Bad reviews
by Ben Ewing · in General Discussion · 08/31/2005 (6:55 am) · 50 replies
Ive read some bad reviews about Torque on Devmaster.com and I was wondering:Is the engine dated?
Is it hard to use? Or, are these people simply incompetent?
Is it hard to use? Or, are these people simply incompetent?
#2
Is it easy to use? Yes - for being a professional quality engine, but No - you won't be able to produce anything without putting in some effort.
08/31/2005 (7:07 am)
Torque can do what your skills, time, and budget allow... and if you're that good, that's what the Torque Shader Engine is for. Is it easy to use? Yes - for being a professional quality engine, but No - you won't be able to produce anything without putting in some effort.
#3
Well I guess Ill use Torque, Thanks Matt and Teck Lee. :)
08/31/2005 (7:13 am)
Kay, well I dont have much of a Budget, but ive been prgramming for a while and ive got tons of time.Well I guess Ill use Torque, Thanks Matt and Teck Lee. :)
#4
In general, Torque is a mature engine. Dated wouldn't be the word. Rather than come out with TGE 1.0, TGE 2.0, TGE 95, TGE XP, etc.. Garage Games has decided that an iterative model is the best approach. With the community constantly giving back to the engine, its development is constantly evolving.
TGE doesn't have the same features that TSE does, but that's because TGE is an older engine. It will run on some old hardware and give fantastic performance. TSE, on the other hand, is targeted at newer hardware. It includes shaders and a better overall graphics pipeline. Again, the community continues to give back to TSE as well, which gives it a great lifespan.
Overall, TGE and TSE are two fantastic engines. I've tried a couple of other offerings and was not as impressed as I am with these two. Unlike "engines" like Dark Basic which limit what you can do because you're building on top of a locked engine, TGE/TSE are full source code. You can modify the engine and the tools to suit your needs.
It's not going to be easy unless you're just gonna be a script kiddie. If you want the engine to do some really cool stuff then you'll have to muck with the C++ code. That's not a negative, it's a huge positive. If you look at some of the projects that have come out of the TGE/TSE or are in development, you will see a varied level of engine enhancement.
Additionally, TGE and TSE have the RTS pack add-on and multiple content packs to extend the usefulness of the engines. You also have T2D to choose from, if you're going to develop a 2D game. The potential is there and the possibilities are endless.
At $100, it's pretty much a no-brainer. It's not meant to compete with the Source engine or Doom engine, but then again the TSE can and does give them a run for their money. Source and Doom are gonna cost ya though... TGE/TSE are bargains for what you get -- take it from someone who's been a part of the community for a couple of years now.
Has it been a lot of work? Yep -- it sure as hell wasn't easy. Game dev shouldn't be easy.
Has it been worth is? Yep -- there's nothing more rewarding than seeing your game at IGC on 30 machines (including macs) with people playing it and whooping it up.
- Brett
(Edited so I don't sound like a moron)
08/31/2005 (7:14 am)
Can you provide a link to the review?In general, Torque is a mature engine. Dated wouldn't be the word. Rather than come out with TGE 1.0, TGE 2.0, TGE 95, TGE XP, etc.. Garage Games has decided that an iterative model is the best approach. With the community constantly giving back to the engine, its development is constantly evolving.
TGE doesn't have the same features that TSE does, but that's because TGE is an older engine. It will run on some old hardware and give fantastic performance. TSE, on the other hand, is targeted at newer hardware. It includes shaders and a better overall graphics pipeline. Again, the community continues to give back to TSE as well, which gives it a great lifespan.
Overall, TGE and TSE are two fantastic engines. I've tried a couple of other offerings and was not as impressed as I am with these two. Unlike "engines" like Dark Basic which limit what you can do because you're building on top of a locked engine, TGE/TSE are full source code. You can modify the engine and the tools to suit your needs.
It's not going to be easy unless you're just gonna be a script kiddie. If you want the engine to do some really cool stuff then you'll have to muck with the C++ code. That's not a negative, it's a huge positive. If you look at some of the projects that have come out of the TGE/TSE or are in development, you will see a varied level of engine enhancement.
Additionally, TGE and TSE have the RTS pack add-on and multiple content packs to extend the usefulness of the engines. You also have T2D to choose from, if you're going to develop a 2D game. The potential is there and the possibilities are endless.
