TorqueX 3.0
by Jonathon Stevens · in Torque X 2D · 05/22/2008 (8:03 am) · 26 replies
The community preview has been out for some time now for XNA 3.0 and I wanted to see what the plans were and how far out on the radar TX 3.0 would be? I know TX 2.0 lagged quite a bit behind XNA 2.0, but IIRC, GG hadn't gotten any build of 2.0 before it was released by Microsoft. Now you have a chance to see the new framework before it's released, so what are the plans for upgrading?
About the author
With a few casual games under his belt as CEO of Last Straw Productions, Jonathon created the increasingly popular Indie MMO Game Developers Conference.
#2
05/22/2008 (12:56 pm)
Hmm. I'd have to go check the blogs and forums again to be 100% certain, but i believe xna 2.0 only had a closed beta, not an open community preview like 3.0 now has. I could be wrong however. 
#3
It wasn't an open beta on this level, though, with 3.0 targeting the holiday season.
05/22/2008 (1:11 pm)
I think that the open beta period was very short. I think it was when it hit RC status, but I can't remember.It wasn't an open beta on this level, though, with 3.0 targeting the holiday season.
#4
05/22/2008 (1:30 pm)
Either way, it'd be nice to get an idea on what the future plans are for TX. A lot of stuff is going into Instant Action, and I want to see that TX isn't gettin lost in the shuffle. 
#5
05/22/2008 (3:33 pm)
Yeah, the TX staff has gone through alot of changes, and now seems to be mostly community driven. 2.0 was not much of an update, in my opinion, but I havn't had a chance to use any networking capabilities. 
#6
05/22/2008 (3:44 pm)
John Kanalakis is working on a 3D Builder for Torque X at the moment. Torque X book will be out soon from him as well! :)
#7
Keep in mind that TX 2.0 made TorqueX compliant with XNA 2.0, so while much of it was under the covers, it was actually quite a big update.
05/22/2008 (4:04 pm)
Quote:
2.0 was not much of an update, in my opinion, but I havn't had a chance to use any networking capabilities.
Keep in mind that TX 2.0 made TorqueX compliant with XNA 2.0, so while much of it was under the covers, it was actually quite a big update.
#8
05/22/2008 (4:54 pm)
Quote:Keep in mind that TX 2.0 made TorqueX compliant with XNA 2.0, so while much of it was under the covers, it was actually quite a big update.One great quote after another here.. But is it as exciting as it sounds
#9
Awesome. Thanks!
05/22/2008 (8:13 pm)
Quote:
John Kanalakis is working on a 3D Builder for Torque X at the moment. Torque X book will be out soon from him as well! :)
Awesome. Thanks!
#11
I think it makes sense for GarageGames to continue its focus on getting the 3D Builder finished off, tested, and rolled out to everyone while XNA 3.0 settles down into some sort of "refresh", "beta", or "release" - as opposed to its current "preview" state. (the 3D Builder is really-really-really close to release) This way, everyone has the tools needed to make some awesome games for the next Microsoft Dream-Build-Play game competition as well as the Community LIVE Marketplace.
Unfortunately, I'm sworn to secrecy - but - from what I've seen, Torque X has a pretty long and exciting roadmap. This includes GarageGames work as well as third party projects that I've heard about. I can't go into details, but there is going to be a lot of great tools, starter kits, reference material, and content to help you create awesome games for Windows and the Xbox 360.
John K.
05/26/2008 (2:57 pm)
Torque X 3.0 is not that far out, but certainly on the way. In spite of best efforts, keep in mind that GarageGames received XNA 3.0 along with everyone else, so there was no lead time to update the engine. Also, after looking through XNA 3.0, it appears that there isn't much more that it offers other than support for Visual Studio 2008 and deployment to Zune (with deployment to Xbox 360 temporarily disabled). I think it makes sense for GarageGames to continue its focus on getting the 3D Builder finished off, tested, and rolled out to everyone while XNA 3.0 settles down into some sort of "refresh", "beta", or "release" - as opposed to its current "preview" state. (the 3D Builder is really-really-really close to release) This way, everyone has the tools needed to make some awesome games for the next Microsoft Dream-Build-Play game competition as well as the Community LIVE Marketplace.
Unfortunately, I'm sworn to secrecy - but - from what I've seen, Torque X has a pretty long and exciting roadmap. This includes GarageGames work as well as third party projects that I've heard about. I can't go into details, but there is going to be a lot of great tools, starter kits, reference material, and content to help you create awesome games for Windows and the Xbox 360.
