TV 6.5 being uptodate or not 2008

[Shadowsong]

As truevision somewhat seems to become sleeping (I refer to this thread: http://www.truevision3d.com/forums/tv3d_sdk_65/worth_keep_with_tv3d_65-t18364.0.html) some question came up in my mind.

I know these questions look kind of randomly put together but they all are about if to go on with TV or not. The point is, it is 2008 now, and most comparisons are just out-of-date. So someone has to ask them again.


- How much is TV 6.5 behind? I mean, DX10 is out for a long time and the AAA-games' shaders kick ass. Is there any chance to be up-to-date with TV6.5 (like if you are a pro-pro in shading) ? Or does it just lack to many DX10 based features?

- Is there any cheap engine out there that features DX 10 already?

- What about Ogre and Torque? Are those more up-to-date than TV6.5?

[sybixsus]

What would possibly be the point in developing for DX10 as a small developer? Unless you're (in the general third person sense) still labouring under the illusion that you can write a AAA FPS to rival Crysis, what possible benefit are you going to get from DX10? None of us here can possibly hope to match the graphics of a game like that. Even if we could match the quality of art, we could never manage enough of it to do anything more than a tech demo. Let us not forget that DX10 is Vista only. Who wants to make a game that the majority of gamers can't play? The only way you get around that is to do what almost all of the AAA developers who have DX10 games out there have done, and write a DX9 version too. Now who seriously is going to write all their graphics code twice to allow that to happen?

If you want to just "play" with DX10 effects, and you have no intention of making a game, nor of distributing it, then why use a game engine of this kind at all? Why not just buy Crysis or The Witcher or one of these games with complete toolkits and just make a Mod?

[jviper]

Hehe.
Good point.
Vista in my opinion is still unstable, dispite what anyone says about it. Even as stable as it is, I would not want to completely drop everything I'm doing now and start development on somthing that's not completely supported yet. But ofcourse, I'm still a trainee, and still don't have "ALL" of the basics, therefore at my current level, I'm better off staying at the techology I'm am until I get the basics, then I can move on.

If your looking for a DX10 Engine now, your better off starting to write one yourself. DirectX10 (even considering how long it's been out), is still New Technology as far as support is concerned. So if you start now, you may be able to have a competitive "Genernal Rendering" Engine/Graphics library ready by the time Vista and DirectX10 becomes main-stream.
Ofcourse, you will not be able to do this very well unless your able to tolerate Vista as an Operating System, and dealing with incompatabilities. But if you can, great. Good luck to you.

[AriusEso]

OGRE has DX10 support iirc.

But I agree with those posts above mine. I mean, DX10 has some nice things. But most of what can be done under DX10 can be done under DX9 - which along with Vista exclusivety is why a lot of studios are simply skipping DX10 altogether and waiting for DX11.

As for keeping up to date. You can write any kind of DX9( up to SM3 ) compliant shader, just like the big boys do. Whilst I do think Sylvain should invest some time into updating his internal shaders to pump out SM3 versions if the support in the system is there. It's much more prudent for him to spend his time fixing bugs. If you're interested in producing visuals in the same way a major studio does than you have to learn shaders anyway - in which case you find yourself not really using any of 6.5's internal shaders. So it's not really an issue either way imo.

[Raine]

I agree with the posters above me.

[Lenn]

I too agree with the posters above me. Though I would rather call them web banners.

[Shargot]

I too agree with the posters above me.
And I heard that microsoft have regretted about release dx 10

[Shadowsong]

Ok thanks for the answers so far! I think, too, the Vista-Only thing is DX10's biggest problem.
I just wondered if it makes any sense to stay with TV6.5 while everything advances. You can't really say TV advances much at the moment.
I'll stay with TV while I'm still a newbie to shaders so I won't benefit from DX10 anyway at the moment.
I hope something will happen, again I refer to that other post. At least we need to be able to use all the SM3 stuff with TV so I hope Sylvain wakes up.

It is kind of frightening when you realize, the engine you are using so much, putting so much time and effort into, stops advancing. 

[Rainchild]

I have been giving this some serious consideration lately, wondering if my $150 was well spent... the truth is "yes".  I've learned a ton about 3D, including the fact that I have about 99 tons still more to learn if I want to be an AAA developer.

The part that worries me is if I do start developing in earnest, will TV3D still be here in 12-24 months, and will it have advanced with the market during that time?  My suspicion is 'yes' to the first part, and 'no' to the second.

I'm not really concerned about DX10, because like Vista I think everyone will skip it and go to Windows7/DX11.  I am a little concerned that TV3D isn't going to support XNA.

The thing which I both love and hate about TV3D is it's ease of use.  On the one hand it's wonderful to be able to go Scene.CreateLandscape(), on the other if you want to do something a little more adventurous and code paging, you spend so much time trying to trick it into doing what you want it to do... having source code access would make it a lot easier to extend something like the landscape object.