At $100, it's pretty much a no-brainer. It's not meant to compete with the Source engine or Doom engine, but then again the TSE can and does give them a run for their money. Source and Doom are gonna cost ya though... TGE/TSE are bargains for what you get -- take it from someone who's been a part of the community for a couple of years now.
Has it been a lot of work? Yep -- it sure as hell wasn't easy. Game dev shouldn't be easy.
Has it been worth is? Yep -- there's nothing more rewarding than seeing your game at IGC on 30 machines (including macs) with people playing it and whooping it up.
- Brett
(Edited so I don't sound like a moron)
#5
Near the bottom there are 3-4 bad reviews.
08/31/2005 (7:25 am)
LOL, Its been forever since ive done HTML ill just give you a url:http://www.devmaster.net/engines/engine_details.php?id=3Near the bottom there are 3-4 bad reviews.
#6
08/31/2005 (7:36 am)
Wow, some of those negative reviews are scathing. As in, let's get personal, scathing. Some points are made, such as the fact that it is a difficult thing to get into if you're not ready to dig into the code, and the art pipeline isn't super-duper fantastic. But it's all workable. And the silly comments about GG just wanting to take our money are just that: silly. And insulting. Especially considering the hours they work. And the dedication they show. Grrr. 
#8
That was from a negative review I think it sorta sums up who are writing these negative reviews. People who don't have the facility use a game engine in the first place and/or refuse to actully invest time to learn it.
Torque is tough, but I started here when it first came out, it was the V12 ( or VL2 depending on who you are talking to ) then. I knew close to nothing, I modded tribes 2 a bit, which was my first real modding experiance. Since then I have published with Garage Games , Dark Horizons: Lore Invasion.
I went from a guy with a B.A. in Art History to Lead Programmer. Yes it is hard, but if you really want to make game you will make it happen, by learning.
08/31/2005 (7:53 am)
Quote:My biggest gripe about Torque is the lack or easy implimentation of doors.
That was from a negative review I think it sorta sums up who are writing these negative reviews. People who don't have the facility use a game engine in the first place and/or refuse to actully invest time to learn it.
Torque is tough, but I started here when it first came out, it was the V12 ( or VL2 depending on who you are talking to ) then. I knew close to nothing, I modded tribes 2 a bit, which was my first real modding experiance. Since then I have published with Garage Games , Dark Horizons: Lore Invasion.
I went from a guy with a B.A. in Art History to Lead Programmer. Yes it is hard, but if you really want to make game you will make it happen, by learning.
#9
Also, the one review in there where we get slammed for taking 6 months to develop constructor, and 17 months to development TSE? What is that a joke? Welcome to the world of development, it takes time. ;)
A lot of that is also GG hasn't always had the manpower and bandwidth to address a lot of the problems, even if we are aware of them. It wasn't until really the last 12 months where we've been able to handle more problems more often, as we grow with manpower and time, and this year goes to show how much we've been working on it. We always listen to feedback, and are always aware of our shortcomings, and continually try to move towards improving them. For example, we know our art pipeline hasn't always been the most user friendly, and this year we are releasing new updated exporters, constructor for a native bsp solution, and TDN to address documentation frustration. We know it's hard to always find what your looking for when you have 10,000+ pages of resources and documentions (we even added in a google search apppliance and a brand new website this year to help this), so with TDN we hope to addesss a lot of those issues, especially to new Torque users.
GG has always been about serving our community and customers, all of us constantly make ourselves available to the community and work long hours because we really are into what we do, not because we are swindlers. :) No bad reviews will ever change that either!
08/31/2005 (7:57 am)
That's the way it goes really, some people get overwhelmed, or things just don't add up for them when trying to use the engine or produce a game (mostly people who try to take on all assets of development by themselves, which is a feat for any person) and they get upset and post reviews like that. Having unhappy customers is unavoidable in any business, but we have many more satisfied ones then unsatisfied ones. Also, the one review in there where we get slammed for taking 6 months to develop constructor, and 17 months to development TSE? What is that a joke? Welcome to the world of development, it takes time. ;)
A lot of that is also GG hasn't always had the manpower and bandwidth to address a lot of the problems, even if we are aware of them. It wasn't until really the last 12 months where we've been able to handle more problems more often, as we grow with manpower and time, and this year goes to show how much we've been working on it. We always listen to feedback, and are always aware of our shortcomings, and continually try to move towards improving them. For example, we know our art pipeline hasn't always been the most user friendly, and this year we are releasing new updated exporters, constructor for a native bsp solution, and TDN to address documentation frustration. We know it's hard to always find what your looking for when you have 10,000+ pages of resources and documentions (we even added in a google search apppliance and a brand new website this year to help this), so with TDN we hope to addesss a lot of those issues, especially to new Torque users.
