0
101 Sep 05, 2009 at 21:13

Hello, I have some questions for Torque 3D owners.

• any idea when they will release the final version?
• how good is new Torque 3D? I know an old version of Torque, maybe 1.2 or something, and I remember wasn’t so tempting
• any comments about that new engine? Please share all experience you have with, I am thinking to buy it.

Thank you.

#### 57 Replies

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 00:13

Hi Roboant.

1. Not sure, but I would guess somewhere in the next 2-6 weeks.
2. It’s way better than TGE. Looks better, and runs faster, and is way easier to use.
3. If you’ve tried it before, and weren’t so happy, I would suggest now is the time to try it again. There are new world editors, and even *gasp* documentation. The stuff is all much nicer now - easier to use in the editor. For example:
Rivers - Just drop down a river, and plot it with points. The river will be created and follow it.
Roads - same thing.
Materials - you can select objects, and edit their materials on the fly
• add normal maps, animate them, etc.

Of course, it’s still in beta right now, so there are still some bugs. I am sure they are ironing them out, this is a very important release for them. I’ve used it, and the advanced lighting is very nice. And for those cards without the ability to do the advanced lighting, you can fallback to “basic” lighting, which is better than the old TGE lighting used to be.

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 01:33
1. I have no idea… The beta’s are going great, I’m personally glad they are taking their time to get it right. The beta forums have been filled with great information and the dev’s have been keeping communication with the consumers. I feel the communication is great!

2. I think this link does justice to the question you have…. Scroll all the way down. http://www.garagegames.com/products/torque-3d

3. My personal experiences with T3D has been good. It’s pretty damn stable, that’s the first thing that comes to mind.

-Pete

you can email me to talk more if you want, mickelonis (at) gmail (dot) com

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 05:22
1. “When its done!” j/k Sounds familiar though!
2. See #3!
3. its Off The Chain -> 53 YouTube Videos(Just recently made the playlist)

More videos on Vimeo Channel->Search Torque3D
http://vimeo.com/garagegames

So much more support with apps like Ecstasy(MoCap Tools), GMK(GAME MECHANICS), Verve(Cinematic Tools)

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 14:41

1) I believe Jaimi’s guess is fairly accurate.

2) T3D doesn’t really resemble TGE in my opinion. To be honest, I don’t think any other engine in it’s class can hold a candle to T3D, and I have licensed afew. T3D has been the best investment I have made to date.

3) GG has expanded, which has greatly benefited their tech and community support. The result is the new engine, which you can see vid’s (posted above) that can show you aspects of the engine from various stages in Beta. Without trying to sound like a fanboy (which I’m not exactly known for).. T3D is amazing; you won’t be disappointed.

Good Luck!

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 15:18

Why are all but LK’s posts from first-posters who all subscribed on almost the same day for only this post?

Something smells fishy here…

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 15:38

This forum thread was pointed out on the Torque3D forums. Torque users came over here to help spread the word and help out with the question asked by the original poster here: “Hello, I have some questions for Torque 3D owners.”
Simple as that.

And the only thing I might point out that might be a little misleading from the above comments from T3D users is this from Jaimi: “There [ is ] even *gasp* documentation.”

The documentation at this point consists mostly of WIP and placeholder pages but it is in Beta just like the engine and is promised to be more complete as the engine moves out of beta. As the person in charge of the docs points out, it is hard to keep up with accurate documentation on something that is constantly changing.

I can also assure you that I recognize the users who have posted here so far and they ‘are’ users and not garagegame staff.

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 16:09

Thanks for all reply to my questions.

I want to say I am honest, I am not GarageGames staff member, I just wanted to know more info about Torque 3D because as I said, I intention to buy it and I was thinking asking here will be good, considering that site neutral.

Any other opinions are still welcome.

Thank you.

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 16:33

@Torqueuser: Glad for the feedback then.

@roboant: Would not have suspected you, the OP, since many people new to building games come to this forum for the first time. It was the subsequent, out-of-the-ordinary stream that was a little weird.

@the other posters: Thanks for posting. Feel free to hang out here too. We get lots of questions on engines here…

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 16:51

Feel free to hang out here too. We get lots of questions on engines here…

DevMaster has been a virtual treasure trove of information for me over the years. I’d recommend it as well. :yes:

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 17:24

Thanks Alphadog. I look forward to checking out more on these forums.

And to add more input to the OP I can say that one of the big advantages of Torque3D is ‘the community’.

Even if something might not be clear or complete in the documentation one can always find help on the forums from not only other users - experienced programmers, scripters and artists - but the interaction with, and participation, of garagegames employees and associates, who are actually building the engine, is something I have not seen with any other game engine.

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 17:32

Like it has been noted, the documentation is not complete.

However, I believe you will find what is complete is heads and tails above what has been done before. There are video tutorials on Vimeo:

Talk a look at the beginners guide here:

http://docs.garagegames.com/torque-3d/official/

Yes, it’s not yet completed. But it’s a heck of a lot more in depth than any previous documentation.

