Intrest in a GG sponsored MMOKit.
by Flybynight Studios · in Torque Game Engine · 08/26/2008 (9:46 am) · 146 replies
I want to thank you guys for stepping up in the last thread thanks, appreciate the clarifications. I think it is clear that a lot of folks, myself included are very interested in seeing a kit that is actually viable for using in a production environment. The 2 kits that have been attempted outside of the GG domain had pros and cons in their own right but as inevitably happens in the indie world, the original creators either 'A' lose intrest or 'B' "take their toys and go home". (IE lock down all the hard work that people donate to the project and walk away).
In my opinion, for what it's worth, a GG sponsored MMOKit would be a fantastic addition to the GG family of products because it would promote a stable and controlled environment for indies to casually build their MMO projects and know that as long as GG is around they can always come back to their work. GG benefits be providing all of their licensed product holders access to any tools they need and colateral sales for products used in these ventures like model kits and developer tools goes up because develoeprs have the confidence in GG that they may not have in other groups.
I am posting this because it was mentioned in the previous thread that GG might be intrested in sponsoring something like this if there was intrest in the community. I dare say there -is- intrest in the community and I know that some people have already done some fantastic work in a TGEA fork of an MMOKit.
My hope is that by centering an MMOKit around GG we can bring developers together in their work rather than segment the community and lose hundreds and thousands of hours of work everytime a new kit comes and goes.
I would invite all of the other people intrested in such a kit to please post their thoughts here and see if there is enough intrest to sway GG into giving us a safer development environment here at the GG site.
My thanks in advance for everyones time in reading and responding to this.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, a GG sponsored MMOKit would be a fantastic addition to the GG family of products because it would promote a stable and controlled environment for indies to casually build their MMO projects and know that as long as GG is around they can always come back to their work. GG benefits be providing all of their licensed product holders access to any tools they need and colateral sales for products used in these ventures like model kits and developer tools goes up because develoeprs have the confidence in GG that they may not have in other groups.
I am posting this because it was mentioned in the previous thread that GG might be intrested in sponsoring something like this if there was intrest in the community. I dare say there -is- intrest in the community and I know that some people have already done some fantastic work in a TGEA fork of an MMOKit.
My hope is that by centering an MMOKit around GG we can bring developers together in their work rather than segment the community and lose hundreds and thousands of hours of work everytime a new kit comes and goes.
I would invite all of the other people intrested in such a kit to please post their thoughts here and see if there is enough intrest to sway GG into giving us a safer development environment here at the GG site.
My thanks in advance for everyones time in reading and responding to this.
#42
That quote is at the bottom of the GG homepage. And to stress what I think Flybynight is trying to say, and to provide my vote for the cause, is this is currently lacking in several ways for those of us interested in massively multiplayer online games - they being rpg, fps, or even poker and hearts for that matter.
I understand Torque wasn't originally written with this in mind and that this is a daunting coding/scripting task and the point of this topic isn't asking GarageGames to do it for us. The point is to get their feedback and support, and eventual administration of the resulting source contributed by the members...that is what is missing. Torque owners have to go outside of torque if they wish to endeavor in a game involving MMO technology. And that is not in agreement with the above, "Torque has a solution for everyone."....yet.
Eventually there should be, under the Product/Developer tools tab on the homepage, a little picture box that says MMO Starter Kit. I don't know how those kits come to be, if they're pure GG staff written or compilations of community contributions, or both - but the future of gaming is obviously MMO. This internet fad doesn't seem to be going away and hell if people demand playing together.
And as a side note - the attraction to GarageGames, for me anyway, was the community of Independents. A collection of essentially volunteers banding together to take on the big guys. Or at least not go extinct because of them. And the polish of our respective games is proportional to the strength of this community. And a good portion of the work I've seen from some of you guys is on par or beyond that of the biggest studios. I smile every time I see Blizzard's zodiacs don't show up on their shapes either.
09/02/2008 (6:54 pm)
"GarageGames is pleased to offer the Torque Technologies line of game development tools and resources to make game programming a reality for game developers of all experience levels. Whether you are a beginning game developer or have plenty of game development experience, Torque has a solution for everyone. Join the growing Torque game development community and start making games today!"That quote is at the bottom of the GG homepage. And to stress what I think Flybynight is trying to say, and to provide my vote for the cause, is this is currently lacking in several ways for those of us interested in massively multiplayer online games - they being rpg, fps, or even poker and hearts for that matter.
I understand Torque wasn't originally written with this in mind and that this is a daunting coding/scripting task and the point of this topic isn't asking GarageGames to do it for us. The point is to get their feedback and support, and eventual administration of the resulting source contributed by the members...that is what is missing. Torque owners have to go outside of torque if they wish to endeavor in a game involving MMO technology. And that is not in agreement with the above, "Torque has a solution for everyone."....yet.
Eventually there should be, under the Product/Developer tools tab on the homepage, a little picture box that says MMO Starter Kit. I don't know how those kits come to be, if they're pure GG staff written or compilations of community contributions, or both - but the future of gaming is obviously MMO. This internet fad doesn't seem to be going away and hell if people demand playing together.
And as a side note - the attraction to GarageGames, for me anyway, was the community of Independents. A collection of essentially volunteers banding together to take on the big guys. Or at least not go extinct because of them. And the polish of our respective games is proportional to the strength of this community. And a good portion of the work I've seen from some of you guys is on par or beyond that of the biggest studios. I smile every time I see Blizzard's zodiacs don't show up on their shapes either.