GG has always been about serving our community and customers, all of us constantly make ourselves available to the community and work long hours because we really are into what we do, not because we are swindlers. :) No bad reviews will ever change that either!
#10
tstuefe found what he wanted in irrlicht: the ability to build from the ground up without a huge amount of pre-enginerred functionality. You can do that in Torque, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you should (without a clear understanding of the architecture).
dudeman has some insights about the engine that have been commonly held and reflected on (often by GG employees themselves). His final comments, though, are misguided. He interprets the engine to be the problem (which, admittedly, the learning curve is steep and therefore provides a problem) rather than the entitlement issue that many new developers have (desire versus will to learn/work). It's easy to want something, but hard to make it happen. It's even more difficult with a steep learning curve (you mean I have to learn a language? And an artpath? And how to use a modeling package to utilize the artpath? And a scripting language? And photoshop for more than a Fark here or there?).
EngineEar has some interesting comments as well, though rather misguided. I can understand the frustration. I've been using TGE for a few years now (well more than his single useless year), and I've gotten a huge amount out of the engine--as I have out of a huge number of other engines. I've used the "free" engines he mentions most likely, as well. There's definitely a lot of benefits to using the Quake II soruce with the shader and lighting modifications for modern hardware (industri looks stunning, as does the tenebrae/2 engine derivatives of Quake fame). But he misses the mark in understanding why free engines have the kitch: they are extended by technical fanatics, often for very specific hardware (theirs and their group's). The focus of many commercial engines is stability on a larger subset of hardware. This isn't to say that a number of mature free engines are not hardware inclusive, but a number of the shiny features in them often are. These features are usually incorporated into splinter projects through (in the case of irrlicht, quake/2/3, etc). Reading these engine derivatives forums and FAQs can be enlightening, though (I CAN'T USE IT ON ATI Y O Y?!?!?!?!??! - Because our team was trying to pump as much out of the Voodoo cards as we could...and we did...)
reaperbv needs to search the forums here.
WhytWulf's comment on doors is quite valid, though mileage will vary.
Just my gloss on their musings.
08/31/2005 (8:12 am)
Jimmy obviously didn't play with the engine very much, regardless of the number of patches he's semingly applied. Strangely inaccurate information all around. Except for the FPS starter comment...which comes down to expectations on a finalized FPS rather than a starter pack. But oh well. Entitlement, expectation, and incompetancy know no bounds on the internet.tstuefe found what he wanted in irrlicht: the ability to build from the ground up without a huge amount of pre-enginerred functionality. You can do that in Torque, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you should (without a clear understanding of the architecture).
dudeman has some insights about the engine that have been commonly held and reflected on (often by GG employees themselves). His final comments, though, are misguided. He interprets the engine to be the problem (which, admittedly, the learning curve is steep and therefore provides a problem) rather than the entitlement issue that many new developers have (desire versus will to learn/work). It's easy to want something, but hard to make it happen. It's even more difficult with a steep learning curve (you mean I have to learn a language? And an artpath? And how to use a modeling package to utilize the artpath? And a scripting language? And photoshop for more than a Fark here or there?).
EngineEar has some interesting comments as well, though rather misguided. I can understand the frustration. I've been using TGE for a few years now (well more than his single useless year), and I've gotten a huge amount out of the engine--as I have out of a huge number of other engines. I've used the "free" engines he mentions most likely, as well. There's definitely a lot of benefits to using the Quake II soruce with the shader and lighting modifications for modern hardware (industri looks stunning, as does the tenebrae/2 engine derivatives of Quake fame). But he misses the mark in understanding why free engines have the kitch: they are extended by technical fanatics, often for very specific hardware (theirs and their group's). The focus of many commercial engines is stability on a larger subset of hardware. This isn't to say that a number of mature free engines are not hardware inclusive, but a number of the shiny features in them often are. These features are usually incorporated into splinter projects through (in the case of irrlicht, quake/2/3, etc). Reading these engine derivatives forums and FAQs can be enlightening, though (I CAN'T USE IT ON ATI Y O Y?!?!?!?!??! - Because our team was trying to pump as much out of the Voodoo cards as we could...and we did...)
reaperbv needs to search the forums here.
