Why Torque is not always the better? (answered here)
by Berserk · in General Discussion · 12/01/2006 (2:08 pm) · 29 replies
.
About the author
Thread is locked
#3
While adding support for free tools "out of the box" seems like a good idea, I think that letting community members running with these tools and working with these tools do that is a better solution than having a GG employee pick up a tool from scratch and try to square peg it into a round hole. The Max exporter was available because Dynamix was a Max house. Lightwave and Maya because Dave and Danny use their respective apps. Blender because Joseph is a nice guy. But tutorials on using them to create Torque content would best be left to community members who use those applications. That's the reason that there is a wiki available. Plus I do not know how relevant a tutorial on making skyboxes or terrains in GiMP would be. Perhaps creating seamless textures...but then, there are a bunch of tutorials on that anyway for web developers and backgrounds (hint: Transform: Offset, and clone, blur, etc until you get it right).
There should be some on-site QuArK tutorials, however. At least until Constructor is released. Right now, the offsite tutorials are great, but it would be nice if they could be placed into TDN as well. I have never had a problem setting up QuArK, nor have I seen many topics about difficulty setting it up. However, there are scores of topics on getting valid brushes out of it. I do think that while a Blender to Map exporter would be nice, it falls into my general problem with such exporters: the artist has to restrict themselves to the same CSG rules within their package which allows them to do *anything* EXCEPT what they are trying to do with CSG. And often they don't like the restrictions and create invalid geometry or their exporters screw up the geometry and they get irritated and throw up their hands.
On the idea of The Future, creating a modeling application is a HUGE undertaking. Especially since there are so many millions of features that users will want to utilize in the future. Plus, if they want to have full motion video and such, they will want high-quality renders that a homebrew art app won't touch. Look at MED which ships with 3D GameStudio. It is one of the most horrible modeling applications I have ever used. I cannot imagine using it to create content for GameStudio. I would rather use any other application. WED, however, has a wonderful workflow and is one of my favorite BSP editors out there. I think that beefing the support for supplemental tools and letting artists work within the safe-havens of their favorite apps is a better solution. We already see "teh haet" that comes from artists having to use Quark and the like for CSG geometry rather than being able to abuse their levels in Max or Maya or Lightwave. I do think that the XSI exporter needs to be bumped up on the radar, however since XSI has a great pricepoint and featureset which is compliant to TGE/TGEA development.
Working with Torsion or CodeWeaver and seeing if it were possible to integrate them (and include Mac versions) would be a nice option. I'm not quite sure what good a paint option would be unless you had an integrated modeling package. Perhaps for painting decals on walls and such.
12/01/2006 (3:06 pm)
Your documentation concerns are quite valid, as I believe I noted in the previous topic before it was closed. And it would be nice if GG could hire a documentation house to scour the code and use the product and write documentation. There are a number of services available, but as few companies like to do this grunt-work, they are rather expensive to contract. I think a very good move, which would solve some of the beginner problems, would be to contract Finney or Maurina to write a series of beginner tutorials in the style of their books. Documenting TorqueScript and C++ is a different demon all-together. It would require a lot of time and money. I think it would be well-worth the effort, but it would cost a lot in development resources. I would love to see TGE documentation as nice as TGB's or Synapse Gaming's or the Adventure Kit documentation.While adding support for free tools "out of the box" seems like a good idea, I think that letting community members running with these tools and working with these tools do that is a better solution than having a GG employee pick up a tool from scratch and try to square peg it into a round hole. The Max exporter was available because Dynamix was a Max house. Lightwave and Maya because Dave and Danny use their respective apps. Blender because Joseph is a nice guy. But tutorials on using them to create Torque content would best be left to community members who use those applications. That's the reason that there is a wiki available. Plus I do not know how relevant a tutorial on making skyboxes or terrains in GiMP would be. Perhaps creating seamless textures...but then, there are a bunch of tutorials on that anyway for web developers and backgrounds (hint: Transform: Offset, and clone, blur, etc until you get it right).
There should be some on-site QuArK tutorials, however. At least until Constructor is released. Right now, the offsite tutorials are great, but it would be nice if they could be placed into TDN as well. I have never had a problem setting up QuArK, nor have I seen many topics about difficulty setting it up. However, there are scores of topics on getting valid brushes out of it. I do think that while a Blender to Map exporter would be nice, it falls into my general problem with such exporters: the artist has to restrict themselves to the same CSG rules within their package which allows them to do *anything* EXCEPT what they are trying to do with CSG. And often they don't like the restrictions and create invalid geometry or their exporters screw up the geometry and they get irritated and throw up their hands.
On the idea of The Future, creating a modeling application is a HUGE undertaking. Especially since there are so many millions of features that users will want to utilize in the future. Plus, if they want to have full motion video and such, they will want high-quality renders that a homebrew art app won't touch. Look at MED which ships with 3D GameStudio. It is one of the most horrible modeling applications I have ever used. I cannot imagine using it to create content for GameStudio. I would rather use any other application. WED, however, has a wonderful workflow and is one of my favorite BSP editors out there. I think that beefing the support for supplemental tools and letting artists work within the safe-havens of their favorite apps is a better solution. We already see "teh haet" that comes from artists having to use Quark and the like for CSG geometry rather than being able to abuse their levels in Max or Maya or Lightwave. I do think that the XSI exporter needs to be bumped up on the radar, however since XSI has a great pricepoint and featureset which is compliant to TGE/TGEA development.