#43
Before I respond to what you are asking of GarageGames, I want to say a couple things:
1. OP (Flybynight Studios) - I think you've done a great job with your initial proposition, moderating the incoming posts, and generally trying to maintain order and organization for the potential project. Kudos.
2. Other Posters - The questions, requests, and brainstorms have been interesting and constructive enough to keep me watching the entire time.
3. I am only one employee in this thread, but others have been reading as well (as you see from Josh's post).
If we approach a topic I am not most qualified to answer, you might have to wait a bit while I confer with someone else.
So, time to address some of the issues I think need to be answered by a GG employee. If I have misunderstood any of the following issues (found in bold), please correct me so that I can rephrase my reply.
Requesting GarageGames's Blessing/Approval/Acceptance of the Project - Of course, as engine holders you do not need our permission or blessing to work on a project. That's the whole point of purchasing a license. Granted, the project is geared more toward creating a kit than making a game, but there is not much difference to be honest. I'll actually get into this more later.
Despite that being said, I can see why this is something you are asking of GG. From the legal standpoint, I'm pretty sure you would be in the clear to work on this project without violating any of the EULA terms. I'll double check, but so far no one has corrected me.
Finally, taking the request at complete face value, I think it's safe to say that Tech & Tools (the employees you are most familiar with seeing in blogs and forums) whole-heartedly encourage community projects. Realm Wars was a similar project/attempt. It's very cool to watch some of the most passionate and talented Torque Community members get together for this kind of project. In summation, you don't need our blessing or approval, but you have it.
...more to come in the next post
09/02/2008 (8:48 pm)
Hey all. I've been lurking in this thread since the very first post. I would have spoke up earlier, but I wanted to let a few more posts go up to get a clear understanding.Before I respond to what you are asking of GarageGames, I want to say a couple things:
1. OP (Flybynight Studios) - I think you've done a great job with your initial proposition, moderating the incoming posts, and generally trying to maintain order and organization for the potential project. Kudos.
2. Other Posters - The questions, requests, and brainstorms have been interesting and constructive enough to keep me watching the entire time.
3. I am only one employee in this thread, but others have been reading as well (as you see from Josh's post).
If we approach a topic I am not most qualified to answer, you might have to wait a bit while I confer with someone else.
So, time to address some of the issues I think need to be answered by a GG employee. If I have misunderstood any of the following issues (found in bold), please correct me so that I can rephrase my reply.
Requesting GarageGames's Blessing/Approval/Acceptance of the Project - Of course, as engine holders you do not need our permission or blessing to work on a project. That's the whole point of purchasing a license. Granted, the project is geared more toward creating a kit than making a game, but there is not much difference to be honest. I'll actually get into this more later.
Despite that being said, I can see why this is something you are asking of GG. From the legal standpoint, I'm pretty sure you would be in the clear to work on this project without violating any of the EULA terms. I'll double check, but so far no one has corrected me.
Finally, taking the request at complete face value, I think it's safe to say that Tech & Tools (the employees you are most familiar with seeing in blogs and forums) whole-heartedly encourage community projects. Realm Wars was a similar project/attempt. It's very cool to watch some of the most passionate and talented Torque Community members get together for this kind of project. In summation, you don't need our blessing or approval, but you have it.
...more to come in the next post
#44
Between GarageGames and you (or your project), there can be multiple levels of sponsorship. At the highest level of separation, we can go with "We support your project and will be happy to slap a "G Logo" on the final product after it has passed QA." As we go deeper, the responsibility and work starts getting heavier for both parties. Before GG can say how far they would sponsor this project, we would probably need to see a project plan, time line, and general design doc. That's my first thought, but I'll be glad to talk to some of the other T&T people who are directly involved with supporting content packs.
So summarize this issue, to get some level of sponsorship from GG you would need to provide more information about the actual project in a format outside of a forum thread. This is a great place to hash out the idea between your fellow collaborators, but once you feel it has a solid design, then start up communication about what GG might be able to sponsor.
...part three coming next
09/02/2008 (9:02 pm)
Requesting GarageGames Sponsorship - I wanted to separate this from the first issue I addressed, because I think the terms "approval" and "sponsorship" are extremely different (my opinion). It's easy to approve of something quietly, and not get involved. However, sponsorship implies out in the open support of something with deeper involvement than just approval.Between GarageGames and you (or your project), there can be multiple levels of sponsorship. At the highest level of separation, we can go with "We support your project and will be happy to slap a "G Logo" on the final product after it has passed QA." As we go deeper, the responsibility and work starts getting heavier for both parties. Before GG can say how far they would sponsor this project, we would probably need to see a project plan, time line, and general design doc. That's my first thought, but I'll be glad to talk to some of the other T&T people who are directly involved with supporting content packs.
So summarize this issue, to get some level of sponsorship from GG you would need to provide more information about the actual project in a format outside of a forum thread. This is a great place to hash out the idea between your fellow collaborators, but once you feel it has a solid design, then start up communication about what GG might be able to sponsor.
...part three coming next
#45
Doing so could pull someone off of engine development, management, me from writing docs, or David from running the forums. Besides, this idea was born in the community. Seems more appropriate that it be powered and led by computer members.
Request For Direct Support of Project - This involves GG supplying a dedicated forum, source control repo, etc. This is something we have provided in the past, but typically only for already completed projects such as the Platformer Start Kit, AFX, etc.
