OpenGL Status?

#21 Nicely said Mark. All I want to know is where things stand. If they aren't on the table for weeks, months, years or have been cut entirely, just let me know. I can then alter my schedules (and others) to accommodate those lost features.

It's not a matter of why isn't that being included when promised, it's a matter of is it still being included so I can make decisions on what I am going to have to devote more time too.

--Carl

#22 Studios and teams looking for Atlas2 editing capability in the near to mid term would be advised to look at a modification (self-written) to your art generation pipeline that uses the built in functionality for importing and exporting of Atlas2 terrains (already written for you, as an API) to write an exporter to and importer from their 3D modelling application of choice.

For example, there is already an Atlas2 importer from heightmap based terrain data sets. The utilities are provided for import of these terrain data sets, and the utilities exist for internal development of exporters from Atlas2 to 3D poly based editing platforms such as Max or Maya.

Thus, your pipeline would be something on the order of:

--Heightmap based terrain generation
--import into Atlas
--export to your (custom written) data set
--import into Max/Maya/whatever your application choice is
--edit as needed
--import to TGE-A (custom written)

An alternative pipeline that may be more attractive for some studios, given that you have written the 3D data set export/import utilities yourself would be:

--3D poly based terrain generation (max/maya)
--import to Atlas2
--note editing requirements
--edit and export again


This post is not meant to imply or suggest that GarageGames, or any affiliated development studio is or is not working on any form of Atlas2 editing capability, but merely a suggestion as to resource allocation for teams using Atlas2 and TGE-A at this time that have a need for poly based editing of TGE-A.

Sorry for the disclaimer, but that's what I have to do to make any recommendation at all!

#23 Thank you Stephen.

#24 I think the programmers at Garage Games who have (or had?) been working on the Atlas terrain editor over the past couple years probably got a good laugh out of that "Just write one yourself" like it's a quick and easy weekend activity. I think if it was easy they would have gotten it done already. That is not to say I think it can't be done, I believe it can. And if GarageGames doesn't do it, then the GG community is likely to step forward with some proposed solutions instead, perhaps even one of the programmers on my team. That wasn't the point.

It's really not about not being "able" to produce a tool that we need. It's about whether or not we "need" to produce a tool that we need. If they are NOT going to develop an editor, then we do need to spend some time working with the issue. If they ARE, we can spend that time working on something else until it is done. It's all about managing our time to the best possible outcome.

Blessings to you all.
-Sparkling
http://www.visionsgame.com

#25 It's not a good business decision to wait on features to be added unless the undefined amount of waiting will cost less than adding x,y,z yourself. Which it never will.
The engine is what it is, when you buy it - that's what you get. You're entitled to nothing more.
If it didn't have feature x,y,z when you bought it and you're not able to write feature x,y,z - why did you buy it?
So, if you're a business needing -super cool feature here- and you knew you couldn't write it or had the budget to hire someone to write it, you made a poor buying decision in the first place.
If you're not a business wanting -super cool feature here- and you knew you couldn't write it, you can afford to wait and hope it'll show up in a future release you may or may not have to pay for.

Can Torque do -woohoo feature- ?
I dunno, can you make Torque do -woohoo feature-?
If not, then I'd say no.
You've got the source, it's a solid starting point, budget accordingly.

#26 I think the programmers at Garage Games who have (or had?) been working on the Atlas terrain editor over the past couple years probably got a good laugh out of that "Just write one yourself" like it's a quick and easy weekend activity. I think if it was easy they would have gotten it done already. That is not to say I think it can't be done, I believe it can. And if GarageGames doesn't do it, then the GG community is likely to step forward with some proposed solutions instead, perhaps even one of the programmers on my team. That wasn't the point.

It's really not about not being "able" to produce a tool that we need. It's about whether or not we "need" to produce a tool that we need. If they are NOT going to develop an editor, then we do need to spend some time working with the issue. If they ARE, we can spend that time working on something else until it is done. It's all about managing our time to the best possible outcome.

Blessings to you all.
-Sparkling
http://www.visionsgame.com

#27 So David, according to your logic, buy the product knowing you can do what is needed but it may require some work. As the "current" wording reads on the product page, *forthcoming* which implies "coming forth, or about to come forth; about to appear; approaching in time". Ok, not a problem, we are all doing that with TGE or TGEA.