WhytWulf's comment on doors is quite valid, though mileage will vary.
Just my gloss on their musings.
#11
If we were 'out to make a quick buck', we would be releasing tools left and right that might satisfy the issues that everyone is bringing up. We are not about creating smoke and mirrors technology that gets people to think they have the greatest thing since sliced bread.. we are actually creating tech and tools that are useful for making and shippng games.
I want to note here that the games we make are not just PC only, must have directX 9 games.. we are making 3d games that work on some really low end and outdated hardware, and as we are promoting the idea that one can make money making games, we are aware of just how large the number of end users with 'junk' as their gaming machine is.
We are aware of the issues, we are working on improving the documentation and tools.. we are addressing the pipeline. We have a long way to go, but we have come a long way.
We are not swindlers. We are actually committed to providing robust and low cost tools that will allow anyone to make a great game, and develop and distribute it on multiple platforms (including the consoles if the game is good enough to be wanted by the console gatekeepers). For us, this is a long term propostion. We are thinking ahead, and we know all the issues that everyone is complaining about (and a bunch that no one is complaining about as they relate to 'the future').
Specifically addressing the reviews.. I respect their opinions, asd they reflect the value of the engine from that individuals POV. If your POV matches their viewpoint, then the TGE might not be for you. If what you want out of an engine is not what TGE/t2D, TSE is.. then you will not be satisfied.
08/31/2005 (8:41 am)
I wanted to add on to what Tim is saying by stating that the time we are spending on these things is out of a desire to do it 'right' and not just throw up some bandaid fix. With several products using the same core technology (t2d, TGE, TSE), we are taking care that everything new is as rock solid as it can be, and that not only does it 'work', but has had the stress test of being used on a real project. Right now, GG is working on some game projects that are really giving the tools we are creating a real stress test. We are not just making tools that work.. we are making tools that work for both a single individual, and for larger teams.. making games, on a schedule.. it is not the easiet thing to do, and we have to go through the process of creating the tools and beating on them in real world conditions, and take that knowledge back to the tools to fix any issues that we see. If we were 'out to make a quick buck', we would be releasing tools left and right that might satisfy the issues that everyone is bringing up. We are not about creating smoke and mirrors technology that gets people to think they have the greatest thing since sliced bread.. we are actually creating tech and tools that are useful for making and shippng games.
I want to note here that the games we make are not just PC only, must have directX 9 games.. we are making 3d games that work on some really low end and outdated hardware, and as we are promoting the idea that one can make money making games, we are aware of just how large the number of end users with 'junk' as their gaming machine is.
We are aware of the issues, we are working on improving the documentation and tools.. we are addressing the pipeline. We have a long way to go, but we have come a long way.
We are not swindlers. We are actually committed to providing robust and low cost tools that will allow anyone to make a great game, and develop and distribute it on multiple platforms (including the consoles if the game is good enough to be wanted by the console gatekeepers). For us, this is a long term propostion. We are thinking ahead, and we know all the issues that everyone is complaining about (and a bunch that no one is complaining about as they relate to 'the future').
Specifically addressing the reviews.. I respect their opinions, asd they reflect the value of the engine from that individuals POV. If your POV matches their viewpoint, then the TGE might not be for you. If what you want out of an engine is not what TGE/t2D, TSE is.. then you will not be satisfied.
#12
We are trying to walk that line the best we can..
08/31/2005 (8:57 am)
I wanted to add that my perception of the reviews is that they come from individuals from two extremes.. those that want a simpler engine with less 'built in' functionality (and complexity) and those that want more built in functionality (i.e. doors and the like). It may be possible to satisfy both camps (we are trying to get there) but it is not an easy things to do, and at some point, you can't have the simplest system in the world (least complex) do everything an end user can imagine and provide support for everything that a specific user wants. We are trying to walk that line the best we can..
#13
Art Pipeline a nightmare: I can't speak to that. I've had no major problems, but I've also not worked with Max, nor done much work with animation. There are definitely some "tricks" to getting things working right that I wish were better documented (in big, bold letters!) Like in Milkshape, setting up unlinked nodes for the eyepoint. Stuff like that.
