So where is the TGB roadmap?

#21 Well considering TGB hasn't been updated in forever.. I guess this is where all the updates we could have been getting for TGB have been going? Instead of updating TGB it looks to me like maybe they've been holding out on releasing the features people have been wanting to see in TGB in order to make everyone pay for the upgrade as if it were a new engine. Just like they did from TGE to TGEA, or TGEA to T3D.. I hope there is some kind of discount for us TGB users, that'd be nice...

#22 @Joe - We have an amusing track record with naming our tech. When Melv first spawned the engine, it was called Torque 2D. The name was changed to Torque Game Builder as it was improved.

The purpose to renaming it back to Torque 2D is for the same reason that we are dubbing our three-d engine Torque 3D.

Torque 2D will eventually become our main, supported 2D engine. More details will be released after Torque 3D ships.

#23 @Govert: As with Torque 3D, we plan to give discounts to people who already own a previous version of the engine. If you buy TGB now, you will get a generous discount on Torque 2D.

#24 Thanks for the clarification Michael. I have to say I'm very excited and interested to hear what's coming for us 2D developers. I know Melv has been back tinkering away at something, maybe this is what it was hmm? :)

#25 if the feature pack of the new Torque 2D addresses all the features ppl has been asking for, and then some, i'd pay that extra cash to get the pro version, like i did with TGB 3 yrs ago.

i'd like to see that feature list already.

#26 In IRC Hour yesterday, Deborah talked about Torque 2D. It was very short, and contained all the information we are ready to provide at this moment. Pretty much said what we have stated in the forums, but felt IRC Hour was a good place to say it all in one breath.

#27 Did anyone from GG ever discuss the results of the feature survey we took some months ago? Like folks here I'm looking forward to what new things you guys have planned, but I'm also wondering what falls in the "snowball's chance in Hades" category (like isometric support or mount points for DTS objects).

#28 @Aaron - We'll start releasing that kind of information post-Torque 3D launch

#29 @Aaron: Are you talking about the TGEA survey? I did post results for that in the linked blog. I also did a survey of TGB way back in my internship days, but that's probably too old to be useful now. We also include survey links in our documentation, which we do check for determining feature specs, but don't make those results public.

#30 Thanks Michael and Deborah. I'm not sure if I'm remembering something old but I thought it was last year that GG did a survey regarding features for TGB. It asked us to rate the importance of features such as isometric support and networking, and I thought this was going to be released to the community but that I'd just missed it.

I realize you can't discuss specific features and that discussing what's NOT going in almost gives away what IS going in, but if I knew something like isometric support was not even a possibility it would help guide the time I'm investing in trying to alter the TGB codebase.

EDIT: Deborah, the survey you linked to has the same language as what I remember for TGB.

#31 I'm with you Aaron.. it's like, I don't want to keep working on my TGB project because everything I'm doing now may be obsoleted or need to be heavily redone to work with the new engine.

Please let us know as much as you can tell us, as soon as you can tell us ;)

#32 @Aaron and Joe: It depends where you've been working in the engine, source or script side?

Most of the work that Melv and I have done has been done with backwards compatability in mind. That said, not everything in your 1.7.4 is going to work straight away in Torque 2D.

To give you an indication, it took me about 30mins to get the PSK, both engine and script sides, working under Torque 2D. There aren't many, if any, hidden little changes that will bite you on the ass. If there are, they will be documented in an upgrade guide like Michael did for TGEA.

As far as features goes, you're going to have to wait for any official word, but some people in this thread have hit the nail on the head. I won't tell you what, you'll just have to wait!

#33 Thanks for the info Phillip, I'm glad to hear backwards compatibility is a priority.

I asked about isometric support because I've gotten the impression that Garage Games views TGB's core strength as serving the casual market. If that's the case, I'm in the minority and shouldn't hold my breath-- because I can't see you guys putting a ton of work into a technology that would make it easier to make retro RPGs that were popular over 10 years ago. Of course, I could be wrong, and if so many of my engine side changes (trying to follow in the footsteps Neo Bindell) could be for nothing.

Anyway, I appreciate the position you guys are in, especially in how you manage expectations. Like Joe, I'm just hoping for some feedback, even if it's a no.

#34 Wow, really good feedback guys. I wasn't expecting it to go on this long but so far good information from everyone involved. Let's keep it up :D

#35 It's comforting to know there will be backwards compatibility. I made a few changes to the source but nothing too deep. I mainly hope that consolefunctions won't change because most of my code is written in Lua and that currently depends on consolefunctions. I'm also hoping behaviors will still exist in the new Torque 2D but I'm going to go ahead and assume they do if the PSK runs in the new engine ;) Maybe even slightly improved? hmmm time will tell...

#36 Behaviours were introduced with such fanfare that I hope they keep them :)
I'm also wishing for more easily pluggable script languages (a hook to call your compile routine, your loader and exposing each script function easily).

#37 @Joe - if I would have to guess, I would say that Melv insisted that if he was to join in, it had to be Torque 2D. He called it T2d and so T2d it IS!!! ;)

#38

Quote:I asked about isometric support because I've gotten the impression that Garage Games views TGB's core strength as serving the casual market. If that's the case, I'm in the minority and shouldn't hold my breath

I don't see isometric support as a minority thing.
The interest in the adventure kit should have shown that pretty well.

Also I don't think it died. If you think back you might remember the isometric editor thingy that was in development from a user.
As it never has been released with and for TGB in all that time, I've the hope that that work on an expanded level actually might become part of T2D.

#39 I just want to see concave collision polygon and Soft body support in T2D, that would make me as happy as a clam! :)