John K.
#13
Exactly, they are just going from one half finished thing to the next. Trying to keep us all going on 'exciting' and 'new' developments and words of such ilk.
@john
Not to be harsh or anything as I know you put alot of time and effort into TorqueX, the forums and your book and all, but what you have said above has all been heard many (many) times before.
Why can't they tweak, finish and polish a product to a quality end instead of moving on leaving all these loose and dangling ends all the time? While the 3D builder is no doubt going to be great, a lot of people bought and invested in TorqueX for the 2D side. Is that going the way of the Dodo now with the focus clearly on everything 3D?
The platformer kit is a great product, but it isn't working under TorqueX/XNA 2, yet should have been up and running long before now. Not only for the new people but all the existing owners who want to upgrade their TorqueX/XNA.
05/30/2008 (4:35 pm)
@AnthonyExactly, they are just going from one half finished thing to the next. Trying to keep us all going on 'exciting' and 'new' developments and words of such ilk.
@john
Not to be harsh or anything as I know you put alot of time and effort into TorqueX, the forums and your book and all, but what you have said above has all been heard many (many) times before.
Why can't they tweak, finish and polish a product to a quality end instead of moving on leaving all these loose and dangling ends all the time? While the 3D builder is no doubt going to be great, a lot of people bought and invested in TorqueX for the 2D side. Is that going the way of the Dodo now with the focus clearly on everything 3D?
The platformer kit is a great product, but it isn't working under TorqueX/XNA 2, yet should have been up and running long before now. Not only for the new people but all the existing owners who want to upgrade their TorqueX/XNA.
#14
I'm glad I haven't invested anything but time into TX2 yet ...so far it's seems to be going the same route as TGE 1.4 did...which is to say that the documentation and resources either don't exist or are worthless/outdated making you pull out your hair until you give up in frustration.
This is incredible, I bought TGE 4 years ago and in that time GG still has the same old problems getting their dev's to buckle down, suck it up and write some decent documentation for the products they release, instead preferring to let everyone else slog through it until they finally get around to writing something down that gets outdated with the next release. (ok so that last part was pure speculation and probably a bit spiteful but damnit this is the same problem I had 4 years ago! At least this time I was able to find it out before throwing down cash)
05/30/2008 (7:01 pm)
Wait a second...the platform starter kit (which is still up for sale on the site) doesn't work with 2.0?...That's freakin awesome /sarcasm. I'm glad I haven't invested anything but time into TX2 yet ...so far it's seems to be going the same route as TGE 1.4 did...which is to say that the documentation and resources either don't exist or are worthless/outdated making you pull out your hair until you give up in frustration.
This is incredible, I bought TGE 4 years ago and in that time GG still has the same old problems getting their dev's to buckle down, suck it up and write some decent documentation for the products they release, instead preferring to let everyone else slog through it until they finally get around to writing something down that gets outdated with the next release. (ok so that last part was pure speculation and probably a bit spiteful but damnit this is the same problem I had 4 years ago! At least this time I was able to find it out before throwing down cash)
#15
I'm a TX Pro owner and I've had significant experience with TGB before working with TX. As such, I had very little trouble 'figuring out' TX. Much more of my time was spent learning C#, VS 2005, and XNA than puzzling over TX. Granted I'm only using 2D functionality (which is more solid and better documented than 3D), and I have TX Pro so I can just step through the source code when I have issues, but I still don't understand the extreme levels of confusion I've seen in these forums and in the TorqueX thread on the XNA forums.
Maybe it's the knowledge gap between people who got started with other GG products and have some concept of their structure and those that are wading into this for the first time. As a member of the former group, I'm far more interested in TorqueX getting support for XNA 3.0 (and consequently VS 2008 and C# 3.0) as quickly as possible than anything else. Getting compatible with MS's new technology is going to open up a whole set of features and tools.
In contrast, I don't see much substance in the 'fix TX 2.0 first' argument. There are no major outstanding bugs that I know of. Documentation is being worked on in parallel. Platformer Kit should be updated but that's a relatively minor issue; I've copied loads of useful code from the Platformer Kit into my project without any compatibility issues.
Compatibility with the new MS framework, IDE, and language features just massively outweighs any amount of "tweak, finish and polish" that TX needs in my opinion.
