With sincere respect:

It's easy to make a quick little statement. But answer the ? Why no commercial products of late? During the era of the previous two scripting languages, many commercial games were created.

"Yes intense x is gone, but the shooter templates are evolving again. We'll see.
I hope 3DGS will keep it simple. Focus on ease of use i.e. particle tools, shader tools built in, template code/scripts, etc. etc...no massive scripting code revisions."


Superku/Firoball-- this, the above, is what I said. [Tumble weed blows by forum.]


>C-Script had wierd limitations which made your head meet the wall.
It's not what C-script couldn't do, it's what the move to Lite-C has precluded.


JCL said himself that mssive scripting code revisions are not going to happen.

"Recognizing the need for change is good. Change is often not good."

Funny that the proof is in the very forum that you are posting on -- no intense x. And there never will be.

You seem to have not much done with scripts yet, do you? The move to lite-C was the best thing that happened. For a commercial product, you can not write complex code in C-Script without structs or dynamic allocation.

BTW, IntenseX Pathfinding works well for me. The bug seems to be only in the Copper and Silver version.

Sorry to say, but it´s your fault when you rely to promises.
Intense X wasn´t finished - I wouldn´t spend money to a unfinished solution.

But it was finished...
They just wanted to be up-to-date, so they converted everything to lite-c, but now there are errors, but not from IX´s side, but from Acknex´s side.

Read the thread. IntenseX Copper had a bug with entity handles and is not finished. Larry said he will fix and finish it when he's back from the army.

But that may take a while, if it happens at all. Being in the army for a year can change many things in someones life and maybe he has then other plans.

You know, IntenseX WAS finished in the past, but as C-script version. But now there is a bug in copper as you said.

That just means its not finished. When you make a software you normally do a beta test and its only finished when no bugs show up. You normally wont release a software as "finished" when you know it has still a bug. It does not matter if an earlier version worked.

Ok, you´re right, sorry, i thought it would also count as finished, if there was working version.

From Spirit:
>You seem to have not much done with scripts yet, do you? The move to lite-C was >the best thing that happened. For a commercial product, you can not write complex >code in C-Script without structs or dynamic allocation.

Hmmm...structs and dynamic allocation required a complete overhaul of the scripting language...and complex code couldn't be written without them. Right.

Ability of "Complex" code doesn't = a commercial game.

Look at the bottom of this page:
http://www.3dgamestudio.com/
Do those look like comercial products? Notice that they're pre-lite-c.

One more point, why was there a need to update IntenseX if 3DGS is backwards compatible? Because it isn't and there is a plan to do away with c-script.

Lite-C was one of the best things that happened to 3dgs, and I believe thats a pretty objective argument. Yes, a series of pre-coded files no longer compiled, but everyone has that. We all have projects that we started in the days of C-script.

Lite-C is more efficient, and brings 3dgs closer to the benchmark of a good 3d game engine. Without Lite-C, I believe the 3dgs community would have slowly drifted into other engines for lack of support of rather simple things, like structs.

There is always another option: Learn AI and write your own?

Cheers,
Adrian