When will the 1.02 out?

#121 Frankly, at this point, i'd agree with option c, if nothing constructive is going to come of this.

#122 It's the end of a long week of debugging. I am tired. I spoke in frustration.

Our technology team is working very hard. I agree that it seems like TGEA is not being worked on, but that is not the reality. We use our technology, that is how we improve it. As was mentioned, rendering of multiple skinned meshes was hugely slow. Rendering in general was non-batched and non-optimized. We found these issues working on MBU, and that was where the render instancing came from. We use our technology, we improve our technology, and we share our technology. It's the way it's always been. We continue to use our technology, (all of our products) because that is the only way we can truely "QA" our development. It's the way engines are put through QA. TGB was in much the same state that TGEA is now, until recently. The TGB team used, and spent massive effort improving the product, and it is now a very far superior product to it's initial release. We are working very hard, and making huge strides with TGEA tech. We are not communicating well, but the reasons behind that are not spite based.

Your point that the product is not all that it could be is correct. The intentions that you assign to us, and the reasons that you speculate about, are not. And...yes, posts like mine don't usually go helping that.

Please accept my apology, or don't. Just don't think that we are not improving our technology.

#123 I can't believe I read all that.

#124 @Pat - no problem whatsoever. Thank you for your post. I guess the frustration is happening on both ends. I would also like to apologize as well. We (TGEA fanboys) don't want to be left out of the loop. Not that you have to tell us every little thing going on, we just want an update from time to time.

No hard feelings. Thanks again for your post.

#125 "Improving our technology" can mean many things. The way it looks now, it means a few minor bug fixes. TGEA really needs to have something new added. Instead of just small updates every 7 months, it would be alot better and alot nicer to see the engine going somewhere besides small bug fixes. Don't get me wrong, we need bug fixes, but we also need something new that will make TGEA the ultimate product.

#126 @mb - next time we'll offer a cliff note version. :)

#127 Haha =P

#128 Kept going down the thread and waiting to see a "1.02 released!" link. =P

#129 I'm not sure if there's a point to waiting for a 1.02 released link. What I mean is, all I know about it is it only contains minor fixes. Whats considered minor? Would it hurt in some way to have a public log of some kind which listed the fixes corrected for 1.02.. or potential one's?

I must admit, I do not fully understand the rationale behind a number of choices that have been implemented by GG. Obviously the most pertinent, referencing this thread of course, would be the strategy of being silent to customers coupled with a vague feeling that it is suppose to be an honor to be a GG cutomer and we should be thankful for what we get (brings to mind the old favorite.. Oliver Twist..."please sir.. may I have some more?").

I like TGEA alot and to this point have had very good service and communication with the GG staff. I suppose I just do not understand. Surely it can't be as stated above that GG has labeled its customers to immature and/or bothersome to deal with so "dealing" will not take place. I'm fairly certain this wasn't a "dev" choice so no offense intended to the workers.

If this post contains to much complaining, please let me know and I will do a better job of spreading it out over time. :)

#130 A few of the employees treat all TGEA clients like kids, when some..maybe most(?) of us are clearly not.
I find this very disrespectful and quite irresponsible.

Some of our requests are extremely valid.
-If you, as an employee, choose to cry, bitch and even insult clients instead of giving a civilized answer then
I would hope that GG finds a replacement for your position. Hopefully someone polite and competent with better ethics BUT if you choose to answer with influence and information...then I commend you and hope the best for you as an employee and person.
Either way You are a paid GG representative...I would suggest: either post nicely or don't post at all.
- No one gains anything from insults. Seriously.