An exception would be if a 3rd party project had enough developers involved that it would make sense to dedicate a forum to it. I do not know the actual numbers, but I'm sure it would basically mean the difference between 10 developers (no forum) and 100 developers (might need a forum).
Honestly, and some others have already said this, a few of the things you want from GarageGames can be created and supported by you (the developers). Yes, I read the counter argument. I'm going to quote Eric here:
Eric also finished his post with another remark that needs to be restated:
Again, this is along the same vein as why we provide forums for already completed products. The projects we've made forums for benefit us, benefit the developers, and benefit the community. However, should this project you've proposed gain steam and a strong following, I can easily see a new forum opening up when it's ready.
...more coming
09/02/2008 (9:14 pm)
Request For Moderation By GG Officials - Unfortunately, at this moment, this is one of the issues that has a definitive answer that you may not like. Even though GG has been growing, with new employees being added all the time, we just do not have an excess of resources that could be dedicated toward monitoring and moderating this project full time. Doing so could pull someone off of engine development, management, me from writing docs, or David from running the forums. Besides, this idea was born in the community. Seems more appropriate that it be powered and led by computer members.
Request For Direct Support of Project - This involves GG supplying a dedicated forum, source control repo, etc. This is something we have provided in the past, but typically only for already completed projects such as the Platformer Start Kit, AFX, etc.
An exception would be if a 3rd party project had enough developers involved that it would make sense to dedicate a forum to it. I do not know the actual numbers, but I'm sure it would basically mean the difference between 10 developers (no forum) and 100 developers (might need a forum).
Honestly, and some others have already said this, a few of the things you want from GarageGames can be created and supported by you (the developers). Yes, I read the counter argument. I'm going to quote Eric here:
Quote:By putting up a SVN repo on a dyndns or having 1 person pay to setup an SVN you have that one person with all the control. By moving it to GG(who has been around for sometime and has no signs of leaving) it allows us as a community to contribute without worrying if anything would happen to the website or code repository.That is a valid statement. I see the reasoning. However, what if we apply that line of thinking to another company that makes game engines? Can you imagine anyone not wanting to develop an Unreal powered project unless Epic Games provided the forum and SVN repo? That seems extreme, but it's a valid application of the theory.
Eric also finished his post with another remark that needs to be restated:
Quote:The problem I see is that if GG was to set this up it would then open up a can of worms for anyone else wanting GG to offer the services.
Again, this is along the same vein as why we provide forums for already completed products. The projects we've made forums for benefit us, benefit the developers, and benefit the community. However, should this project you've proposed gain steam and a strong following, I can easily see a new forum opening up when it's ready.
...more coming
#46
1. "Josh Engebretson was hired to make an MMO Kit for Torque." Go back and read the blogs posted by Josh and Lara. At no point did anyone make that statement. Just because Josh worked on MoM and MMOWorkshop doesn't mean he will be working on MMO architecture for the rest of his developer life. I don't want to speak for him, but I also don't want other's speaking for him and speculating his job responsibilities.
2. "GarageGames could be working on their own MMO Kit, so this project could be a waste if they 'one-up' us." If it isn't on the website, don't assume. If you spent your time wondering who is gonna beat you to the finish line, why run the race at all? =)
3. This last one is not meant to pick on anyone, but I want to address something Jim said. Yes, it does say "Torque has a solution for everyone." on our site. However, this does not reasonably equate to "Torque is an everything at once engine."
This argument gets used so much that even I hate using it, but when you get the source code for a Torque Engine you then have the coding freedom to turn it into what you want. Josh and Dave Young wanted an MMO solution, and they got that out of Torque.
This debate can go either way, because if someone wants to focus on the exact wording we won't get anything done. Look beyond the words, and you will see rationality. I also wrote out a long rant about the "MMOs are the future of games", but we'll save that for another thread =)
09/02/2008 (10:35 pm)
Speculation - I have two main reasons for jumping in this thread: to end speculation and to give you an employee's response. I've seen some wild assumptions flying around, so let's address a couple of these.1. "Josh Engebretson was hired to make an MMO Kit for Torque." Go back and read the blogs posted by Josh and Lara. At no point did anyone make that statement. Just because Josh worked on MoM and MMOWorkshop doesn't mean he will be working on MMO architecture for the rest of his developer life. I don't want to speak for him, but I also don't want other's speaking for him and speculating his job responsibilities.
2. "GarageGames could be working on their own MMO Kit, so this project could be a waste if they 'one-up' us." If it isn't on the website, don't assume. If you spent your time wondering who is gonna beat you to the finish line, why run the race at all? =)
3. This last one is not meant to pick on anyone, but I want to address something Jim said. Yes, it does say "Torque has a solution for everyone." on our site. However, this does not reasonably equate to "Torque is an everything at once engine."
This argument gets used so much that even I hate using it, but when you get the source code for a Torque Engine you then have the coding freedom to turn it into what you want. Josh and Dave Young wanted an MMO solution, and they got that out of Torque.
This debate can go either way, because if someone wants to focus on the exact wording we won't get anything done. Look beyond the words, and you will see rationality. I also wrote out a long rant about the "MMOs are the future of games", but we'll save that for another thread =)
#47
Managing a large source-base in a repo with hundreds, if not thousands or more, developers over the lifetime of the repo, examining and testing check-in's, determining access rights, rolling-back as necessary, documentation, *training users* (which is extremely, extremely difficult as most large SVN projects that do not offer stable downloads can attest--as can we after our CVS waking nightmare back in the day). That takes a lot of time above and beyond any sort of bandwidth or storage costs associated with the project.
