Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

suncaller's Achievements

  1. I like that there are guidelines and a path for correction explicitly in place.
  2. You're not wrong, Phantom_Limbs. In fact, the point I was making was that people disliked gdscript, and yet the engine still became popular before the other languages were implemented. The proposal you made is one I've been contemplating, as well, and inspired by, it seems, the same Godot article. It may be unnecessary for me to say I agree with Azaezel's points, but I'll do it anyway.
  3. I dislike TorqueScript as much as the next guy, but if we're going to all in with anything, that should be our choice, I think. Its strengths outweigh its negatives for its intended use cases. I've gotten started on a t3d-tools extension for vs code which for now adds code completion, snippets, refactoring, and code navigation. Debugging and profiling is on the TODO list, but it's not as straightforward. The rest of your points... I'm not really sure I'm convinced about C#. I'd love if Lukas would be able to finish getting that popped in there, because who doesn't want more options, but the advantages TorqueScript provides for development are superior in every way, even if the language itself isn't. Real-time, live scripting in the editor, anyone? Preview of t3d-tools (click the image to see it in action):
  4. I got it working with devhead shortly before AFX was integrated, but scrapped that for manually importing certain parts (the camera math for my overhead follow cam). I'm not sure I'd recommend anyone use it straight out if they have any desire to upgrade to 4.0. But I look forward to seeing your own efforts, Jeff. Maybe I just did it wrong, heh.
  5. I'll volunteer to help with getting these updates to happen, but can you point out exactly what you want changed? I've got my own list of modernizations that need to happen, and I'd be happy to add any solutions you have to my notes. Problems -- well, there are plenty of those, and we can all see them for ourselves. The issue is there's not enough bandwidth to deal with stuff that's not immediately important to our individual interests. Also, can we all please roll the flaming back just a tad? The community is small enough as it is, let's put in some effort into trying to be more welcoming and less hateful. The reality is, we're getting heated about it because we care. That's something we have in common. Let's focus on that, and try to overlook the other stuff as much as possible.
  6. Version: Devhead, Feb. OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 CMake: 3.12.1, 3.13.4 Generator: Visual Studio 15 2017, Ninja Compiler: Visual Studio 2017, Clang 7 Visual Studio 2017: Works seamlessly from clean install. No hacks required. Clang 7: Fails, currently unable to resolve issues.
  7. I've been watching the growth of the Godot engine, and I'm not sure that's a fair assessment. Instead, I think it's because Godot has certain strengths that it leverages correctly and follows through on that with appropriate marketing and development. The difference is that Torque3D's strengths take a tremendous amount of time to improve or change, because unlike Godot, it is a historied engine with a massive codebase capable of doing a great many things. The purpose of this thread seems to be to embrace the metaphor of Startup!Torque3D, and a part of that is analyzing the demographic we serve, leveraging the existing resources we have, and figuring out how to procure those we don't. In this sense, Godot is an objectively good example, since they've leveraged less into more.
  8. I agree, metrics would be a useful starting point for figuring out what avenues of approach will yield the best results. However, I think we can perhaps make some judgements based on reasoning and the observable statistics of other major websites in the meantime. For example, github and the google results for game engines: https://github.com/collections/game-engines https://github.com/topics/game-engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_game_engines. There isn't much we can do with the wiki entry, except update it when there is something spectacular with which to update it, but we can contemplate what happens when someone sees that Torque3D might be a match, and clicks through. What do they see? How does that effect their decision? Is the decision they make in line with reality -- in other words, if they decide to try it, or click away, does the engine actually match up with what the impression that it makes to lead to that decision? Is there a different front we can present that would allow them to better see the reality and make a better choice (in theory, and in my opinion, this would be that there are goods odds that if there is a valid reason to not use UE4 or Unity, T3D is the best available option).
  9. I've seen this mentioned before: "decent but outdated engine with a weird scripting language for which no modern tooling exists and moves on." Did Godot's scripting language put people off? Not at all. Godot got c# and python scripting well after it boomed in popularity. Writing UE4 blueprints is not really a transferable skill, but that sees quite a bit of use. Regardless, a better scripting interface has been proposed and work on it has started. Is the real issue that there is no modern tooling? If so, Torsion is a thing that exists, and creating language highlighting and tossing it into the IDE of choice isn't really that hard. I intend to have something up for VS Code some time in the near future. Do you feel that would be a significant factor in people choosing Torque? If not, what more would need to be done in this regard? Blood's viewpoint on this is a bit harshly phrased, but not really wrong. I very much like the image you've created of Torque as a small tech startup. I wrote more, answering the original questions you posed with reasoning, but I'm exhausted, so I've removed it for now in favor of rewriting it with a clearer head. I'll summarize my thoughts to: I think we have all the components of a major game engine at hand, we just need to optimize for success. Forget the committees, the voting, etc. We just need to start writing things down and organizing ourselves better. I assert that we should distribute discussions over the discord, forums, and wiki based on what is most appropriate. Not because discord is bad or anything silly like that, but because the forum and wiki can facilitate different kinds of discussions more appropriately and also be readable down the line if needed -- something that's a bit challenging with discord. That, or make an army of bots to sort out things discussed in discord. It's all about using the right tool for the job.
  10. Oh, I didn't realize! That's entirely my fault, but now that I've realized that, as well as the vital fact you have in fact completed a game, unlike the rest of these plebeians, I must accept your claim that you are one of the best artists around these parts, although I've seen your art and I personally wouldn't be so hasty to do the same, I can only respect that as two master artisans of our craft, we must by necessity have differing opinions. But I should respect you above these others, at the very least; so sorry for that slight. Still, obviously, I've made way more than just one game, so when I say I'm a better artist than you, as well as a better speaker, writer, historian, mathematician, etc., it would be foolish for you to deny me. So with that concrete reasoning in place, let's settle this petty squabbling and join together in mocking these lesser mortals! :roll:
  11. Excellent contribution as usual, Duion! That got me thinking, if we constrain by game type, what type has the most core features common across the others? And if we constrain by theme, should we select it based on some similar criteria, random chance, or perhaps even following trends?
  12. This is an amazing idea. Would it be better to select constraints based on game type or theme, I wonder?
  13. It might help if you go back and actually read what I've said so far; I'm not at all interested in arguing with you to begin with, and even less so as it's becoming clear you have nothing to say but ad-hominem attacks and outright bullying. All you've done so far is prove exactly the points I had made before, far from discrediting them. As I said, please provide evidence of your superior credentials? Unless you're seriously trying to claim the stuff you have on your site is superior to the work that's gone into the engine over even the past couple of months? If so... Not even remotely close. Try again.
  14. I think our credentials as far as how adults speak with each other show very clearly even within this thread. For the rest, could you kindly point me in the direction of these credentials of yours that you claim exist? I'm sure you're speaking nothing but the truth with your claims, but I've yet to come across anything to back that bluster up. I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
  • Create New...