When will the 1.02 out?
by Heron Huang · in Torque Game Engine Advanced · 04/11/2007 (11:37 pm) · 194 replies
I was just noticed the new static mesh feature in the coming TGEA 1.02,but when will it launch? Some of my new project's huge interiors can rely on it if it comes out in time.
Thanks.
Thanks.
#162
Andy, please forward me that email as well if you will, so I can test against it as best as I can in 1.02
kenh at garagegames
thanks!
07/21/2007 (1:04 pm)
It is nice to see the direction this thread is going :)Andy, please forward me that email as well if you will, so I can test against it as best as I can in 1.02
kenh at garagegames
thanks!
#163
Point conceded, but you can edit the data fields, and/or modify the mission file itself via editing. I had no problems at all moving around with the camera myself, so not sure what to say there.
We agree, lighting didn't come out the way we expected, and many of the things that work aren't as optimized as they could be. No ETA at all on any lighting system modifications, but I will say that it has our attention. No short term fixes planned, so take that for what it's worth. I don't have specific comments on individual features (not a lighting guy, either implementation or use).
Atlas and lighting have been discussed in multiple threads, and I remember some specific point implementations and fixes have been posted in the forums. It might make sense to start up a new post on your specific challenges for community discussion in a separate thread. Again, see above, there are no short term solutions that you should wait for on currently existing projects.
Please do forward me that email.
07/21/2007 (1:09 pm)
Quote:
The Mission Editor in TGEA does not work. You can't edit the mission bounds, and when you do, you can't even use camera (like in TGE) to move around.
Point conceded, but you can edit the data fields, and/or modify the mission file itself via editing. I had no problems at all moving around with the camera myself, so not sure what to say there.
Quote:
Many of the Torque Lighting Features are not working. They've been broken for a very long time. You can see what I'm saying by creating an fxlight which doesn't do anything. I forget what the other lighting problems are, but there are a few.
We agree, lighting didn't come out the way we expected, and many of the things that work aren't as optimized as they could be. No ETA at all on any lighting system modifications, but I will say that it has our attention. No short term fixes planned, so take that for what it's worth. I don't have specific comments on individual features (not a lighting guy, either implementation or use).
Atlas and lighting have been discussed in multiple threads, and I remember some specific point implementations and fixes have been posted in the forums. It might make sense to start up a new post on your specific challenges for community discussion in a separate thread. Again, see above, there are no short term solutions that you should wait for on currently existing projects.
Please do forward me that email.
#164
Andy, please forward me that email as well if you will, so I can test against it as best as I can in 1.02
kenh at garagegames
thanks!
07/21/2007 (1:19 pm)
It is nice to see the direction this thread is going :)Andy, please forward me that email as well if you will, so I can test against it as best as I can in 1.02
kenh at garagegames
thanks!
#165
In TGE, you have an arrow.. the indicator shows where you are on the map. Since Atlas is broken as well as the lighting, I wanted to use Legacy until Atlas was fixed. For me, this was a temporary solution. But without the Mission Editor working, I can't tell where I am on the terrain, or if I have reached the outer "bounds" or not.
Also, I know this one sounds "picky", but the chat doesn't work properly. It gets annoying after awhile. If you type 2 sentences in the chatbox, the first letter of the second line will show up duplicated at the end of the first line. This probably doesn't make sense from the way I describe it. Just type 2 full lines of chat and you'll see the duplicated letter at the end of the first line, and at the beginning of the 2nd line.
The chatbox issue isn't that big of a deal, but after awhile, people start complaining about it. I don't know what changed from TGE to TGEA's chatbox. I've reviewed the script files and don't see why it's doing that.
07/21/2007 (1:29 pm)
@Stephen - I don't know if you misunderstood me about the Mission Editor or not. You can't change the bounds from the edit box itself. There is no visual indicator icon either. I know you can manually change it, but I still don't know where I am on the terrain without going through a lot of calculations. In other words, I'm lost on the terrain without the proper Mission Editor. It works in TGE, does not work in TGEA.In TGE, you have an arrow.. the indicator shows where you are on the map. Since Atlas is broken as well as the lighting, I wanted to use Legacy until Atlas was fixed. For me, this was a temporary solution. But without the Mission Editor working, I can't tell where I am on the terrain, or if I have reached the outer "bounds" or not.