We often think of versioning as a pretty simple solution since we are either maintaining a small or single-project repo with limited access or are used to others maintaining a large-scale one seamlessly (for example, Apache).
So my questions are mostly support-related in this brainstorming session. How do we look at supporting this community action? How would "sanctioning" or "approving" it with an official seal impact our support implications on the project? Would it be a splinter of the original BSD-based MMOWorkshop kit or would the community build their own kit from the ground up? I'm trying to get an idea of how to organize this brainstorming session a bit so that we can come up with some more concrete questions to ask as we brainstorm.
09/03/2008 (7:15 am)
I thought I had posted a big, long-winded response on support issues that it could generate (FBNS has already seen such a long-winded worry-wort braindump in his e-mail!). The concept of a GG sanctioned product or project implies a line of support, even if everything is upfront and we say "any e-mails about this project sent to us will be ignored...use the forums and the community and don't bug us!!!" (not that we'd use that wording, but support issues can be very costly, and MMO support is voluminous as anyone who has ever seen the RC, DreamGames, or MMOWorkshop forums has a pretty good idea). But even if we said that and no one ever bothered us for support other than posting on the forums (which is our support base currently, even though we get a lot of support e-mails daily), there are the back-end administrivia costs. Perhaps it isn't much cost in terms of money, but it can be in terms of time.Managing a large source-base in a repo with hundreds, if not thousands or more, developers over the lifetime of the repo, examining and testing check-in's, determining access rights, rolling-back as necessary, documentation, *training users* (which is extremely, extremely difficult as most large SVN projects that do not offer stable downloads can attest--as can we after our CVS waking nightmare back in the day). That takes a lot of time above and beyond any sort of bandwidth or storage costs associated with the project.
We often think of versioning as a pretty simple solution since we are either maintaining a small or single-project repo with limited access or are used to others maintaining a large-scale one seamlessly (for example, Apache).
So my questions are mostly support-related in this brainstorming session. How do we look at supporting this community action? How would "sanctioning" or "approving" it with an official seal impact our support implications on the project? Would it be a splinter of the original BSD-based MMOWorkshop kit or would the community build their own kit from the ground up? I'm trying to get an idea of how to organize this brainstorming session a bit so that we can come up with some more concrete questions to ask as we brainstorm.
#49
09/03/2008 (7:42 am)
Wow I like that idea Joseph. I think it's been brought up before, but I can't remember if GG ever said anything about it. That would be very cool to have. 
#50
Not really interested in MMo but that is one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time!!!
09/03/2008 (7:45 am)
@JosephNot really interested in MMo but that is one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time!!!
#51
As a maker of 3rd party products and hoster of several community projects in the past, I've suggested and begged for an api periodically over the last couple of years. Even though it's a 2 hour php/db integration project which is about medium level complexity, it hasn't been done.
The reason why it would be useful is because it is difficult to share source code changes in a community environment and take responsibility as a project owner for verifying licenses, so we resort to threads in forums. If there was an API, we wouldn't have to use a forum thread, we could use tighter integrated processes for making sure a certain user has the required licenses.
In the end, GG needs to protect their intellectual property and allowing free roaming community projects which contain product source code dilutes their intellectual property. Especially if someone goes unscrupulous with it and hands it out for free to unlicensed people. Granted, this has ALWAYS been possible and ends up being a risk management scenario. The project owner assumes the risk and responsibility for protecting the GG IP by verifying licenses manually.
It becomes more of a problem when you want to include one of the many art or enhancement packs in the project. Even if everyone on the project was to buy packs 1,2,3, ArcaneFX, FPS Enviro Pack, etc. Those things do not all have forums so their ownership can't be verified even using this old-fashioned method, and the project owner cannot in good conscience use them in the project.
That sucks!!
Having a simple API which accepted a memberID and product# and responded with a true/false for ownership status would let a project owner keep records as to the license status of the project and LIFT the barriers to using the other code and art packs in a project. Which means more licenses sold, and more complex games being made, all which contribute to the lifespan and mass acceptance of the products.
To sum up, it would take 2 hours to accomplish a major enhancement in community or complex private projects. Most likely 15 minutes, with an 1:45 spent uploading and downloading, getting passwords straight, getting coffee, checking emails, etc.
Seriously!
And after this is done, we can beg for Arranged Connection support in TGE/TGEA ;)
09/03/2008 (8:26 am)
Here is what "Sanctioning" means to me: providing the one major enabler that would let the projects grow and live: the license verification API.As a maker of 3rd party products and hoster of several community projects in the past, I've suggested and begged for an api periodically over the last couple of years. Even though it's a 2 hour php/db integration project which is about medium level complexity, it hasn't been done.
The reason why it would be useful is because it is difficult to share source code changes in a community environment and take responsibility as a project owner for verifying licenses, so we resort to threads in forums. If there was an API, we wouldn't have to use a forum thread, we could use tighter integrated processes for making sure a certain user has the required licenses.
In the end, GG needs to protect their intellectual property and allowing free roaming community projects which contain product source code dilutes their intellectual property. Especially if someone goes unscrupulous with it and hands it out for free to unlicensed people. Granted, this has ALWAYS been possible and ends up being a risk management scenario. The project owner assumes the risk and responsibility for protecting the GG IP by verifying licenses manually.