Working with Torsion or CodeWeaver and seeing if it were possible to integrate them (and include Mac versions) would be a nice option. I'm not quite sure what good a paint option would be unless you had an integrated modeling package. Perhaps for painting decals on walls and such.
#4
@Berserk - Your documentation concerns are not valid.
I know, you're excited about making a game. You bought the engine thinking that was the magic wand. Sorry, but it's not a magic wand that you can wave around and make your game magically appear.
Those that complain about the lack of documentation simply don't know where to look.
Did you even go through the tutorials?
I went through every single thing that you said isn't documented, did a quick look at the standard documentation, and if I didn't find exactly what I needed to answer your questions there then I Google'd the forums / resources / TDN and most of the time I found what you're wanting. It's not hard!
Now, granted, not every function in the C++ code is documented... but who cares? The function you mentioned - MatrixF& CameraFX::getTrans ( ) is a freaking getter method for the Camera FX Transformation. It's not rocket science; it's self explanatory. It doesn't need documentation!
Some of the tutorials you wanted (like how to make a skybox using Gimp), etc... first, did you Google "Making a Skybox" first? Now, it's not such a great idea to make one using Gimp I think, but Terragen, Bryce, Skygen and a few other products show up in the first page of that search.
Complaining about the art pipeline is also just plain dumb... if you don't like Blender or Quark, buy something better. It is an option, ya know? And as far is installing map2dif on Quark, all I did was download the exporter and followed the installation directions and it worked... same with Blender.
A lot of the documentation on how to use Blender and Quark is missing on this website because it'd simply be redundant to the websites specifically about those products. The Blender documentation is impressive and tells you how to do all sorts of things. The Torque documentation tells you how to do the Torque specific stuff, and that should be good enough. Put the two together and you shouldn't have any problems.
If you want something that will export both DIF's and DTS's, get Deled3d... it works great for both (so I've heard... I've not actually used it myself because I use Quark and Blender).
There is a lot to learn related to making a game, and there's no way you can learn it all in only one or two years. You either have to buy more stuff (content packs, etc), or you have to be patient and take the time to learn more (or both).
There are a couple of shortcuts... go to a bootcamp and/or buy some books.
Sorry for ranting, sorry if this comes across as a flame.
I'm simply tired of seeing people buying Torque and not backing it up with a lot of time, sweat and energy into learning, then complain that the thing isn't well documented.
Garage Games spent a lot of time and effort into indexing this web-site as best as they could.
Just remember, search in this order:
1) TDN - It's well organized. Start with the home page, follow the links you think might lead you where you want to go. If that doesn't work, use the "search" feature of the Wiki.
2) If you haven't found what you're looking for, do the same thing with the Resources. On the menu bar at the top of the web site, click on Community, then click on Resources. Navigate through there and see if you can't find what you want. Be careful, though. The first few times you do this, you'll end up getting distracted and reading a bunch of unrelated stuff, but that's ok; it's part of the fun learning process.
3) Google! First, start with GG's Google. If that doesn't give you what you want, use the WWW Google.
4) If you have questions specific to a non-GG piece of software, go to that software's website and look at their documentation.
After you've read every single Resource, every single TDN article, all of the sample code provided with the engine, then if you can't find something post a question on the forums. If you don't get an answer within a day or so, hop on over to the GG IRC channel and ask there.
If you still don't have an answer at that point, feel free to make a nice long post on how poorly documented TGE is... but until then, start reading.
Laterz :P
12/01/2006 (8:10 pm)
Sorry, but I disagree with David. @Berserk - Your documentation concerns are not valid.
I know, you're excited about making a game. You bought the engine thinking that was the magic wand. Sorry, but it's not a magic wand that you can wave around and make your game magically appear.
Those that complain about the lack of documentation simply don't know where to look.
Did you even go through the tutorials?
I went through every single thing that you said isn't documented, did a quick look at the standard documentation, and if I didn't find exactly what I needed to answer your questions there then I Google'd the forums / resources / TDN and most of the time I found what you're wanting. It's not hard!
Now, granted, not every function in the C++ code is documented... but who cares? The function you mentioned - MatrixF& CameraFX::getTrans ( ) is a freaking getter method for the Camera FX Transformation. It's not rocket science; it's self explanatory. It doesn't need documentation!
Some of the tutorials you wanted (like how to make a skybox using Gimp), etc... first, did you Google "Making a Skybox" first? Now, it's not such a great idea to make one using Gimp I think, but Terragen, Bryce, Skygen and a few other products show up in the first page of that search.
Complaining about the art pipeline is also just plain dumb... if you don't like Blender or Quark, buy something better. It is an option, ya know? And as far is installing map2dif on Quark, all I did was download the exporter and followed the installation directions and it worked... same with Blender.