Also, I know this one sounds "picky", but the chat doesn't work properly. It gets annoying after awhile. If you type 2 sentences in the chatbox, the first letter of the second line will show up duplicated at the end of the first line. This probably doesn't make sense from the way I describe it. Just type 2 full lines of chat and you'll see the duplicated letter at the end of the first line, and at the beginning of the 2nd line.
The chatbox issue isn't that big of a deal, but after awhile, people start complaining about it. I don't know what changed from TGE to TGEA's chatbox. I've reviewed the script files and don't see why it's doing that.
#166
First I had heard about the chat box issue, but I would suggest it should be something relatively trivial to fix--and I'd also suggest that the chat capability itself is a reference/example implementation...personally I would build my chat system based around it as an example, not directly.
This is the type of scenario I was getting at with my statements above regarding "shoreline rendering". The stock chat system is a very specific example of a very specific implementation appropriate for a very specific game type--all those "specifics" meaning it is similar to what was used in Tribes quite a long time ago. I would suggest that much of the underlying design decisions made in that example simply don't apply to specific projects, and that it should be used as an example for design/implementation of your own system.
Your point of view may completely disagree with that--and I respect that, but it still remains that it's not something we can provide a solution for that meets everyone's needs.
07/21/2007 (1:37 pm)
@Andy: Yes, I do see what you are saying, and realize the usability issue.First I had heard about the chat box issue, but I would suggest it should be something relatively trivial to fix--and I'd also suggest that the chat capability itself is a reference/example implementation...personally I would build my chat system based around it as an example, not directly.
This is the type of scenario I was getting at with my statements above regarding "shoreline rendering". The stock chat system is a very specific example of a very specific implementation appropriate for a very specific game type--all those "specifics" meaning it is similar to what was used in Tribes quite a long time ago. I would suggest that much of the underlying design decisions made in that example simply don't apply to specific projects, and that it should be used as an example for design/implementation of your own system.
Your point of view may completely disagree with that--and I respect that, but it still remains that it's not something we can provide a solution for that meets everyone's needs.
#167
However, GG did provide a chat. To me this is something GG provided and it should work. It works, but is buggy.
It just seems like we're now entering, "If what we provided doesn't work, then use it as a learning curve and fix it for us." It's a function and a feature. This is the part where many TGEA owners are crying foul because we purchased a product delivered as a post-Early Adopter, advertised as a full & working Version 1.0+, but some things don't work.
It would be as we (TGEA owners) had to use the Torque Lighting as a learning curve and fix all the lighting problems. We paid to have it working.
07/21/2007 (2:00 pm)
@Stephen - I understand what you're saying but I totally disagree. The "shorline rendering" isn't something that GG provided. They provided the water ability.However, GG did provide a chat. To me this is something GG provided and it should work. It works, but is buggy.
It just seems like we're now entering, "If what we provided doesn't work, then use it as a learning curve and fix it for us." It's a function and a feature. This is the part where many TGEA owners are crying foul because we purchased a product delivered as a post-Early Adopter, advertised as a full & working Version 1.0+, but some things don't work.
It would be as we (TGEA owners) had to use the Torque Lighting as a learning curve and fix all the lighting problems. We paid to have it working.
#168
I concede the point in a perfect world of "if GG provides it, it should be perfect", if you concede the point that "nothing is ever perfect", as well as the point that limited resources thrown at a huge project will never meet all expectations.
Is it a bug? Yes. Is it a bug that should be fixed? Yes, eventually. Is it a bug that has more importance than refactoring the lighting system (hypothetical comparison here)? I would suggest no.
Is it a bug that you can identify, factor in to a solution that works for your project, and move on? I would hope that given the realities stated above, the answer would be "not something we would prefer doing, but yes".
07/21/2007 (2:07 pm)
@Andy: it all ultimately comes down to definitions between "game engine functionality" and "example/reference implementation".I concede the point in a perfect world of "if GG provides it, it should be perfect", if you concede the point that "nothing is ever perfect", as well as the point that limited resources thrown at a huge project will never meet all expectations.
Is it a bug? Yes. Is it a bug that should be fixed? Yes, eventually. Is it a bug that has more importance than refactoring the lighting system (hypothetical comparison here)? I would suggest no.
Is it a bug that you can identify, factor in to a solution that works for your project, and move on? I would hope that given the realities stated above, the answer would be "not something we would prefer doing, but yes".
