Duion

Those are all just buzzwords and you probably would not even be able to notice it if nobody would tell you. Post effects existed in Torque since forever and the post effects stack is pretty much the same as in all other engines. Also global illumination is not as good as many might think, it depends on the situation and how it is implemented. I once made an experiment with one of my levels where I baked global illumination or the lightmap into the model, because I thought it would make the graphics so much better, but in fact it was hardly even noticeable, so I did not bother to implement it. The default SSAO post effect did a similar job and did not cost any effort so I went with that. If I really wanted I could implement a global illumination post effect or just bake perfect global illumination into the model with Blender, so having a feature in the engine for that is not that essential. And such a thing as "global illumination feature" does not even exist. There are just several ways you can fake it or you bake it into the model, otherwise it costs too much performance to be usable. You did not get my point, I meant that people are sold game engines that you cannot even make games with, I meant the game engine with that, not the people. There are so many game engines out there that cannot make games, but some of them are still popular and that is because of marketing and buzzwords like you already fell for. And I'm not making any new games with T3D 4 since it does not even exist yet and just updating my existing games would be enough work, since people carelessly break backwards compatibility all the time because it does not affect them since they have no game in the making.

Well I don't have a third person aim animation, that is missing, should be doable, but will be hard to align. Or you do a separate first person gun model with the arms attached to it and remove the rest of the body like other games do, with this solution the animation will always line up perfectly, since the arms are glued to the gun. You do not change the look animation, you change the aim animation. My solution is pretty cool since it works, much cooler than a not working solution. So don't complain, even most AAA games cannot solve this problem and their third and first person animations do not line up perfectly as well. So my solution is even cooler than theirs, since I have the real body in first person that accurately reflects the animations in first and in third person, well except the iron sight aim animation. I could have fixed it, but it turned out to be more complicated since the default engine code did not have something to put the iron sight aim state into a state machine and attach an animation for it.

Torque3D already had more impressive demos than Godot now has, more than a decade ago, they were made or commissioned by Garagegames. Since then we had no demos, since the community seems to be too incompetent and to be honest making demos is a waste of time and resources. The old Garagegames demos were already better than most real indie games produced with Torque now, so they could have easily made a working game prototype with those resources. Torque3D will not perform better than Cry Engine, it is technologically somewhere between FarCry1 engine and Crysis Engine, but even FarCry1 engine was superior in some ways to Torque now, for example it had a build in lightmap baking. But whatever this is all irrelevant, first you need a market you advertise to, then you can worry about quality of your actual product. I mean look at others, they manage to sell game engines to people that are not even able to make games with.

You encountered one of the reasons why most games do not use the actual third person model for first person. Did you look into Uebergame how I solved it? I have working iron sights with third person model as first person as well. I have kind of an ugly solution, I just mount the gun to the eye node, only problem is the hand animation no longer fits, that is why most games do not use the actual body in first person and just attach the hands to the gun. Whatever, why don't you just steal my working code?

Everyone with half a brain should be able to quickly figure out that Torque3D is the best open source engine and all other open source "engines" are simply not an option, if you are in any way serious about developing a real 3D full scale game, not just a prototype or primitive mobile style game. I don't get how that is so hard for people to understand. The whole debate is so useless. I'm not up to date currently, but when I hear things like Godot has no LOD support this means the engine is disqualified right out of the gate already, since LOD support is one of the most essential things a game engine needs. If you have no LOD support or similar features, everything bigger than a single scene will kill performance and therefore kill your game and therefore kill the engine as an option for you to use. Torque3D needs no improvement, it is already the best, all we need is organize things better so we get things done and think about marketing to gain more users. Projects like Godot work because they get hyped up and subsidized by commercial companies and because the mobile market is a growing market, while the market for real games is shrinking. So Godot appeals to a growing market and we appeal to a shrinking market, that's the secret.

Uh do you use the default spawn function where it spawns you in a random location inside the spawn sphere? Either change the function or much easier just change the spawn sphere size to something very small, so there is less variation. The polyhedron is just a model to symbolize the spawn sphere, the green sphere is what defines where the player spawns. I have not thought about the problem of the player standing in the middle of the bed, if you just unmount. Can't think of a good solution right out of my head now for that, maybe one thing, did you know you can make animations offset from the models origin? So you can make an animation where the player goes to bed, without actually changing the players location. At least I think that's possible. Similar to the death animation where the player falls over, but the models origin is still where his feet were before he fell, so you can make a go to bed animation similar like that.

Why do you respawn the player out of the bed anyway? Is it not enough to just change the mount and animation? For spawning you should always spawn things above to where you want them spawned, so you have a little buffer zone that prevents glitching through the floor, if you already have that the problem may be somewhere else. Also it may depend on the physics engine you use, I had problems with PhysX and Bullet before. For example one issue was that when I fire my weapon and run forward, the player somehow managed to run faster than the bullet and the bullet would hit him, causing damage to yourself. But I can just guess here, a video or so would probably help much, to me it just sounds you are doing things too complicated. I mean if you really want to respawn the player near the bed, then you can manually place a spawn that works I don't see the problem there. Maybe the animation messes up the collision box and that is why you glitch through.

You mean the popups that appear when you hover over a GUI item? You can set them in the properties what you want them to be or enter nothing. You have to explain in more detail what you mean, maybe a screenshot of what you mean.

One thing I use that sounds similar to what you want is a containerRayCast it checks if you are near something, not just a raycast from your mouse, but all around. My bots use that to check if an enemy is near, but they run on a tick rate, where they perform an action every tick which is like every second or so. So if you really want to do that you would have to shoot your raycasts constantly in intervals of x seconds.

