Some "Official Clarification" on 1.4 info...
by Kirby Webber · in General Discussion · 11/23/2005 (12:23 pm) · 63 replies
To the good folks at Garage Games,
First let me take this opportunity to not only congratulate you on the release of 1.4, but also to thank you profusely for all of the time and effort it's taken to see this thing through and make TGE what it is today... you guys are an Indy's best friend.
There seem to be some changes and statements on the TGE product page however, that are causing quite a stir.
This prompted me to ask for some clarification on behalf of the community...
Are we to take this to mean that the Synapse Lighting Pack has been integrated into the "stock" 1.4 source code and no additional purchase is necessary to access the additional lighting functionality?
If so... WOW!
If not, please elaborate on what is meant specifically. (C;
Now, I personally take this to mean that, other than adressing immediate stability issues, 1.4 is pretty much "it" and the future of Torque lies with TSE.
The question is though, IS that what is meant, or are their plans for further - pay for a different license - versions of TGE?
At any rate, I'm excited that 1.4 is finally here and can't wait to start porting my project.
Thanks again to all of you. =)
First let me take this opportunity to not only congratulate you on the release of 1.4, but also to thank you profusely for all of the time and effort it's taken to see this thing through and make TGE what it is today... you guys are an Indy's best friend.
There seem to be some changes and statements on the TGE product page however, that are causing quite a stir.
This prompted me to ask for some clarification on behalf of the community...
Quote:
Torque 1.4 also has received an illumination boost with its integration with the new Torque Lighting Kit.
Are we to take this to mean that the Synapse Lighting Pack has been integrated into the "stock" 1.4 source code and no additional purchase is necessary to access the additional lighting functionality?
If so... WOW!
If not, please elaborate on what is meant specifically. (C;
Quote:
TGE 1.4 is the last free upgrade in the Torque Game Engine line. If you're looking for an upgrade beyone TGE, you should check out the Torque Shader Engine
Now, I personally take this to mean that, other than adressing immediate stability issues, 1.4 is pretty much "it" and the future of Torque lies with TSE.
The question is though, IS that what is meant, or are their plans for further - pay for a different license - versions of TGE?
At any rate, I'm excited that 1.4 is finally here and can't wait to start porting my project.
Thanks again to all of you. =)
#22
But then again, what doesnt :)
11/23/2005 (9:26 pm)
Nothing for nothing but I agree that torque should go on a pay for update policy. The only problem that I forsee has been the common mantra that updates are free and now you are charging for one. I for one would buy it if I need it, but it may give you some backlash.But then again, what doesnt :)
#23
I'm quite interested in the changes that have been mentioned as 1.5 and beyond, but thats more from a curiousity standpoint, and its not worth thinking about too much now (we just got 1.4!).
Logistically how is it going to be handled? Only installer updates? Different SVN repositories? Am I asking too many questions way too early? ;)
11/23/2005 (9:33 pm)
Charging for an update is perfectly acceptable, and I think is a good idea to secure TGE's future growth.I'm quite interested in the changes that have been mentioned as 1.5 and beyond, but thats more from a curiousity standpoint, and its not worth thinking about too much now (we just got 1.4!).
Logistically how is it going to be handled? Only installer updates? Different SVN repositories? Am I asking too many questions way too early? ;)
#24
This could get complicated , people would not want to contribute bug fixes and resources when they have to "buy them back" in the next release etc. Perhaps a dollar value discount could be put in place for those people who do contribute fixes, based on the "value" of the fix. At least this provides motivation for continued improvements from the community.
11/23/2005 (11:37 pm)
Charging for new features is perfectly acceptable, but charging for bugfixes contributed by the community will be considered a bit suspect by some people.This could get complicated , people would not want to contribute bug fixes and resources when they have to "buy them back" in the next release etc. Perhaps a dollar value discount could be put in place for those people who do contribute fixes, based on the "value" of the fix. At least this provides motivation for continued improvements from the community.
#25
Also I don't think that GG will ever charge bugfixes contributed by the community.
11/23/2005 (11:45 pm)
Basicly we allready pay for upgrades we want (TLK, Different starter packs) so it's nothing new. I will be glad to pay for upgraded engine (AI, RENDERING....).Also I don't think that GG will ever charge bugfixes contributed by the community.
#26
@Denis
You can pay now for advanced (single-platform) rendering! Heh.
11/24/2005 (6:43 am)
Actually, I would see the upgrades like any software I've ever purchased. Take Lightwave (or Photoshop or Endnote or Final Draft) for example. Release the base-level patches for free to registered users of that version while charging for major functionality upgrades. I think that resource management between versions (already a difficulty) would be a problem, though.@Denis
You can pay now for advanced (single-platform) rendering! Heh.
#27
You guys sound like you're arguing that paying for updates is a good thing..... when noone has yet to say other wise.