A lot of the documentation on how to use Blender and Quark is missing on this website because it'd simply be redundant to the websites specifically about those products. The Blender documentation is impressive and tells you how to do all sorts of things. The Torque documentation tells you how to do the Torque specific stuff, and that should be good enough. Put the two together and you shouldn't have any problems.
If you want something that will export both DIF's and DTS's, get Deled3d... it works great for both (so I've heard... I've not actually used it myself because I use Quark and Blender).
There is a lot to learn related to making a game, and there's no way you can learn it all in only one or two years. You either have to buy more stuff (content packs, etc), or you have to be patient and take the time to learn more (or both).
There are a couple of shortcuts... go to a bootcamp and/or buy some books.
Sorry for ranting, sorry if this comes across as a flame.
I'm simply tired of seeing people buying Torque and not backing it up with a lot of time, sweat and energy into learning, then complain that the thing isn't well documented.
Garage Games spent a lot of time and effort into indexing this web-site as best as they could.
Just remember, search in this order:
1) TDN - It's well organized. Start with the home page, follow the links you think might lead you where you want to go. If that doesn't work, use the "search" feature of the Wiki.
2) If you haven't found what you're looking for, do the same thing with the Resources. On the menu bar at the top of the web site, click on Community, then click on Resources. Navigate through there and see if you can't find what you want. Be careful, though. The first few times you do this, you'll end up getting distracted and reading a bunch of unrelated stuff, but that's ok; it's part of the fun learning process.
3) Google! First, start with GG's Google. If that doesn't give you what you want, use the WWW Google.
4) If you have questions specific to a non-GG piece of software, go to that software's website and look at their documentation.
After you've read every single Resource, every single TDN article, all of the sample code provided with the engine, then if you can't find something post a question on the forums. If you don't get an answer within a day or so, hop on over to the GG IRC channel and ask there.
If you still don't have an answer at that point, feel free to make a nice long post on how poorly documented TGE is... but until then, start reading.
Laterz :P
#5
Why do you keep posting old news. What is your problem with Mattew Langley, he has worked very hard to get where he is at, he learned the Torque Engine and the Unreal while he was in school. He knows what he's talking about. I'm sure he didn't post useless information and was only trying to help. Besides why waste your time with this useless blog, Do you have $700,000 to buy the Unreal Engine?
Someone lock this Trend as well.
12/01/2006 (8:45 pm)
Beserk,Why do you keep posting old news. What is your problem with Mattew Langley, he has worked very hard to get where he is at, he learned the Torque Engine and the Unreal while he was in school. He knows what he's talking about. I'm sure he didn't post useless information and was only trying to help. Besides why waste your time with this useless blog, Do you have $700,000 to buy the Unreal Engine?
Someone lock this Trend as well.
#6
Just my nickel, dime and 3 pence on the subject....
12/01/2006 (9:25 pm)
I started with Unreal, many years ago. I worked on 3 different projects (main stream commercial projects not home brew MODS.) with Unreal, as an artist and level designer, and made allot of money from them. Now i get to work on my own project, and i picked the Torque engine. Sure Torque takes a bit of time to learn. But the documentation is not as bad as other engines. The Torque community is helpful and supportive, unlike some that hold onto there proprietary 'tricks' as if they were the ticked to heaven. Torque is actually very simple next to Unreal, and allot of other engines. Torque is easy to customize. Torque takes about a year to fully understand, and im still learning from Torque. Torque DO have some sloppy silly hack together parts, but they work. It do not take much to do what you want with Torque, just understanding the basics. If one is willing to invest the time, any 3D engine can do whatever there imagination wish, but Torque is by far the easiest on the budget.Just my nickel, dime and 3 pence on the subject....
#7
There isn't any dishonesty going on about Torque, but there is some miscommunication. I personally wish that Torque marketing let people know that Torque is great compared to other engines and tools but it's not complete like a commercial public software application. Game engines are internal tools not public tools. GG can honestly say that Torque is a great game engine and toolset compared to other game engines and toolsets. But let's face it... that doesn't mean the same thing to an experienecd game developer that it does to someone who wants to learn to make games.
If you want to learn to make games with Torque it's like wanting to learn to write novels. There's some information about it, but most of it's up to you to figure out. There has been probably hundreds or thousands of licenses purchased by people who thought Torque was going to be something they could just use out of the box like Unreal or Half Life or Neverwinter Nights and have been dissappointed to find out that it's not. They expected to have to work hard to creat content and design game play and program game code. They just didn't expect to have to fight with the game engine that they licensed. That is why lately GarageGames has been trying to convince people to start making games with TGB instead of TGE, because TGB is an out of the box game engine and toolset for people who don't want to fight with the game engine and toolset to make a game.