So, let's say I do that. I spend a couple months working on adding in OpenGL (which is what I am concerned with and why I started this thread). Instead of working on the database system which held off my story editors from implementing content or fixing some odd graphics glitch that my artist needed to import their objects, or adding in the sequence routine to allow my animator to add a required feature for their work, I've now gotten OpenGL to work.

Those on my team have taken a break because they can't try out their work in a live environment without said bug fixes but that's ok, they worked on other things or took a much needed break. I've got the feature we needed working.

I go to do a few more tests and there is an update to TGEA. I snag it so we are current and low and behold OpenGL is included. Well ... *insert your choice of cuss words here* ... there goes two months of time that I could have worked on the database routines, fixed that one bug for my artist, finished this or that. Now, let's just add in the idea that the routine for OpenGL is better than mine. So, toss out that code I worked so hard on and move forward OR keep it and assume mine will do even though thousands of others are posting fixes, cool updates, or improvements that I can not really take advantage of because I kept my code instead of the official code.

How would you feel? Time spent good or bad? Several people waited on me and now I have yet another bit of drama to deal with, new code, old code, time spent wasted in my opinion. Even if I kept the official code and dropped mine then anything I had added to work around systems already included to this point would be tossed out and then restarted. I'm kind of screwed no matter what I do because I didn't wait for the official update but then had I waited, was I going to wait a month, two months, six months, a year, two years. Your right do it myself but then ... ack ... isn't that what they call a circle jerk?

Now, had I known that sometime in the next 2-4 months I'd be seeing OpenGL OR OpenGL was dropped from the latest pool of updates not to be considered until 2008 or TGEA 1.5 I wouldn't feel so bad. I can plan around that and make a more logical/planned decision on doing it myself, hiring someone or dealing with DirectX and fixing that.

--Carl

#28 I think the programmers at Garage Games who have (or had?) been working on the Atlas terrain editor over the past couple years probably got a good laugh out of that "Just write one yourself" like it's a quick and easy weekend activity. I think if it was easy they would have gotten it done already. That is not to say I think it can't be done, I believe it can. And if GarageGames doesn't do it, then the GG community is likely to step forward with some proposed solutions instead, perhaps even one of the programmers on my team. That wasn't the point.

It's really not about not being "able" to produce a tool that we need. It's about whether or not we "need" to produce a tool that we need. If they are NOT going to develop an editor, then we do need to spend some time working with the issue. If they ARE, we can spend that time working on something else until it is done. It's all about managing our time to the best possible outcome.

Blessings to you all.
-Sparkling
http://www.visionsgame.com

#29 Hmmm weird, not sure how my post got added twice. I only clicked once Sorry about that.

*Moderators feel free to delete duplicate at your disgression*
-Sparkling

#30 Wow. As I write this I'm still not sure I actually want to participate in this thread. First, I'd have to voice my agreement of the 'if you need it so bad, then write it yourself and stop complaining' mentality. If it's not there, don't assume it's going to be there soon, period. Programming time is never wasted as an Indie because it teaches you more about the engine and technologies you are using.

Torque is not here to get your game built for you, IMHO. Torque technologies are here to give you a boost so you don't have to do the repetitive stuff or roll your own as well as teach you how to be better game developers (or to be game developers at all.) It is apart of software life to have features cut as many have pointed out before me.

I'll keep it short and say "that's all I have to say about that." in a Forrest Gump sort of way.

Having said that, I think the problem we're seeing here isn't that GG is over-promising and under-delivering (in some people's minds) but instead that GG doesn't have a community manager. These forums should be treated the same way as actual game forums. There should be a small staff (maybe just 1 person) whose sole responsibilities are to keep the public informed and happy.

A good example of why this is necessary is this thread alone. Look how the tone changed drastically once Alex drove home the why of the decision to drop OpenGL instead of the what. GG basically told us that OGL was cut due to time restrictions, which probably was one of many reasons. This approach is obviously going to anger many in this very dramatic community (some people would prefer the term passionate but it's the same damn thing when you're Indie =P).

If a community manager had been involved in the discussions about this obviously large feature drop, then the response would have been much more like Alex's and would have been received in a much better light. I think as it stands not publishing any more features or dates is a good idea, but ultimately hurts GG and Indies in general overall.

If I had any advice to give to defuse this and restrict future issues of this nature it would simply be: hire a good community manager. Community Managers have jobs because life isn't like a box of chocolates when it involves a passionate group of game developers reaching into the ranges of how many are in this community.