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 20:20

I have licenced a few engines, messed around with them, struggled.
I got tgea when it was at 1.7.0, and was baffled by the whole thing, couldnt make head or tail of anything, but with help from the very active community there, I started to learn how torque worked. then the anounced a new engine: T3D.
I debated whether to invest in it, or to get the C4 engine.
I made the right choice.
I got T3D.
it is on a par with any of the “uber engines” (I am talking about a game engine, used to make games, not a game made with a game engine)
if you keep that in mind, if you plan on making a game for distribution on the market,
GET THIS ENGINE!!!

and if you look at my joined date, youll see I am not a new member, but this is the first time I’ve had anything worth posting here!!

scratch

0
101 Sep 10, 2009 at 22:54

Nod, a forum posting about this forum posting popped up. Have visited here before, but haven’t create an account. Good for everyone I guess.

Most of us are from the Torque side so I think you are going to get pretty solid reviews, but my suggestion is to look at Unity along with C4 as they are pretty much in the same class as T3D in regards to cost and graphical quality (C4 is a bit cheaper though)

T3D besides improving the graphic quality introduced a very much needed improvement to the toolset. Might check out some of the videos online to see what was added. If you do a lot of level design (which well someone has to do at some point) the price tag alone is worth the time saved compared to previous versions.

We moved over from using TGEA for the MMO we are designing and have been nothing but happy with the purchase and the progress made.

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 03:17

Most of the “one post” users here actually own a license to T3D….

Here’s the way I look at it bro… The T3D license costs $1,00 bucks, however I think there’s a deal going on right now for$900.

To a lot of indie developers and hobbyists, that’s a lot of coin. If the engine was not good, you would see people complaining about the betas demanding their money back. Bottom line is, you’re not seeing that here.

I am VERY happy I purchased a license to T3D. It’s a solid engine that offers a lot of ‘out of the box’ features.

My personal opinion is that there is no other “indie” engine that can compare.

The T3D forums are currently private for licensees only. However, I do believe I read somewhere that GG will open the forums (after T3D launches) up to the public so non-license holders can see what T3D’s all about by people who currently use the product. That’s unfortunate for people like you =(

Have you seen ANY bad reviews for T3D? (honest question, I could be missing something).

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 03:47

@Mickelonis

Most of the “one post” users here actually own a license to T3D…

That can be good or bad, or both. Experience matters, but from that comes bias…

My personal opinion is that there is no other “indie” engine that can compare.

There are. The OP should consider looking at C4, Esenthel, Unity, NeoaAxis and Panda3D. Those are all very good choices. Depending on the game being made, any engine will do, or the OP will have a real particular reason to pick one over the others.

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 06:42

There are. The OP should consider looking at C4, Esenthel, Unity, NeoaAxis and Panda3D. Those are all very good choices. Depending on the game being made, any engine will do, or the OP will have a real particular reason to pick one over the others.

That is what I am doing. All other engines offer some demos actually, except Torque3D, that is the one of the reasons why I am asking for opinions.

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 12:46

AlphaDog is right… We don’t really know what your needs/desired attributes are in a game engine.

I have taken what AlphaDog suggested engine wise, and linked you to the corresponding information the best I could.

* - Note that I did not bother to repeat T3D’s info since its fairly well represented in the above posts.

1) Esenthel

Features - http://www.esenthel.com/?id=features

2) Panda3D

Features - http://www.panda3d.org/features.php

3) C4

4) Unity

Features - http://unity3d.com/unity/

5) NeoAxis

Features - http://www.neoaxisgroup.com/neoaxis
Licensing - http://www.neoaxisgroup.com/services/licensing

• Make sure, if you haven’t already.. look closely at all of the terms of use and license break down; ie what you get listed in the features pages depending on what License you might get (some have no source code or limited.. others won’t let you change much of anything depending on the license). You might also want to check out the forums for each to see what current users are saying about each engine (make sure they are talking about the same one you are looking at and not and old version).

Out of these listed, here is the order I would personally place them in. Take it for what it’s worth.

1) T3D
2) Unity
3) C4
4) Neoaxis
5) Esenthel
6) Panda3D

Best of luck to you in whatever you decide.

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 13:42

I appreciate your opinion and time, so don’t get me wrong on the following, LK.

There’s some information missing in your ranking.

Why is T3D first and Panda3D last? Through what process did you come to that evaluation? What you weighed heavily may not matter to me.

Also, how far better is T3D, your first choice, than Panda3D, your last choice?

I think that’s what people usually want to know when they ask “what engine should I use?”. And that information is, quite frankly, impossible to get. I don’t know of a single person who’s used three or four of those six “front-runner” engines, more importantly used each engine enough to be able to really give a mostly objective, meat-and-potatoes compare on features, price and license impact, documentation and community.

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 14:04

People who ask “What engine should I use” won’t finish their game anyway. If they don’t have the experience or patience to evaluate engines, they sure don’t have the stamina to see a game to completion…

0
101 Sep 11, 2009 at 18:22

Well I am not a new member here, I have been lurking around since 2006, check my profile.