It becomes more of a problem when you want to include one of the many art or enhancement packs in the project. Even if everyone on the project was to buy packs 1,2,3, ArcaneFX, FPS Enviro Pack, etc. Those things do not all have forums so their ownership can't be verified even using this old-fashioned method, and the project owner cannot in good conscience use them in the project.
That sucks!!
Having a simple API which accepted a memberID and product# and responded with a true/false for ownership status would let a project owner keep records as to the license status of the project and LIFT the barriers to using the other code and art packs in a project. Which means more licenses sold, and more complex games being made, all which contribute to the lifespan and mass acceptance of the products.
To sum up, it would take 2 hours to accomplish a major enhancement in community or complex private projects. Most likely 15 minutes, with an 1:45 spent uploading and downloading, getting passwords straight, getting coffee, checking emails, etc.
Seriously!
And after this is done, we can beg for Arranged Connection support in TGE/TGEA ;)
#52
My final post was going to be completely helpful advice and figuring out what you all would want from GarageGames that hasn't been covered in my posts. I guess a final summary, if you will.
Here's my first piece of advice: Organize. Get a tally of who all wants to work on the project. Determine up front how decisions will be made: democracy, individual makes all decisions, a panel of decision makers, etc. Start with the basics. What engine(s) will this support? What are the bare minimum features you want? What do we need to get started.
Once you have an organized concept down on paper (or electronic document), you should then find it easier to present your idea to other developers you want to recruit and GG employees you want help from. Once you have a design, timeline, team, and the base technology you'll then have a clear idea of what you would want from GG and your fellow team mates.
I'd like to keep this thread going and get some feedback on what David and I have posted. I do have one last suggestion based on personal development experience. I'm currently working on a content pack of my own (side project in what spare time I have). I asked someone at GG what the best practice is for developing content packs. I was under the impression that developing a content pack was different enough from developing a full game that I should seek the help of someone else who has dealt with the issue.
His response was this: create a small game that uses all the features you want in the kit. There is no purpose or use for the kit if it can't be used to make a fun game. It makes perfect sense. The game doesn't have to be AAA with 40 hours of game play and uber storylines. However, packaging a sample game with a content pack is common practice, and it gives you an end goal.
Now, how you can apply that to your own project can be difficult. I've seen MMORPG, MMOFPS, MMO with no game play, and everything else in between. I just wanted to throw out some advice someone gave me that has been extremely helpful.
09/03/2008 (8:30 am)
@David - I think you and I are headed down the same road.My final post was going to be completely helpful advice and figuring out what you all would want from GarageGames that hasn't been covered in my posts. I guess a final summary, if you will.
Here's my first piece of advice: Organize. Get a tally of who all wants to work on the project. Determine up front how decisions will be made: democracy, individual makes all decisions, a panel of decision makers, etc. Start with the basics. What engine(s) will this support? What are the bare minimum features you want? What do we need to get started.
Once you have an organized concept down on paper (or electronic document), you should then find it easier to present your idea to other developers you want to recruit and GG employees you want help from. Once you have a design, timeline, team, and the base technology you'll then have a clear idea of what you would want from GG and your fellow team mates.
I'd like to keep this thread going and get some feedback on what David and I have posted. I do have one last suggestion based on personal development experience. I'm currently working on a content pack of my own (side project in what spare time I have). I asked someone at GG what the best practice is for developing content packs. I was under the impression that developing a content pack was different enough from developing a full game that I should seek the help of someone else who has dealt with the issue.
His response was this: create a small game that uses all the features you want in the kit. There is no purpose or use for the kit if it can't be used to make a fun game. It makes perfect sense. The game doesn't have to be AAA with 40 hours of game play and uber storylines. However, packaging a sample game with a content pack is common practice, and it gives you an end goal.
Now, how you can apply that to your own project can be difficult. I've seen MMORPG, MMOFPS, MMO with no game play, and everything else in between. I just wanted to throw out some advice someone gave me that has been extremely helpful.
#53
Centralizing an MMO community here at GG to avoid losing it down the road when the "leads" of the project move onto "other" things.
MMOs can take years to produce and in that time people come and go but what has happened at least twice now is kit's get pulled or source gets pulled and then the kit is no better than any of the other engines out there. You can't release an MMO without having source access or you are simply doomed. Period. The thought process behind the OP was to bring something to the community right here at GG to make sure that it (A) didn't violate any licensing by distributing source to people who didnt own the kit and (B) make sure that it stayed accessable for years to come irregardless of who comes and goes.
Creating an API for license management is truely a great idea and I am not poopooing that in any way. But in the end we are talking about potentially segmenting the community back to a third party. That third party can leave at any time. Code can get shut down, pulled...
Just a reminder guys that the MMOWorkshop kit is not dead. It's actually a fantasticly solid and stable running MMO backend. You can ahve a game up and running in a matter of hours. The issue is that with most of the driving force behind the kit now gone only 1 or 2 people have source access and that is causing alot of issues in the community. At least it's still free. On the other side of the coin you get people who want to build up a big intrest in a kit and then lock it down and start charging$10 a month to have access to it. That is also counter productive IMO and certainly doesnt foster the growth of the Torque MMO community. I know I have no intrest in spending the next 6-12 months working on a kit that someone can just lock down and suddenly tell me I need to pay them to have access to.
