taumeson
Community Member
Posts: 5
|
 |
« on: February 15, 2006, 03:11:57 AM » |
|
Hi, obviously this site will be biased (just like GG site would be biased to torque)
but i'd like to hear people's summarized comments as to the good/bad of TV3D.
in general, my main questions are:
- does it include physics/collision?
- how difficult is the art pipeline?
- community tools? are there any?
- how is 2d support?
Thanks for your time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigCountry
Community Member
Posts: 92
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2006, 09:47:55 AM » |
|
c++ only in Torque. I think that's the real kicker.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Frost
Community Member
Posts: 153
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2006, 11:14:28 AM » |
|
Oh yeah, TV3D supports a lot of languages, so thats where it excels the most.. and to top it all it runs VERY fast in VB.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
billythekid
Community Member
Posts: 814
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2006, 11:39:17 AM » |
|
Can one of the devs lock this? We do not need ANOTHER torque vs tv3d thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jviper
Community Member
Posts: 2130
Discipline in training
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2006, 01:43:58 PM » |
|
Wow, so all of the other torque vs TV3D threads have been locked? Yikes! I rivalry we have between TV3D and Torque? I believer there should not be. But.....oh well.
I will say one thing though: TV3D is primarily a rendering engine. Torque is primarily a game engine. Like comparing oranges to apples, this is.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
JAbstract.....Don't just imagine, make it happen!
|
|
|
billythekid
Community Member
Posts: 814
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2006, 01:49:35 PM » |
|
No they havent been locked, but I think this one should be.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jviper
Community Member
Posts: 2130
Discipline in training
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2006, 01:55:26 PM » |
|
Oh....well then that case, this information could have bee posted in one of the other Torque vs TV3D threads, right? :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
JAbstract.....Don't just imagine, make it happen!
|
|
|
taumeson
Community Member
Posts: 5
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2006, 04:44:52 PM » |
|
Thanks for the replys guys... i really appreciate it.
also, the guys in the irc channel gave me a good run down of the other questions i had.
as for this thread being locked.. geeze,.. talk about harsh :?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
billythekid
Community Member
Posts: 814
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2006, 05:06:43 PM » |
|
Has nothing to do with you, dont take it personally. jviper - yes  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DwD
Community Member
Posts: 2
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2006, 07:11:05 AM » |
|
A BSP edit/creator would be a useful tool. I have found several online, but with very little documentation. Most related to quake map editing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jviper
Community Member
Posts: 2130
Discipline in training
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2006, 02:55:10 PM » |
|
Yeah.....I hate BSP!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
JAbstract.....Don't just imagine, make it happen!
|
|
|
Mincetro
Community Member
Posts: 4
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2006, 10:40:48 PM » |
|
I don't hink I've ever seen a Torquer come out and say "Windows API's Suck", We're just not like that. It seems mainly TV3d users complain about Torque. Torquers are complaining about C4 atm. Yeah.....I hate BSP!!! BSP is awesome! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BlindSide
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2006, 12:56:34 AM » |
|
BSP is old and out-dated - TV 6.5's new octree system is much, much more flexible (and will inculde tools to port .map's and mesh's into octree's).
However, a note to anyone reading this, and any other's looking for help concerning the differences between TV and Torque:
DO NOT make another thread, please. There are already several throughout the forum, and it doesn't matter which one you post in - people will look at it. The fact is, nothing has changed between TV nor Torque, so there really is no new information. I've been around for a while; I've used both engines, and here is the conclusion that *I* have come to.
FIRST, Torque and TV 6.5 cannot be compared, as is often done. Torque itself is dated, whilst 6.5 (and I say 6.5, because that is where the Dev support is now) is meant to run atop the latest shader technology. Compare it to TSE instead.
SECOND, there is no rivalry between Torque and TV; this is just the fabrication of members within the community. As has been stated countless times, TV is a rendering engine, whilst Torque is a game engine. It's like trying to compare an easy bake oven, to a real oven. One is specialized, is easier and quicker when working towards it's specialty, but isn't reall meant for anything else.