Poor Documentation:That's getting better, but it remains an issue. There's a lot of information I found scouring forums and resources or reading 3DGPAI1 that probably should have been part of the core docs.
GG Staff Plays Favorites:Um - I can strongly disagree with this one. I can't believe the amount of time the GG guys spend answering questions on the forums. They may not exhaustively answer all questions, but they definitely provide way more customer support than a $100 flat one-time fee ought to provide. To everyone.
Sound Issues: I dunno what the one guy was dealing with here. Yeah, there's some weirdness with the sound (some of it probably can be blamed on OpenAL, I think, having dealt with similar problems with my own engine). But some tweaking is needed.
Lighting Pack: Well, you could add the lighting pack to Torque and charge $150 for it for everyone - I actually don't think that would be a bad idea! I think that the lighting pack is essential. It saved me a buttload of work. But we're talking chump change here if you are serious about game development.
GUI editor problems if you change resolution:Yeah. Not a huge issue, but it is a problem. Half my UI editing takes place in the editor, the other half with a text editor.
Diff converter is useless:That's been updated. The new one works wonderfully. It should be more publicized.
Starter Kit doesn't support multiple weapons & cycling: Er, I believe the term is "WTF?" Yeah, it also doesn't have built-in capture-the-flag games, competitive AI, level completion and cycling, submarines, and telefrags. You have to be careful with a "starter pack" to not provide so much that someone trying to learn the system gets swamped with an overload of features, trying to figure out where one ends and the other begins. It SHOULD be kept very simple.
... what I need, a simple slim fast C++ renderer with good documentation: Yeah, Irrlicht is cool. And something very small, tight, simple, and about 1/40th the size of Torque is a lot easier to document. If that's all you needed, more power to you. Use the right tool for the job.
The only successful ones are written by the GG team: Um, so every other Torque game besides Marble Blast has been a failure? Or is he including the whole Dynamix history there? I'll agree that there should be more TGE games out there. There have been a few suggestions out there about how to improve productivity with Torque - but how many successful, commercial games have been made by the other game engines out there for a similar price? The only one that's been a relatively decent success story has been the Blitz series, and it can be argued that its the very limitations of the engines that encourages productivity. A lot of new game devs have trouble imposing their own limitations so they can actually get things done.
Yeah, there's some legitimate issues and frustrations with Torque - I'd have the same complaints if it were free. But having worked on several 3D engines in the past I guess I'm more forgiving (realistic?) than some.
08/31/2005 (8:57 am)
There are some reasonable points made in the negative reviews - but some of them are pretty buried with stuff that leaves me scratching my head. Art Pipeline a nightmare: I can't speak to that. I've had no major problems, but I've also not worked with Max, nor done much work with animation. There are definitely some "tricks" to getting things working right that I wish were better documented (in big, bold letters!) Like in Milkshape, setting up unlinked nodes for the eyepoint. Stuff like that.
Poor Documentation:That's getting better, but it remains an issue. There's a lot of information I found scouring forums and resources or reading 3DGPAI1 that probably should have been part of the core docs.
GG Staff Plays Favorites:Um - I can strongly disagree with this one. I can't believe the amount of time the GG guys spend answering questions on the forums. They may not exhaustively answer all questions, but they definitely provide way more customer support than a $100 flat one-time fee ought to provide. To everyone.
Sound Issues: I dunno what the one guy was dealing with here. Yeah, there's some weirdness with the sound (some of it probably can be blamed on OpenAL, I think, having dealt with similar problems with my own engine). But some tweaking is needed.
Lighting Pack: Well, you could add the lighting pack to Torque and charge $150 for it for everyone - I actually don't think that would be a bad idea! I think that the lighting pack is essential. It saved me a buttload of work. But we're talking chump change here if you are serious about game development.
GUI editor problems if you change resolution:Yeah. Not a huge issue, but it is a problem. Half my UI editing takes place in the editor, the other half with a text editor.
Diff converter is useless:That's been updated. The new one works wonderfully. It should be more publicized.
Starter Kit doesn't support multiple weapons & cycling: Er, I believe the term is "WTF?" Yeah, it also doesn't have built-in capture-the-flag games, competitive AI, level completion and cycling, submarines, and telefrags. You have to be careful with a "starter pack" to not provide so much that someone trying to learn the system gets swamped with an overload of features, trying to figure out where one ends and the other begins. It SHOULD be kept very simple.