#31 I should put out a disclaimer here - I'm a linux shop and would love to see opengl come to tgea -.
There's marketing and there's reality.
Reailty is there's no opengl support for tgea.
If you need opengl, tge is the engine to use - why? It's got opengl support - today.
In your scenario, you're getting mad because you've taken the time to write something you needed anyways. That's the risk you take when buying a engine that doesn't have the feature set you're looking for - today.
I bet you would be just as mad if you totally finished every other part of the game and had to wait another 2 years for opengl to appear in a future release that costs more money.

My point is - it's not GarageGame's fault for not having everything you need to make a game in a game engine. Of course they're going to put neat-o "at some point in the future" bullet point features on the product page - or it wouldn't be a very good product page.
It really sounds to me you just caught up in the marketing sugar buzz. Nothing wrong with that - just means marketing did their job.
All I'm saying, work with what's available today.

#32 When you post, do not hit refresh right after or it will keep posting. Just re-navigate back to the forum thread. Unless that was fixed already ...

In any event, I think there is one issue here that should be mentioned about the work flow issue. Actually it is more advice than anything. That is:

Do not merge in updates when you are working on a project.

Once full blown development on a project has started, it is bad mojo in my opinion, to be merging in updates to the engine. You should always just fork the release and never look back. You do this because right away you know where you stand and what needs to be done. Spending programmer time merging in updates rather than having him implement game feature X will absolutely derail productivity. It wastes the programmers time, it wastes the game designer and artists time waiting on feature X, and it wastes QA time.

I understand and I sympathize with those of you who are expecting a certain feature and are still waiting. I feel your frustration, and I am frustrated too. But I do not buy into the excuse that your currently ongoing project has suffered because you were waiting on a particular feature to be implemented into the engine by GarageGames. I'm sorry if this upsets some of you.



Disclaimer:
This post is of my own opinion and does not reflect any official stance of GarageGames.com

#33 All I wanted to know was "status updates on adding OpenGL to TGEA?" And that was followed up with a second question on what others had experienced with the latest version of DirectX in TGEA.

There are some valid points throughout this thread. I don't care if OpenGL was dropped, has been moved back a year or it won't be included until the next big upgrade to TGEA at version 1.5 (or heck even version 2.0). All I wanted to know was the status so I can plan accordingly.

Almost all situations I have been in when it comes to products being designed I have been able to view a predicted time line for those developing in this product (and that includes the OpenSource stuff too). Let me tell you those time lines are frighting since it seems that daily to weekly they change. BUT they are posted and updated allowing anyone working on the product to make their own decisions.

Let me know where things stand on some of these big ticket items so I can plan and work my team around it. I head off to a meeting tonight with all my team members and yet again I have to say, I have no idea. Seeing GarageGames say they have stopped providing updates only upset me (which I wasn't when I started this thread) in the fact that I'm in that same tree with them. Those I support and provide services too are getting irritated with me all because I can't give them any answers and when I do they fall flat.

Believe me, if I knew the status of OpenGL and it was off the table or won't be a topic until 2008 I'd be heading right off to start my own OpenGL port or finding someone to do it. But if it's only four months out or so about, I can hold off and so can everyone else that is part of the great game we are working on. If we hit the four month mark and GarageGames comes back and says it's not ready, x, y & z have stopped us, OpenGL changed their this or that, what ever ... that's fine. I will either adjust the schedule again or evaluate my teams progress and the need to jump pass GarageGames and do OpenGL ourselves ... OR ... yes, possibly wait again.

All I want to see is a predicted time or progress so far so I can manage my time, my teams time and our primary goal of creating a game.

--Carl

P.S. Additionally, in reference to Sparkling (below) we aren't suffering do the lack of said features, I apologize if that might have come across as this, I just wanted to know about any updates.

Disclaimer:
This post is of my own opinion and does not reflect any official stance on GarageGames.com, its staff, those who worship them, those who have voodoo dolls of certain persons or those expecting me to loose it on a random tangent leading to the great explosion dubbed "GG Forums Debacle of 2007".

#34 Hmmm weird, not sure how my post got added twice. I only clicked once Sorry about that.

*Moderators feel free to delete duplicate at your disgression*
-Sparkling

#35 GarageGames is the best at what they do, marketing.