05/31/2008 (2:33 pm)
If we're having a discussion about GG's priorities I'd like to add my input here to balance what I see as a very 'squeaky-wheel' dominated discussion.I'm a TX Pro owner and I've had significant experience with TGB before working with TX. As such, I had very little trouble 'figuring out' TX. Much more of my time was spent learning C#, VS 2005, and XNA than puzzling over TX. Granted I'm only using 2D functionality (which is more solid and better documented than 3D), and I have TX Pro so I can just step through the source code when I have issues, but I still don't understand the extreme levels of confusion I've seen in these forums and in the TorqueX thread on the XNA forums.
Maybe it's the knowledge gap between people who got started with other GG products and have some concept of their structure and those that are wading into this for the first time. As a member of the former group, I'm far more interested in TorqueX getting support for XNA 3.0 (and consequently VS 2008 and C# 3.0) as quickly as possible than anything else. Getting compatible with MS's new technology is going to open up a whole set of features and tools.
In contrast, I don't see much substance in the 'fix TX 2.0 first' argument. There are no major outstanding bugs that I know of. Documentation is being worked on in parallel. Platformer Kit should be updated but that's a relatively minor issue; I've copied loads of useful code from the Platformer Kit into my project without any compatibility issues.
Compatibility with the new MS framework, IDE, and language features just massively outweighs any amount of "tweak, finish and polish" that TX needs in my opinion.
#16
Since Mr. Duke knows GG products so well, perhaps he can point out how we are to display arbitrarily-rotated text in Tx 2.0? TGB? Any of their 2D products? Answer: the functionality doesn't exit. This is just one example of a litany of issues with this incomplete product.
I bought TGB in the "early adopter" period too, and never could figure out how to do a single thing with it because the documentation sucked so bad.
You see, what's sad is I can get a game demo up and running in TWO DAYS with straight XNA or WPF or DirectX (I did all three first) and I've been going TWO FULL WEEKS with negligible success using TorqueX. Thats PATHETIC and it's not because I'm a moron -- I got it running on several other technologies in around 12-14 hours each, counting art asset generation.
I'm not here to base TorqueX, but I agree it has the same problems as TGE & TGB. They feel like they were half-baked, thrown out the door, and forgotten. If GG wants to be a REAL technology supplier then they need to work on support. But it would appear they're making what they want to make for themselves and if anyone else can make heads or tails of it then fine, but don't kid yourself -- none of us are a priority.
I'm evaluating .net-based graphics engines for my company's next big product and we're probably talking about HUNDREDS of games released all over the world using this technology. We're going to proceed with whatever gets us to the finish line fastest, and right now that's not TorqueX (heck, I can't even get GG to talk to me about the issues I've encountered).
Too bad too sad for GG -- it really would've been a feather in their cap.
ALF
05/31/2008 (4:21 pm)
I disagree, Tx 2.0 (and any GG product) has major problems if people can't actually use it.Since Mr. Duke knows GG products so well, perhaps he can point out how we are to display arbitrarily-rotated text in Tx 2.0? TGB? Any of their 2D products? Answer: the functionality doesn't exit. This is just one example of a litany of issues with this incomplete product.
I bought TGB in the "early adopter" period too, and never could figure out how to do a single thing with it because the documentation sucked so bad.
You see, what's sad is I can get a game demo up and running in TWO DAYS with straight XNA or WPF or DirectX (I did all three first) and I've been going TWO FULL WEEKS with negligible success using TorqueX. Thats PATHETIC and it's not because I'm a moron -- I got it running on several other technologies in around 12-14 hours each, counting art asset generation.
I'm not here to base TorqueX, but I agree it has the same problems as TGE & TGB. They feel like they were half-baked, thrown out the door, and forgotten. If GG wants to be a REAL technology supplier then they need to work on support. But it would appear they're making what they want to make for themselves and if anyone else can make heads or tails of it then fine, but don't kid yourself -- none of us are a priority.
I'm evaluating .net-based graphics engines for my company's next big product and we're probably talking about HUNDREDS of games released all over the world using this technology. We're going to proceed with whatever gets us to the finish line fastest, and right now that's not TorqueX (heck, I can't even get GG to talk to me about the issues I've encountered).
Too bad too sad for GG -- it really would've been a feather in their cap.
ALF
#17
I see your point Robert.. Basically you are saying 2.0 is more or less finished, we can get more in the long run if GG concentrates thier efforts on 3.0..