I am not against people going off and making another Torque MMOKit at all but I just wanted to remind folks that the MMOWorkshop kit is light years ahead of anything else the community has seen to date. Even the 1.5.2 alpha code (Which has C++ extensions here at GG) is a great starting platform. I think it would be a real shame if this thread simply spawned yet another itteration of an MMOKit and segmented the community yet again.
Perhaps the best thing that could happen is someone take the 1.5.2 MMOWorkshop alpha code and fork a kit from that. It's a BSD based license and 100% available for use.
Please dont get me wrong guys I am really glad we are all talking about this but just remember that even with the best of intentions (I am sure DAve Young can attest to that) a kit can go astray very quickly. If someone does want to create an MMOWorkshop fork I think the licensing needs to be made clear right off the bat so there is no future locking down of the kit.
Keep the ideas coming guys :)
09/03/2008 (9:14 am)
Thanks for chiming in everyone. I think it's clear that the intrest is definietly there for this sort of project. What I have been trying to come to grips with is actual implementation and logistics. Ley's keep in mind the whole reason for this post:Centralizing an MMO community here at GG to avoid losing it down the road when the "leads" of the project move onto "other" things.
MMOs can take years to produce and in that time people come and go but what has happened at least twice now is kit's get pulled or source gets pulled and then the kit is no better than any of the other engines out there. You can't release an MMO without having source access or you are simply doomed. Period. The thought process behind the OP was to bring something to the community right here at GG to make sure that it (A) didn't violate any licensing by distributing source to people who didnt own the kit and (B) make sure that it stayed accessable for years to come irregardless of who comes and goes.
Creating an API for license management is truely a great idea and I am not poopooing that in any way. But in the end we are talking about potentially segmenting the community back to a third party. That third party can leave at any time. Code can get shut down, pulled...
Just a reminder guys that the MMOWorkshop kit is not dead. It's actually a fantasticly solid and stable running MMO backend. You can ahve a game up and running in a matter of hours. The issue is that with most of the driving force behind the kit now gone only 1 or 2 people have source access and that is causing alot of issues in the community. At least it's still free. On the other side of the coin you get people who want to build up a big intrest in a kit and then lock it down and start charging$10 a month to have access to it. That is also counter productive IMO and certainly doesnt foster the growth of the Torque MMO community. I know I have no intrest in spending the next 6-12 months working on a kit that someone can just lock down and suddenly tell me I need to pay them to have access to.
I am not against people going off and making another Torque MMOKit at all but I just wanted to remind folks that the MMOWorkshop kit is light years ahead of anything else the community has seen to date. Even the 1.5.2 alpha code (Which has C++ extensions here at GG) is a great starting platform. I think it would be a real shame if this thread simply spawned yet another itteration of an MMOKit and segmented the community yet again.
Perhaps the best thing that could happen is someone take the 1.5.2 MMOWorkshop alpha code and fork a kit from that. It's a BSD based license and 100% available for use.
Please dont get me wrong guys I am really glad we are all talking about this but just remember that even with the best of intentions (I am sure DAve Young can attest to that) a kit can go astray very quickly. If someone does want to create an MMOWorkshop fork I think the licensing needs to be made clear right off the bat so there is no future locking down of the kit.
Keep the ideas coming guys :)
#54
@Michael: The idea of building a solidly playable mini MMO with a kit to generate intrest is most definitely the absolute best idea right now. The MMOWorkshop kit comes with three zones (very sparce) that highlight some of the features of the kit and give some example code to work with. If someone builds a working kit with an updated minigame I think people would be surprised at just how amazing the Workshop kit is.
I'm getting close on having a much more functional mini-game but really I want to add several more features to show this isnt just a MoM knock off. Hopefully I'll have somethign to show .. soon :)
09/03/2008 (9:18 am)
Just a followup note.. @Michael: The idea of building a solidly playable mini MMO with a kit to generate intrest is most definitely the absolute best idea right now. The MMOWorkshop kit comes with three zones (very sparce) that highlight some of the features of the kit and give some example code to work with. If someone builds a working kit with an updated minigame I think people would be surprised at just how amazing the Workshop kit is.
I'm getting close on having a much more functional mini-game but really I want to add several more features to show this isnt just a MoM knock off. Hopefully I'll have somethign to show .. soon :)
#55
I learned a hell of a lot working on this stuff and would make some different choices if I ever go down this road again. I'm actually working on some stuff now which could make creating MMO or larger scale persistent world games with Torque products much easier... and better. I can't go into this in detail right now, but it isn't an MMO Kit :)
At any rate, I think the "TorqueForge" idea is something that is long overdue. If we can marry some of the Open Source development methods (boons) with GarageGames remaining a strong company, win and win.
09/03/2008 (9:38 am)
The Torque MMO Kit (a.k.a. "MMOWorkshop Kit" in this thread) is really good starting place for either building your own MMO or getting some ideas of the issues involved in creating these kinds of games and technology. Minions of Mirth, from which the kit spawned, is a pretty successful game (nearly 100,000 registrations on Windows and OSX). The tech handled all this pretty well and we had next to no downtime while Lara and I ran the game for over 2 years...I learned a hell of a lot working on this stuff and would make some different choices if I ever go down this road again. I'm actually working on some stuff now which could make creating MMO or larger scale persistent world games with Torque products much easier... and better. I can't go into this in detail right now, but it isn't an MMO Kit :)
At any rate, I think the "TorqueForge" idea is something that is long overdue. If we can marry some of the Open Source development methods (boons) with GarageGames remaining a strong company, win and win.
