Why WAS Torque3D documentation so poor?

#301 Torque 3D has a lot of promise to it, and my concern is that history will repeat if the right choices aren't made. It's not only UDK and Unity that has 'indie' developer versions, Crytek is releasing a CryEngine 3 variant and other engine developers are catching on that a 30 day eval just isn't going to cut it for them to be competitive in the engine marketplace. It's going to boil down to who has the best tools, best documentation and best community - the same thing the 'big boy' engine race is on.

My hope is that GG will continue to press hard and make the statements they've said on these forums and online a reality and that it'll be very soon. They literally need to take the 'The Game Programmers Guide to Torque', update it entirely for Torque 3D, upload it to TDN and include its price to every license of Torque 3D sold; either Binary or Pro. The community needs to hold hands together and help each other in converting the other TGE/A/1.5 TS resources to Torque 3D and help one another. I cringe every time I see "did you convert the 1.5 resource?" with no links, no suggestions, etc. It's just a cycle of poor team work; why would those people want to help later if they weren't helped in the first place? We all started as dumb noobs and we all need help in growing and learning to come past that point. We’ve all invested money into this, we’re all part of the same family, trying to do the same thing.

I'm sticking with Torque 3D until 1.1, or maybe a little bit after that, waiting to see what GG will do. My dev friends have Unity 3 Pro (with several titles under their belts) and UDK and have been really itching to do something with me. I can't wait forever, but I'll hold out as long as I can, only because I see promise, I see potential, and I hope that GG and everyone else will invest in it to reap the rewards. My hope is that in the 'indie' engine marketplace that GG wants to be number 1, I want to see them as number 1, and the community will band together to help with that.

In the mean time; talk is cheap - I’m going to submit some resources.

#302 Well, I held off replying until now to see what exactly the reactions would be, and I have to thank the OP, Jon D, for supporting me. You pegged my feelings exactly. It's been all talk for years, and over four months, for just this thread.

@ Eric - The short, simple fact is that there has been no progress at all since the initial rush when this thread first started and I'm sick of it. I refuse to support a company that so obviously doesn't care about its existing customers. GG has proven time and time again that the business charter is, "Get them in, get them to buy it, and get rid of them." Despite promise after promise, no one at GG seems to care.

As if that weren't bad enough, I finally, after stating my intention to leave Torque entirely, get a response back from Mich stating that he's sorry for not replying and allowing the e-mail to get under his radar, but he'd be happy if I would be willing to submit my own docs and resources. Let me restate that: He's aware of how upset with GG I am, but he wants me to do GG's job for them for free.

Before all of this came to a head, I was willing to do so, provided that GG was working on the docs as well. Mack, you stated that everyone should chip in because we paid money to be part of this family. This is incorrect. We paid money for a well-documented product, or at least a product that we can use without having to reverse-engineer the damned thing. My team are artists and scripters, not programmers.

Garage Games, it is your responsibility to make your own documentation, not to provide a forum and say "Now that you bought it, figure it out and share your findings if you feel like it and are not currently under an NDA.

My instructors (plural now) are unhappy with GG, and are heavily shifting focus away from Torque and are settling more and more on Unity in the coming months. I spoke pretty regularly (read: daily) with my Torque instructor during the time you two were supposed to be contacting each other, and I know that there was more effort on his part put into making contact that is being reported here.

But honestly, none of that is relevant at this point. The school's decision was weighted heavily on how GG performed with this last promise of docs. The students and instructors were tired of having no resources to use this engine that we were forced to purchase.


TLDR: It's too late. GG, you've upset too many people with your lack of concern for existing customer happiness, and your frenzy for trying to hype over actually create content. It's not our job to create your docs for you after so many broken promises, and my school, my team, and myself are all leaving. You've lost a lot of money and credit over this.

#303 @Tom - I apologize ahead of the time if this is confrontational, but your statement is misleading. I did not ask you to do my job for me. In our e-mail exchange, you offered up help from yourself and students to aid in the documentation effort. My response was that additional help is very much welcome, offered some suggestions, and explicitly stated that my bandwidth is completely taken up and I can't possibly manage anyone else.