12/01/2006 (10:15 pm)
I think that when people hear that making games with Torque is difficult they don't think that means that it's difficult to use Torque to make games. That's the real frustration people are having and the real miscommunication. Someone complains that Torque is hard to get working and someone else says that nobody says making games is easy. People expect Torque to be a commercial public software application. It's not. But it is sold that way. Torque is not Mac or Windows it's Linux. Made by programmers for programmers. There isn't any dishonesty going on about Torque, but there is some miscommunication. I personally wish that Torque marketing let people know that Torque is great compared to other engines and tools but it's not complete like a commercial public software application. Game engines are internal tools not public tools. GG can honestly say that Torque is a great game engine and toolset compared to other game engines and toolsets. But let's face it... that doesn't mean the same thing to an experienecd game developer that it does to someone who wants to learn to make games.
If you want to learn to make games with Torque it's like wanting to learn to write novels. There's some information about it, but most of it's up to you to figure out. There has been probably hundreds or thousands of licenses purchased by people who thought Torque was going to be something they could just use out of the box like Unreal or Half Life or Neverwinter Nights and have been dissappointed to find out that it's not. They expected to have to work hard to creat content and design game play and program game code. They just didn't expect to have to fight with the game engine that they licensed. That is why lately GarageGames has been trying to convince people to start making games with TGB instead of TGE, because TGB is an out of the box game engine and toolset for people who don't want to fight with the game engine and toolset to make a game.
#8
--check out what a car is, what skills are needed to use it, and any permissions/training I may need to be allowed/able to drive.
--take a look at the manufacturer's specifications, and make sure they meet my needs. If I am doing city driving, I'm going to buy a different type of car from what I would buy if I were doing cross country drives every week.
--read up on what others think about the car, including both how they use it, and what they may have had to do to learn how to use it properly.
Just because the engine is $100 doesn't mean you shouldn't do what it takes to understand the product and what it takes to use it. Nowhere does it say (officially) that any of the products GG sells have a big red make your game button, and quite honestly, let the buyer beware if they can't be bothered figuring out what it takes to make a game with any engine before actually buying that engine.
The freaking demo is free. Don't buy a product without actually test driving it if they give a free, fully powered demo. Ever bought a car without test driving first?
12/01/2006 (11:23 pm)
When I go to buy a car, I do several things:--check out what a car is, what skills are needed to use it, and any permissions/training I may need to be allowed/able to drive.
--take a look at the manufacturer's specifications, and make sure they meet my needs. If I am doing city driving, I'm going to buy a different type of car from what I would buy if I were doing cross country drives every week.
--read up on what others think about the car, including both how they use it, and what they may have had to do to learn how to use it properly.
Just because the engine is $100 doesn't mean you shouldn't do what it takes to understand the product and what it takes to use it. Nowhere does it say (officially) that any of the products GG sells have a big red make your game button, and quite honestly, let the buyer beware if they can't be bothered figuring out what it takes to make a game with any engine before actually buying that engine.
The freaking demo is free. Don't buy a product without actually test driving it if they give a free, fully powered demo. Ever bought a car without test driving first?
#9
It's not a big red button. It's a cheat code.
$cheats = true;
createGame("Halo3","Win95");
12/02/2006 (1:43 am)
@Stephen ZeppIt's not a big red button. It's a cheat code.
$cheats = true;
createGame("Halo3","Win95");
#12
My post above about cheats and red buttons was in response to Stephen Zepp. It had nothing to do with you. It's just a running joke around here.
12/02/2006 (3:06 am)
@BerserkMy post above about cheats and red buttons was in response to Stephen Zepp. It had nothing to do with you. It's just a running joke around here.
#13
I am trying to be on your side about this so you don't just get ignored. My serious post above is an attempt to explain to people who can't understand where you are coming from that you have a valid dissappointment if considered from your point of view as a customer who is purchasing a product and expects the product to be at a standard that most software products are at.
But my point to you is that a game engine isn't like other software products. You can expect it to be because you've only used a game engine like DarkBasic, which is a hobby game engine for people to learn game development with.
Torque is a professional production game engine and it requires professional expertise to use it. It was something I really had to come to a realisation about myself. I used to get pretty offended by people who'd say everything was peachy when I was struggling with the engine. I was expecting mod tools. What I got was a real game engine.
Honestly, I think that there is a break in understanding from GG to customers about what the experience of using Torque is supposed to be. They tell you straight out how hard it is, but I think most of us who don't know what they are talking about assume they mean it's hard work to make the content for the game. Torque is not a tool that you can sit down in a week and learn to use to make games. It really does take a year or two to get it down. Maybe less if you have used similiar engines.
12/02/2006 (3:18 am)
@BerserkI am trying to be on your side about this so you don't just get ignored. My serious post above is an attempt to explain to people who can't understand where you are coming from that you have a valid dissappointment if considered from your point of view as a customer who is purchasing a product and expects the product to be at a standard that most software products are at.
But my point to you is that a game engine isn't like other software products. You can expect it to be because you've only used a game engine like DarkBasic, which is a hobby game engine for people to learn game development with.
Torque is a professional production game engine and it requires professional expertise to use it. It was something I really had to come to a realisation about myself. I used to get pretty offended by people who'd say everything was peachy when I was struggling with the engine. I was expecting mod tools. What I got was a real game engine.