#56
Just an addition to my posts above, (Sorry I was too busy trying to race back upstairs for breakfast to finish typing ;) haha) I completely understand the logisitical problems and potential "support" issues having a local GG supported MMOKit would bring here. Rereading my posts I seem to be a little unwavering on the whole third party thing but alternatively it's not just something that GG can throw the doors open to without taking on an exessive ammount of "baggage".
So with that said I am still trying to come to grips with a truely workable solution. I think defining the goal of that solution is essential and IMO, above all else, the goal should be a perpetually sustainable kit with unfettered C++ extension access. Those are just my own personal goals but I am certain they arent necessarily everyone elses ideals.
I really do not have the time or ability to take on leadership of a kit fork myself but I'm open to hearing ideas :)
09/03/2008 (9:55 am)
Thanks Josh :)Just an addition to my posts above, (Sorry I was too busy trying to race back upstairs for breakfast to finish typing ;) haha) I completely understand the logisitical problems and potential "support" issues having a local GG supported MMOKit would bring here. Rereading my posts I seem to be a little unwavering on the whole third party thing but alternatively it's not just something that GG can throw the doors open to without taking on an exessive ammount of "baggage".
So with that said I am still trying to come to grips with a truely workable solution. I think defining the goal of that solution is essential and IMO, above all else, the goal should be a perpetually sustainable kit with unfettered C++ extension access. Those are just my own personal goals but I am certain they arent necessarily everyone elses ideals.
I really do not have the time or ability to take on leadership of a kit fork myself but I'm open to hearing ideas :)
#57
If the project is closer to becoming a reality, you would want to sync up with the people responsible for licensing at GG (not me).
09/03/2008 (10:47 am)
@All - I just double checked with those who know the licensing a little better than myself. Under the EULA, you would be able to work on this MMO kit project in private, but to release it publicly (free or for profit) you would need the permission of GarageGames. This adheres to the EULA considering the kit is not an actual game.If the project is closer to becoming a reality, you would want to sync up with the people responsible for licensing at GG (not me).
#58
AHAHAHA. Look, dude... Torque is a game ENGINE. You don't need a silly kit, and you shouldn't have everything done for you, because then there is no such thing as game development. How would you be making a game if its made for you? I think you should best learn to program if you want to make an MMO. Now, you can't come out and say, "Waaaaah, you're wrong Neill!" mostly because, I am NOT wrong. An MMO is an MMO... Whats so hard about making an MMO that you need it pre done? Nothing. Kits are usually for prototyping, like the ones currently at GarageGames now. There is nothing about an MMO that a normal game developing studio couldn't do. The hardest part is writing the client/server system, and you could easily hire a programmer to do that if its out of your reach. The second hardest part is getting your Multiplayer On-line game, well, massive. These are all things of an MMO that any game development studio should be able to do. If you are an Indie, and say you can't do it as an Indie... Guess what that means? It means Indies shouldn't be trying to make an MMO.
If you want to make an MMO, I suggest you either find a professional team, or make games long enough to get a budget for your team to be able to afford MMO development. I mean, Warhammer was like, $100,000,000. An Indie will most likely NOT make an MMO, because they are missing the massive aspect. Its the truth.
I really am lost on why now a days people think everything should be done for them. If you want a game made, do the dirty work. Either learn to program, hire a programmer, or join a team with a programmer.
EDIT: Look at how every other MMO did it... Did they use a kit? No, they made their own game. Even Hero Engine isn't a kit, its an MMO Middleware Engine based around being developed having an MMO framework laid out from the start.
09/03/2008 (11:19 am)
"I strongly disagree edward. An MMOKit -is- needed."AHAHAHA. Look, dude... Torque is a game ENGINE. You don't need a silly kit, and you shouldn't have everything done for you, because then there is no such thing as game development. How would you be making a game if its made for you? I think you should best learn to program if you want to make an MMO. Now, you can't come out and say, "Waaaaah, you're wrong Neill!" mostly because, I am NOT wrong. An MMO is an MMO... Whats so hard about making an MMO that you need it pre done? Nothing. Kits are usually for prototyping, like the ones currently at GarageGames now. There is nothing about an MMO that a normal game developing studio couldn't do. The hardest part is writing the client/server system, and you could easily hire a programmer to do that if its out of your reach. The second hardest part is getting your Multiplayer On-line game, well, massive. These are all things of an MMO that any game development studio should be able to do. If you are an Indie, and say you can't do it as an Indie... Guess what that means? It means Indies shouldn't be trying to make an MMO.
If you want to make an MMO, I suggest you either find a professional team, or make games long enough to get a budget for your team to be able to afford MMO development. I mean, Warhammer was like, $100,000,000. An Indie will most likely NOT make an MMO, because they are missing the massive aspect. Its the truth.
I really am lost on why now a days people think everything should be done for them. If you want a game made, do the dirty work. Either learn to program, hire a programmer, or join a team with a programmer.
EDIT: Look at how every other MMO did it... Did they use a kit? No, they made their own game. Even Hero Engine isn't a kit, its an MMO Middleware Engine based around being developed having an MMO framework laid out from the start.
#59
There are definitely people who want everything (I deal with them everyday!), but many of the dev's that come through here want to make their games and not MoM 2.0, regardless of how much they may have liked MoM.
