ah, now i understand a bit better what you mean.

i think this is a matter of what programming style you prefer. some people like to work with complicated class hierarchies (i don't) and some prefer to keep the oo design simple and work more with classes that don't rely on inheritance that much but simply are aggregates of objects of other classes.

but i still would call both styles object oriented and i think with most engines you can decide yourself how you want to work. i don't have any experience with truevision3d though and i am still a beginner with unity.

Yes both are object oriented programming

I meant that an engine such as Truevision3d implement a traditional OOP style while Unity and Torque x propose a new approach to OOP

3DGS is in my opinion a precursor of the component phylosophi

I remember when I switched to 3dgs some years ago, from TrueVison and blitz3d mainly because they lack an editor, that I found 3dgs programming style a little odd

Which is better?
Well probably it depends on taste , not to mention that you can have hybrid solution in the same engine

John Kanalakis is of course on Component side but I tried to use Torque X , believe me it is not that easy
Traditional OOP may have some drawbacks but also the new approach has its issues
Go through Torque x tutorial projects , they are far away from being intuitive

Unity3d is a little easier because it supplies a lot of prefabbricated components while Torque x supplies only the basic ones but even Unity is not that easy to use

However getting back to my first post

I wonder why people consider Unity3d an engine for artists
Unity3d is not an user friendly engine, maybe it is a powerfull engine but I would not say that it is an engine for "non programmers "
Maybe they tested the editor only

The truth of course is just in between. A pure artist will not make a game and a pure programmer also will not sell something. If you are making a game on your own, then you need to be both of them or you need help.

But Unity sold 90 thousand licenses after they released the basic edition for free. The new licensees had enough time to check it, to read tutorials and to get an idea how hard programming really is:
http://unity3d.com/support/resources/tutorials/2d-gameplay-tutorial
http://unity3d.com/support/resources/tutorials/fpstutorial
http://unity3d.com/support/resources/tutorials/3d-platform-game

But with tutorials like this it is feasible. And this might be the big difference to other engines: the learning curve is not so steep in the beginning. This attracts way more users.

And with this in mind you should not underestimate ambitious artists. A skilled artist already knows most of these 3d concepts. They know about the concept of instantiation, 3d-coordinates, transforms, uv-maps. Often they create custom shaders. Many of them even scripted in their 3d modelling tools.

But in the end it does not matter where you come from when you are willing to learn and when you have fun doing it.

right , but posts about game engines are not something in between
It seems that people choose an engine just because of the editor
Take for example Unity3d and Leadwerks
The former use the component approach the latter the traditional OOP
Sometimes someone express some preference about a programming language but C++ , at a basic lavel, is neither mor powerful nor less user friendly than Lite c
It is about the same stuff
It is the game engine architecture which makes the difference
The Leadwerks, C4, Unity , 3dgs... programming style is quite different but I have never seen a forum discussion about the programming topic
On the other hand in my opinion a one man developer should spend 90 % of his time in the code rather than in the graphic editor
the other way around he makes a Virtual reality project , not a interactive game

I absolutely agree with you.

But there is a little difference, when I personally rate these different tools. I also have my preferences and I personally love some Delphi-like style, a mixture of OO, components and a powerful library with a very good documentation.

But nevertheless I would even program in C++ (I dont like it because you have to deal with so much technical issues of the language instead of writing your code), when this is the only way to get my hand on a good renderer with a good scene management.
In the end I see the language as an interface to a very powerful technology. I would not use a Delphi-Game-Engine, only because I love this language. I am first checking how powerful the technology is. Can it render the world I want to build?
I love sci-fi interiors, but when I dont have zones and portals together with shadows and shaders, then I never can create interesting sci-fi interiors. So I have to check, where I can render something like this.
The same counts for people who want to make a large terrain game. They have to check, make stress tests and then use what works best for them.

I would read a comparison of languages and code styles of different engines. I would take this into account but in the end it would not be the most important feature to make a decision.

Are you guys Unity spies trying to sway 3DGS users away from Conitec!
Why is this post here?

BTW, I am a Torque user, and while I believe there is no perfect engine. I do think that Torque and 3dGS comes close to the mark.
I do not yet own a copy of 3DGS, but it is on my 'must buy' list. I prefer this engine 'authoring system' as conitec calls it over Unity.

Discussions around competitor products are allowed on this forum, so all is fine.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/apple-takes-aim-at-adobe-or-android.ars

looks like apple is going crazy.

maybe unity (and other similar technologies) will be forbidden on iphone.

http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/10/unity-and-the-iphone-os-4-0/

Yeah everyone is talking about it on the unity forum too.
But as far as i know, apple wants to force people to develope on an apple when the want to release an iPhone game. So Unity might still be supported afterwards. But we will see.

This is a step into the wrong direction. I hope, that more people will change to Adroid and other more open environments as a clear answer to this restrictive policy. Maybe even Windows on mobile phones might become an alternative for some game engines in the future.

To develop a game in C# in Unity is a great advantage. You can use the same code for different platforms. It simply would be a step back to write iPhone games in Objective C instead.

In the end the most interesting question is:
Will it work? Will Apple win developers with this strategy and get rid of cross-platform to harm Windows, Android, Symbian whatever with Apple-exclusive applications?
Or will it work the other way around? Will Apple lose developers? We have to keep in mind that there is no good development tool from Apple, there is no game engine, everyone has to write its own now.

This is a big step back into the middle age of software development.