#169
With Atlas not working, it's difficult to launch a game using Legacy. Atleast for me it is. I have no idea where my boundaries are in my mission editor and that's because I need to plan where to setup my objects on the terrain.
07/21/2007 (2:16 pm)
@Stephen - As I earlier stated, the chat thing isn't a big deal. If GG already had a quickfix solution (obviously it can't be that hard, but I can't find the problem) then it would be great for GG to spend the 5 minutes to fix it, than waiting 2 years. The chat thing is just annoying. It's a constant reminder that it's not fixed. Like I said, something changed between TGE and TGEA with the chat, or the code for the chat to cause that problem. I'm not sure what it is, but then I don't always have time to learn more development skills to fix it.With Atlas not working, it's difficult to launch a game using Legacy. Atleast for me it is. I have no idea where my boundaries are in my mission editor and that's because I need to plan where to setup my objects on the terrain.
#170
Basically you can click through to windows. Load up TGEA and turn on your mouse and then click anywhere on the bottom part of the screen or the right part of the screen (the last 20 or so pixels) and it will click you through into windows (you can also sometimes see your windows toolbar shine through). The workaround is to not put any of your menus near the windows and hope noone clicks that part of the screen. For anyone developing an RPG though this is a major headache. Our interface has an action bar on the bottom of the screen and I've had to move it about 40 pixels above the bottom of the screen for the time being because I'd always click through to it. When using the mission editor scrolling the vertical scrollbar also will often click through to windows.
This problem has been around I think from the very beginning. I remember running into it a couple of years ago in our menuing system on another project. It affects both XP and Vista, and I've seen the same bug on a variety of cards including ATI and NVidia.
07/21/2007 (11:07 pm)
@Stephan: One bug I'd like to see squashed is the context problem. That's the only game stopper that I have run up against. It's not stopping me from developing, but as far as shipping it would be a problem. This is not really a problem for FPS style games or ones that don't require a lot of clicking.Basically you can click through to windows. Load up TGEA and turn on your mouse and then click anywhere on the bottom part of the screen or the right part of the screen (the last 20 or so pixels) and it will click you through into windows (you can also sometimes see your windows toolbar shine through). The workaround is to not put any of your menus near the windows and hope noone clicks that part of the screen. For anyone developing an RPG though this is a major headache. Our interface has an action bar on the bottom of the screen and I've had to move it about 40 pixels above the bottom of the screen for the time being because I'd always click through to it. When using the mission editor scrolling the vertical scrollbar also will often click through to windows.
This problem has been around I think from the very beginning. I remember running into it a couple of years ago in our menuing system on another project. It affects both XP and Vista, and I've seen the same bug on a variety of cards including ATI and NVidia.
#171
I am an experienced game developer and I have worked on several published commercial titles and a colleague and I recently bought TGEA to use on our own project. We have high hopes and are gradually getting to grips with the engine.
From my perspective having solid deadlines with stated deliverables is pretty standard practice in ANY industry. I respect that priorities change and that you guys at GG are rapidly expanding, but TGEA is (I believe) your flagship product and desereves to be given pride of place.
We bought TGEA because we believe in it's potential, but the biggest frustration is waiting with the unknown. YES, we can get on with stuff but take level building for example, people say just get on with "making the game" but we are deliberatly using Constructor for our levels and the lack of support for "baked in" DTS support is a genuine hindrence, we could place objects inside of TGEA but we'd have to redo it later in Constructor. I realise you have said it will be fixed in 1.02 (as above) but having no - reasonably - firm dates on the release of that functionality is mildly problematic. We are trying to schedule out our production process, and while we can deal with everything else, getting stuck with not knowing when a feature will work can be frustrating.
I guess my point is: more information would be good, it doesn't have to be exhaustive or totally exact but say what is definitely going to be "in" and the latest it will be available so that we can schedule around it and make sure to use our time wisely. otherwise our schedules become mere guess work - which isn't great.
Cheers
Andrew
07/22/2007 (3:24 am)
Hi all,I am an experienced game developer and I have worked on several published commercial titles and a colleague and I recently bought TGEA to use on our own project. We have high hopes and are gradually getting to grips with the engine.
From my perspective having solid deadlines with stated deliverables is pretty standard practice in ANY industry. I respect that priorities change and that you guys at GG are rapidly expanding, but TGEA is (I believe) your flagship product and desereves to be given pride of place.
