
Joe, you understand that better as nobody else. I have a feeling that the definition of "indie" is blurring somehow now in GG community.
Games can be done in TGE, I admit it, but indies would like to have better tools that save their short free time and resources -> Is it the GG's slogan 5 years ago? ;)
06/02/2006 (11:35 pm)
"We are not drawing a line in the sand and telling people to do it themselves.. what we are trying to say is that we are working on it.. and it will take time"......and the focus is not yet on the tools or engine, that's why people are getting frustrated...
That's understandable that GG should stay afloat, that's why GG is busy with it's own game projects, "procrastinating" with the featureset/toolset. On one hand it makes people (GG customers) nervous (gives them impression of uncertainty in platform's future), on the other hand, it bulletproof the engine (it's been developed in usage). Not enough marketing was done by GG to keep people updated. I just noticed that the number of unsatisfied customers is growing in GG community. It's a sad fact.
It's repeated over and over that games can be done with TGE and TSE. That's true, BUT what indie has enough time to patch bugs, add features (that are standart by this moment, e.g. BSP is so last centure technology -> I would like to have octree in my arsenal to optimize perfomance, I want to support non-shader and shader video cards in ONE application to save my development time) to the core platform? Few. Indies better concentrate on game dynamics then that, otherwise he/she should go fulltime to acomplish the idea, very very few can do that.
Joe, you understand that better as nobody else. I have a feeling that the definition of "indie" is blurring somehow now in GG community.
Games can be done in TGE, I admit it, but indies would like to have better tools that save their short free time and resources -> Is it the GG's slogan 5 years ago? ;)
#28
I have yet to see GarageGames making or promoting the creation of "big games" with tremendous technical requirements... if you want to push the boundries, expect to do a lot of work.
06/02/2006 (11:50 pm)
The tools are freaking sweet for making some types of games. The kinds of games that GG, rightly, suggests you make... I have yet to see GarageGames making or promoting the creation of "big games" with tremendous technical requirements... if you want to push the boundries, expect to do a lot of work.
#29
For instance, even small games can benefit from a nice little touch of shaders to kick up the perfomance, instead of software emulation (like TLK). Even your MOM could use ability to run good on non-shader cards and run smoothly on shader ones just with one executable, otherwise you spent other man-months to port it from TGE to TSE ;) I've seen your .plan post, you are going to add a lot "standard" features to TGE/TSE to be "comfortable"..
06/02/2006 (11:57 pm)
At some point of view, you are right Josh, but I didnt mean "big games" at all... For instance, even small games can benefit from a nice little touch of shaders to kick up the perfomance, instead of software emulation (like TLK). Even your MOM could use ability to run good on non-shader cards and run smoothly on shader ones just with one executable, otherwise you spent other man-months to port it from TGE to TSE ;) I've seen your .plan post, you are going to add a lot "standard" features to TGE/TSE to be "comfortable"..
#30
Yes, I am doing a lot of work with TSE. I am confident that the work is worth it and that we'll have a great system. I used to get really upset about GG not doing this, that, or the other thing. It turned out that this was my problem and not theirs...
06/03/2006 (12:02 am)
If I was making casual games targeting anything BUT XBox360, shaders and anything requiring octrees would be the first thing out the window.Yes, I am doing a lot of work with TSE. I am confident that the work is worth it and that we'll have a great system. I used to get really upset about GG not doing this, that, or the other thing. It turned out that this was my problem and not theirs...
#31
Then we have the massive project that is Break Into Games, website improvements, a massive library of documentation and tutorials written for TGB, art projects, and the unrelenting work of the biz-dev team to continue to open doors for indies all over.
Last year was exciting in the doors that were opened. (Last year, this month, TSE ran for the first time on the Xbox 360.) This year will dwarf last year, I think. We live in exciting times; come along for the ride.
06/03/2006 (1:06 am)
I don't think tools are getting neglected at all. TGB is a massive step forward in GG tools, Constructor is in beta, and some of the optimizations Brian is doing on TSE rendering are pretty stunning. There are currently more simultanious programming projects going on right now than we've ever had, and there are sub-projects of those projects, as well. For the first time we are able to do project planning and development by slightly-more than the seat of our pants.Then we have the massive project that is Break Into Games, website improvements, a massive library of documentation and tutorials written for TGB, art projects, and the unrelenting work of the biz-dev team to continue to open doors for indies all over.
Last year was exciting in the doors that were opened. (Last year, this month, TSE ran for the first time on the Xbox 360.) This year will dwarf last year, I think. We live in exciting times; come along for the ride.