... what I need, a simple slim fast C++ renderer with good documentation: Yeah, Irrlicht is cool. And something very small, tight, simple, and about 1/40th the size of Torque is a lot easier to document. If that's all you needed, more power to you. Use the right tool for the job.
The only successful ones are written by the GG team: Um, so every other Torque game besides Marble Blast has been a failure? Or is he including the whole Dynamix history there? I'll agree that there should be more TGE games out there. There have been a few suggestions out there about how to improve productivity with Torque - but how many successful, commercial games have been made by the other game engines out there for a similar price? The only one that's been a relatively decent success story has been the Blitz series, and it can be argued that its the very limitations of the engines that encourages productivity. A lot of new game devs have trouble imposing their own limitations so they can actually get things done.
Yeah, there's some legitimate issues and frustrations with Torque - I'd have the same complaints if it were free. But having worked on several 3D engines in the past I guess I'm more forgiving (realistic?) than some.
#14
Poor Documentation: I don't know. I solely use the code as documentaion.
Sound Issues]: Torque sound system is very good, though 1.3 has some sound bugs. OpenAL has worked very well for us.
The main issue I have with Torque is in slow terrain/interior rendering... way, way too CPU intensive.
-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games
08/31/2005 (9:22 am)
Art Pipeline a nightmare: No way... it's really, really good.Poor Documentation: I don't know. I solely use the code as documentaion.
Sound Issues]: Torque sound system is very good, though 1.3 has some sound bugs. OpenAL has worked very well for us.
The main issue I have with Torque is in slow terrain/interior rendering... way, way too CPU intensive.
-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games
#15
Well put... I mean GG is aware of more than most of us probably are, it takes time to try and fix every little aspect that could use improvement :)
@Josh: A good, level-headed review of Torque.
Most of the issues people complain about aren't really a problem when compared to other game engines of any relative calibur (like art pipeline).
08/31/2005 (9:30 am)
Quote:A lot of that is also GG hasn't always had the manpower and bandwidth to address a lot of the problems, even if we are aware of them.
Well put... I mean GG is aware of more than most of us probably are, it takes time to try and fix every little aspect that could use improvement :)
@Josh: A good, level-headed review of Torque.
Most of the issues people complain about aren't really a problem when compared to other game engines of any relative calibur (like art pipeline).
#16
The door issue is a bit more complex than the DTS work-around. It works well, but many people come here and see a CSG editing solution and the first impression is Quake/2/3 which includes doors as brush entities. Hence their confusion. And before Matt's map23DS program, matching up DTS's and DIF's was a bit unintuitive.
But yes, the solution is simple. In fact, that's what I've been doing for a long time. But it's also easy to project the things we've learned onto the uninitiated.
@Jay
I see the favoritism being a reflection in status. Seeing member and seeing associate gives a sense of status, and then seeing associate interviews, knowing that associates get to test software in alpha, leads to a sense of favoritism. Of course, I don't understand how this is a bad thing as associates have shown strong initiative and ability, "proving" themselves worthy of the title. As far as I can tell, it's an entitlement issue. I've been on the forums for a little while, I bandy about and make comments (sometimes helpful, sometimes not), yet I don't feel some schism or sense of entitlement. I don't feel that GG should repay me in title and respect for the nothing I provide them (other than the money for products I buy). I don't expect Bill Gates to talk about that guy in Idaho who bought a tablet PC and the Tablet edition of Office simply because of a purchase I made. I expect reasonable updates, patches, and support, but I don't need Bill to give me a shout-out. Some people seem to, and I think that's where that comment comes from.
I think your perspective as someone who has created his own engines and acutally shipped products provides a necessary counter-argument to the negative reviews. You plan(s) on working with the artpath are another excellent example of learning limitations to be able to transcend them. Most people don't put forth the effort and complain when things don't happen accordingly.
Either that, or they call themselves hobbyists like I do. ;-)
08/31/2005 (9:39 am)
@DeanThe door issue is a bit more complex than the DTS work-around. It works well, but many people come here and see a CSG editing solution and the first impression is Quake/2/3 which includes doors as brush entities. Hence their confusion. And before Matt's map23DS program, matching up DTS's and DIF's was a bit unintuitive.
But yes, the solution is simple. In fact, that's what I've been doing for a long time. But it's also easy to project the things we've learned onto the uninitiated.
