3dws or Contructor

#1 3DWS6 is going to be awesome. Especially if you combine it with the Leadwerks Engine. I would stick with what tool you are more comfortable with. If you already have a good pipeline that is easy for you to use, stick with 3DWS. If you like the baking that Constructor provides, use constructor.

#2 IMO Constructor is as straight foward as it gets. If you need instructions for Constructor you probably dont need a computer. :P

#3 I am useing BOTH, QUARK and Constructor.
I learned to use QUARK back in late 90's, and am very comfortable with it, I use it to build all my geometry and still can not find any BSP editor that offers the same amount of power. (yes Constructor is easy to use but hardy have 1/10th the functionality!)

Then after the geometry is made, i import into Constructor to use its most powerful functions, LIGHTS and TEXTURES alignment. Before Constructor it took extra hard time consuming work to alight textures using QUARK, and lights from QUARK were sad.

Constructor is easy to use, I have not had any stability problems with Constructor. I dont like that i can not use my multi-monitors with Constructor, this is a bit mark against Constructor. Constructor also takes MASSIVE amounts of ram, its almost insane to watch the Task Manger when it is running- I find it very difficult to multi task when Constructor is running, and i have 1.5 Gig ram, (I can have 3D Max, PhotoShop, PaintShopPRO , Visual Studio, Quark, TorqueScript Editer and test run my project all at the same time with RAM left over still. But I need to close everything if i wish to start Constructor...)

Constructor is young, its got time to grow, and should only get better. It also have functions to offer. I was happy to add it to my toolbox of other programs...

#4 Really? Wow when I first used quark back in the quake days I thought it was the worst program I have ever used. What kind of powerful functions are in quark? Is this the quark you use? quark.planetquake.gamespy.com/features.php3 To me it looks horrible, and is not very user friendly. Maybe I'm missing something.

#5 Ya thats the one, the new 6.5 is great.

And i do agree its got a clumsy interface, BUT it is very customizable, I have it set up like 3D max. Not to mention every program is CLUMSY when you first start to use it.

You want to know about powerful functions? Boot QUARK up and look in the menu options, You can do just about anything you wish with a shape.
Then look at the Shape Builders (in case you dont know where to find them, just click "NEW ITEM" found left of the odd 'angle' tool in the upper left panel.)
Now check out what you can do with Duplicators.

And here is one of the BEST things about QUARK. Its ability to subtract a brush from a set of other brush- it actually COMPUTER the best brush cuts possible, allowing one to carve away at brushes, and NOT worry about creating a bad brush that will NOT export.(it can still happen- but finding the offending brush is so very easy...) On its own computing QUARK will calculate the best possible brushes for a shape, removing a world of hurt and wasted time from the user.

Anyhow, i was not saying "SWITCH TO QUARK!", (I understand QUARK is not for everyone.) what I was saying is, "Learn and use a tool for its strength and weakness."

I still have not found any ONE 'paint' program that can do everything I wish, so i use PhotoShop/PaintShopPRO/GIMP all together... Same for my BSP tools, Constructor have its strong points, and i will be using Constructor to take advantage of them, but i would be a fool to drop everything else and worship in the temple of Constructor with ignorant faith, Constructor is not the almighty BSP editor...


EDIT:
Just wanted to add, some time ago they added CRASH trapping, so IF/when QUARK do crash, its actualy only crash out the function you were using- 99.5% of the time you can correct whatever generated the crash, and keep on working as if noting happened.

#6

Quote:
And here is one of the BEST things about QUARK. Its ability to subtract a brush from a set of other brush- it actually COMPUTER the best brush cuts possible, allowing one to carve away at brushes, and NOT worry about creating a bad brush that will NOT export.(it can still happen- but finding the offending brush is so very easy...) On its own computing QUARK will calculate the best possible brushes for a shape, removing a world of hurt and wasted time from the user.

Constructor does this as well--it's called CSG subtract.

#7 I wasnt trying to bash quark. I know you have been using it for a while, just like I've been using Worldcraft & Hammer. You get used to knowing everything about it, and dont wanna switch... and the cool thing is you can use both. I was just wondering what it could do, as I haven't used it in many many years. Crash trapping sounds nice. :D

But I think I'm gonna quit using Hammer and learn Constructor. I likes it, I likes it alot. :)

#8 Um, actually when i tested Constructors CSG ability's i was fully unimpressed, it made an absolute MESS. Constructor also will not do a very good job subtracting when you have many overlapping brushes. Constructor force one back to building clean and carefully- a good practice anyhow, but not always possible.

