Canardian's Blog

Agreed. This is the reason why Unity 3D has been so successful. Leadwerks has made some major improvements, but it still feels like a game engine for programmers. This is exactly why Torque3D has lost so much market share and Unity has gained so much.

Torque has been always a horror for programmers (I have TGE and TGEA), and I've heard from Torque3D owners (who regret their purchase), that Torque3D is no improvement regarding the spaghetti code.

 

Unity seems quite popular, but it is too outdated for modern virtual reality simulations (it doesn't even have deferred rendering and global illumination). I'd rather use Unigine then, but that's too expensive for Indie developers, so the only choice left is Leadwerks Engine (it's getting GI also, or even SSRT).

This is exactly why I'm really big into Thingoids and pushing them. This is what it can be like with the LE editor. We just need more people to get into Thingoid programming to make this happen.

Torque has been always a horror for programmers (I have TGE and TGEA), and I've heard from Torque3D owners (who regret their purchase), that Torque3D is no improvement regarding the spaghetti code.

 

Add another to the regret Torque3D purchase here. Torque3D is the biggest pile of garbage to have ever come into existence. The code is still spaghetti code (they promised a modularized rewrite). The performance is horrible. I get much better visuals with LE and I get over 2-3 times the framerate. Torque is driven by marketing and marketing alone. The most humurous thing to me is that the head of their product development left to do the same job at Unity. The only advantage that Torque, Unity, and C4 has over LE is that they can run on consoles. LE will not make any significant market penetration until it can as well unfortunately.

Although I own a console, I would never play a game on it. It's just a poor excuse to gimp games to have autoaim because the console controllers are not as accurate and easy to use as keyboard and mouse.

 

Consoles are good as long they can play BluRay movies and lay flat on top of the VHS video cassette player. But as soon consoles need to stay upright, and can't play BluRay movies, they are not worth a penny.

 

The PC took over the game platform role from Amiga years ago, so it should keep to its purpose, and it does.

 

I would not support people who want to play games on consoles, it's just ethically not right in my world view. The PC is for playing games, nothing else is.

Although I own a console, I would never play a game on it. It's just a poor excuse to gimp games to have autoaim because the console controllers are not as accurate and easy to use as keyboard and mouse.

 

Consoles are good as long they can play BluRay movies and lay flat on top of the VHS video cassette player. But as soon consoles need to stay upright, and can't play BluRay movies, they are not worth a penny.

 

The PC took over the game platform role from Amiga years ago, so it should keep to its purpose, and it does.

 

I would not support people who want to play games on consoles, it's just ethically not right in my world view. The PC is for playing games, nothing else is.

 

I guess it just depends on why you want to make games. If you don't want to make any money, then yest consoles don't matter. However, if you would like to make some money developing games, consoles are definitely important. Trust me, I am no console gamer. I have owned a PS3 ever since launch, but I own no PS3 games. It is solely a Blu-Ray player for me. But there are reasons why 99.9% of all big game companies release more console games than anything else.

 

Do you honestly believe that PC is the main gaming platform in the world? Sure there are a lot of games for it, but most of the money is in console gaming...unfortunately. I think your statement about not supporting people who want to play games on consoles is hilarious. While I personally have no desire to play games on a console, a LOT of gamers do.

I think console games have their place. I prefer sports games on console and they are good for some party type stuff with a small gathering. I don't see console gamers as "hardcore" gamers though. I think the PC gamers still hold that. Console games generally don't give enough gameplay hours because of space limitations. I generally give the title of "hardcore gamer" to MMO players though because not many games can draw a person in like an MMO. When you play the same game for 4+ years near every day, that's hardcore. Nobody does that with any other type of game and MMO's are only on PC.

 

I don't understand consoles though. They are becoming more and more like PC's. So at some point you have to think what's the difference? The more kids get comfortable with PC's as the digital age goes on the more I think PC games will become the main game platform. PC's are only going to be more and more powerful and able to be smaller and smaller. They also accept different input types.

 

So what's the difference if I put a PC under my TV or a console? Just the games.

 

Me being an IT guy I feel I'm ahead of the time of most common people when it comes to computers. I have a smaller PC under my TV. Why would I need a Tivo? Why would a need a separate DvD player? Why would I need a SlingBox? Why would I need anything but a PC? Currently it's because of the controlling device for a PC. The keyboard and mouse isn't very easy to use when sitting on your couch.