We bought TGEA because we believe in it's potential, but the biggest frustration is waiting with the unknown. YES, we can get on with stuff but take level building for example, people say just get on with "making the game" but we are deliberatly using Constructor for our levels and the lack of support for "baked in" DTS support is a genuine hindrence, we could place objects inside of TGEA but we'd have to redo it later in Constructor. I realise you have said it will be fixed in 1.02 (as above) but having no - reasonably - firm dates on the release of that functionality is mildly problematic. We are trying to schedule out our production process, and while we can deal with everything else, getting stuck with not knowing when a feature will work can be frustrating.
I guess my point is: more information would be good, it doesn't have to be exhaustive or totally exact but say what is definitely going to be "in" and the latest it will be available so that we can schedule around it and make sure to use our time wisely. otherwise our schedules become mere guess work - which isn't great.
Cheers
Andrew
#172
I hardly can believe that experienced programmers that have been working for years with Torque Technology actually need 3+ months between releases to do the kind of fixes that have been done from 1.01.
Until launch of TGEA I actually did not have much of a problem.
But the new license actually makes this kind of time schedule inacceptable.
We payed for a year of free updates. Soon, half a year has passed and a single fix release has been done in that time, the major bugs from MS 3 and 4 are still persistant even thought for some of them users even posted fixes.
Half of the advertised features are still not working the way they are advertised and need highly specific setups to work (light/shadow, Atlas2, DIF, DTS).
That is, at least to me, not an acceptable way of handling TGEA licensees.
We payed good money for the year of free updates and would like to see that someone is actually doing something for the money payed for this year of update contract.
I already stepped back 3 months ago on my Refund request because I was told by the support, that the massive problems with documentation (inexistant, totally outdated and plain wrong) will be solved soon as GG hired a new writer to solve that problem.
Yet, 3 months later, the only thing I see is that I was tricked (at least it extremely looks like that) back then.
so please:
Fix the errors
Release them once per month
Get back out of the dust of nothing with TGEA or stop selling it until you stop breaking advertisement.
Because TGEA has some good parts and definitely potential, but right now, this potential is wasted due to active ignorance or at least by far to less dedicated people working on it to get it where it is advertised to be and where it could have been months ago.
07/22/2007 (1:24 pm)
Would like to know as well, when 1.02, which was mentioned to be a pure bug fix release with no new features, will be available.I hardly can believe that experienced programmers that have been working for years with Torque Technology actually need 3+ months between releases to do the kind of fixes that have been done from 1.01.
Until launch of TGEA I actually did not have much of a problem.
But the new license actually makes this kind of time schedule inacceptable.
We payed for a year of free updates. Soon, half a year has passed and a single fix release has been done in that time, the major bugs from MS 3 and 4 are still persistant even thought for some of them users even posted fixes.
Half of the advertised features are still not working the way they are advertised and need highly specific setups to work (light/shadow, Atlas2, DIF, DTS).
That is, at least to me, not an acceptable way of handling TGEA licensees.
We payed good money for the year of free updates and would like to see that someone is actually doing something for the money payed for this year of update contract.
I already stepped back 3 months ago on my Refund request because I was told by the support, that the massive problems with documentation (inexistant, totally outdated and plain wrong) will be solved soon as GG hired a new writer to solve that problem.
Yet, 3 months later, the only thing I see is that I was tricked (at least it extremely looks like that) back then.
so please:
Fix the errors
Release them once per month
Get back out of the dust of nothing with TGEA or stop selling it until you stop breaking advertisement.
Because TGEA has some good parts and definitely potential, but right now, this potential is wasted due to active ignorance or at least by far to less dedicated people working on it to get it where it is advertised to be and where it could have been months ago.
#173
I'm game. Here's a short list.
Matt came out and finally admitted there were serious deficiencies in the physics implementation. Problems that he said GG just didn't have the resources to fix. Acceptable response, was refreshing after head-in-sand denials you get from Stephen.
Uhh yeah. Why is it that my lights don't affect terrain in my version of TGEA?
How interesting. That is, until a user tries to flatten his atlas terrain or cut a hole in it to place a building.
While this is true, forgetting about the editing issues or the clunky terrain generation path we had until recently...what good is an unlimited terrain when you start twitching like a guy with turrets syndrome when you get a few thousand units from the origin?