Honestly, I think that there is a break in understanding from GG to customers about what the experience of using Torque is supposed to be. They tell you straight out how hard it is, but I think most of us who don't know what they are talking about assume they mean it's hard work to make the content for the game. Torque is not a tool that you can sit down in a week and learn to use to make games. It really does take a year or two to get it down. Maybe less if you have used similiar engines.
#14
For the record, using Torque is good for more than just making an indie game. I spent 3 years learning to use Torque and I learned how to be a professional game programmer from it. 3 years of education for $100. Now, I make a living using Torque. Yes, it's MUCH harder to learn to use, BUT once you've done it, you are worth money. You can't go wrong learning Torque. Plus, in the real world of professional game development... no engine is without bugs or oversights. Getting used to working with that will make you ready for the real world of professional game development.
12/02/2006 (3:25 am)
@BerserkFor the record, using Torque is good for more than just making an indie game. I spent 3 years learning to use Torque and I learned how to be a professional game programmer from it. 3 years of education for $100. Now, I make a living using Torque. Yes, it's MUCH harder to learn to use, BUT once you've done it, you are worth money. You can't go wrong learning Torque. Plus, in the real world of professional game development... no engine is without bugs or oversights. Getting used to working with that will make you ready for the real world of professional game development.
#15
Here's a secret for you. If you let go of your frustration about what Torque can't do and determine that you are going to work around those things and with what works and contribute to helping make more work then what will happen is you will become a real game developer. Not just a dreamer. But the real thing. That's not just a message for you but everyone in your shoes. The funny irony of software development is that if everything is so easy that any noob can do it then there's no point in having professionals. Don't be too eager to have everything too easy or how will you be worth anything to anyone. If you don't care about game development as a professional then you probably shouldn't be trying to use Torque. Cause that's what Torque is, a professional game engine.
12/02/2006 (3:33 am)
@BerzerkHere's a secret for you. If you let go of your frustration about what Torque can't do and determine that you are going to work around those things and with what works and contribute to helping make more work then what will happen is you will become a real game developer. Not just a dreamer. But the real thing. That's not just a message for you but everyone in your shoes. The funny irony of software development is that if everything is so easy that any noob can do it then there's no point in having professionals. Don't be too eager to have everything too easy or how will you be worth anything to anyone. If you don't care about game development as a professional then you probably shouldn't be trying to use Torque. Cause that's what Torque is, a professional game engine.
#17
Did you see where I wrote this:
Cut me some slack man. I don't even know you. You are about the 100th person to say what you are saying. I am saying what I think about it. I've been in your shoes saying the same things before. I am just giving you my honest opinion. At least I'm not dismissing you or blindly disagreeing with what you say just to protect the rep of Torque. I think you are really misunderstanding where I'm coming from because I'm not trying to tell you that your disappointments or frustrations or whatevers are wrong. I'm just telling you my experience and trying to give you a light at the end of the tunnel here.
I'm trying to tell you that if you are looking at trying to use Torque to make money that you'll find that it's a great engine. If you are just trying to make games for fun then maybe it's not worth the work. I wouldn't use Torque if it wasn't for making money. I would use TGB though, cause it's just easy and fun.
As for documentation. I started programming with the Intuit Quickbooks SDK right after it was first release a number of years ago. Within the first few days. It was a nightmare to figure out. But it was worth it because I was the only one in Spokane, WA programming with Quickbooks SDK. I also programming with Adobe Photoshop and that was not a pleasant experience. I was in my first semester of computer science when I starting programming with Adobe Photoshop. Talk about jumping into the deep end. But it was cool because I was the only one I knew who did that and I made a lot of money from it. I'm just trying to say that it's not uncommon to have spotty documentation and it's an advantage to those who are determined enought to still figure it all out because it makes you uniquely valuable.
But I'm not saying anything to tell you that you are wrong or that you should be quiet. I'm just discussing this with you. At least Im trying to. I am going on a third day in a row with very little to no sleep. So, maybe I'm just too tired to make sense when I write. I don't know.
Good luck. I hope you enjoy LawMaker. From what I saw when I evaluated it I thought it was a good engine with good tools and great developers. I really liked how much personal time they can still afford to put into customers.
Personally, I've been saying this for a couple weeks, but Torque doesn't have to be a one stop shop for game development technology just to use it. I'm using TGB and Torque but I'm also going to license the Jupiter engine for a game I'm developing in my spare time. It's a few thousand to license but I like the Jupiter engine. I'm pro use what works best for your projects. I want an interior fps engine and Torque is an exterior fps engine. I didn't like LawMaker enought to license it. A few thousand is more than worth using the same engine used for NOLF 2 and Tron 2.0. Would I use Jupiter for an exterior game? Hell no. I'd use Torque. Hands down.
12/02/2006 (9:53 am)
@BerserkDid you see where I wrote this:
Quote:I am trying to be on your side about this so you don't just get ignored.
Cut me some slack man. I don't even know you. You are about the 100th person to say what you are saying. I am saying what I think about it. I've been in your shoes saying the same things before. I am just giving you my honest opinion. At least I'm not dismissing you or blindly disagreeing with what you say just to protect the rep of Torque. I think you are really misunderstanding where I'm coming from because I'm not trying to tell you that your disappointments or frustrations or whatevers are wrong. I'm just telling you my experience and trying to give you a light at the end of the tunnel here.
