you will be able to buy Game-Edit seperatly (no idea about the price - dont ask for freeware.. even if I wanted to publish it for free, I don't think I would be allowed to do this) from us with much more features (like the mentioned gras generator and sky managment, maybe even a sequence generator + update service and support), around 2 months after I've finished the version of JCL / conitec.

@TheExpert: I don't want to compare myself with the developers of the torque ingame-editor, but I know that they've been working on it much longer than I (and maybe it is more than 1 programmer and 1 graphic-designer).
But never the mind.. Game-Edit 1.0 wont be the last version of Game-Edit.. so lets suprise yourself what comes after it.

thanks for the comments,
Triple-X

great to hear that. what that skymanagement about ??

hmm what do you want to do in a sky-managment? generally I have no idea what to support, sorry
(of course you'll be able to change the flags/types/layers etc. of every sky, and change the general settings like sky_blend/clip etc., but I'll think more about this topic when I want to start the next version of Game-Edit).

Triple-X

I have just finished re-scanning this thread - to reacquaint myself with the tool and it's progress.

To start, a quote from August 19, 2005 (first posting), "At the moment this editor is planed to be free for everyone." Seems like this has changed. With the "information" to-date, it appears it will be included in a7, and available to all other previous versions as a commercial addon. After waiting 6 months, is disappointing to discover the orginal intent has changed, and appears to be a bit "leading" to foster interest for a commercial product.

That being said, doesn't bother me as I would have paided for the editor. Does aggrevate me abit that users were lead to believe one thing only to discover after six months another situation.

I congratulate TripleX on a job well done and certainly don't bemoan him compensation for his excellent work. But now that release dates, updates and general maintenence are being handled by conitec, I will pass. Even if the project continues to be headed up by TripleX, given conitec's past record of slow updates and buggy first or second releases, I will just continue to use the tools that were included when I purchased 3dGS or other commercial tools. Have served me well so far. For what it is, 3dGS is still the best "bang for the buck" gaming system.

At such time that I may consider a7, seems it will be available as part of the package.

As a side note to developers of addons, additions, ect - whether gratus (free) or commercial, I suggest that you post NO information prior to a v.9 beta with less than 10% work to completion. That way, readers here will know that the tool will be available SHORTLY. If once it is released, and additions/corrections are to be made, posters can continue to use the tool while waiting for new implementations; or if the software is to go commercial, users have had the chance to try it and decide if they want to purchase. Creates less confusion. It's the way the "big boys" (profession software companies) do it.

Sincerely.

Well, selling the Editor is also an improvemt to is
future quality, as TripleX will/can put more effort to it.

Nevertheless, as long as there is no running demo,
it is hard to discuss about its "bucks to usability" ratio.

Ok ...

software development is about 1.) writing the GUI shell (which is akin to defining what your application will or will not do - like an outline), 2.) writing the core engine to accomplish that which you defined in part 1, 3.) releasing an alpha to a group of testers for examination, 4.) a beta to a larger - most times non-affliated - users and 5.) Release of v1.0. While a forum platform can be used to simulate some of these steps, it is misleading most times to the readers/poster whereas a tangible application in hand is a "hardcopy" that an user can interact with.

I have several applications I have written "in-house" (code named "chyrsalis") that I have used in my game development that I fully plan to release to the 3dgs community. I have finished the GUI (it's being written in Delphi Enterprise) and could release screenshots for your consideration. In fact - here is a compilation .jpg of the GUI - versions 1 and 2. I show these to make my point. Even if I described to you what the app is meant to do and ask for your input, I don't have a working version that I would feel confortable releasing to the community at this point and as such wouldn't start a thread. It wouldn't benefit you or me. Whereas you may look at screenshots and think, that doesn't appear to work or be an effective UI, with the application in hand, running you may then understand the logic and flow behind the design.

Granted, we have a forum for GAMES -> showcase 1. And a WIP game is much different than a tool as levels, lighting, shaders, particle effects ... are subjective. In that respect, input from fellow game developers is welcomed and even cherished. A tool is abit of a different situation in my opinion.

As I said previously, I applaud TripleX for being able to make money. He's done GREAT work in the past. But as even he acknowledges - the original intent (free) has changed. I had the same happen to me, on my post in Showcase II - "the unKnowing". Publisher is now interested. I am under non-disclosure. I announced that to the forum in a post in the thread, and told them there would be no more screenshots or discussions - ect, effectively closing the thread. I know that in December - TripleX did much the same when he announced the tool had been sold and intimated it was bought by conitec (and I might add, an interesting way he did it without violating non-disclosure/contract details). Thread, in my opinion, should have ended there. I had to backtrack from the end (QUITE a few posts later) to discover it had indeed been sold. As I said previously, I would have paid for it regardless.

These again are just my opinions. But I have seen alot of posts here that show this or that for inpending projects, ect with lots of user input and excitement only to find out after getting excited about a potentional useful situation, anticipating for 1,2 or even 6 months that things have changed or are nonexistent. My intent here was to express that and suggest that developers don't post unless they have something more tangible to offer; or create a forum properly entitled, "what I hope to accomplish" so that a reader hasn't any misleading expectations.

Applogize if this appears to be a rant, but I read/review far too many forums expecting things that never come to fruition. Don't want this useful forum to go down that road.

Sincerely.

1) My intend for this project has changed after I sold it too conitec. Of course. Nevertheless I think after this disposal it got much more important to give every forum user the possiblity to give critics and proposals.
Example:
I work until Version 0.9. Now there is one big feature which is wished by many users. It will be impossible to implement it in V 1.0.

Of course, I can not promise you too see every feature.I could die today
I can say you at this time that not every feature will make it into V1.0.

Please don't discuss this in this thread anymore. I wont change the information "service" for this thread for the said reasons.
I think the quality of 3DGS would be much better, if they would accept more feature wishes of the forum-users.

Triple-X