//=============================================//
The following is posted for a team member who heard this topic through vocal discussion (and he has a good point TBH):
/=======start
If TGEA isn't TGE plus 'A'dvanced qualities, then it should NOT be called TGEA.
To elaborate: It is either 100% of the original engine plus the new advanced-addition or it is not an honest/ethical naming convention OR marketing technique.
.
Example: Hershey's milk chocolate bars don't say(on the label) 'now with almonds' but then leave the milk out of the milk chocolate bar that now contains almonds.
That would be: a dark chocolate bar with almonds that has the name of milk chocolate ON THE WRAPPER and that is a lie.
.
'TGEA' as a "name" is a ^Very-misrepresentative-name^ (most of GG's site contains misnomers but this TGEA naming convention is a blatent absurdity!!).
**** It appears that GG artfully places words to conjur assumptions from soon-to-be-clients. ****
((AND If THAT isn't marketing, then I do not know what is !!!!))
-> Either way, without blaming anyone.... The name should have remained TSE or GGSE.

GG has been receiving alot of frustrated posts in many, many GG forum threads along with loads of bad reviews ALL over the web.....perhaps
an honest naming convention would have prevented all of these bad situations/misconceptions/assumption-related-thinking ?
-> Afterall, myself, as a person, would not mistake TSE as having all of TGE's features/qualities because the name is not associative.
TGEA *IS* a VERY associative to TGE as it means (in other words)"Advancement of the TGengine".

I say: put the milk back in the TGEA chocolate OR change the name to "GG's big misnomer engine".[/ROFL and jk]

@ everyone in the thread: most game engine's use false advertising, why should GG be any different ?
Every engine, for which I own a license, blatently lies about features on their website home page.
-> I think that is why they all claim "no refunds/returns".

Respectfully,
Mr. B
/=====end



Please don't hate me for posting his thoughts.
Thanks
g

#131 If I'm not mistaken one of the non-bug fixes in 1.02 (it was originally at least) is that it was bringing the engine up to Constructor's 1.02 format, and allowing for the baked DTS objects. I'd say that is pretty useful, in addition to bug fixes.

#132 That would be great to have that feature working, Thanks for the info.

#133 I've bought the TGEA license about 4 weeks ago. While following this thread I think I've spent my money for a somehow "dead" product (dead because I don't know anything about future release plans and fixes). That's frustrating!
If someone would ask me if TGEA is a good choice for an engine and can be bought without any concern, I would say no today. I won't recommend TGEA as long as there's no (official) information about future plans or fixes which i could pass to interested people.

@GG My suggestion is to keep us customers informed about your plans regarding TGEA with dates (rough information should be enough). No information is bad information.

Off topic:
G, I'm sitting hungry in front of my comp and you're talking about milk chocolate with almonds? I hate you! :D

#134 I agree entirely, Shaderman.

From the threads I've read over the last few months, they've said on a few occasions that they wouldn't release information about what was planned because of the people complaining about it, when either it didn't make it in on the estimated date, or that it took priority over other features people deemed more important.

In my opinion, GG needs the fortitude to disregard these few people for the good of GG and their customers on a whole. As you say, no information is bad information and we need to be able to plan our game based on something even when it's an estimate it's better than nothing.

More detailed information when the patches are released would also be a plus, maybe even a changelog.txt file that we can reference what has been fixed and added in each release.

Just my 2c + GST

#135 Agreed. TGEA is probably the purchase I regret the most (and I've bought various versions of Windows). I own another game engine which I don't really use, but it has served as a good learning example. TGEA, however is too similar to TGE to be useful for learning something new, and too broken for anything else.

All in all, I think if they stick with it, it might be a usable engine one day (but I'm not holding my breath).

#136 Well... me, i'm just gonna just chill out for a while, work on some other stuff, and buy into what Mr. Zepp said a lil ways up the thread...

Quote:There are extremely valid reasons why it's being delayed, and you will all be very happy when you find out why.
Please be patient.

ok... so let patience be the keyword for the next couple of days (weeks?)...

besides, i'm starting to get some really good vibes in the aftermath of Stephan's statement...

so, lets wait and see...


also... what Mark D said bears a lil repeating...

Quote:Don't get caught in a "grass is greener" effect.

take it from someone who has tried a couple of greener grasses throughout the years... all of em so far seems to have at least one fly in the ointment... one 'showstopper' as it were... nowhere are ya gonna find a perfect 'game engine'...

... unless you write one up yourself.