Can of worms anyone? That's why all the bugs haven't been fixed, why the terrain editor is still missing two years after it was promised next patch. It's not the 99e99 projects GG has other than their 'flagship' project. They're just too busy with OpenGL support being at the top of their list!
07/23/2007 (1:28 am)
Quote:Andy: please send me an email with point by point list of the several functions and features that you state are marketed, but not implemented and/or broken. I hear people make that statement often, but have never gotten raw, point by point statements where our marketing material indicates something is present that is not.
I'm game. Here's a short list.
Quote:Networkable Physics: Lightweight systems allows for hundreds of players with collision detection, rigid body, and vehicle physics.
Matt came out and finally admitted there were serious deficiencies in the physics implementation. Problems that he said GG just didn't have the resources to fix. Acceptable response, was refreshing after head-in-sand denials you get from Stephen.
Quote:Light objects can be configured as static or dynamic, omni or spotlights, and are capable of illuminating multiple interiors, shapes and terrain.
Uhh yeah. Why is it that my lights don't affect terrain in my version of TGEA?
Quote:Portals, Occlusion Culling, LOD
Portal based interiors with seamless integration with the terrain engine. Buildings can be instanced, placed, manipulated and scaled with the world editor
How interesting. That is, until a user tries to flatten his atlas terrain or cut a hole in it to place a building.
Quote:Atlas Terrain Generation allows for unlimited, dynamically paging terrains designed for efficient rendering with modern hardware.
While this is true, forgetting about the editing issues or the clunky terrain generation path we had until recently...what good is an unlimited terrain when you start twitching like a guy with turrets syndrome when you get a few thousand units from the origin?
Quote:TGEA uses an API independent graphics layer, TorqueGFX. Though it currently supports DirectX 9, it was designed with forthcoming OpenGL support in mind (it's at the top of the list Mac guys!)
Can of worms anyone? That's why all the bugs haven't been fixed, why the terrain editor is still missing two years after it was promised next patch. It's not the 99e99 projects GG has other than their 'flagship' project. They're just too busy with OpenGL support being at the top of their list!
#174
@Marc: Where did you get information that you only get Fre updates for a year? I find that very hard to believe.
Expecting them to release a new version every month is unrealistic and would be a waste of time sending it through QA everytime. You can rather use the fixes found in the forums.
07/23/2007 (2:08 am)
@Jacobin: Hehe... I wish there was a Mac port in sight :-P@Marc: Where did you get information that you only get Fre updates for a year? I find that very hard to believe.
Expecting them to release a new version every month is unrealistic and would be a waste of time sending it through QA everytime. You can rather use the fixes found in the forums.
#175
He asked for things that are not true in the marketing. Everything they say in the marketing material is true.
07/23/2007 (2:36 am)
@Jacobin: While there may be problems in all of those areas... nothing that is printed there is false. The only one that is even remotely close to not being true is regarding the lighting on atlas, but they do affect legacy. It should also be noted that some lighting types do affect atlas, and some do not. He asked for things that are not true in the marketing. Everything they say in the marketing material is true.
#176
So far, nobody from GG mentioned to opposite.
A new version every month is unrealistic if features are added, there you are right.
But 1.01 did not bring much that was not posted already and from what mentioned, 1.02 will not add features as well.
I don't see that much of a point of waiting 3 months for this kind of release.
Why bother with QA for a bugfix release anyway? So far, in any release bugs were unfixed that had been posted weeks before the engine entered QA at all.
QA should concentrate on serious releases (TXB, TGB 1.5, TGEA 1.1 with a working lighting system, Atlas2 fully implemented etc), where serious features are added/modified from base up and they really can test something and can guarantee anything.
Bugs are assumed to be in C++ software and most likely will ever be. Why waste a week and human ressource on it? You can't win and the QA has not enough members to test against bugs intense enough as well.
So we end up waiting twice the time without having a that much better release in the end.
Perhaps I've an error in my logic and my assumptions.
Before this were no problems as there has been a repository to get the current version.
But with bundled releases, it is a problem if bug fixes take quarter of a year and serious stuff needs at least half a year (don't know how long, we will know when the release containing a fully working atlas2 system etc will be out)
07/23/2007 (2:43 am)
James: That were the information given out back then by GG employees when all the users thinking about buying the EA version were holding back as GG announced that there will not be lifetime updates any further to Torque engine products. you will have to renew your license to higher versions similar to TGE to get large scale bug fixes and the like after that period.So far, nobody from GG mentioned to opposite.