I have all of the Torque engines, along with NeoAxis, Lawmaker, and many many others! I currently have a game in development using the GG TGEA 1.7.1 engine.

At first when the new Torque 3D engine price was released I thought it was a bad idea, and I was upset about it since T3D was so much higher than all the previous GG engines. Since then I have changed my mind.

It is so much more professional of an engine than TGE/TGEA. The quality of the rendering, the tools inside the editor, and the use of COLLADA have set this product in a different category. This new engine does not have that indie engine feel, but that of a more professional product.

Being a picky developer, I have to say that the amount of work that GG is putting into this new product is impressive. Being part of the beta process I have seen our community come together to document any bugs, and the Dev team reseraching them and fixing them. Impressive response from an engine developer, more so than I have seen from any other.

It is well worth the investment.

0
Oct 06, 2009 at 12:48

1) T3D
2) Unity
3) C4
4) Neoaxis
5) Esenthel
6) Panda3D

Realmcrafter “Professional” version is a better buy than all these engines you listed. Supports all the latest visual FX , has a rock solid networking system (with Dynamic loading for seamless worlds) and is even cheaper than most or all those.
Only negative would be I don’t think it comes with source code. But who needs it when you have all the latest features.

Torque is just a total pile of junk. Torque is not so much a game engine as it is a badly coded old game turned into a game engine/tools. And GarageGames are not so much developers as they are a marketing / hype machine selling their crap to ignorant people.

0
101 Oct 06, 2009 at 12:56

@Hardly

But who needs it when you have all the latest features.

l…… o…… l

you might not want to take this advice if you’re actually trying to make a game.

0
Oct 06, 2009 at 13:08

@starstutter

you might not want to take this advice if you’re actually trying to make a game.

You do not need source code to build games when you have a good scripting system to write gameplay with which RC Pro also has.

Source code is mainly for modifying an engine and tools.. addding more features etc.

0
101 Oct 06, 2009 at 13:43

@Hardly

You do not need source code to build games when you have a good scripting system to write gameplay with which RC Pro also has. Source code is mainly for modifying an engine and tools.. addding more features etc.

I wouldn’t take this guy too seriously. The C4 engine review (as have some others) on this site has been the subject of attacks recently. The main mistake the person made when doing this was he posted the same exact review under two different usernames, so they were deleted, and the others banned. Since those bannings occurred, Hardly has shown up and posted a review for C4 where the first several paragraphs are word for word the same as the others that were deleted.

0
101 Oct 06, 2009 at 14:43

@zebeste

I wouldn’t take this guy too seriously. The C4 engine review (as have some others) on this site has been the subject of attacks recently. The main mistake the person made when doing this was he posted the same exact review under two different usernames, so they were deleted, and the others banned. Since those bannings occurred, Hardly has shown up and posted a review for C4 where the first several paragraphs are word for word the same as the others that were deleted.

Ah, I see, one of those situations. Thanks for the heads-up.

But on a side-note, no, you don’t need source code to the engine to write a game, but it makes it a whole lot easier. Even with full-blown professional engines like Unreal 3, developers still need at least partial access to the code base. Adding a new feature doesn’t necessarily mean sooping up the graphics. It could be something like an AI algorithem that is too complex and heavy to be run in a scripting language. No engine (especially indie ones like all listed here) can possibly account for every single feature that everyone will ever need to create anything.

0
101 Oct 06, 2009 at 16:42

@Hardly

Realmcrafter “Professional” version is a better buy than all these engines you listed…Only negative would be I don’t think it comes with source code. But who needs it when you have all the latest features.

Highly debatable. And, RC is in a different category of engine: the “super-friendly-scripting” type. They tend to fall into/favor specific game genres. And, they tend to look alike. For example, look at Knights Of Dream City and Fasaria.

And, yes, depending on the game, source code does matter. You know what they say about “assume”.

However, given even a passable tool, professional devs will always find a way to make a professional game.

0
141 Oct 06, 2009 at 18:40

He does come off as a RealmCrafter advertisement in that post. Most of the engines listed are in the top ten for recommendations and have their following. The main thing to realize is that these engines aren’t all that different. Also, Torque 3d is not the engine that started as a game. That’s Torque game engine. I doubt that this individual has any experience with those other engines. The first thing to do is download an evaluation copy of an engine and make sure you can get your art work in it. That means models with animations, usually. If you don’t have any art work to put in there you should probably look into that first and write some 2d games because the engine will expire or be outdated by the time you get something in there. Everyone worries about which engine they should get, but it’s really a Ford/Chevy argument. Any of them will do the job well, but very few will actually write a game with one because of the amount of work involved. If you haven’t written a 2d game, you might just as well flush the money down the toilet.

0
104 Oct 06, 2009 at 19:01

I had a look at torque 3d (the movies on u tube) and it does look pretty speccy, but I wonder how hard is it to get it to look as good as they do by yourself from scratch.

I bet it is pretty tough, but even Im starting to think maybe id buy it :) it looks pretty good, and im a die hard write your own engine from scratch programmer.