I'm trying to tell you that if you are looking at trying to use Torque to make money that you'll find that it's a great engine. If you are just trying to make games for fun then maybe it's not worth the work. I wouldn't use Torque if it wasn't for making money. I would use TGB though, cause it's just easy and fun.
As for documentation. I started programming with the Intuit Quickbooks SDK right after it was first release a number of years ago. Within the first few days. It was a nightmare to figure out. But it was worth it because I was the only one in Spokane, WA programming with Quickbooks SDK. I also programming with Adobe Photoshop and that was not a pleasant experience. I was in my first semester of computer science when I starting programming with Adobe Photoshop. Talk about jumping into the deep end. But it was cool because I was the only one I knew who did that and I made a lot of money from it. I'm just trying to say that it's not uncommon to have spotty documentation and it's an advantage to those who are determined enought to still figure it all out because it makes you uniquely valuable.
But I'm not saying anything to tell you that you are wrong or that you should be quiet. I'm just discussing this with you. At least Im trying to. I am going on a third day in a row with very little to no sleep. So, maybe I'm just too tired to make sense when I write. I don't know.
Good luck. I hope you enjoy LawMaker. From what I saw when I evaluated it I thought it was a good engine with good tools and great developers. I really liked how much personal time they can still afford to put into customers.
Personally, I've been saying this for a couple weeks, but Torque doesn't have to be a one stop shop for game development technology just to use it. I'm using TGB and Torque but I'm also going to license the Jupiter engine for a game I'm developing in my spare time. It's a few thousand to license but I like the Jupiter engine. I'm pro use what works best for your projects. I want an interior fps engine and Torque is an exterior fps engine. I didn't like LawMaker enought to license it. A few thousand is more than worth using the same engine used for NOLF 2 and Tron 2.0. Would I use Jupiter for an exterior game? Hell no. I'd use Torque. Hands down.
#18
Tell me one thing that's broken in the art pipeline that is preventing you from making art.
Tell me one thing that you've wanted to do that you cannot because of a lack of documentation.
You have yet to do this. I just think you're full of hot air.
12/02/2006 (10:41 am)
@Berserk - Why do you keep saying the Torque art pipeline is broken? Why do you insist that not everything is documented?Tell me one thing that's broken in the art pipeline that is preventing you from making art.
Tell me one thing that you've wanted to do that you cannot because of a lack of documentation.
You have yet to do this. I just think you're full of hot air.
#19
Actually, my initial use of C was pretty close to this. My uncle gave me his old Turbo C books which were the library reference. He could not find the programmer's guide. Now, this was before the big bad net was around most houses so I had to deal with people on BBS's, which was a rather elitist and harsh audience. More harsh than the GameFAQs Pro Wrestling boards to anti-wresting trolls. Learning C was hell. When he gave me his Turbo C++ disks, I didn't have any books. So I either had to buy books, which I did buy a few (usually the wrong ones) or go through the source code examples that shipped to learn it. Luckily I had a rather solid base of experience with BASIC and Assembly, though they did not help with me learning the syntax, the concept of functions, or C++' style OOP. (Much) later I took classes to recement my knowledge and unlearn bad habits. Newsgroups were extremely helpful, as was gopher. Now there are some excellent tutorials available for free on C and C++ and just about any language that you can imagine. There are even Whitespace tutorials.
My "teh haet" comment is pointed towards users who nether took the time to research Torque nor had the skills to modify the basic starter kits to figure it out...and then who move to other forums and spread "teh haet" (the hate in console spam-speak). They often show up on DevMaster complaining that Torque has no usable documetnation because they do not C++ even though the product page is clear about C++ knowledge for engine changes (as is a cursory glance at the public forums). But most of the time these users neither search. They click, buy, download the SDK, and worry when they run it because it says demo...without ever playing the demo version for a product that they just dropped money on. And then they start spreading "teh haet".
The problem with your asking for better tools (and there is nothing wrong with asking and hoping) is that you have stated before that you do not care about the financial situation or decisions that GG has to make. You just want the tools that you want.
Now, my perspective for lack of documentation, as counteredby Tony quite eloquently, is on the terms of getting started with Torque with near-zero experience, so I can understand where you are coming from in that respect to the documentation (though I disagree on the quality of the tutorial.base documentation which I find to be intuitive an easy to use). But torque is better documented than many commercial engines which cost far more, have per-title licenses for tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars. At $1400, Lawmaker is a cheapie compared to them, even if a commercial license to Lawmaker only allows your first game to be published royalty-free (which is rather consistent with a number of engines).
My next post will be looking at how the mod-centric viewpoint has marred expectations among new Torque licensees in my opinion.
Edit: Formatting rogue periods.
12/02/2006 (11:02 am)
Quote:When you first wrote your \\\"Hello World\\\", had you problems with the standard C++ library?
Has it required you to read the standard library source code before using it?