A new version every month is unrealistic if features are added, there you are right.
But 1.01 did not bring much that was not posted already and from what mentioned, 1.02 will not add features as well.
I don't see that much of a point of waiting 3 months for this kind of release.
Why bother with QA for a bugfix release anyway? So far, in any release bugs were unfixed that had been posted weeks before the engine entered QA at all.
QA should concentrate on serious releases (TXB, TGB 1.5, TGEA 1.1 with a working lighting system, Atlas2 fully implemented etc), where serious features are added/modified from base up and they really can test something and can guarantee anything.
Bugs are assumed to be in C++ software and most likely will ever be. Why waste a week and human ressource on it? You can't win and the QA has not enough members to test against bugs intense enough as well.
So we end up waiting twice the time without having a that much better release in the end.
Perhaps I've an error in my logic and my assumptions.
Before this were no problems as there has been a repository to get the current version.
But with bundled releases, it is a problem if bug fixes take quarter of a year and serious stuff needs at least half a year (don't know how long, we will know when the release containing a fully working atlas2 system etc will be out)
#177
:)
hey hey!!! stop throwing things... heyyyy!!!!
--Mike
07/23/2007 (5:34 am)
Ok... like i suggested months ago... lets just wrap this up and upgrade all TGEA licenses to TorqueX-3D licenses...:)
hey hey!!! stop throwing things... heyyyy!!!!
--Mike
#178
07/23/2007 (8:57 am)
@Marc: 1.02 adds the embedded DTS shapes in your DIF objects through constructor. That's a decent addition, along with the bug fixes. A tentative feature list is located higher up in the thread. I do agree with you though in that I'd much rather see more frequent, if smaller updates.
#179
I remember milestone lists and I actually see what they meant to the shipped stuff.
I only believe what I see and what I get as part of contracts.
I last time did not get payed when I deliveried something that was of that far from the milestone which what I deliveried, I've to say ...
07/23/2007 (10:29 am)
Tentative feature lists are what they are tentative.I remember milestone lists and I actually see what they meant to the shipped stuff.
I only believe what I see and what I get as part of contracts.
I last time did not get payed when I deliveried something that was of that far from the milestone which what I deliveried, I've to say ...
#180
The only "contract" that applies to anyone is the EULA, which specifically states that the product you purchase is "As Is", with no expectation of any future updates or modifications:
Anything else is "tentative feature lists" as you describe above.
Not trying to come down on the thread here, but that's the contract that applies when you purchase the engine.
07/23/2007 (10:38 am)
Quote:
I only believe what I see and what I get as part of contracts.
The only "contract" that applies to anyone is the EULA, which specifically states that the product you purchase is "As Is", with no expectation of any future updates or modifications:
Quote:
6. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTY OR GUARANTEED UPDATES OF ANY KIND,
Anything else is "tentative feature lists" as you describe above.
Not trying to come down on the thread here, but that's the contract that applies when you purchase the engine.
Torque Owner Andy Hodges
The Mission Editor in TGEA does not work. You can't edit the mission bounds, and when you do, you can't even use camera (like in TGE) to move around. You can't see your movement in the Mission Editor box. It's empty.
So while Atlas is broke, I tried using Legacy terrain and ran into that mission bounds problem.
Many of the Torque Lighting Features are not working. They've been broken for a very long time. You can see what I'm saying by creating an fxlight which doesn't do anything. I forget what the other lighting problems are, but there are a few.
The other problem is Atlas, which I could spell out numerous items. But one thing for sure, Torque Lighting doesn't have any impact on terrain as it does in "Legacy". Even when you light up the "lightmap" the sunlight has no impact on the terrain as it does in regular TGE. It's just one huge blob object that's dark.
It's just things like that which were promised to be fixed for.. god knows.. it's been almost 2 years.
There might be reasons why the lighting doesn't work, because of HDR and GFX. But even when you use HDR on the terrain, it still doesn't have any impact on it. And HDR has a HUGE impact on FPS. It cuts it down by 60% (there was a thread about that too). If you don't use HDR, the Atlas terrain is dark.
I wrote a long list of things broke in TGEA awhile back, which I did email to GG. Never heard back. I'll dig it up again and forward it.