#32
06/03/2006 (1:39 am)
@Alexander - sorry to be so blunt but I think you could benefit to read Joe's entire post, then step back and "look in the mirror".Quote:If an individual cannot get a product to the shipping state, or cannot begin their project because of some perceived 'lack' of tools or documentation or funding orMyself , I looking in the mirror too and I see a prototype of a fun game made with TGB :-), then that person needs to take a look in the mirror.
#33
Ahh, but unfortunately what isn't blatently obvious is that while the number of unsatisfied customers is growing slowly, the number of satisfied customers is growing at orders of magnitude higher rates...it's just that the happy customers are the ones actually making games instead of complaining about x, y, or z...
I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specifically, and especially not you Alexander, but I wanted to point out that the observation you made is a bit one sided--of course when a customer base grows, the unsatisfied portion is going to grow as well, but in this case, with all of our tools, it's not nearly as high a rate (nor even an increasing rate) that the other side of the equation has.
06/03/2006 (1:58 am)
Quote:(from Alexander)
I just noticed that the number of unsatisfied customers is growing in GG community. It's a sad fact.
Ahh, but unfortunately what isn't blatently obvious is that while the number of unsatisfied customers is growing slowly, the number of satisfied customers is growing at orders of magnitude higher rates...it's just that the happy customers are the ones actually making games instead of complaining about x, y, or z...
I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specifically, and especially not you Alexander, but I wanted to point out that the observation you made is a bit one sided--of course when a customer base grows, the unsatisfied portion is going to grow as well, but in this case, with all of our tools, it's not nearly as high a rate (nor even an increasing rate) that the other side of the equation has.
#34
If you break in the middle of the process or have too short attention span and jump from idea to idea, project to project, you will end up with nothing to show and deep urge to blame something for your failures.
And, btw, Noolness, Joe can not possibly be buddha of game design. He looks too skinny to me :)
06/03/2006 (4:50 am)
I guess the grumpiness comes simply from not fully understanding what an undertaking making a game is. Even a simple, bare bones, little game. No matter what tech you are using, you`re going to have to pour buckets of sweat in it and start to hate it at some point, until one day the features are complete, the art is there and game suddenly unravels before you in its full beauty, without need to imagine how this or that will look "when its done", and all you can do is look dumbly in the screen, marveling at it. If you break in the middle of the process or have too short attention span and jump from idea to idea, project to project, you will end up with nothing to show and deep urge to blame something for your failures.
And, btw, Noolness, Joe can not possibly be buddha of game design. He looks too skinny to me :)
#35
@Stephen,
@Pat,
@Alex Rice:
1st things first :) : I wasn't bashing Torque platform at all, please, read my post again. My point is much bigger picture than that. GG does awesome job, but "something" is missing in the whole picture...
IMHO, GG needs to tell more about its progress on its development, so people know that they are investing money in a live and developing technology (like in any business), more .plans telling what was achieved recently, etc. Sometimes community "feels" lost ;) I like you guys, but I may tell that the "geek" nature (of any programmer) leaves PR behind ;)
Alex, your quote is very true and mirrors my philosophy as well. That's true that an individual should be very dedicated to his/her dream to make it happen. But then, how MUCH time he/she can devote to it?... That's why indies are looking for "complete" solutions, not because they "cannot", but because they dont have time for everything. Unfortunatly, not everybody can secure funding...
Everything that was said by me was said with good intension.
06/03/2006 (10:57 am)
@Josh,@Stephen,
@Pat,
@Alex Rice:
1st things first :) : I wasn't bashing Torque platform at all, please, read my post again. My point is much bigger picture than that. GG does awesome job, but "something" is missing in the whole picture...
IMHO, GG needs to tell more about its progress on its development, so people know that they are investing money in a live and developing technology (like in any business), more .plans telling what was achieved recently, etc. Sometimes community "feels" lost ;) I like you guys, but I may tell that the "geek" nature (of any programmer) leaves PR behind ;)
Alex, your quote is very true and mirrors my philosophy as well. That's true that an individual should be very dedicated to his/her dream to make it happen. But then, how MUCH time he/she can devote to it?... That's why indies are looking for "complete" solutions, not because they "cannot", but because they dont have time for everything. Unfortunatly, not everybody can secure funding...
Everything that was said by me was said with good intension.
#36
This is where I disagree with you.