So yeah, I've been poking about in google to see how the engines I evaluated 1.5 years ago have progressed in that time, compared to how TV3D has.  Some haven't come very far at all and towing that "the new version will be released really soon" line which seems to be getting more common around here.  Others have improved in leaps and bounds.

I haven't given up on TV3D, but by the same token if I was looking to make my purchase now (rather than 1.5 years ago), I would pick a more active project.

[Raine]

I too agree with the posters above me. Though I would rather call them web banners.

I'm not a web banner! >0^(

[AriusEso]

Not really sure I understand the frustration being exhibited here. The bug fixes are not coming as fast as some need them. But outside of that the engine can't really "advance" much further until a new version is written. Not sure what you mean about XNA support. TV3D is a DirectX engine. XNA is essentially a DirectX engine, if anything XNA is more like a competitive .NET-based framework than a building foundation for TV3D. I say this as a user of both( I use XNA for 360 development - wouldn't go near it for PC dev ).

As I say, I think the bugfixes aren't coming fast enough and the lack of documentation is certainly an issue in terms of newbies. But technology wise I don't consider TV3D to really be behind in any sense. Some of the internal shaders are a bit old hat now, but that doesn't stop you writing your own. I mean, yea, it doesn't have any real HDRR support and the shadowing mechanism is ancient. But these are shader based things and the tools are provided for you to go ahead and do this yourself. The same is true of most things. Maybe it would help if you guys outlined what kind of technology you're referring too - if nothing else I'm sure Sylv will see the thread and consider it for TV7( If we get a TV7 ).

[40ton]

I have been considering buying a license. Certain lack of activity worries me. What I fear most is:

• Development of TrueVision ceases in the near future
• There turns out to be a stability / system compatibily issue and it doesn't get addressed as fast as I'd like
• I encounter a bug that is important to me and it takes too long to get it fixed

[SylvainTV]

TV3D is still currently up to date for a DX9 engine. You can extend the features with your own shaders, and we're making it easier to do so ( use shader on minimesh/landscape etc..)
SM3 is supported by the TVShader interface even if no internal TV shader uses SM3.

Considering that only about 10% of people have a DX10/Vista setup, and that you can do everything except geometry shaders on DX9, it's not very important to go the DX10 for now. However it will be increasingly useful later on.

And no we're not dead Just a little slow at the moment, but this happened before and the pace restored after that. We provide private builds for people also if there is an important bug to be fixed.

[Shadowsong]

Thanks to all your replies! I now feel happy using TV again
After all, one very important aspect is the living community. Maybe this is the best indicator for TV not being dead at all.

I wished more of the advanced guys showcased their serious projects to show that you still can do great things with TV.

[40ton]

Thanks for the response.

[pnaples]

happy to use tv again?!?
You feared about lack of support of dx10?
Have you ever played with a dx 10 game on vista?ahaha.
Looking at e3 lineup i don't seen nothing so exciting, also in game yet to come.
Dx10 are easy to use have a really better structure than dx9, but maybe only on paper nowdays...
I hope that we will se something better later in time, maybe on windows 7, or maybe directly with dx11 that are far better than dx10...
I hope to see dx11 also on xp...
I have written something with dx10 converting horde opengl renderer it was left on my vista installation and i think and hope to never look at it again ahaha.
I ended up with the same thing but that run on less than half the pc around here.
It' s interesting to study if you have time take the sdk and write some tech demo.
If you want to do games use TV3D that will be in line with actual tech for also another year, without any major update.
Thinking about consolles they are really worse than an actual pc, so all multiplatform game, also with dx10, are not so better than the consolle counterpart(es highter resolution Antialiasing but nothing special.
Consolles decide actual graphic standards and you can do what they do right now with dx9...and the new power of monster gpus can help to  bruteforce some things also id they fit better in dx10 architecture.

[Brac]

Pnaples, people would probably read your posts
if you'd be using paragraphs and punctuation marks.

If you want to be taken seriously in here,
please format your posts in a readable fashion.

Thanks in advance

[pnaples]

i edited just for your happyness i'm italian so i'm not completely sure about the form of my writings...if you find some huge error let me know.
Just today i was thinking if an indie team can manage to do a game for multiple targetsnot consolles also pc's).
Doing a game is not so easy for a small team if you have also to think about 2 completely different renderers and one also with different paths for different kind of support (not only shader version but also completely different render paths or support for faster materials.
My team cannot manage this at moment so we are concentrating only on dx9 not low end shader model 3.0) and expecting a 2.0 ghz dual core old tech was opengl and the engine has a completely different architecture so using the old one for old cards is almost like do 2 games.
i just listen everyday people that haven't do a game before fear that his first game will not ship on all possible consolles and pc.I thik enjoy to do your game as you can do with what you have.If it come good for sure there will be a painless solution for all.Think about your pc like a consolle.The best and cooler one and stick also in 2009 with dx9 or you will not do any game this year.