But it is definitely important to keep the scope of the solution in mind.
09/03/2008 (11:33 am)
The purpose of starter kits is to give nudges in the right direction, not do everything (though, there are--of course--people who want it all out of a starter kit). Having a full game as an engine proof-of-concept is a long-time industry tradition, though if you hit up middleware booths you'll often find that many of them started outside of that mentality (or only as a sideline to it, often through handshake agreements or side-funding projects with other dev houses).There are definitely people who want everything (I deal with them everyday!), but many of the dev's that come through here want to make their games and not MoM 2.0, regardless of how much they may have liked MoM.
But it is definitely important to keep the scope of the solution in mind.
#60
I wanted to chime in here as well =)
As far as "official" GG support goes, at the moment we are just waiting to see how this shapes up. There have been a lot of cool projects talked about and started over the years that never resulted in anything and we need to be careful to not spend too much time on a project like this too early. Good ideas are cheap (I could post a list of all of the different projects we'd like to see done) but execution is worth more than its weight in gold. At this point, your "execution" is putting together a really solid team, feature list, proposal, and plan. This is what Michael has been gently pushing you guys towards =)
Would GG like to see a community driven MMO Kit done properly? We'd love it! You have our blessing to start =) We are even willing to offer some advice on what we think would make an effective kit and how to lay out a plan for it. We are also willing to grant you a license to release it to the public (for free or profit) if it meets our quality standards (code, features, *and* support) but that is a decision that necessarily has to wait until you have results.
Commiting space on our Subversion servers is a little more tricky since it directly effects the bandwidth and security of our internal network (or would require us to invest time and money in setting up an external Subversion server). We have allowed 3rd party developers to use our Subversion server but that was only after they had a viable product to show us and a team that we knew we could trust.
We do recognize the need for a "TorqueForge" but the bare truth is that we don't have the resources to make it happen. We have already sunk some resources into it but there are higher priority things that need to get done first. It is high up on our list but we still don't know when we will be able to get to it.
As far as a webservice for authenticating product ownership: we absolutely agree that could be super useful. I've been asking for it for longer than Dave Young has worked with Torque =P However, it is a bit more complex than just a username and a product id. It is fairly easy for someone to lay hands on a GG user account name and claim that they are that person so you would either have to transmit the password for that account securely or put in place some sort of email authorization system (email the account holder to authenticate that it is okay to send an authorization back to the querying product). Transmitting passwords is dangerous and challenging and could open up some serious security holes for GG since we have no way of controlling the system that the query is coming from. An email authorization system is easier but it won't reply in "real time" to the querying system which means that we would have to help those systems deal with delayed responses (potential delayed by days or weeks). Either way that is a bit more than "a 2 hour php/db integration project" and that doesn't even hit on dealing with some of the underlying security architecture currently in place within the GG.com database which further complicates things.
It is a *great* idea and it is one we'd like to make a reality but it is going to take us time to make it happen.
Keep the ideas coming guys!
09/03/2008 (11:37 am)
Hey guys,I wanted to chime in here as well =)
As far as "official" GG support goes, at the moment we are just waiting to see how this shapes up. There have been a lot of cool projects talked about and started over the years that never resulted in anything and we need to be careful to not spend too much time on a project like this too early. Good ideas are cheap (I could post a list of all of the different projects we'd like to see done) but execution is worth more than its weight in gold. At this point, your "execution" is putting together a really solid team, feature list, proposal, and plan. This is what Michael has been gently pushing you guys towards =)
Would GG like to see a community driven MMO Kit done properly? We'd love it! You have our blessing to start =) We are even willing to offer some advice on what we think would make an effective kit and how to lay out a plan for it. We are also willing to grant you a license to release it to the public (for free or profit) if it meets our quality standards (code, features, *and* support) but that is a decision that necessarily has to wait until you have results.
Commiting space on our Subversion servers is a little more tricky since it directly effects the bandwidth and security of our internal network (or would require us to invest time and money in setting up an external Subversion server). We have allowed 3rd party developers to use our Subversion server but that was only after they had a viable product to show us and a team that we knew we could trust.
We do recognize the need for a "TorqueForge" but the bare truth is that we don't have the resources to make it happen. We have already sunk some resources into it but there are higher priority things that need to get done first. It is high up on our list but we still don't know when we will be able to get to it.
As far as a webservice for authenticating product ownership: we absolutely agree that could be super useful. I've been asking for it for longer than Dave Young has worked with Torque =P However, it is a bit more complex than just a username and a product id. It is fairly easy for someone to lay hands on a GG user account name and claim that they are that person so you would either have to transmit the password for that account securely or put in place some sort of email authorization system (email the account holder to authenticate that it is okay to send an authorization back to the querying product). Transmitting passwords is dangerous and challenging and could open up some serious security holes for GG since we have no way of controlling the system that the query is coming from. An email authorization system is easier but it won't reply in "real time" to the querying system which means that we would have to help those systems deal with delayed responses (potential delayed by days or weeks). Either way that is a bit more than "a 2 hour php/db integration project" and that doesn't even hit on dealing with some of the underlying security architecture currently in place within the GG.com database which further complicates things.
It is a *great* idea and it is one we'd like to make a reality but it is going to take us time to make it happen.
Keep the ideas coming guys!
Torque 3D Owner Eric Clausing
The problem I see is that if GG was to set this up it would then open up a can of worms for anyone else wanting GG to offer the services.