Actually, my initial use of C was pretty close to this. My uncle gave me his old Turbo C books which were the library reference. He could not find the programmer's guide. Now, this was before the big bad net was around most houses so I had to deal with people on BBS's, which was a rather elitist and harsh audience. More harsh than the GameFAQs Pro Wrestling boards to anti-wresting trolls. Learning C was hell. When he gave me his Turbo C++ disks, I didn't have any books. So I either had to buy books, which I did buy a few (usually the wrong ones) or go through the source code examples that shipped to learn it. Luckily I had a rather solid base of experience with BASIC and Assembly, though they did not help with me learning the syntax, the concept of functions, or C++' style OOP. (Much) later I took classes to recement my knowledge and unlearn bad habits. Newsgroups were extremely helpful, as was gopher. Now there are some excellent tutorials available for free on C and C++ and just about any language that you can imagine. There are even Whitespace tutorials.
Quote:The demo comes with no script docs, so it\\\'s almost useless until someone gets documentation from somewhere else.I'm not sure where you're coming from here. The tutorial.base documentation is great, as are the miniApp tutorials (though not included). I can see if you were talking about the starter.fps or starter.racing tutorials since they are more complex in their setup in that they already have terrains and models and such pre-loaded.
My "teh haet" comment is pointed towards users who nether took the time to research Torque nor had the skills to modify the basic starter kits to figure it out...and then who move to other forums and spread "teh haet" (the hate in console spam-speak). They often show up on DevMaster complaining that Torque has no usable documetnation because they do not C++ even though the product page is clear about C++ knowledge for engine changes (as is a cursory glance at the public forums). But most of the time these users neither search. They click, buy, download the SDK, and worry when they run it because it says demo...without ever playing the demo version for a product that they just dropped money on. And then they start spreading "teh haet".
Quote:On the other hand, you also say Torque is a professional tool, but is not professionally usable because, as everyone knows, art pipeline is broken and documentation portions are missing.There is nothing broken about the art pipeline. It could be better in a number of ways (and Adrian Tysoe has has a number of very cogent features that would make the model pipleing better for current capabilities of hardware and expectations. But a broken pipeline would mean that it would be next to impossible to get artwork into your game. This is not the case at all. It may not be user-friendly or cuddly, but it is far from broken.
The problem with your asking for better tools (and there is nothing wrong with asking and hoping) is that you have stated before that you do not care about the financial situation or decisions that GG has to make. You just want the tools that you want.
Quote:Personally, however, I don't care about GG problems.I can understand why you are unhappy, but I cannot understand why you cannot connect a company's situation and size and resources with your dreams of what you think they should provide out of the box. There is a severe disconnect there. rather than a wish list of features to take TGE up to where you think it should be, it is coming across as an ultimatum.
Now, my perspective for lack of documentation, as counteredby Tony quite eloquently, is on the terms of getting started with Torque with near-zero experience, so I can understand where you are coming from in that respect to the documentation (though I disagree on the quality of the tutorial.base documentation which I find to be intuitive an easy to use). But torque is better documented than many commercial engines which cost far more, have per-title licenses for tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars. At $1400, Lawmaker is a cheapie compared to them, even if a commercial license to Lawmaker only allows your first game to be published royalty-free (which is rather consistent with a number of engines).
My next post will be looking at how the mod-centric viewpoint has marred expectations among new Torque licensees in my opinion.
Edit: Formatting rogue periods.
#20
The mod community is one of the single-handed best investments that an engine can garner. It kept Quake and Half-Life alive far after the normal cycle of gamer interest. And because of the amazing amount of mod content, the fanbase, and groups dedicated to doing things with your engine that you never intended, game companies have made modding their engines easier and easier. When companies with money make their modding pleasant, then trying to make the transition to an engine with a more difficult work-flow or higher learning curve can a rather unpleasant experience at best.
So, moving from modding something like Unreal with an integrated editor and pleasant, highly-funded art flow that they spent a good chunk of change on knowing they would easily make it back in engine licenses and longevity to Torque can be a nasty transition. Mod tools are tailored to a more general audience than the tools that usually ship to licensee companies. They get the tools as well, but they are usually not nearly as polished as what modders get. People who work for game companies will learn a tool or lose their job. Modders will stop modding, which can lower the amount and quality of content...which means that you have to make a new engine to keep up with the interests rather than letting the community regenerate interest in your engine. There are still Quake 3 mods going on. There are still Unreal 2k4 mods going strong. Some will undoubtedly switch to 2k7, some may finish it in 2k4 and then convert up like we saw with UT -> 2k4.
If you go back and look at the tools that were being shipped to mod games when Tribes and Tribes 2 were released, you will see that most engines weren't necessarily that easy to mod. Easier than creating your game (and engine) from scratch, but not nearly the pleasant flow of UT2k4 with UnrealEd and Maya PLE and a series of professionally written tutorials on the workflow written specifically for modification. The developers who license Unreal do not get documentation even close to what end-users received. And for the most part, they do not need it since it is their job to get their arms dirty elbow-deep in engine internals. Plus, being well-versed on engine internals will help your employment possibilities at other companies as well as your current company's desire for retention.
