"The only added value of an engine is the workflow"
EXACTLY

That's what the whole discussion is about. Having an engine where you can just provide the art , and select per pixel lighting for it and dynamic shadows , and just compile and have it work just like it's supposed to is INVALUABLE. Having this engine gave the shaders optomized with fallbacks for older cards is even better. This is what I'm talking about , having a river editor ? FANTASTIC , having the shaders ready out of the box for the river/water = GREAT.

Because I KNOW I can do this with gamestudio , but if another engine is offering all this things out of the box , it's many many things less in my mind while creating a game.

One of the things I want to test with torque 3d is speed , as I havn't downloaded it(don't know if they have download available) , because I'm busy with a diff project.

But speed is also a concern , but the new Torque 3D toolset is AWESOME , undeniable , everything that's been asked of gamestudio for years torque has delivered , don't see how anyone could not see that ?

yes, but the price comparison makes it apples and oranges. $200 vs $1000, you may as well say that people should get unreal instead of a7 since the workflow is unreasonable. I still don't get why your trying to compare the two instead of just rating torque as it's own engine in a different bracket tool-wise and price wise.

"$200 vs $1000"
Well gamestudio Pro is also $899 , and $1000 is actually INSANELY cheap.

There's also differences between Com and Pro for gamestudio , but nowadays mainly the multiplayer numbers. Still , Torque has torque advanced for like 300, but , the way T3D is looking , it's well worth the $1000.

Again , the only thing left is the speed , see how fast it runs with all those shaders.

Same for unity.

who in there right mind would use pro aside from getting rid of the need for an intro screen and if bsp was needed.

If you want to make an indoor game then you will not come far with ABT as your scene management of choice.
Though I am not sure how well the latest BSP implementation works with shaders and lots of detailed static meshes applied.

But actually something like a good BSP system or a system with zones and portals is needed then. Torque and C4 have zones and portals. The advantage is: You can manually influence how areas will be occluded. This way you can put tons of details into a zone. Shaders and real-time shadows will be no problem even if your level is huge. Only one room and some geometry visible through a portal in view will be rendered.

Because of this I would also compare the pro edition to these alternatives.

Also let's note that for a multiplayer game you more likely would need pro as well , as the norm player count in multiplayer is usually 16.

Yes, though no one but Pro owners can effectivly use bsp, in my commercil build, if I obey the requirements for bsp then what little effect commercial has, works very well indeed.

In my house example for a tutorial series I have undertaken, my properly built bsp type map loads faster and effortlessly plays at the required 60 fps.
A similar house without the bsp build parameters on the other hand, drags as if the level is loaded with tons of shaders so auto scene management thru portals and bsp is essential for workflow purposes and for saving time writing work arounds (or trying to )

It is native to A7 so therefore, you may have chosen the wrong engine to begin with

I choose A7 because I knew no better and after trying and spending good money on torque , I am happy to say I made the right choice for me at this time
A7 cost me 400 NZ dollars, well!, what other engine provides for the same in the same price range, my answer, none!

I am not a programmer so any option where true languages are used is beyound me, but learning scripting thru A6 templates then Georges AUM series and my tutors has set me up to continue with lite_c in mixed scripting mode (A6 and A7 script types) which will lead to full light_c and finally, oop's (in my dreams )

yes but if you used native mp features... well Im not sure this even needs explainations. better to use anet gsnet or the raknet plugin made by excessus.

Just to say i have played with the new torque engine, its only beta (stage 2) but it is amazing, it has a really good editor and just some amazing features.

We are using (http://spearbang.awardspace.com/news.php) and will be commenting on it in our blogs.

Yeah , I think the main point of the post was , Torque is becoming a very professional engine , and a better option to opt for in creation a full commercial game. Same thing for unity. While I myself still like gamestudio(A6 as A7 = garbage), for my next full game project , I'm certainly going to evaluate Torque vs Unity , to see which I ultimate choose for the project.

But to make one thing clear , as much as the out of the box effects impress me , the BIGGEST advantage I see with Torque and Unity is the cross platform development option. It's been asked here for YEARS , but never been done because of licensing reasons. However , these engines now support it , which to me is the biggest plus they have , as learning this engines now gives you a much better opportunity as a developer to get your game out there to players. And that to me , is truly INVALUABLE.


Oh yeah , and for the people talking about the price , we're looking at pro versions here , of both Torque and Gamestudio , as they both have cheaper versions with less features.
So it's really more like Gamestudio $899 VS Torque $1000.

$200 is not a bigg difference to me for getting a good solid engine with a beautiful userfriendly interface and a bunch of great fully functioning out of the box fx.

Another thing to point is , I've been using gamestudio for years, and am now serious about developing a commercial title , as opposed to back then when I just thought having a game engine to play with was the most incredible thing on earth. So as a serious developer looking for a serious engine to develop commercial products with , Torque and Unity have now become my 2 top choices , with 3rd being something like Flash , and maybe after that gamestudio.

To the gamestudio defenders , I've been defending it for years , but as good and advanced as it was back then , it's progress from there to now has been SLOW and almost none other than in the programing aspect of the engine , which to MOST users I'd say is worthless. But this topics are actually good for gamestudio , as the engine developers can weigh what the users are thinking of the engine , as we are their customers and this is nothing but pure unadultered feedback concerning the newest engine edition verses the newest competitor's editions.

And again , I await A8 , as if Conitec actually delivers , I'd be very happy to purchase that new version. But we'll have to see , as only time will tell where this engine is going , I might be judging to soon.