--Mike

#137 Maybe my comments were taken the wrong way.

I'm not getting impatient, I'll wait for the next version as long as it takes, there's plenty of stuff to be done.

The thing I'm talking about is not knowing what the plans are with the engine, what the next version is intended to include, and what is currently being worked on.
I'm sure on the inside there's alot of stuff going on, but me sitting here on the outside as it were, it's like sitting on an empty milk crate in the desert, watching the spinefex blow past on the highway to nowhere. Occasionally a bus will stop but i'm afraid to get on, because it's got "enter at own risk" written on the front.

Enough with the metaphores, more and better communication is the thing so we know where we're at, what the plan is, and where we're going.

#138 @Mike - Stephen retracted what he said. There isn't anything "big" coming as noted above (see his last posting in this thread).

Chris Fagot also mentioned (noted above) that TGEA was pushed back a few times already and further stated that the new update (if ever released) is only a small update with bug fixes found in the forums.

Geeze, 4 wasteful months. It tells the TGEA customer base to wait even longer, perhaps later in the year or in early 2008. Not everyone enjoys that timeline. GG didn't want to tell us about TGEA being placed on the back-burner so they washed it down with, "We're not going to release anymore info about the product because of customers complaining". Wow, that's cute.

GG is getting a bad name in this industry. I read on one of the dev forums yesterday that most devs aren't taking GG seriously and label them as "Toy Engines" instead of indie/commercial/marketing solutions. The EA staff is just laughing loud and hard at the Indie market. It doesn't help us Indies one bit when we use an engine from a company that's getting a bad rep with product, service and support for its customers.

#139 Not being hateful here, and not saying this is the exact same situation. You cannot deny though that it has a similar sounding scenario (atleast as far as the accusations go, i doubt Epic will be found guilty).

1. Company A signs contract for engine from Company B that will be improved at a steady pace and be supported accordingly.

2. A states that B hasn't been updating regularly and that B is using the money A paid for a service to improve its own copy of the engine and work on other products using that engine to make itself look good instead of following up and helping A.

3. B states its not true and that A is just incompetent and not skilled enough to recreate what B showed off at the trade show, and that the engine is perfectly capable of doing the same things for A that it has done for B.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=14759


I just find the timing funny and I am not accusing anyone. =]

#140 @Domox - I agree, the timing is amusing. I find this part of the lawsuit interesting:

Quote:"The suit also charges: "Upon information and belief other game developers have been faced with a similar dilemma as Silicon Knights."

It continues: "To the extent that Epic contends any such third party developers purportedly were able to utilize the Engine during the early development cycle (when Epic had warranted Silicon Knights would have a functional engine but failed to deliver one), upon information and belief those third party developers broke away from the unworkable code that Epic had delivered and created their own distinct engines, just as Silicon Knights was forced to do."

"Silicon Knights was forced to decide whether to continue waiting for Epic to provide it with a commercially functional version of the Engine. Under the Agreement, Silicon Knights found itself in the position of being ostensibly "bound" to use Epic's non-functional product, even though doing so would result in the breach of its obligations to its publishing partners. Rather than let that happen, in May of 2006, with the Engine two months overdue and under the looming risk of funding for Too Human drying up if no workable engine could be found, Silicon Knights had no choice but to abandon the Engine and begin creating its own game engine ("the Silicon Knights Engine"). By that time, Epic had shown neither the ability nor the intent to fulfill its obligations under the Agreement."

This one reminds me of "Legions" (made by GarageGames itself using TGEA)

Quote:The suit initially alleges that: "Rather than provide support to Silicon Knights and Epic's other many licensees of the Engine, Epic intentionally and wrongfully has used the fees from those licenses to launch its own game to widespread commercial success while simultaneously sabotaging efforts by Silicon Knights and others to develop their own video games."

Now from what I read, GG is only entitled to give us one UPDATE per year. Which is fine if TGEA was actually a post-Early Adopter product as advertised. But those functions and features as advertised that don't even work as GG has placed TGEA on the back-burner.

www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=14759