TV sits on top of direct X, handles some internals like meshes, lights, state changes, etc. It is NOT designed to create a game for you in 30 min (though, if you know TV, then you'll know this is easy to do). Torque on the other hand was designed as a game engine, for a commercial game, and is now out there for others who wish to create an FPS.
Honestly people (and this is not a knock against anyone, I'm sorry if in any way it comes off as one) please stop asking about Torque. There is nothing new or useful to add - Torque is in a different catagory, and it hasn't had any major changes in the past few years. If you have any questions, ask on IRC or read the old threads.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
billythekid
Community Member
Posts: 814
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2006, 04:10:49 AM » |
|
BSP is old and out-dated - TV 6.5's new octree system is much, much more flexible (and will inculde tools to port .map's and mesh's into octree's). How do you know that? TVO still isnt in beta! Though it is finally being worked on. Anyway the point is, please stop the false claims. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pizzayoyo
|
|
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2006, 10:34:39 AM » |
|
His statement wasn't a false claim. BSP IS outdated, and TVO IS better than BSP. Sylvain already knows how it will work, it just isn't ready for beta yet.
I thought his post was a good conclusion to everything TV vs Torque. Nothing he said was false.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BlindSide
|
|
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2006, 08:02:56 PM » |
|
BSP is old and out-dated - TV 6.5's new octree system is much, much more flexible (and will inculde tools to port .map's and mesh's into octree's). How do you know that? TVO still isnt in beta! Though it is finally being worked on. Anyway the point is, please stop the false claims. Thank you Pizzayoyo. Nothing I've said here was false. If you had done any research on the matter, you would have understood that Octree's are not TV's alone - they are a tried and proven method of culling. Please, before you go around telling people they don't know what they're talking about - make sure you know what YOU'RE talking about. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
billythekid
Community Member
Posts: 814
|
|
« Reply #17 on: February 20, 2006, 03:02:16 AM » |
|
Well maybe "false claim" was a little incorrect. What I meant was do not buy into the hype until TVO is out. I know it is supposed to be this great thing blah blah. And I have faith in Sylvain to do a good job. However like the good engineer I am, I wait to make judgement on TVO until I get my hands on it. It is quite possible that Sylvain will do a poor job with TVO for whatever reason. Or it could be the most awesome thing since sliced bread. The bottom line is dont be a fool and buy into the hype. As for me not knowing anything about culling is quite incorrect. By the simple fact that you think BSPs and octrees are ways to cull shows you do not really know much about the subject. BSPs and octrees are two different ways to partition the 3d space. There are several other ways to partition the 3d space too. What space partitioning is used for is to speed up other algorithms. For example, space partitioning can be used to speed up collision detection, frustum culling, occlusion culling, ray casting just to name a few. Space partitioning in and of itself does nothing. But when you combine that with occlusion tests or collision tests you suddenly have a very powerful tool. Essentially octrees and BSPs are data structures. Data structures can be an essential part of an algorithm to help increase performance, but alone they are not an algorithm. Also I wanted to mention that although I agree that BSP is old and the Torque BSP is outdated, there have been modifications to BSP that in some cases performs better than a simple octree. References: http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991109/moller_haines_01.htmhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1568811829/002-8725334-2068814?n=283155 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jviper
Community Member
Posts: 2130
Discipline in training
|
|
« Reply #18 on: February 20, 2006, 10:27:11 AM » |
|
Hey, I just said I don't like BSP because I haven't found alot of good FREE editors for them. I heard you first have to get a program that edits .map. Then you have to get somthing to compile it. But I guess all the good editors costs money. That's why I don't like it :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
JAbstract.....Don't just imagine, make it happen!
|
|
|
|
Raine
|
|
« Reply #19 on: February 20, 2006, 10:35:51 AM » |
|
Let's see what'll be next. I trust the devs' work, I just hope the open beta won't take too much time to come out. Anyway, speculating about wheter bsp is better than tv octree or viceversa is pointless at the moment. Doesn't it?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