@Jay
I see the favoritism being a reflection in status. Seeing member and seeing associate gives a sense of status, and then seeing associate interviews, knowing that associates get to test software in alpha, leads to a sense of favoritism. Of course, I don't understand how this is a bad thing as associates have shown strong initiative and ability, "proving" themselves worthy of the title. As far as I can tell, it's an entitlement issue. I've been on the forums for a little while, I bandy about and make comments (sometimes helpful, sometimes not), yet I don't feel some schism or sense of entitlement. I don't feel that GG should repay me in title and respect for the nothing I provide them (other than the money for products I buy). I don't expect Bill Gates to talk about that guy in Idaho who bought a tablet PC and the Tablet edition of Office simply because of a purchase I made. I expect reasonable updates, patches, and support, but I don't need Bill to give me a shout-out. Some people seem to, and I think that's where that comment comes from.
I think your perspective as someone who has created his own engines and acutally shipped products provides a necessary counter-argument to the negative reviews. You plan(s) on working with the artpath are another excellent example of learning limitations to be able to transcend them. Most people don't put forth the effort and complain when things don't happen accordingly.
Either that, or they call themselves hobbyists like I do. ;-)
#17
That being said, if you can team up with competent coders, the engine itself is very capable, and you can do a surprising amount with just the scripting language. Some things that I found restrictive and made a lot of torque games look and feel the same are the way you set up controls, camera control, but my biggest gripe has always been the art path.
The people I'm working with are developing an alternative art path that should be really handy for developers working on certain types of games. Since $100 provides you with full source, if you can get hold of the right coders your team can fix the few weak points that are holding back the development of your game.
Jeremy has already improved the cameras and released a resource that offers some basic script controls of the cameras, offering more interesting fluid camera responds to player movement rather than the fixed node cameras traditionally seen in torque games. this can be adjusted in script and offers, camera lag, decay and offset for third person view.
We also have our art pipeline that offers multiple UV's, 8 layers of multitexturing, and various blend modes and multipass effects on regular meshes with the GL renderer.. One of the coders also implemented the OPCODE collision library into torque to replace the DTS and DIF collisions with arbitrary (poly soup) collisions that are more useful for some games. All this via a separate 3d format that is public domain and well supported by freeware/shareware and professional art tools.
So really, all that's holding you back are the skills of your team. All the modifications to the engine listed above we have or hope to eventually release to torque users.
They address most of the issues I initially had with torque and took for granted after working with several in house proprietary engines. The nice thing that stands out about torque is that the engine itself is a tried and tested engine with a proven track record that's hard to beat at such a low price. It's also general purpose enough that it makes for a excellent foundation for large projects and a good starting point for a variety of games.
At the end of the day, making games is hard work, and to get the most out of TGE you will have to spend the time and find people with the skills to realize your goals. As far as engines go, the higher level aspects of the engine are easy to pick up and learn. And for more experienced developers there's lower level access to the engine via C++ source.
I've looked at a lot of engines and have been very critical of torque. But there really isn't much to choose from if your serious about developing games and not just doing it for fun.
P.S. (My last plan introduced the new art path were currently working on, and I'll probably post more in future as we make marked progress with both it and our new Leadfoot game)
08/31/2005 (10:14 am)
I'd say that with TGE the art path is the weakest part. No multiple UV's and therefore limited multitexturing capabilities. Being primarily a FPS engine with some added functionality the whole package uses technology geared towards the development of these kinds of games. So you do only have CSG/BSP type collision by default, and limited texturing and mapping possibilities. That being said, if you can team up with competent coders, the engine itself is very capable, and you can do a surprising amount with just the scripting language. Some things that I found restrictive and made a lot of torque games look and feel the same are the way you set up controls, camera control, but my biggest gripe has always been the art path.
The people I'm working with are developing an alternative art path that should be really handy for developers working on certain types of games. Since $100 provides you with full source, if you can get hold of the right coders your team can fix the few weak points that are holding back the development of your game.
Jeremy has already improved the cameras and released a resource that offers some basic script controls of the cameras, offering more interesting fluid camera responds to player movement rather than the fixed node cameras traditionally seen in torque games. this can be adjusted in script and offers, camera lag, decay and offset for third person view.
We also have our art pipeline that offers multiple UV's, 8 layers of multitexturing, and various blend modes and multipass effects on regular meshes with the GL renderer.. One of the coders also implemented the OPCODE collision library into torque to replace the DTS and DIF collisions with arbitrary (poly soup) collisions that are more useful for some games. All this via a separate 3d format that is public domain and well supported by freeware/shareware and professional art tools.