I do own up to not replying to you sooner when we might have been able to salvage a more positive relationship, just like I own up to the shortcomings of the documentation. However, for the sake of my humble reputation and to respect the people I am paying to write docs, please do not say that I am shirking responsibility and asking others to do our work.

@All - With the website changes coming, I am able to push the new script manual draft and draft web docs with the latest updates this Friday.

#304

Quote:With the website changes coming, I am able to push the new script manual CHM and web docs with the latest updates this Friday.

Why do I get the feeling this isn't going to happen? Or it will be very incomplete.

#305 I didn't say it would be complete by Friday. I originally stated the script manual completion was aimed for the 1.1 release, not Friday.

#306 But you didn't say that it would be a draft either. This is the problem with GarageGames, you don't manage expectations correctly.

Personally, it doesn't matter, because I know it is all just hype and talk anyway. I don't believe a thing that comes from GarageGames.

#307 Alright then. I've edited my post so no one else is confused.

#308 @Tom - Firstly, let me suggest the proper tone of my message before you read it so that there isn't any misinterpretation of what I write. I'm not mad at your post and I am sorry to see you go. I think there are some incorrect facts stated in your post that I'd like to correct; I'm not doing this to discredit your frustration - I'd merely like to give my perspective for the benefit of everyone who read yours and are looking for a response.

Quote:The short, simple fact is that there has been no progress at all since the initial rush when this thread first started and I'm sick of it.

We've done a lot and will continue to do more: 1) We've changed a lot about how we are currently doing feature development. Devs are taking an active role in documentation so that we don't require monolithic documentation sprints. 2) We did an initial push which drove the first series of docs that we posted. 3) We've continued doc development with contractors and our devs 4) we have been meeting with 3rd party documentation vendors. 5) We updated documentation of other products other than Torque 3D. 6) We set aside budget for a curriculum initiative that we are announcing in the next two weeks via an e-mail news letter to education. 7) We added several new video tutorials.

Quote:I spoke pretty regularly (read: daily) with my Torque instructor during the time you two were supposed to be contacting each other, and I know that there was more effort on his part put into making contact that is being reported here.

There's no need for an argument here. We mis-communicated during what I believe was your semester break when your instructor said he was available. I can't find anything in my e-mail that suggests what I wrote is anything other than true and I can't think of a reason to lie. The solution is simpler than trying to figure out exactly where the communication was lost; I'm still willing and available to work with your instructor. I will e-mail him after writing this post to see if he is still willing to work with me.

Quote:GG, you've upset too many people with your lack of concern for existing customer happiness, and your frenzy for trying to hype over actually create content.

We are very concerned with existing customer happiness. 1) Our QA has denied three release candidates on different products so far because it didn't meet a quality bar that we are continually increasing. 2) We've removed as many of the statements on our web site that our users took issue with ( there is another remaining gray area regarding the term "web deployment" that we will be updating soon ). If there are other remaining advertisement issues, feel free to point me to them. 3) We have fixed over 150 T3D bugs that we expect to release this month ( pending QA approval ). 4) We've released several new betas with many fixes for TorqueX 2D/3D with a final release going to QA next week. These developers have been neglected for a long time and we have short and long term fixes underway.

#309 Hi All,

I've been keeping tabs on this thread for a while now and have to admit,the very first time I saw it pop up, I had this funny feeling it would make for some "uncomfortable" reading.

Unfortunately, this now seems to be the case! While I *completely* understand the level of frustration that can be caused when buying into something that is essentially still under development, I feel somewhat compelled to defend GG on this matter.

It is clear that progress is indeed being made in a number of areas, and that we've (for the most part) been at least made aware of what's going on in the background. I like this attitude from GG, and commend them for taking the time to respond personally to, what in my opinion is sometimes downright rudeness. As an IT professional, I would not expect to have to justify myself at the whim of disgruntled individuals (it's enough to drive anyone crazy!).

I wonder, in how many other companies will you find people with the inclination to respond frequently and in person to customer concerns with products... especially from employees at Eric's level ?

I can tell you that my boss wouldn't be doing things like that - its the kinda thing usually left to faceless customer servicing departments!