0
Oct 07, 2009 at 09:55

Highly debatable. And, RC is in a different category of engine: the “super-friendly-scripting” type..

That’s not RC Professional. You’re talking about the old original realmcrafter. Two completely different engines. Original RC was just hobby stuff.

Hardly has shown up and posted a review for C4 where the first several paragraphs are word for word the same as the others that were deleted.

That review is reality. I guess the 12 fanboys who use it can’t handle reality so they report people and pad it’s score like ignorant muppets. Most bias trash I’ve ever seen over there. 5 star engine my hairy ass.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 12:14

@Hardly

That’s not RC Professional. You’re talking about the old original realmcrafter. Two completely different engines. Original RC was just hobby stuff.

Okay, I’ll keep an open mind and “bite the bait”. Since you seem to be an expert on all these engines, exactly in what way make RC better than all the other front-runners? (“Just because” won’t cut it in a forum with a fair amount of game dev indies and lifers.) What precise functionality in other engines is distinctly subpar relative to RC?
@Hardly

That review is reality. I guess the 12 fanboys who use it can’t handle reality so they report people and pad it’s score like ignorant muppets. Most bias trash I’ve ever seen over there. 5 star engine my hairy ass.

It’s not the differing viewpoint people don’t like. It’s the manipulative stunts like posting under multiple aliases that people react to.

0
Oct 07, 2009 at 14:09

What precise functionality in other engines is distinctly subpar relative to RC? .

RC Pro version. Not RC.

Well for one it’s networking has a built in Dynamic Loading system for seamless zoneless loading worlds. None of those other engines have that.

Unity uses Raknet which BTW was (idiotically) integrated directly into their engine when there’s absolutely no reason to integrate something that is just a networking wraparound essentially forcing you to use only those features the devs chose to implement.

I didn’t say it was “superior” or other engines were sub par to it. You did.

I said it was a “better buy” because it’s just as capable both in rendering and networking (and moreso in some areas) and is even less expensive than most or all of those listed.

It’s a laugh that it wasn’t even on that list or that it’s not even listed in the engine database.
Solstar is one of the best known suppliers of this type of stuff there is. They have thousands of customers.
But I am sure GG already knows that which might explain some things. haha

Rc Pro = More powerful Networking than T3D, just as capable in the rendering department (if not moreso),
Hundreds of dollars cheaper and supported by a very well known company.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 14:37

Is there something you’re trying to accomplish here? You’re borderlining on trolling.

0
Oct 07, 2009 at 14:40

@starstutter

You’re borderlining on trolling.

If you say so.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 15:13

@Hardly

Well for one it’s networking has a built in Dynamic Loading system for seamless zoneless loading worlds. None of those other engines have that.

How does RCP “dynamically load” world data as part of the “networking” subsystem? Can you explain it a little more in detail, ie. without any terminology that involves Excessive Capitalization for Marketing Emphasis? Let’s get down to an apples-to-apples compare.
@Hardly

I didn’t say it was “superior” or other engines were sub par to it. You did.

Correct. My mistake. You didn’t specifically say it is “superior”.

However, is it then correct to say that you stating that there is a higher “bang for buck” with RCP versus all other engines in the short list?

If so, is the only thing you can list as a differentiator is this “dynamic loading built into the network” feature? Are there any others that should be highlighted? For example, does Realmcraft have support for shaders, physics engine integration, Collada import? How about browser integration? What kind of shadows are supported? Lots of people have different needs.

Additionally, these are the following costs for indies, assuming eventual minor sales and no publisher:
1) T3D: $1000, source access 2) Unity Indie:$200, no source
3) C4 Standard: $350, source access 4) Neoaxis:$95, source access
5) Esenthel: Not clear. $200 gets you in, but may need to upgrade to$1000 license when selling your game? partial source access
6) Panda3D: free, source access
7) Realmcrafter Pro: normally $300, currently$165 on sale (unknown for how long), no source

So, I don’t think “hundreds of dollars’ is the issue, unless you are obsessing on T3D.

I eagerly await your answers. I frequently have a hard time picking an engine, and I simply don’t have the time to put real projects through on so many choices, and maybe you see something that I don’t.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 15:48

You edited your post while I worked on mine, so excuse the second follow-up to your edited/new points.
@Hardly

Unity uses Raknet which BTW was (idiotically) integrated directly into their engine

Well, given that RakNet is one of the most common networking libraries in use, the use of “idiotic” is debatable. And, Unity will state, if you do your research properly, that they do not support massive online games, just multiplayer (less than 32). However, some devs have pushed the system much higher.

Secondly, if you really will have a game that will have hundreds of users, integrating a networking library more efficient than Unity’s or RCP’s should be of utmost concern, I’d imagine…
@Hardly

It’s a laugh that it wasn’t even on that list

So, I didn’t list your pet engine in my personal post. I don’t list other people’s pet engines too; I don’t see them getting their knickers in a bunch.
@Hardly

Solstar is one of the best known suppliers of this type of stuff there is. They have thousands of customers.