But that doesn't really make sense. Polishing the code, the engine itself, should be seperate from worrying about 3.0 compatibilty, and VS2008 compatibility. I only have my own personal perspective to count on, but from what I can see, TX does need polish. From what i can tell, especially in the 2.5D on up realm, there TX doesn't really make the cut on the 360.. from what I can tell. Deploying on my home machine results in a black screen for 3DCameraComponent/rendered objects. At work I can deploy the 3D demo onto the XBox, but it results in a blotchy blackness in some areas, and is genearlly looks like complete garbage. 2D3D objects deployed from whatever computer I'm working on, seem to be invisible from what I can tell... Even if these problems are easily fixable, they need to fix them! So that when we have something that is 3.0 complient, it is actually worth the install upgrade. Granted, there are many benifits to TX, but it works best if all its features are working at maximum compacity. And advertising that it is a 3D engine, when really it only deploys to the xbox as a 2D engine is a real embaressment I think.
I dont see how the above outweights the inability to deploy 3D onto the Xbox. Now, some people may have figured out a way to get around these limitations, but I would argue that some people are very few, and that most people/ indie game studios are really counting on here that we get some real power out of the next TX installment. Sometimes gg seems very serious about TX, sometimes not, I've been following them for over a year and almost a half, and have visited them a few times. They do seem very enthusiastic about TX.. XNA is supposed to be leading the pack of game development, that should put TX in a position to really let loose some awesome console games.. but thats simply not happening right now, probobly due to what was stated above, amongst other bits of confusion..
I think we all just have to wait and see what GarageGames does at the next GameFest.. if they have some releases planned, if they are going to pop the hood and stun everyone.. well the last two GameFests I think we've seen alot... And I don't see why this year should be any different... In my opinion the Xbox is the most import part of the equation. They obviously have the technology to do it, its just these little bugs that keep tripping us up. They have to make it a priority, and I guess that they have to some degree. As consumers/ developers who depend on them for buisness we just have to be patient and wait for the next gamefest, hope they bless us with more awesome stuff we can use..
Sorry, but it just seemed like a good time to go on a rant.
05/31/2008 (4:38 pm)
Edit: Good point Farmer, But I wrote my blog before seeing yours.. I see your point Robert.. Basically you are saying 2.0 is more or less finished, we can get more in the long run if GG concentrates thier efforts on 3.0..
But that doesn't really make sense. Polishing the code, the engine itself, should be seperate from worrying about 3.0 compatibilty, and VS2008 compatibility. I only have my own personal perspective to count on, but from what I can see, TX does need polish. From what i can tell, especially in the 2.5D on up realm, there TX doesn't really make the cut on the 360.. from what I can tell. Deploying on my home machine results in a black screen for 3DCameraComponent/rendered objects. At work I can deploy the 3D demo onto the XBox, but it results in a blotchy blackness in some areas, and is genearlly looks like complete garbage. 2D3D objects deployed from whatever computer I'm working on, seem to be invisible from what I can tell... Even if these problems are easily fixable, they need to fix them! So that when we have something that is 3.0 complient, it is actually worth the install upgrade. Granted, there are many benifits to TX, but it works best if all its features are working at maximum compacity. And advertising that it is a 3D engine, when really it only deploys to the xbox as a 2D engine is a real embaressment I think.
Quote:Compatibility with the new MS framework, IDE, and language features just massively outweighs any amount of "tweak, finish and polish" that TX needs in my opinion.
I dont see how the above outweights the inability to deploy 3D onto the Xbox. Now, some people may have figured out a way to get around these limitations, but I would argue that some people are very few, and that most people/ indie game studios are really counting on here that we get some real power out of the next TX installment. Sometimes gg seems very serious about TX, sometimes not, I've been following them for over a year and almost a half, and have visited them a few times. They do seem very enthusiastic about TX.. XNA is supposed to be leading the pack of game development, that should put TX in a position to really let loose some awesome console games.. but thats simply not happening right now, probobly due to what was stated above, amongst other bits of confusion..
I think we all just have to wait and see what GarageGames does at the next GameFest.. if they have some releases planned, if they are going to pop the hood and stun everyone.. well the last two GameFests I think we've seen alot... And I don't see why this year should be any different... In my opinion the Xbox is the most import part of the equation. They obviously have the technology to do it, its just these little bugs that keep tripping us up. They have to make it a priority, and I guess that they have to some degree. As consumers/ developers who depend on them for buisness we just have to be patient and wait for the next gamefest, hope they bless us with more awesome stuff we can use..