So really, all that's holding you back are the skills of your team. All the modifications to the engine listed above we have or hope to eventually release to torque users.
They address most of the issues I initially had with torque and took for granted after working with several in house proprietary engines. The nice thing that stands out about torque is that the engine itself is a tried and tested engine with a proven track record that's hard to beat at such a low price. It's also general purpose enough that it makes for a excellent foundation for large projects and a good starting point for a variety of games.
At the end of the day, making games is hard work, and to get the most out of TGE you will have to spend the time and find people with the skills to realize your goals. As far as engines go, the higher level aspects of the engine are easy to pick up and learn. And for more experienced developers there's lower level access to the engine via C++ source.
I've looked at a lot of engines and have been very critical of torque. But there really isn't much to choose from if your serious about developing games and not just doing it for fun.
P.S. (My last plan introduced the new art path were currently working on, and I'll probably post more in future as we make marked progress with both it and our new Leadfoot game)
#18
[NEWSFLASH]
If you haven't posted your reviews about Torque on devmaster.net yet, now is the time to do it. (Especially those of you who've already written your reviews above.) This public service announcement was brought to you by your local PR guy.
[/NEWSFLASH]
08/31/2005 (10:23 am)
Everyone is bringing up tons of really good points about the pros and cons of Torque. [NEWSFLASH]
If you haven't posted your reviews about Torque on devmaster.net yet, now is the time to do it. (Especially those of you who've already written your reviews above.) This public service announcement was brought to you by your local PR guy.
[/NEWSFLASH]
#19
I was one of the reviewers who mentioned this. Honestly, if you can say what you said in the quote above, then it's impossible that you've gone into great length trying this out extensively. There are loads of problems with the OpenAL implementation, and that is probably why GG tried to get Manuel to rewrite it too, or else it would be fine, right?
Emitters and their distance modifiers have problems, and it's outlined in a few threads on the forums. Manuel and Billy managed to fix/hack around these issues, as well as some other guy.. but that snippit doesn't work with 1.3. Weapons with repeating fire sound effects have trouble and skips them if you repeat them fast enough (still at an acceptable rate). Sure it's easily hacked and fixed, but it's still there for people who don't know how to fix it.
That's just two of the problems.
Edit: That's concerning release 1.2.2, which was the release I had when I wrote that review.
08/31/2005 (11:19 am)
Quote:
Sound Issues: I dunno what the one guy was dealing with here. Yeah, there's some weirdness with the sound (some of it probably can be blamed on OpenAL, I think, having dealt with similar problems with my own engine). But some tweaking is needed.
I was one of the reviewers who mentioned this. Honestly, if you can say what you said in the quote above, then it's impossible that you've gone into great length trying this out extensively. There are loads of problems with the OpenAL implementation, and that is probably why GG tried to get Manuel to rewrite it too, or else it would be fine, right?
Emitters and their distance modifiers have problems, and it's outlined in a few threads on the forums. Manuel and Billy managed to fix/hack around these issues, as well as some other guy.. but that snippit doesn't work with 1.3. Weapons with repeating fire sound effects have trouble and skips them if you repeat them fast enough (still at an acceptable rate). Sure it's easily hacked and fixed, but it's still there for people who don't know how to fix it.
That's just two of the problems.
Edit: That's concerning release 1.2.2, which was the release I had when I wrote that review.
#20
You are right, I haven't TOUCHED the OpenAL code in Torque so far. It's down the road for me. I've noticed the falloff issues, but nothing that I thought was really serious. When I was working with OpenAL last time, there were some problems I couldn't solve directly, and eventually had to put in work-arounds to get it fixed. But it's been over a year, now, and such things have blissfully been forgotten about.
08/31/2005 (1:57 pm)
My comment was based on the claim that there was a crossbow sound instead of footfalls on walking, and randomly firing sounds - stuff I have never experienced. You are right, I haven't TOUCHED the OpenAL code in Torque so far. It's down the road for me. I've noticed the falloff issues, but nothing that I thought was really serious. When I was working with OpenAL last time, there were some problems I couldn't solve directly, and eventually had to put in work-arounds to get it fixed. But it's been over a year, now, and such things have blissfully been forgotten about.
Torque Owner Teck Lee Tan