Huh? Never heard of them till now. (BTW, their site is down for me right now. No response.) And, thousands of customers means nothing to me. It could be thousands of kids who have purchased it with heavy dreams of killer MMOs, only to see the software languishing on an HD somewhere. Name the biggest titles out now?
@Hardly

Rc Pro = More powerful Networking than T3D, just as capable in the rendering department (if not moreso),
Hundreds of dollars cheaper and supported by a very well known company.

Man, you sure have a hard-on for Torque, that’s for sure. Torque this, Torque that. You’d think they killed your first-born…

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 16:15

How does RCP “dynamically load” world data as part of the “networking” subsystem?

That’s kind of what I was wondering. As far as I know most of the work to do this kind of thing is done on the client. It’s of interest to me since I am going though a lot of work to build a seemless world engine.

Maybe it means the creation of server processes when needed. Technically you don’t need to have a server process running for a particular area of a world when there is no one in that area. However then you need to be able to start one up and populate it with MOBs on the fly when someone gets close.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 16:25

Man, you sure have a hard-on for Torque, that’s for sure. Torque this, Torque that. You’d think they killed your first-born…

I think its funny how most people have no idea that this site is sponsored by Garage Games

0
Oct 07, 2009 at 16:41

Well, given that RakNet is one of the most common networking libraries in use, the use of “idiotic” is debatable.

I didn’t call Raknet idiotic. I called Unity’s direct integration of it idiotic.

Huh? Never heard of them till now. …

Shows your experience level I guess.

Man, you sure have a hard-on for Torque, that’s for sure. Torque this, Torque that. You’d think they killed your first-born…

Well it is a Torque Engine OP thread isn’t it? I figured I would stay on topic and save the guy some money and grief by not having him have to work with that mumbo jumbo spaghetti Garage Games likes to call source code.
That’s why it’s given out BTW. Because GG wants you to fix all the problems yourself that it has.
@starstutter

I think its funny how most people have no idea that this site is sponsored by Garage Games

I know it is.
@starstutter

So, I didn’t list your pet engine in my personal post.

It’s not “my” engine. Nice try at flaming though. :D

But I suppose I should now digress before I get banned for “trolling”. Then whatever would I do? :(

Good luck.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 17:06

@Hardly

It’s not “my” engine. It’s just a better or as good less expensive engine.

That quote’s not from me buddy. If you’re going to be a smartass, at least check your post as to not look like a dumbass.

EDIT: This is a waste of time.

0
101 Oct 07, 2009 at 19:41

@Hardly

I didn’t call Raknet idiotic. I called Unity’s direct integration of it idiotic.

Yes, I know. And, that is precisely what is debatable. They provide a decent “wrapper” that will satisfy most Unity users making multiplayer (not massively so) games.

BTW, if you’re going “massive”, you usually want a highly tweakable networking library. Given that RCP does not put out any source, you are SOL there too, just like with Unity. In fact, in the Unity boards, lots of people have suggested many solutions. But, you can’t get into the RCP boards, right? More secrecy…
@Hardly

Shows your experience level I guess.

I will willingly admit I am totally inexperienced with small players in the proprietary game engine market. PM me when their website is finally back up and working. Maybe I’ll take a spin and educate myself on them.
@Hardly

That’s why it’s given out BTW. Because GG wants you to fix all the problems yourself that it has.

Nice spin! Everyone knows the only reason a game developer needs source is to fix buggy code.
@Hardly

It’s not “my” engine. Nice try at flaming though. :D

Wasn’t flaming. pet == preferred; pet != made by you. Most game devs have a pet engine.

You obviously are a big fan of RCP. That’s fine. If you had just said: “I use RCP and really love it.” that would have been that. Instead, you had to go and denigrate the differing opinions of others, and denigrate other engines without backup.

You still haven’t given a tangible, detailed reason why it should be the only engine considered out of my list. Lots of handwaiving and marketingspeak about the wonders of RCP, but no actual technical explanations or analysis.
@Hardly

But I suppose I should now digress before I get banned for “trolling”. Then whatever would I do? :(

How about actually answering questions and backing up your assertions? As a user of RCP, here’s a recap of the actual interesting topics we could be discussing that you have avoided:
- How does RCP “dynamically load” world data as part of the “networking” subsystem? How’s it better than other engines? (Apparently, I’m not the only one wondering exactly what you meant there.)
- What differentiating features, if any, does RCP have versus similarly-priced engines?
- If they have “thousands of customers”, who are they? What titles are currently active on RCP in the market?

Smokescreens are cool, but they eventually dissipate…

0
101 Oct 09, 2009 at 21:16

C’mon, Hardly, this was getting interesting! How’s about some those answers?

(BTW, Solstar’s site is still down! Maybe you have an “inside track” on why a company as illustrious as you state would have their corporate site down for at least three days?)

0
101 Oct 11, 2009 at 08:54

Pardon my intrusion, I hope I am not speaking out of turn here.

For the Realm Crafter Pro, here is the main site: http://realmcrafter.com/
It is not too bad, but does have its limitations for sure. As far as source, eventually we are suppose to have the source code for RCP… Eventually.