If you wish to test this yourself, here is a simple example, build a cylinder with 12 sides, hollow it. Now try and subtract an cylinder from the side, so you have a silo shaped cylinder with a round door/entry. You will find Constructor just made LOTS of crazy shaped brush, and most likely you will have invisible polys in Torque, odd collision issues or even crashing.

You can do the same thing in QUARK and end up with far fewer clean shaped brush, and it have always worked fine for me running in Torque. QUARK will also subtract into a mess of overlapping brushes without having a stroke.

Im not insulting Constructor, its still a little baby BSP editor with lots of room to grow up into a GREAT tool. But it will only become a great tool if people realize that there IS indeed room/need for improvement!

#9 MB, yes. I used Worldcraft / Hammer off and on for years, And i would agree 100% that Constructor is just as good as Worldcraft / Hammer in many ways.

#10 Stephen, I suspect he means the ability to use negative brushes. These brushes will affect the 3D view, but not actually make any CSG subtractions (though correctly sends them during process time)*.

There's obvious benefits and detriments both for this feature. The benefit is not having to slice up other brushes (like for a window), but still seeing and exporting the results. A detriment is not being able to immediately see how it carves, though it can be predictable and in the final version those brushes marked negative still can be CSG-subtracted at this point.

To all:
Constructor has a lot of potential. The ability to literally place DTS items inside a DIF is awesome, and something for which I've wished for a long time. Better static shadows using DTS is very, very nice. Being able to see lighting in the CSG editor is also sweet. I know the devs are working on getting zones and debugging. However IMHO Caylo is completely correct in that QuArK offers a lot of nice features --and with the latest couple of QuArK beta releases, even runs faster.

Constructor has a lot of potential, including that of user-created plug-ins. I'm not sure I'm quite ready to convert from QuArK, but if it keeps progressing I may well.



*on edit, I see that he's since replied and was speaking of something different.

#11 Eric, correct im not speaking of negative brushes, But the way Constructor THINKS versus QUARK, QUARK is far more careful and thoughtfull.

Im sure Constructor will someday (judging from the past way GG works, soon) be just as good at it- I expect right now the focus for Constructor is getting the exporters working correctly, fixing bugs and making sure all of the functions it have right now are working in TOP form. Constructor is in the same place UED, Worldcraft / Hammer and QUARK, (not to mention all the dozens of other BSP editors that have NOT evolved over time), were when THEY were fresh young BSP editors.

I just hope that the 'its good enough' philosophy do not over reign 'it could be better' way of thinking. And as far as im concerned there is NO ONE 'perfect' BSP editor out there yet!

The original thread comment was ".... I own 3dws already I know how to use it." I suggest; take the time to learn what Constructor have to offer (took me all of 3 days to FULLY explore Constructor), weigh Constructors STRONG points against the weak points of the BSP editor you currently use, and learn how best to exploit every tool you can get your hands on!

I realy like Constructor for its texture alignment, and 'true to Torque' lighting ability. I can not say anything for its ability to export DTS with the DIF because my current project is 2 years worth of investment in the 1.3 then TLK then 1.4 code base. (why cant we get a patch JUST for the Dif's to update the older code base? There is no way im going to update to 1.5 just for ONE feature, when my project is 98% finished now)

#12 I like constructor better.

#13 I bought 3dws a day before they said Constructor was going to be released. 3DWS is very easy to use, Constructor I just tried today and it is Awesome, it is alittle bit tougher, mainly because of some terminology used a new person to it may not know what certain things do.

#14 Constructor does have potential. I'm anxious to see what the developers and community do with it.

Wouldn't mind seeing a QuArK or Hammer-like interface option too. ;)

#15 I used both QuArK and Cartography Shop (forerunner to 3DWS) until Torque Constructor was released. Now I've deleted QuArK, and I'm concentrating on wringing as much performance as I can out of TC. However, I found nothing wrong with CS/3DWS, and because I'm used to it I find myself hopping back and forth between it and TC.

I don't think there's anything weird about using 'em both. I have both MSOffice and OpenOffice on my machine, too.

#16 Try both and use the one you prefer, I know which one I prefer

#17 @ ando:
I feel the same...you pick and choose the tool you feel confortable with....run with it and never look back.