There are already complete functions like that in the default template I think, I mostly just copy and paste existing functions and extend them to what I need, it's simpler than reinventing the wheel every time. Isn't there already a tooltip GUI by default in the full template? I remember seeing it. A toggle function looks like: function toggleTooltips() { if (TooltipsGUI.isAwake()) { Canvas.popDialog(TooltipsGUI); } else Canvas.pushDialog(TooltipsGUI); } Then you bind a key to do that and done. What else you need?

You can bind a key to toggle the GUI on and off, should be relatively simple, if you want them to stay off, you have to create a button in options menu that sets a pref value to disable it or have the pref value set, if you just press the toggle tooltips on/off button. Look into the code how it is done for other GUIs that you can toggle.

A trigger zone is probably the better and easier solution instead of constantly having to check for objects, it also allows you finer control on what you define as "close enough" to interact, the trigger then can also be used for interaction or another trigger. Personally I'm not that much of a fan of guiding the player through automatic events, if designed well a game can work without such things, in the past games usually did not have help texts, GUIs, triggers or hints to tell you where, how and with what you can interact, you would have to figure it out by yourself. I would design first without those things and then have players test it and see how well it works or if help is needed through texts or whatever.

I believe most games where you can customize character they don't actually change the character, the customization is achieved through a combination of bones that morph the model and through different textures that change skin tones. Often a base model for male and one for female is used, sometimes multiple, in case or role play games where you can play as cat people or reptile people. However you can have multiple heads for example and swap them out or hide/unhide them based on what you need, but I never got as far as testing that out. Hiding the head only is pretty easy, but it does not help you customize anything. Character creation, especially customizable ones are one of the hardest things to do in game design, as an indie I would not even touch that area. I would recommend just make a bunch or pre-made models one for each race and have the player select one out of those few.

I have no animosity towards JeffR, he is doing great work, but that does not change the fact that he tries to control it all by himself and at the same time throwing everything overboard that was decided before. You can like the SC concept or not, but fact is still, that when it was still in place, everything worked much better, for example the plan was to have 4 major releases of the engine each year which was more or less met, but now we have no releases for over 2 years now, so to the outside it looks like there is nothing happening anymore and that there is no leadership.

It is more like 3-5 years depending on how you define it, strictly speaking as soon as Torque3D was in the hands of the nonexistent community the idea of the steering committee and everything that came with it was more or less abandoned. JeffR has taken control of it all now, since he is the only active existing member left with write access to the repository, I would still be there as well, but they threw me out. It is probably pointless to create new threads about that, I did multiple times and it was still ignored.

You mean the Steering Committee? That does not exist anymore for years now, just in case you did not know. Regarding to the topic, I don't even know what this is good for, it just says rendering framework, what are you supposed to use it for? It seems to be middleware not designed for end users.

You can also use real clouds aka particles/billboards or even 3D models, the Pacific Demo uses particle/billboard clouds, which have a real location in 3D space. The only drawback of that is, that you can fly to the end of the world and see the clouds up close. There is no need to fake anything, you can as well just build it in 3D. I even used a cylinder around the map with an alpha texture and mountain background, it looked amazingly convincing, but only until you flew there to see it was only a backdrop. You could even make the cylinder or dome with alpha texture rotate so the clouds move, so many possibilities.

That's an unusual way of doing it, that idea never came to me. What is the supposed benefit to that, since you cannot have it moving, or it would become obviously ugly? Have you tried cloud layer that is affected by daylight? Otherwise I would just make another for night, like Torque3D does now with the night skybox. You could also use a very large cloud layer with lots of variants so you occasionally get cloudy areas and clear areas, which then move all over the map, which is also more realistic, since the very cloudy areas can also be over your head. To the simulate the more cloudiness at the horizon you can use fog.

Can you give me keywords or a Link to a website to know what to search for? PS: The link to the old backup was http://abighole.hngamers.com/ but it is down now.

Don't worry I have backups of many of those things, just ask me and I will check. There was also some guy recently who hosted a backup collection of the resources from Garagegames thats where I got most of my backups of the resources from as well, no idea if it is still up.

What you create is automatically copyrighted by you, you can additionally protect brand names, but I don't think that is necessary, it only may be necessary if you have a bigger company and a known brand name and your profit depends on it.

You don't need to do anything for now, create game or whatever product first and then you can worry about that. You also do not need a company, as Steve says, you are the company, a company is only needed, if you are a bigger business that has multiple people and/or make serious money. Apart from that check the laws of your country.

Probably not, our current moon is just fine. To even make use of that texture you would have to model a moon and unwrap that texture to it, then figure out how to render it to 2D exactly from the front and then output it as an image and then you would end up with something that will look almost exactly like what we have now in Torque.

The potential harm here is, that people waste their and other peoples time with pointless undertakings and cause confusion and possibly even sabotage the whole engine. Why would you even want to do something that you don't have an argument for why you want to do it? Sanity is not relative, sanity is when you have reasons and arguments for what you are doing, insanity is when you don't.

Of course there is an argument, it is totally common sense to argue whether you should or not do something before you do something. Everyone should operate on the same standards of sanity. Imagine someone on a car forum asks how to do something stupid like how he can replace the wheels with wooden wheels, of course the first question of the sane people in that forum would be "Why the hell you want to do that?" and even if the persists with it, they will tell him to not do it and list all the potential drawbacks and dangers associated with it and even if he still persists most people would not help him, because they don't want to be responsible for such an insane undertaking. And that is why I list the potential problems you may run into replacing the scripting language and even if you manage to do it, there is still no guarantee that you gain anything in the end.