Currently we are messing with Realm Crafter/Realm Crafter Pro, Torque TGEA, T3d, Abysial and Esenthel engines.

To be honest, each one is different, and each one takes a learning curve. Especially if you are just an artist like me. I have experience with Hero and U2.0/2.5 and limited experience with Emergents Gamebryo to the degree of cell design and asset placement. I have to say that each that was listed that we have messed with has its own challenges, each of them different then the other.

As far as T3d goes, it has been tricky for us. We are still in the design stage and lack a genius coder, so we are really putting these things through the wringer.

As one poster said, I would have to say take a look at the tools your artists will be using or have experience in. I have years of adobe (from photoshop 4) to 3ds max (since3). Yet, I find it very difficult to go to a program like Gimp or other common graphic design programs. It might be because im stubborn and old, might be im not smart enough any more to learn something new.. who knows. But the key thing is, find out what tools your artists use/want to use and what each of the engines provide import/export support for.

From there, I have to say that in my opinion, source code is important if you want to make something unique. Yes, you can use the basic engine with out touching the source code, but then you are limited to only what the game engine provides. There are some creative combinations im sure, but it would be limited. If you want to have custom inventories, or animations or improve something like pathing or anything else, I think it is a lot easier if you have the source code.

We are still learning ourselves, and many of us have experience as either professionals or contract artists. Is there one better then another with out going to a triple A engine that is filled with api’s and a nice clean easy gui? I do not think so. I think it more matters what a person wants to make, and how they want to use it.

Not sure if that helps at all, but that is just my thoughts from an artists point of view.

Peace,
Sarrene’

0
101 Oct 11, 2009 at 13:42

@Sarrene

As far as source, eventually we are suppose to have the source code for RCP… Eventually.

They’ve been saying that for years. Don’t hold your breath…
@Sarrene

Is there one better then another with out going to a triple A engine that is filled with api’s and a nice clean easy gui? I do not think so.

Very true.

0
141 Oct 11, 2009 at 16:02

From there, I have to say that in my opinion, source code is important if you want to make something unique. Yes, you can use the basic engine with out touching the source code, but then you are limited to only what the game engine provides. There are some creative combinations im sure, but it would be limited. If you want to have custom inventories, or animations or improve something like pathing or anything else, I think it is a lot easier if you have the source code.

I’ve tried a few general purpose engines and I find the scripting will let you do any type of game. Mostly we are talking about things like rotation, collision response, moving along an axis, physics, things like that. Does that sound like any special type of game? If you want a very custom gui, you may be in trouble, but usually you can put up a plane with your own textures on it and overwrite with text if you don’t like the gui. You can make any kind of inventory, etc, from real 3d objects to 2d images and arrange them any way you want. I think most people have misconceptions about that for some reason. If you need to do a custom math algorithm in c++, yes, you may need the source code because script is slower. For most designers, that isn’t really going to be a problem. In general, a small team or single person isn’t going to need it. You’ve really got your work cut out learning api’s, doing game design, getting art work and writing game flow code. Also, you will find most game engines authors are very helpful when you do run into a problem.

0
101 Oct 13, 2009 at 04:29

@Hardly

Realmcrafter “Professional” version is a better buy than all these engines you listed. Supports all the latest visual FX , has a rock solid networking system (with Dynamic loading for seamless worlds) and is even cheaper than most or all those.
Only negative would be I don’t think it comes with source code. But who needs it when you have all the latest features. Torque is just a total pile of junk. Torque is not so much a game engine as it is a badly coded old game turned into a game engine/tools. And GarageGames are not so much developers as they are a marketing / hype machine selling their crap to ignorant people.

Sorry but LOL…
and I dont post much here but still…WOW

0
104 Oct 13, 2009 at 04:42

Go Hardly, i like an opinionated man!

0
101 Oct 13, 2009 at 16:20

They’ve been saying that for years. Don’t hold your breath…

Very true.

While I mostly agree with your point of view in your posts alpha, I have to ask this…if you never heard of Solstar Games before this thread, then why do you say “they’ve been saying that for years”. “They” has to be Solstar Games, which you claim to have no knowledge of?

Anyway, Realm Crafter Pro source will be available but the product is still in development so there will be no source release until both the client and server are “complete”.

0
101 Oct 13, 2009 at 18:12

@Rofar

why do you say “they’ve been saying that for years”. “They” has to be Solstar Games, which you claim to have no knowledge of?

For a long time on various forums, Realmcrafter as a product has been discussed by many and, quite frequently, allegations are made to the imminent release of source… which has yet to happen. So, the “they” in that case is the fan base that supports RC in forums.

I did not know of the actual parent company of the product. I had always thought RC was a “self-titled debut album”. Admittedly, I didn’t research deeply as I have never wanted a canned platform for myself. My knowledge there is circumstantial. In my defense, the website made little emphasis of Solstar Games. (Currently, the RC website is down so this is from memory.)