Dee - TSE is not a huge update to TGE... It's an entirely different engine.
11/24/2005 (7:25 am)
This thread cracks me up. You guys sound like you're arguing that paying for updates is a good thing..... when noone has yet to say other wise.
Dee - TSE is not a huge update to TGE... It's an entirely different engine.
#28
I also think this might get complicated. Why would John Kabus not say that you have to pay for the next Lighting Pack Update? He claimed that the 1.4 update is free for the Lighting Kit owners (thanks, John), but basically he is better off following the GG licensing strategy. (Aside from that I think the lighting belongs into the engines, but that's just me and a different story).
So if GG wants to get into the next licensing step another direction they should state that even clearer:
Is TSE the successor of TGE?
If yes, then I'll buy the EA version straight away. Because then we might see another 1.5 and someday TSE is fully released and that was basically it for TGE.
If no, then you'll always have two (or more) products to maintain, with TGE being held alive for Indy Devs and the TSE for the big guys?
[EDIT] typos and philosophy :-).
11/24/2005 (7:34 am)
I don't think they are saying it's nice to give away money. I think they are saying it's a good thing to pay for the hard and good work of these folks on software development. Which I am saying too.I also think this might get complicated. Why would John Kabus not say that you have to pay for the next Lighting Pack Update? He claimed that the 1.4 update is free for the Lighting Kit owners (thanks, John), but basically he is better off following the GG licensing strategy. (Aside from that I think the lighting belongs into the engines, but that's just me and a different story).
So if GG wants to get into the next licensing step another direction they should state that even clearer:
Is TSE the successor of TGE?
If yes, then I'll buy the EA version straight away. Because then we might see another 1.5 and someday TSE is fully released and that was basically it for TGE.
If no, then you'll always have two (or more) products to maintain, with TGE being held alive for Indy Devs and the TSE for the big guys?
[EDIT] typos and philosophy :-).
#29
There you go Chris. Now everyone who is defending future pay upgrades has a post to defend against. :P
11/24/2005 (8:54 am)
We will have to pay for the next upgrade for TGE!!!!! How just like GarageGame$ to try to pull a fast one like this. So, now we will have to pay for upgrades to TGE. I'll never pay!! This is just the same kind of S*** that my parents tried to pull a few years ago when they tried to make me paaayyyyyy for living with them!! So?! What?! They let me live at home for free for 29 years to get me sucked in and then spring rent contributions on me out of the blue!!! Was I the one who always hogged the tv watching Matlock 24/7?!! I don't think so!! I hate the world!!! I hate my parents!! I hate GG!! I hate that I still haven't gone thru puberty!!!! AAARRRGHHH!!!There you go Chris. Now everyone who is defending future pay upgrades has a post to defend against. :P
#30
It's all good to me. I'd rather pay than watch GG lose employees and/or go under. Frankly, 1.4 + TLK will do anything I want it to for the forseeable future!
Just keep the content and environment packs coming and I'll be a happy camper! :-)
11/24/2005 (9:20 am)
Lol at Anton!It's all good to me. I'd rather pay than watch GG lose employees and/or go under. Frankly, 1.4 + TLK will do anything I want it to for the forseeable future!
Just keep the content and environment packs coming and I'll be a happy camper! :-)
#31
11/24/2005 (9:31 am)
You Have Made A Contribution, Anton ;)
#32
Our community rules.
11/24/2005 (9:48 am)
Wow, and I was worried we'd be slammed for a few months because of that.Our community rules.
#33
I'm looking foward to it:)
11/24/2005 (10:58 am)
To me paid upgrades means we can expect great things from TGE in the future.I'm looking foward to it:)
#34
I too think that charging for new features is a good idea. Then maybe GG could get enough funds to start working on some of the parts in the engine that severly lack (not that they are many) and we would get a better product!
Although I really hope that charging for bugfixes won't be it.
11/24/2005 (11:04 am)
Quote:
Charging for new features is perfectly acceptable, but charging for bugfixes contributed by the community will be considered a bit suspect by some people.
I too think that charging for new features is a good idea. Then maybe GG could get enough funds to start working on some of the parts in the engine that severly lack (not that they are many) and we would get a better product!
Although I really hope that charging for bugfixes won't be it.
#35
11/24/2005 (11:23 am)
I think from now one, when someone purchases the engine, they should be entitled to at least one upgrade for free. Such as someone who purchases the engine just a few days before the update is available. I for one would be a little upset if that was the situation with me. I hope they keep that in mind.