Life is about choices and sacrifices. You simply cannot have it all. If you value your nice car, your neighborhood, your day job, your television programs, whatever is causing you to not have time, resources, or whatever to make your game and you have unrealistic expectations of what you can make: no engine is going to solve your dilemma.
06/03/2006 (11:22 am)
@Alexander: It's clear that you have good intentions. Otherwise, folks probably wouldn't be responding to you.Quote:But then, how MUCH time he/she can devote to it?... That's why indies are looking for "complete" solutions, not because they "cannot", but because they dont have time for everything. Unfortunatly, not everybody can secure funding...
This is where I disagree with you.
Life is about choices and sacrifices. You simply cannot have it all. If you value your nice car, your neighborhood, your day job, your television programs, whatever is causing you to not have time, resources, or whatever to make your game and you have unrealistic expectations of what you can make: no engine is going to solve your dilemma.
#37
I hear you. The decision to not give more frequent progress updates was not a intentional one. It happens because everyone is head down working on stuff. My silence as of late is a result of working hard on many things. Everyone else at GarageGames is also working on many, many cool things.. in fact, most are working on the same things many people are complaining about.
We are telling people what is happening, but a lot of that is hidden in the day to day communications in the forums, addressing specific issues. The development teams have not made a concerntrated effort to communicate the day to day activities of what they are doing. Perhaps we should do this.. my feeling is that the developers would rather spend their time working on getting the technology out the door than talking about what they are planning on doing.
Some of the developer actually ARE telling people what they are doing. Read Matt Fairfax's plan, or Matt Langely's, or Justin DuJardin.. read their forum posts.
Right now, I can't talk about the projects I am working on.. but they are all pretty cool, and the community is already benefitting from some of the 'secret' things that have been going on in the form of the tools and technology that are derived from working on the projects that we just can't talk about yet.
As for the time thing.. I understand it totally, but I have no pity for anyone who claims they have none. I worked full time while going to school full time, and no one paid my way. Now I am married, have a 3 year old daughter, and I work quite a bit as well (my work often bleeds over into the evening and weekends). Time is my most precious resource.
We are doing what we can to make things better and easier, but lack of funding and lack of time are complaints that I personally don't wan't to hear about. If someone does not have funding or time, that is their problem, not mine.
I am working hard with a bunch of like minded individuals to provide the hammers, the nails, the screwsdrivers, the bulldozers and the cranes.. we are working on the hammer swinging machine for those that don't want to learn how to swing a hammer, and we have a background project for the automated bulldozer driver. Eventually, we may create the 'create my dream house' button.
Until then, if someone tries to build the Taj Mahal, and tries to blame me because I did not do enough to help, well.. I will respond that I did my best, and provided everything in my power that they needed to build the Taj Mahal, ask them questions about where they failed so I can help make it easier for the next Taj Mahal attempt, and then advise them that building the Taj Mahal was probably not a good choice. I am not going to take to heart that their failure is my fault.
I am here to help contribute to peoples success. I am not here to hand it to anyone. I am not going to take credit for anyones success.. and I am not going to suffer the blame for anyones failure.
As for how much time someone can devote to their dream? that is a deeply personal question that has no one answer. My answer was that I could devote all my time to it. I did. and I have been at it for 5 years now.
I am not saying that all can do this, or shoudl do this.. .but you will get out of it what you put into it. The tools have gotten way easier, and they will continue to improve. Every month that passes, it gets that much easier. I see it as a continuum. We don't at some point pass a magical gate where it becomes 'easy'.. we just keep approaching it slowly and steadily.
So, your message is heard.. we have heard it long ago, and we are taking steps to improve things. We will keep pushing, and if you feel that it is still not easy enough or quick enough, then all I can do is look at what impediments are holding you back, understand them, and look to create technology or documentation to help correct the impediments to your success. These will get thrown on the stack with all the other feature requests.. and we will prioritize them and work on them.
In the meantime, anyone working on a game will either stop and wait for us, or they will push forward. Both are the choice of the individual, and I would personally prefer that they own that choice.
06/03/2006 (11:38 am)
@ Alexander, I hear you. The decision to not give more frequent progress updates was not a intentional one. It happens because everyone is head down working on stuff. My silence as of late is a result of working hard on many things. Everyone else at GarageGames is also working on many, many cool things.. in fact, most are working on the same things many people are complaining about.
We are telling people what is happening, but a lot of that is hidden in the day to day communications in the forums, addressing specific issues. The development teams have not made a concerntrated effort to communicate the day to day activities of what they are doing. Perhaps we should do this.. my feeling is that the developers would rather spend their time working on getting the technology out the door than talking about what they are planning on doing.