Does that cover it well enough for you? My apologies for the confusion; it was not intended.
@Rofar

Anyway, Realm Crafter Pro source will be available but the product is still in development so there will be no source release until both the client and server are “complete”.

Yes, that’s what “they” say alright! :)

So, when will it be complete? Isn’t it at v2 or more already? Are they pulling a google on people? People paying for a long beta cycle?

Even if we allow such behavior as normal, that doesn’t help someone who wants to put together a real (non-hobbyist) MMO now and may (will likely?) need source over the next months…

0
101 Oct 13, 2009 at 21:55

To clear up something though, the source for Realm Crafter Standard (1.x) has been released. It was released over a year ago. The Pro version source code will be released when it’s out of beta. Of course there is no real definition of what “source code” actually means when it comes to pro. I’m assuming it means you will get access to be able to do a fair amount of customization, but it may be via a SDK or something.

This entire debate in this thread doesn’t make much sense. Torque 3D is not a MMO engine. Either are the other engines mentioned in this thread. It makes no sense to compare Realm Crafter (or any other MMO engine) with the engines mentioned here.

0
104 Oct 14, 2009 at 00:39

Hobbiest MMOS rule! :)
I followed “fabled lands” and they really got it nearly lookin’ good! Goes to show, if you wanna make one, and your good… nothings gonna stop ya.

But apparently, he coded from scratch without an engine, so Maybe you have to be that good to do it.

0
101 Oct 14, 2009 at 01:06

I am not totaly sure on some of those engines, though I do know that most of them do not support any mmo scripts or networking. However, Esenthel engine does (if you have one of the payed versions, not the trial).

Though what I have seen from a few that have been creative enough they have been able to introduce their own networking code to make it mmo capable. Mind you, I am not talking multi player, but actual mmo.

I think one of the things that is a it upsetting for a few people with the T3d engine is that there was suppose to be a mmo kit, as well as a few other things. Sadly, however, what turned us off from it was the public release and a few comments on some aspects that a few of us had asked about. Such as 3dsmax import/export. The response we had gotten was “why would you want to?” or being told to use blender instead. I probably could complain more, but I will just say that the T3d engine, even though we did pay for it, turned out to not be what we needed, as so many other indie engines. T3D I think is best for those that want to produce either an RTS or FPS game that has separate levels/zones.

Realm Crafter Pro has been in beta for.. oh lords, at least 26 months. I would look it the purchase date for us, but the site is down as someone else had mentioned a bit ago. They have been saying “releace is near” for a while now, and if you are a person in the planning stage, that is not a problem. Since it will give you time to get acquainted to the engine itself. But again, it was not for us. I honestly have no idea when they are going to have the first rc, or release the source code. I do not think anyone really does. Perhaps when its ready. Once this is released, I think it would be a decent engine for those just starting off, both code and graphics alike. Easy to learn and fit together the different levels/zones.

Panda 3D seemed.. I dont know, not quite as customizable for us and what we needed. We needed an engine that supported streaming and or mega terrains, networking (or at least support it), collada and lod, as well as a customizable scripting system (source code). So we went away from that one. However, Panda 3D did seem to have some really nice features built in.

While C4 has some great capabilities via graphics, it was still lacking somewhat for us. What I have seen some do with the C4 was amazing. Even our walk through turned out VERY nice. But for us, that is all it ended up being, a walk through world. We had a difficult time getting some api’s plugged in, and support for custom scripts was limited. Though I do realize that they have their hands full. I think this would be a great step up engine for those that are ready to go beyond the traditional FPS or 2d game level style game. For presentations it is truly amazing.

Unity.. Well, from an artists point of view, I got very frustrated with it. Though our coder did not seem to mind it too much. However the layout of the file system was a bit confusing, and .. well I am a wee bit of a perfectionist when it comes to my 3d work and cell designs. Placement was a bit of an issue for me, and there were a few bugs that got a bit frustrating. It also was limited in the network department. However I did hear that someone was working on a mmo network kit. I do not know what happened to that. Of course this was a year ago, so things could have changed.

NeoAxis, This one I have no idea on. This was not an engine that we got or tried out. I am not sure why, though I had seen it listed, for some reason we passed by this one. So I have no knowledge on this.

Overall, we ended up going with the Esenthel engine. It is great, and the support is amazing. Not to mention it is one young man that created and is supporting this engine. So out of all the ones that we have tried, in this list and additional ones, we found that Esenthel is what will work best for us right now.

In the end though, it really all depends on the needs of a person or group. What they want to create and how. Also, are they new to game design, coding and or graphics? Those things will matter also.

Each person/group has their own needs. As I said, with out paying 250,000usd up to 890,000usd you will not find one engine that will do everything… at least not without a lot of work. Even Professional AAA companies still customize (sometimes to a great extent and combine several api’s together) their AAA engine.

My recommendation to anyone that is just starting out..
1. Try out as many as you can.
2. Figure out what your most important needs are (cost, api’s, features, scripting and customizing abilities, etc.)
3. Try (and try again) with each engine #2 to see if it fits.
4. Repeat number 1 until you find your perfect fit.