So, to cut a long story short - I thinks it's unfair to continue the negative press here. To clarify my own position... Yes! I would like to see the latest release of T3D with all the documentation under the sun (I'm no different to everyone else here!) - No! I'm not a Torque fan boy! But having worked on several large development projects myself, I know that the road is long and that problems are frequent. Let's hope for a swift conclusion!

I believe in the old adage "the customer is always right" - but I also believe that the customer should also know when to draw the line when expressing themselves... nuff said!

Cheers! :-)

#310 Well said Richard, couldn't agree more

#311

Quote:I originally stated the script manual completion was aimed for the 1.1 release, not Friday.

To try and have this as clear as possible you are on record as promising that the next version of the engine will not ship without "complete api documentation" "whether that is beta 2 or the full release." And Eric is on record sitting right beside you promising that he "will hold everybody to that."

So I look forward to seeing that complete documentation with beta 2.

#312 Seconded Richard.

Now can we get this thing back on track?

#313 @Gerry - Went back and watched the video. If that's what was stated, then confirmed. TorqueScript manual complete by Beta 2. That's all the global functions (ConsoleFunctions), all the methods (ConsoleMethods), member variables (addFields(...)), callbacks (con::executef(...)), and class descriptions (IMPLEMENT_CONOBJECT).

#314 I should point out, like others have done in recent posts, that I write this and other posts in a tone of concern and not one of lashing-out anger or belligerence. This is meant to be constructive rather than the mere venting of frustration.

Quote:Went back and watched the video.

Yes this is the video I was referring to:
www.ustream.tv/recorded/5421886

The relevant section starts just after the 9 minute mark.
I myself took from that the intent was it would be 'complete' documentation, not just TorqueScript-complete. Am I the only one who was left with that impression? Of course everyone can listen and judge for themselves.

But really for me it isn't just an issue of complete documentation at beta or a short while later with the final but one of trust in a company I care about, which in the past seems to let its users down, and whether things have changed for the better with the new changes in management etc. Whether you will make sure not to promise anything you are not reasonably sure you can deliver on, and if you find that you can't deliver whether you will come forward as soon as possible and explain the situation, rather than waiting for your customers to point it out and start complaining. The latter type of thing 'tending to suggest' that the company hasn't learned much at all and just throws out promises loosely, hoping that it gets forgotten and they don't get called on it, or something equally as irresponsible.

Again I should reiterate that these are not angry accusations but concerns from a customer who is also a businessman, like you and many of your other customers. I would like nothing better than to see GG grow into a successful and respected company which follows the best practices possible. It could only benefit me as well as everyone else here... a win/win feedback loop.


Thanks for listening and your replies.

#315 @Gerry - Then to set the expectations:

What prompted that video announcement was almost completely based on this thread and the demand for complete TS API documentation. In the video and my comments in this thread, I'm talking about the effort to finish up the TS Manual (CHM).

#316 @ Mich - Perhaps my wording was poor. I absolutely am writing from a frustrated point of view, and it is influencing my wording. What I meant was that you waited until I stated that I was leaving to let me know that you were willing to accept the help I offered a few months prior. This comes across as if you were disregarding my frustration and just wanted to get a response out the door so it could be crossed off the to-do list.

I'm not saying that was your intent, but that is the only way I could interpret it after so long without a reply.

@ Eric - The Torque instructor you've been attempting to communicate with will no longer be instructing here in a few months, making this issue and your wishes to continue talks moot. The classes have already been transferred to another instructor who has been updated with what's happened, not just here, but with the history of GG's promises of docs and support. Thus the lean towards Unity for its docs and zero-dollar price tag. Remember, we're students, we don't require a license allowing hundreds of thousands in sales.

I apologize to you as well if it sounds like I attacked/am attacking you. Again, it is never my intent to assault someone directly. It was, perhaps, more crushing for me to have so much hope as (at the time) a Torque fanboy, getting to communicate with you directly, hearing that my ideas are valued and should be shared with Mich to further the docs "cause", then not only not getting a response from Mich for a long while, but getting the cold shoulder immediately after. All responses that I got were short, curt-sounding one-liners that made all the effort I put into reaching out and trying to help feel useless.