My estimation of Torque's documentation is not that "it sucks" or such, but that it is representative of the Tribes legacy and the environment from which the current engine arose. It assumes not only professional programmers but professional artists. Professional programmers working "in the industry" will dig deep and learn the engine inside and out because they have to. They have a project, a schedule, and working on it *is* their livelihood, not just their hopeful livelihood. Usually they are experienced in some aspect of programming before they are hired or have shown a high level of programming prowess while interning. Sometimes they may be a whiz at algorithms, being able to tell at a glance the logic that escapes most of us and then can relate it to the gifted programmer that they are working with to create a hell of a tool. The artflow is designed with production artwork in mind, not ease of use. It is oriented on the final product rather than the process of creation. Most professional game engines work this way. Over the last couple of years, indie engines (and some professional engines) have moved in this direction as well, but with major tool caveats for the artists to make sure that they do not inadvertently cripple the engine simply because they are able. Again, this is my estimation of where the engine came from as an in-house engine to indie product. It is skewed with opinion, and my opinion is that the TGE documentation is not oriented towards beginning developers with no game development experience. There are some great tutorials and the beginner docs with tutorial.base are an EXCELLENT step in the right direction. But I also do not think that the product page misrepresents the engine as a beginner's tool that anyone can use with no experience as has been brought up in the past. I just do not see it as oriented towards beginners.
Of course, like the vast majority of people, I am not stepping up to make beginner tutorials. The writers of the Torque books, however, are.
12/02/2006 (11:03 am)
I am going to wax a moment about mod communities, which I think are part of the impression problems we see in topics like these both directly and residually. I actually think one of the problems comes from people transitioning from mod communities, especially recent mod communities where modification has been made as easy as possible for every user who wants to make a level or modify a weapon or vehicle physics. And even if people licensing it are not modders, they are tainted by thousands of mod projects which give the impression of ease.The mod community is one of the single-handed best investments that an engine can garner. It kept Quake and Half-Life alive far after the normal cycle of gamer interest. And because of the amazing amount of mod content, the fanbase, and groups dedicated to doing things with your engine that you never intended, game companies have made modding their engines easier and easier. When companies with money make their modding pleasant, then trying to make the transition to an engine with a more difficult work-flow or higher learning curve can a rather unpleasant experience at best.
So, moving from modding something like Unreal with an integrated editor and pleasant, highly-funded art flow that they spent a good chunk of change on knowing they would easily make it back in engine licenses and longevity to Torque can be a nasty transition. Mod tools are tailored to a more general audience than the tools that usually ship to licensee companies. They get the tools as well, but they are usually not nearly as polished as what modders get. People who work for game companies will learn a tool or lose their job. Modders will stop modding, which can lower the amount and quality of content...which means that you have to make a new engine to keep up with the interests rather than letting the community regenerate interest in your engine. There are still Quake 3 mods going on. There are still Unreal 2k4 mods going strong. Some will undoubtedly switch to 2k7, some may finish it in 2k4 and then convert up like we saw with UT -> 2k4.
If you go back and look at the tools that were being shipped to mod games when Tribes and Tribes 2 were released, you will see that most engines weren't necessarily that easy to mod. Easier than creating your game (and engine) from scratch, but not nearly the pleasant flow of UT2k4 with UnrealEd and Maya PLE and a series of professionally written tutorials on the workflow written specifically for modification. The developers who license Unreal do not get documentation even close to what end-users received. And for the most part, they do not need it since it is their job to get their arms dirty elbow-deep in engine internals. Plus, being well-versed on engine internals will help your employment possibilities at other companies as well as your current company's desire for retention.
My estimation of Torque's documentation is not that "it sucks" or such, but that it is representative of the Tribes legacy and the environment from which the current engine arose. It assumes not only professional programmers but professional artists. Professional programmers working "in the industry" will dig deep and learn the engine inside and out because they have to. They have a project, a schedule, and working on it *is* their livelihood, not just their hopeful livelihood. Usually they are experienced in some aspect of programming before they are hired or have shown a high level of programming prowess while interning. Sometimes they may be a whiz at algorithms, being able to tell at a glance the logic that escapes most of us and then can relate it to the gifted programmer that they are working with to create a hell of a tool. The artflow is designed with production artwork in mind, not ease of use. It is oriented on the final product rather than the process of creation. Most professional game engines work this way. Over the last couple of years, indie engines (and some professional engines) have moved in this direction as well, but with major tool caveats for the artists to make sure that they do not inadvertently cripple the engine simply because they are able. Again, this is my estimation of where the engine came from as an in-house engine to indie product. It is skewed with opinion, and my opinion is that the TGE documentation is not oriented towards beginning developers with no game development experience. There are some great tutorials and the beginner docs with tutorial.base are an EXCELLENT step in the right direction. But I also do not think that the product page misrepresents the engine as a beginner's tool that anyone can use with no experience as has been brought up in the past. I just do not see it as oriented towards beginners.
Of course, like the vast majority of people, I am not stepping up to make beginner tutorials. The writers of the Torque books, however, are.
Torque Owner Berserk