Peace,
Sarrene’

0
141 Oct 14, 2009 at 02:03

It makes no sense to compare Realm Crafter (or any other MMO engine) with the engines mentioned here.

I don’t think Realmcrafter is really a true MMO engine either is it? I think it’s made for one server. Although most of the other engines use the client computer for the server. I really haven’t seen any information for it other than in the forum, they say to use it on a dedicated server. Not that it matters because you aren’t going to find that many people logging on to an amateur deal like that. I think it’s basically in the same class as the other engines other than it’s more built for an rpg. I think most amateur developers would be better off using a multi-player server on the client so they don’t have to pay for a dedicated server that is going to end up being a loss of money. I don’t think it’s really a choice for someone trying to make money on an MMO, but most people just aren’t going to get the manpower to pull something like that off anyway.

0
104 Oct 14, 2009 at 03:38

Hey Sarrene, so I take it your a bit disatisfied with whats out there at the moment, but what I think, is give it maybe a few more years and some really good engines are gonna come out that support these huge levels, and come with the networking to make an mmo possible.

But really, just like my last post, i recommend DOING IT FROM SCRATCH, dont bother using any engine if you can just code it yourself!

It does take a legion of artists tho, even benifiting from 3d - like you dont have to draw every frame of animation these days, you just animate models… but still it is a hell load of work…

0
101 Oct 14, 2009 at 04:01

@Sarrene

While C4 has some great capabilities via graphics, it was still lacking somewhat for us. What I have seen some do with the C4 was amazing. Even our walk through turned out VERY nice. But for us, that is all it ended up being, a walk through world. We had a difficult time getting some api’s plugged in, and support for custom scripts was limited. Though I do realize that they have their hands full. I think this would be a great step up engine for those that are ready to go beyond the traditional FPS or 2d game level style game. For presentations it is truly amazing.

Hi, Sarrene –

Thanks for the comments about C4’s graphics. I’d be interested in hearing about your experiences with customizing scripts in C4, because the scripting system was designed to be extremely customizable / extensible. Feedback from users like yourself could help us identify how this information may not be getting in users’ hands as easily as we would like. If you have a moment, please send me an email or post in the C4 forums.

0
101 Oct 14, 2009 at 14:18

@rouncer

Hey Sarrene, so I take it your a bit disatisfied with whats out there at the moment, but what I think, is give it maybe a few more years and some really good engines are gonna come out that support these huge levels, and come with the networking to make an mmo possible.

But really, just like my last post, i recommend DOING IT FROM SCRATCH, dont bother using any engine if you can just code it yourself!

It does take a legion of artists tho, even benifiting from 3d - like you dont have to draw every frame of animation these days, you just animate models… but still it is a hell load of work…

I am not sure sure it is dissatisfaction alone. Only one engine I am really dissatisfied and disappointed in, but that is another topic all together. It is more that we experimented and tried out a majority of engines that thought might or could work for us. In the end we did find one that seems to fit.

As far as coding goes, I am more an artist. I know how to script websites (somewhat) with the usual html,xml,css and so on. I can design a gui/ui with xml (the hard coding already done :) ), though over all, and at heart, I do concept, 3d graphics and cell design. I am having enough trouble trying to just get our business proposal complete. hehe

However, designing an engine from scratch I am sure is no easy task, and from what I understand talking to a few, it can take years and years if one is just starting off with C++, C#, lua. Though I am not trying to dissuade anyone. I just know that i may understand aspects of the engine and most of what goes into it, I know also my limitations. I will stick with the art. ;)

My main point to my post was that for any project, you have to try out different things to find the one that will best fit you. This is what we did, and we did end up finding the engine that seems to fit best. I am quite happy with it from an artists point of view, my one lone coder likes it and the support is amazing. So we found our fit. I hope that those out there can find theirs and don’t give up.

Peace,
Sarrene’

0
101 Oct 24, 2009 at 02:40

@roboant

Hello, I have some questions for Torque 3D owners.

• any idea when they will release the final version?
• how good is new Torque 3D? I know an old version of Torque, maybe 1.2 or something, and I remember wasn’t so tempting
• any comments about that new engine? Please share all experience you have with, I am thinking to buy it.

Thank you.

Granted as others have mentioned, the documentation is a little behind, but it is better. I have owned GG engines since about 1.4TGE. You can’t really go wrong with the community, they will help and fill in the gaps where the documentation is lacking and it fact, provide a lot of resources that can be used to enhance the engine as well.

Recent changes with the addition of Collada import to DTS it makes it easier for a programmer (me) to integrate artwork into the game. Working with several artists you can simply take the Collada, change if needed (nodes, new animations) and import. Or change things once the files are in the engine.

And speaking of the engine, I love T3D and the GG brand since you have full access to the code. Granted other engines are out there which you can produce a game without the source, but having the source means you can go in any direction you want without being limited at some point by having to wait for the company to add the feature into a patch.

0
101 Oct 30, 2009 at 05:41

Where are the Torque 3D vehicle examples?