Yes, basically all you need for your home entertainment and game development is just one laptop under your TV, or on your desk. But you just need one, adjust the cables according to that. You save a lot of time with juggling discs and cables when you just have one system for all. No need for a CD player, DVD player, BluRay player, Consoles, just one laptop where you write games and play games. No Console can do that, no DVD player can do that, only a PC laptop can do that.

I think you guys are missing the point. It doesn't matter that all three of us prefer to use a PC for gaming. The majority of the public just wants to pay a couple hundred of bucks for a console every five years or so. They don't want to purchase a new graphics card or new computer every year or two to play the latest games. The money is in consoles for the most part. It sucks, but that is the truth. Sure you have games like WoW that make a fortune, but very few games enjoy that kindof success.

I think our point is, that will change with time. Let's face it, back in the day hardly anyone used a PC. Today you have 5 year old kids who are better at using their PC than their parents are. The more comfortable the population gets with PC's and the more TV's that have the right inputs, the more the general population will realize that having all those devices is a waste of money. They'll realize that having a PC or laptop hooked up to their TV will give them a far better experience. In 20 years those 5 year old kids will be 25 and in a better position to change the way things are done. They will all be more comfortable with computers and will realize the benefit of hooking one up to their TV.

 

On a side note, the money is everywhere. PC has a huge gaming market also. If you make a good game it doesn't matter what platform it's on. People will play it. I'd worry more about making a good game than worrying about the platform.

I wouldn't base your business plan off of what people will be buying in 20 years.

 

Yes there is money everywhere. I never said there was no money on the PC. Just not even close to near as much.

You wouldn't? That's planning for the future

 

Well let's put it this way then. Besides XBox because of it's XNA community, for you as an indie developer to actually get someone to make the CD's and packaging for your console game is pretty slim. There may be more money in consoles, BUT as an indie developer, which really we all here are, you are more likely to make money on the PC than console because of the PC distribution model. If you are a company with a few million dollars then making your game for the console makes sense, but let's be honest, no one is buying LE to make their games if they have a few million dollars in their bank account.

True, but I would like the option to be able to move onto a console, if (yes a big IF) my game is successful. To be honest though, I would like to see it as a console capable engine because larger corporations will invest in a license. More $$$ for LE means a better engine for all of us. It worries me that Josh is still a one man show. Leadwerks doesn't seem to be growing very quickly. Leadwerks has been around for several years and it hasn't increased in full time developers. Unity started with just a handful of guys and now they are easily 30-40+ people. I believe opening up to Linux and Mac users would increase the user base. Remember, Unity was ONLY Mac until recently. They built a significant company off of only Mac users. Never under estimate the niche market.

True, but I would like the option to be able to move onto a console.....

 

 

So how close are you to having a need for this?

...and have Models have their own logic so you just place them in Editor, and they get alive.

 

getting back to the topic above... isn't this actually the whole idea behind OOP...

 

reading your post it struck me as being quite familiar... this sounds exactly like the goals i set forth a while back in designing my lil OOP Engine, except from a coding perspective as opposed to a graphics perspective...

 

from the old forum...

 

 

Post subject: GameObjects - Another Approach Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:06 pm

 

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:29 am

Posts: 131 Report this postEdit postReply with quote

 

as promised i'm going to make available my lil object oriented source code 'library' that i plan to use with Leadwerks... it's nothing spectacular... and it'll be filled with a lot of faulty code...

 

all i can say for sure that its main goal is to make game development with Leadwerks an easier proposition by implementing the use of objects as the basis for everything done in developing a game... and maybe give those people who are a lil daunted by aspect of coding everything from scratch, an alternative method that they might use until the lua enabled version arrives...

 

it's not pure OOP... and i'll break many rules in the process of getting this thing going, but it will stay true to the object oriented methodology...

 

the goals...

 

1- everything will be derived on the generic TGameObject class...

 

2- all gameobjects will be self reliable... that is they will all be designed as self reliant, independant entities that only need to be instantiated and initialized at the start of the application... and then left alone to do what they were designed to do...

 

3- well, i dunno... i haven't gotten that far yet...

 

 

--Mike

To make a game for the consoles, you need to be approved by MS or Sony. To get this, you must already be an established game house with one successful title under your belt. It's much easier to get a game approved for sale on Steam. As I have pointed out before, Penumbra is the best example to model your plan after.

 

So even if our engine was offered on the consoles at this time, it is unlikely anyone here would be able to use it.