#36
11/24/2005 (11:58 am)
In the case that you bring up, Ramen Sama, I'm sure they would have a strategy like most software providers. I know that when I order software, I am always on the lookout for the next available version and most of the companies I deal with will give me upgrade opportunities for buying the current version shortly before the new one is released. The problem is one of time, though. If they designate April as the "buy TGE now and get the next available upgrade for free" they will undoubtedly have unhappy people who purchased it in February and March and want to be entitled to the same upgrade freedom. Depending on the need and determinance of the purchasers (say they had a lot of people purchase in March), GG may decide to refigure their announcement to include March purchasers to keep existing customers happy without having to move back to the fewer number who purchased in February. It's a guessing game, but the have the power to make decisions as well as change those decisions.
#37
However, it does raise expectations.
Can I expect dates for milestones? It would be a lot easier to plan what I'm doing if I knew when x feature will be implemented. Will there be people working on the engine, and not leaving it to work on other 'more pressing' projects?
Take the AI pack for instance, as soon as it was 'When its done', I gave up on it. I'll probably still get it if it emerges, it does sound good. But I'm not planning on using it in the game I'm working on, because I can not count on it arriving by the time I need it.
11/24/2005 (5:55 pm)
I am quite comfortable with the idea of paying for upgrades.However, it does raise expectations.
Can I expect dates for milestones? It would be a lot easier to plan what I'm doing if I knew when x feature will be implemented. Will there be people working on the engine, and not leaving it to work on other 'more pressing' projects?
Take the AI pack for instance, as soon as it was 'When its done', I gave up on it. I'll probably still get it if it emerges, it does sound good. But I'm not planning on using it in the game I'm working on, because I can not count on it arriving by the time I need it.
#38
Possible pricing structures like 'nibbuls' mentioned has me curious as well, but I figure we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves with that one.
My fear from the 'last free update' was that TGE was essentially being EOL'd at 1.4.x, but that doesn't seem to be the case, so I'm happy. I have no objection to paying for software that I use.
11/24/2005 (8:13 pm)
The only thing I'm concerned about with this announcement is the possibility of confusion when someone working with TGE 1.5 needs help and someone working with 1.7 or 1.4 tries to answer. Certainly not unsolvable.Possible pricing structures like 'nibbuls' mentioned has me curious as well, but I figure we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves with that one.
My fear from the 'last free update' was that TGE was essentially being EOL'd at 1.4.x, but that doesn't seem to be the case, so I'm happy. I have no objection to paying for software that I use.
#39
This raises another question;
How will this be handled on the forums? A guy posting code from 1.7, allowing people from 1.5 to read it..
I guess that's a problem to be worked out, but still.. feels confusing (:
11/25/2005 (12:03 am)
Quote:
The only thing I'm concerned about with this announcement is the possibility of confusion when someone working with TGE 1.5 needs help and someone working with 1.7 or 1.4 tries to answer. Certainly not unsolvable.
This raises another question;
How will this be handled on the forums? A guy posting code from 1.7, allowing people from 1.5 to read it..
I guess that's a problem to be worked out, but still.. feels confusing (:
#40
Well, already we see obsolete code being posted on the board, from v. 1.2 or earlier. So long as people label the code, I don't see it being a huge problem. A snippet of code from a newer version is either going to fit perfectly in an older version, or be so incompatible as to be useless without the whole kit & kaboodle.
11/25/2005 (5:14 pm)
Quote:How will this be handled on the forums? A guy posting code from 1.7, allowing people from 1.5 to read it..
Well, already we see obsolete code being posted on the board, from v. 1.2 or earlier. So long as people label the code, I don't see it being a huge problem. A snippet of code from a newer version is either going to fit perfectly in an older version, or be so incompatible as to be useless without the whole kit & kaboodle.
Torque Owner Unk
My build compiled with errors (using TBE) but it did eventually compile and run fine.
Should we plan on going ahead and re-integrating with 1.4 (and will it work?) or are you planning on creating an integrated 1.4 lighting pack?
@Jeff - You guys have been more than generous and I too think that starting to charge for major updates is a good idea for GG. You could still release bug fixes and incremental updates for free to keep people interested. Then if people are still worried about it you could sell bundled packages at discount rates... IE: 3 Years of Upgrades at x% off the normal cost. That'll line your pockets. =) Plus, like others mentioned, this could help recommit not only GG to keeping the tech up to date but the community to not taking the tech for granted and using what they have to it's fullest.
----------------
Those who might be tempted to complain about additional charges should go out and research the alternatives. Personally I am not in the position to shell out 100-500k for a game engine. Of course this is cheap if you want to do what everyone else in the video game business is doing. Just borrow 1 - 10million from a publisher. Hire 50-100 people to work full time for 2-3 years. No big. =) On top of that you won't see any money on the project until the publisher is paid off plus interest. Developers are set up for failure. Publishers are setting themselves up to own this industry. And somehow... most projects don't succeed.
We have a great alternative. Pay a fraction of the cost, own your own content, and keep what you earn. The risk is so small that you can afford to fail and try again. Yet the investment although minimal is in many ways priceless if taken seriously.
-Unk