#36 Ahh hitting refresh does that. I see. I was not aware of that bug. Interesting.

And I don't know that anyone here has said their project is suffering. If that somehow was gleaned from what I said then it was not intentional. I think my project is doing pretty well at the moment. We're all just saying we'd like to know what's going on so we can plan accordingly. Nothing less, nothing more.

Thanks for the tip about the refresh button. I've never seen that particular bug before. Guess I don't often refresh threads on GG forums. I'll try to remember that for the future. :)

-Sparkling
http://www.visionsgame.com

#37

Quote:
So, if you're a business needing -super cool feature here- and you knew you couldn't write it or had the budget to hire someone to write it, you made a poor buying decision in the first place.

That is ridiculous. OpenGL nor Atlas Editors are "super cool features". They are features which were on the milestone list when TSE EA went live. Now, I can understand that you dont care, seeing as you are making a space game where terrain is irrelevant. But for some of us, TSE would not have been as attractive without that milestone list on the product page.

I could not care less for Atlas editors nor OpenGL, but I do show respect to the people who think they should have gotten those features on the milestone list. It was never promised, but I understand their frustration still.

#38 I'm really sorry but I just can't fathom how OpenGL support can be so critical a project that you'd need to shift resources from other core parts of your game to implement it during the development of your game. AFAIK you'll only need it when you do the Mac and Linux ports: it'll add nothing to the Windows version.

Personally I don't see launching a game simultaneously on all 3 platforms as something crucial enough to get my project gimped.

Given the current situation, I'd tag Mac and Linux versions of my game as "coming soon" and get the Windows version done and released first (while making sure all my changes to the engine are properly tagged and easily identifiable). The AAA dudes to that all the time, we smaller fries don't have the resources to do any better.

When the game starts selling, I'd check if GG implemented OpenGL or not. If they didn't, I'd get in touch with them (e-mail, not the forums) explain my situation (got a Windows game release, need to port to Mac and Linux) and ask for a NDA on the OpenGL status and, depending on the results, see what I'd need to do (wait, do joint development to get it done, do it myself, etc) and port my existing game to Mac and Linux.

I know people do get frustrated and need to complain to ease their spirits, but you have to be aware that it won't lead you anywhere: ultimately, it's GG that decides it's schedule, not us.

And I agree 100% with Robert: merging stuff and introducing new tools mid-project is often a bad idea (a double edged sword, actually). If I decide to use TGEA as the basis for a project today, I'll consider only what is in the box and treat any pending feature as indefinitely inexistent. Anything can happen (EA might come, buy GG and drop TGE and TGEA support) and nothing can guarantee they'll be done when I need them. Having my schedule depend heavily on someone's schedule is not good, and I like to avoid it whenever possible.

That's why I never bothered using TGEA in a serious commercial project until recently. And even right now I'm recommending my associates against heavily Atlas-dependent game ideas until I can find time to proof test the Atlas2 pipeline.

--------------------
EDIT
--------------------

Anyway, for anyone trying to get an Atlas2 exporter-importer working, I seriously recommend using the Autodesk FBX SDK. It has interfaces for reading and writing FBX files, which can be imported and exported from all major 3D modelling apps with several features (multiple UVs and even parametric surfaces).
I believe it's the most rational format to use for Atlas editing, since it's widely supported and you don't need to know it's internals and bother with byte-by-byte writing.

I'd do it myself (and probably will), but right now none of our upcoming games need Atlas2 and I have far more urgent things to take care of (finishing our custom polysoup interior format and making TGEA work on DX7 cards).

#39

Quote:I know people do get frustrated and need to complain to ease their spirits,

Ok perfect example of "don't feed the trolls" here. I'm not going to address anything else in that post.

None of us were complaining. No need to throw pot shots at us. We asked a question, it's half the other people who have been extracting assumptions out of our words to try and make it sound like we are whining, complaining or otherwise "making excuses". No excuses. No whining. No complining. Our projects are going well and will continue to progress. Overall I believe we're happy with the TSE engine and will continue to use it. Go back to your caves and look for someone else's pot to stir, because we're not angry or even upset. We just wanted to know some valuable information as it pertained to our projects. And were trying to explain WHY we need the information. It's not that emotional, really.

Blessings to you,
-Sparkling

#40 Alright, sorry. Bad wording on my part created a bad post.