Sorry, but it just seemed like a good time to go on a rant.
#18
Oh.. I forgot to check the 'this is what's required to be considered a true game engine' list to ensure that was on it.
If you can't get a simple game demo going in TX in 2 weeks, then you didn't get one going in XNA in a couple hours. TX is on top of XNA and makes things MUCH simpler. I build a complete game, front to back in less than 4 days during GDC 2 years ago using TX before the 2D version was even out of beta. There was NO documentation, NO TDN, and most of the TX posts were mine.
TX is feature complete with what was promised. If something is missing, code it in yourself. If certain functionality doesn't exist, that doesn't make the product incomplete.
In case you missed it, GG just sold themselves for what must have been an incredible chunk of change. I think they're doing just fine without your business Anthony.
I'm no GG fanboy either, I simply point out what I see. I'm not siding with anyone but myself. GG documentation has always been the worst part of their business and usually lacks a TON. TX could certainly use improvements, but so could every game engine I've ever used. XNA didn't even have network support (outside of system.net) until 2.0 and even that doesn't work with their own latest development environment. Everything is going to have it's issues and nothing has every feature we want, or we'd simply click a button and it would build our games for us.
The difference between a game developer and a hobbiest is typically that the hobbiest just takes what's available and pieces them together and hopes for the best, where a developer adds what's missing.
05/31/2008 (4:39 pm)
Quote:display arbitrarily-rotated text in Tx 2.0
Oh.. I forgot to check the 'this is what's required to be considered a true game engine' list to ensure that was on it.
Quote:You see, what's sad is I can get a game demo up and running in TWO DAYS with straight XNA or WPF or DirectX (I did all three first) and I've been going TWO FULL WEEKS with negligible success using TorqueX.
If you can't get a simple game demo going in TX in 2 weeks, then you didn't get one going in XNA in a couple hours. TX is on top of XNA and makes things MUCH simpler. I build a complete game, front to back in less than 4 days during GDC 2 years ago using TX before the 2D version was even out of beta. There was NO documentation, NO TDN, and most of the TX posts were mine.
TX is feature complete with what was promised. If something is missing, code it in yourself. If certain functionality doesn't exist, that doesn't make the product incomplete.
Quote:Too bad too sad for GG -- it really would've been a feather in their cap.
In case you missed it, GG just sold themselves for what must have been an incredible chunk of change. I think they're doing just fine without your business Anthony.
I'm no GG fanboy either, I simply point out what I see. I'm not siding with anyone but myself. GG documentation has always been the worst part of their business and usually lacks a TON. TX could certainly use improvements, but so could every game engine I've ever used. XNA didn't even have network support (outside of system.net) until 2.0 and even that doesn't work with their own latest development environment. Everything is going to have it's issues and nothing has every feature we want, or we'd simply click a button and it would build our games for us.
The difference between a game developer and a hobbiest is typically that the hobbiest just takes what's available and pieces them together and hopes for the best, where a developer adds what's missing.
#19
finally, some justifiable problems to complain about!
05/31/2008 (4:43 pm)
Quote:inability to deploy 3D onto the Xbox
finally, some justifiable problems to complain about!
#20
I know that GarageGames has comitment to Torque X and a long roadmap for the engine. I suspect that a 2.X release will be coming out before the 3.0 release that incorporates a lot of bug fixes and some minor features. Also, when you come across bugs, be sure to log them here in the forums, since that drives the bug-fix list.
John K.
05/31/2008 (6:01 pm)
I can't speak for GarageGames, just for myself. I've also been working with Torque X since the early days with no documentation and incomplete functionality. I still managed to produce over 50 game prototypes - just by dissecting the code. My only point is that there are definitely bugs in Torque X, but it's not "unusable". And I've personally seen newcomers build basic games in Torque X 2D within a day. I think the most honest assessment is that Torque X is a good engine for hobbyists/developers that already have game creation experience. Torque X now needs to focus more on usability for hobbyists/developers that are completely new to game creation. I know that GarageGames has comitment to Torque X and a long roadmap for the engine. I suspect that a 2.X release will be coming out before the 3.0 release that incorporates a lot of bug fixes and some minor features. Also, when you come across bugs, be sure to log them here in the forums, since that drives the bug-fix list.
John K.
Torque Owner DodongoXP
i supose it will take a while.. since as far as i know torque x is being developed by very very few people