Some of the developer actually ARE telling people what they are doing. Read Matt Fairfax's plan, or Matt Langely's, or Justin DuJardin.. read their forum posts.
Right now, I can't talk about the projects I am working on.. but they are all pretty cool, and the community is already benefitting from some of the 'secret' things that have been going on in the form of the tools and technology that are derived from working on the projects that we just can't talk about yet.
As for the time thing.. I understand it totally, but I have no pity for anyone who claims they have none. I worked full time while going to school full time, and no one paid my way. Now I am married, have a 3 year old daughter, and I work quite a bit as well (my work often bleeds over into the evening and weekends). Time is my most precious resource.
We are doing what we can to make things better and easier, but lack of funding and lack of time are complaints that I personally don't wan't to hear about. If someone does not have funding or time, that is their problem, not mine.
I am working hard with a bunch of like minded individuals to provide the hammers, the nails, the screwsdrivers, the bulldozers and the cranes.. we are working on the hammer swinging machine for those that don't want to learn how to swing a hammer, and we have a background project for the automated bulldozer driver. Eventually, we may create the 'create my dream house' button.
Until then, if someone tries to build the Taj Mahal, and tries to blame me because I did not do enough to help, well.. I will respond that I did my best, and provided everything in my power that they needed to build the Taj Mahal, ask them questions about where they failed so I can help make it easier for the next Taj Mahal attempt, and then advise them that building the Taj Mahal was probably not a good choice. I am not going to take to heart that their failure is my fault.
I am here to help contribute to peoples success. I am not here to hand it to anyone. I am not going to take credit for anyones success.. and I am not going to suffer the blame for anyones failure.
As for how much time someone can devote to their dream? that is a deeply personal question that has no one answer. My answer was that I could devote all my time to it. I did. and I have been at it for 5 years now.
I am not saying that all can do this, or shoudl do this.. .but you will get out of it what you put into it. The tools have gotten way easier, and they will continue to improve. Every month that passes, it gets that much easier. I see it as a continuum. We don't at some point pass a magical gate where it becomes 'easy'.. we just keep approaching it slowly and steadily.
So, your message is heard.. we have heard it long ago, and we are taking steps to improve things. We will keep pushing, and if you feel that it is still not easy enough or quick enough, then all I can do is look at what impediments are holding you back, understand them, and look to create technology or documentation to help correct the impediments to your success. These will get thrown on the stack with all the other feature requests.. and we will prioritize them and work on them.
In the meantime, anyone working on a game will either stop and wait for us, or they will push forward. Both are the choice of the individual, and I would personally prefer that they own that choice.
#38
That's why I drive Saturn SL1 1997 (no car payments) and live in an apartment (no morgage and expensive householding expences) ;) with a dream of moving into a house as soon as my indie business will get stable.
But still, I'm on contract positions to support my small family; and my time is tight.
06/03/2006 (11:43 am)
@Josh:Quote:
Life is about choices and sacrifices. You simply cannot have it all.
That's why I drive Saturn SL1 1997 (no car payments) and live in an apartment (no morgage and expensive householding expences) ;) with a dream of moving into a house as soon as my indie business will get stable.
But still, I'm on contract positions to support my small family; and my time is tight.
#39
And frankly, I largely prefer GG's approach to announcements than the over hyped PR that is the norm in the game industry.
And to boot, they've been providing their improvements to the engine since release for free to current licensees. Yes, this might change, but they need to be able to sustain themselves as a business somehow.
To mention Unreal again, you license a certain point release, and only get sporadic updates to that release : a license for Unreal 2.5 doesn't get you Unreal 3.
And if you're making a game, you should never base your project development timeline on future developments of the tech you've licensed : that's just bad business, as shit can happen in so many ways that you absolutely do not want to do that.
Frankly, it's also quite clear what you get when you license GG technologies if you bother to do the least bit of homework before doing so, and have a fair idea of what you're getting into : again, this is no hobbyist sandbox like DarkBasic and co, but realworld gametech, with warts and all.
You either leverage it, learn to fight as little as possible with it, or license other tech, or build from scratch (which can be a totally viable option, don't get me wrong)
As for TSE not being ready to ship games, it's already been used to ship multiple titles on xbox and one so far on xbox 360 : yes, it might be missing some parity of features with TGE, but it's definitely usable as is. Yes, it might involve more work than using TGE but any serious team that's going to finish a viable, quality game can certainly consider it, and decide whether they have the time and know how to tackle a project's development with it.