Again, these were my feelings, not what I'm stating facts to be.

@ Richard H. - While I respect your position, I have to state that fully fleshed out docs and tutorials greatly help to alleviate the need for direct executive-to-customer contact.

@ All - I should like to apologize for my wording and tone last night. It was the breaking point for me, and everything came off more accusatory and angry than I intended. Am I still upset? Absolutely. Will I consider going back to Torque for projects again? Not without some incredible changes and displays of remorse to the community from GG for their actions.

In short, I paid a lot of money for a product that was released at version 1.01. In the game industry, this means major bugs worked out, stable, and, yes, ALL documentation complete. I expected it to perform as advertised, and I am particularly sensitive to buying something that has no support, no help, and a lackadaisical approach to helping me when I have problems.

I understand the feelings of community here. That comes mainly from the "fend for yourself" mentality that GG has put upon us, forcing us to share ideas and methods. The problem is that GG is a business, short and simple. If T3D were open source, I would understand, but this is a $1,000 product. With the community figuring things out on its own, how is anyone supposed to know if the proposed solutions for an issue are the best way to go about it? We don't. Docs, examples, and tutorials solve that issue.

TLDR: Sorry about the 'tude, still upset, had hoped for better and got crushed.

#317 Eric,

This is a bit off topic but I discovered those videos you linked earlier this week through a yahoo search. I have to say they are top notch and showed me a few ways to do things. My only concern with the videos is when entering values sometimes they show entering .5 for a value and other times 0.5. Whenever I tried to enter a change without the preceding zero it would not take.

#318 I would just like to comment to the people bent out of shape at those of us who you perceive as being unfair to GarageGames.

I pose a simple question: Am I in the wrong for expecting something that was promised and I paid for?

Some people act like I need to give them a chance. I have given them a chance. I think I purchased my license over 6 years ago. I am still waiting on half decent documents. "This is a new GarageGames. You can't blame them for what happened in the past." Why can't I? It is still the same company. I'm not sure why this is so hard fror some people to grasp. If GarageGames was willing to refund me, I would more than happily move along and forget about the disaster that GarageGames is for life (please GarageGames return my $$$).

The fact of the matter is this, GarageGames is a for profit enterprise. I paid them money and they have not delivered on what they promised. So will I cut GarageGames slack? No. Trust and respect is earned. GarageGames has done nothing to earn either. They continue to support more products than they can succesfully manage. What they need to do, is just release a stable version of TorqueX and iTorque and leave it alone for a few years. If they don't release a stable, well documented engine soon, say good bye to your investment in Torque. I guarantee that eventually IAC will see GarageGames as a sunk cost and close shop before they lose even more money.

I don't mean to insult any of the GarageGames' employees personally. I'm sure there are a lot of capable and intelligent people at GarageGames. I just don't think any of them understand the concept of "jack of all trades, master of none."

#319 @Chris
I believe that's been reported as a bug in the current version, and the powers-that-be said it's fixed for next. *fingers crossed*
[/off_topic]

#320 @Jon D; Your forgetting that the other Torque engines cover some very valuable market space. If you had a Torque product worth putting on the market, it only takes a bit more work to transport your project to other Torque Engines. Also, when you read the forums for the other engines, you will see they have development teams dedicated to the other engines. The other Torque engines do not seem to be much of an influence on Torque3D documentation outcome.


I trust and respect GarageGames, including all of Torque shortcomings GarageGames/TorquePowered[whats with the rebranding anyhow?] are able to offer some very great, powerful, flexible and affordable Game Engine options. They might not have any ONE PERFECT product, but you will not be able to find any other Game Engine near the same price that will treat you any better.

I will always bitch and moan about stupid Torque stuff, but im not stupid about my bitching and moaning. I have the feeling that all recent outbreaks of Torque unrest have been thoughtfully considered and debated, and we have official news that the TorquePowers are more then eager to satisfy perceived shortcomings.

They just need a little more time, TorquePowers say.

So i say, give them some time to make things right before regurgitating the same old arguments. Anything else shows sign of logic flaws, and one questions motivation.