|
riflefire Member Posts: 57 From: Registered: 08-25-2003 |
Since a good many of us own Torque products, You might find the following link very helpful : http://www.garagegames.com/blogs/34977/13731 I hope i got that link right. Its from Stephen Zepp entitled The post is a great one and be SURE to read the comments part as its very important you read the entire post with the comments. Several nuggets of info that i found very interesting and useful especially in light of several threads here about purchasing Torque Products and the future of Torque Products were: o new forums and areas are coming exclusively for torque 2 discussion and ALL other unrelated comments/questions will be not accepted in these areas. Very highly moderated as to keep the transparent development part of the development cycle on track. Not sure who can participate but sounded like everyone might be in on the Transparent Development cycle process. Read it for yourself though as it was long and involved. o As i read it, it seems ALL of the current torque engines (except Torque X) will be fading out and replaced over time by the very nice sounding modular component style Torque 2 engine. o Torque 2 (a c++ engine) apparently should have many if not most of the features from all the current Torque engines in it and also have a ton of new material available due to its modular component nature. o It was indicated that *IF* you plan to start a game in the next year or two, or have a game in progress currently, do pick one of the current torque engines because Torque 2 is at least a year or 2 away before beta. o For existing owners of current Torque engines, the upgrade to Torque 2, if there is one even, is still under discussion. Its just too early in the process for a decision there yet. Anyway, thats just a few of the nuggets that i understood from Mr Zepp's postings that seems to bear on the current ccn discussion about torque engines and whats to come. However, PLEASE go read the entire post AND the comments yourself as i could be reading some of it wrong. Its a great read. Matt Langley, do you have any comments here if you can? Sounds like a great ball plan for the future according to Mr Zepps postings. |
|
Matt Langley Member Posts: 247 From: Eugene, OR, USA Registered: 08-31-2006 |
Great Summary... a bit later I may add some points, though it's covered pretty well in Stephen's post as well as the comments. As Eric Fritz appended in responses, his description of Transparent Development is our target and goal, so we will slowly try and ramp up all of those aspects at the most opportune time. This really is a high priority and major goal for us. I personally am part of the group/division of GarageGames that will handle many of these aspects for Torque 2... I won't be doing low level engine or tool dev, though I will be working on usability, planning, and strategy for our tools and future Torque 2 product. ------------------ |
SSquared Member Posts: 654 From: Pacific Northwest Registered: 03-22-2005 |
> though I will be working on usability, planning, and strategy for our > tools and future Torque 2 product. That is sweet! Should be loads of fun! By tools do you mean like a developer's environment for building/creating your game? |
steveth45 Member Posts: 536 From: Eugene, OR, USA Registered: 08-10-2005 |
The part that stood out to me, as already mentioned, is this quote : "If you are currently working on a game with Torque (or another engine), or are planning on starting a new project in the next 6 to 9 months, Torque 2 is not for you at this time." As fun as it is to keep upgrading to new versions of software you use at home, it doesn't work like this in game development. I know some folks here are currently working on Torque-based projects, and if you were considering waiting for the next Torque--don't. You need a stable platform to finish the games you are working on, so stick with whatever you are using now. ------------------ |
|
SSquared Member Posts: 654 From: Pacific Northwest Registered: 03-22-2005 |
Keep in mind, too, that TorqueX does not fall into the above mentioned category. TorqueX will be a separate product, with its own feature set. If you want to do games in C# and .NET 2.0, then TorqueX is a possibility. |
|
Matt Langley Member Posts: 247 From: Eugene, OR, USA Registered: 08-31-2006 |
quote: Yes... in fact by tools I really mean the "product" which includes all aspects we deliver to our end user, including (though not limited to): - Engine
quote: I couldn't agree with that statement more. Often we get this exact question asked... "should we upgrade" or "port". Our answer is typically to stick with what you are using now, especially if you have invested a great deal of time into it. A port from one piece of tech to another seems like a trivial thing but rarely ever is. So unless the next platform you want to work on is in your face and has features you absolutely need, thens stick with your current one. This holds true when porting Torque projects. Even porting a project in a piece of tech to another version of the same tech can be hard, yet a conceptually new piece of tech. ------------------ |
|
SSquared Member Posts: 654 From: Pacific Northwest Registered: 03-22-2005 |
> Yes... in fact by tools I really mean the "product" which includes all > aspects we deliver to our end user Thanks. I just wanted to be sure what you meant, because Stephen Zepp presents the 'tools' and the 'engine' as two separate entities, which makes sense. I just wanted to know if you were solely on the tools side or if you would be on both. That really does seem like it will be fun. |
|
Matt Langley Member Posts: 247 From: Eugene, OR, USA Registered: 08-31-2006 |
Actually his separation is the easiest way to reflect it. Though it's more of a separation of - low level development -> product development Where as most of the engine will be in the low level development, and the tool "framework" will be in the low level as well. The product passes on the tools will be in the product development where I'm heavily involved. So I won't be digging too heavily into engine modifications though possibly a layer of usability upon engine code (Components will make this much easier) and the tools will be similar. I'll be doing mostly usability design on the tools as well as contributing heavily to the creation of our end user tools, though I shouldn't be digging into the framework itself. This is good because both sides are handled by different divisions of the company now, though we keep in good communication with one another. That way our product will be targeted for our target market instead of for our internal/external game teams (though a lot of we put in the product will utilize whatever makes sense of that). ------------------ [This message has been edited by Matt Langley (edited October 22, 2007).] |
|
SSquared Member Posts: 654 From: Pacific Northwest Registered: 03-22-2005 |
Matthew, I am all about the Tools. Maybe I'm weird, but I'm more interested in the tools than the underlying engine. Probably because my background is not in gaming APIs, so I really don't know what is good or bad or necessary. Or even understand all the terminology. I think this is a terrific opportunity for Garage Games. Given the right tools, I think people will find even more satisfaction in building and creating their end product. |