It always strikes me as bizarre that people tend to expect more from GG than any other middleware vendor that charges orders of magnitude more for their tech, that usually only covers part of what TGE gives you out of the box.
I fully understand why GG employees are not more active on the forums or IRC : it's been 5 years or so, and while there is a great community, there is also a mass of lazy, clueless folks (not saying you are Alex) who will clamor for GG help with questions that have been answered 100s of times on the forums, or whose first post is about how they disagree with design decisions that went into GG's tech design, etc.
Reading that drivel takes its toll, and I don't think I'm the only one who'd rather see them working on their project and tech to keep the company and spirit going, than pandering to a very vocal, but in the end, ultimately very unproductive mass...
I'm no blind fan boy of GG as I've told Jeff, and others many times, I sometimes disagree with the choices they make, but I respect their spirit, their drive : they are one of the reasons I still consider game development as a way to make a living after bitter experiences in that world, both indie and mainstream.
If one of the pioneers of the industry still has that gleam in his eye, we should look in the mirror when we face the hardships of shipping a game, not blame them, or the tech, or whatever else : middleware is there to leverage, so if a certain product doesn't suit you, try something else, etc.
Again, this is not particularly directed at you Alex, so do not get me wrong :)
Cheers all, stay true, and keep on torquin' !!!
06/03/2006 (5:40 pm)
Alex, there is no complete solution, in the sense that making a game is always going to be hard work... And frankly, I largely prefer GG's approach to announcements than the over hyped PR that is the norm in the game industry.
And to boot, they've been providing their improvements to the engine since release for free to current licensees. Yes, this might change, but they need to be able to sustain themselves as a business somehow.
To mention Unreal again, you license a certain point release, and only get sporadic updates to that release : a license for Unreal 2.5 doesn't get you Unreal 3.
And if you're making a game, you should never base your project development timeline on future developments of the tech you've licensed : that's just bad business, as shit can happen in so many ways that you absolutely do not want to do that.
Frankly, it's also quite clear what you get when you license GG technologies if you bother to do the least bit of homework before doing so, and have a fair idea of what you're getting into : again, this is no hobbyist sandbox like DarkBasic and co, but realworld gametech, with warts and all.
You either leverage it, learn to fight as little as possible with it, or license other tech, or build from scratch (which can be a totally viable option, don't get me wrong)
As for TSE not being ready to ship games, it's already been used to ship multiple titles on xbox and one so far on xbox 360 : yes, it might be missing some parity of features with TGE, but it's definitely usable as is. Yes, it might involve more work than using TGE but any serious team that's going to finish a viable, quality game can certainly consider it, and decide whether they have the time and know how to tackle a project's development with it.
It always strikes me as bizarre that people tend to expect more from GG than any other middleware vendor that charges orders of magnitude more for their tech, that usually only covers part of what TGE gives you out of the box.
I fully understand why GG employees are not more active on the forums or IRC : it's been 5 years or so, and while there is a great community, there is also a mass of lazy, clueless folks (not saying you are Alex) who will clamor for GG help with questions that have been answered 100s of times on the forums, or whose first post is about how they disagree with design decisions that went into GG's tech design, etc.
Reading that drivel takes its toll, and I don't think I'm the only one who'd rather see them working on their project and tech to keep the company and spirit going, than pandering to a very vocal, but in the end, ultimately very unproductive mass...
I'm no blind fan boy of GG as I've told Jeff, and others many times, I sometimes disagree with the choices they make, but I respect their spirit, their drive : they are one of the reasons I still consider game development as a way to make a living after bitter experiences in that world, both indie and mainstream.
If one of the pioneers of the industry still has that gleam in his eye, we should look in the mirror when we face the hardships of shipping a game, not blame them, or the tech, or whatever else : middleware is there to leverage, so if a certain product doesn't suit you, try something else, etc.
Again, this is not particularly directed at you Alex, so do not get me wrong :)
Cheers all, stay true, and keep on torquin' !!!
#40
06/03/2006 (6:41 pm)
No offense taken, Nicolas, and I see your point. 
Associate Kevin Ryan
Top Meadow Inc.
You certainly were.
Where I live up here in the High Sierras we have lots of large granite outcroppings. Somes place the road down into the valley goes around them and other places it is obvious that they used dynamite to blast a path through.
When driving into town a couple of weeks ago I was thinking game design/development is like that. You have to decide which rocks to just make a path around and which rocks to take the longer more difficult effort to blast through.