This thread and this argument still makes no sense to me.
Let me ask you this , did you spend $250 on your car ? Did you spend $250 on your computer ? Many PC gamers spend more than that on a video card or ram . My monitor cost me more than that , so do you think it's suitable or even sane to pursue creation of a commercial game of today's standard by using the cheapest engine version of (an already cheap)game engine you've chosen to use?
There are people that spend $50,000 on a night in a penthouse suite, but I'm betting most people here can't do that, so they stay in a Best Western and it works for them. How much some people can afford for a game engine doesn't relate to what others can afford. If money is no object for creating your commercial game then go with a real AAA engine. If money
is an issue, then you make do with what you can afford to work with. Which in the case of most people here is probably GS Extra or Commercial.
Be realistic , $5000 for a game engine would be a steal , I mean , compare to a AAA+ engine like U3 , $760,000. And Torque is only $1,000.
Again, compared to a Lamborghini a Lexus is a steal, so why aren't we all driving a Lexus? Everyone tries to use the comparison above, but you can't compare T3D to U3 no matter how hard you try. T3D is still Tribes 2 code with some updated functions and a better toolset than TGEA had.
A successful commercial game will make you a millionaire , and you think spending $1000 on the tool to make it is too much of an investment to shell out?
Torque in all it's various forms has been around for 9 years now, and though 'commercial' games have been made with it I'd like to see a list of people who have become millionaires from them. I'm betting the list of GameStudio millionaires is just as large.
I've seen modelers charge over $1000 for ONE next-gen game model , and what can you do with just one game model?
And again, how does this relate? I've seen people pay $60,000 for a paint job on a vehicle, but that still doesn't mean that being able to get a whole car for $60,000 is a good deal for the average person. Why throw these figures out there?
I think we have some people here who have no idea of what a good piece of software is worth.
I think most people have an idea of what things are worth, but they also have a better idea of what they can afford. There are people out there that would say "Why are you playing around with a $50,000 game engine, you should be using U3 if you want to make a real commercial game."
I'm extremely happy to see garagegames still offering it's engine at an extremely fair price , when with their track record they could easily tackle the middle price range and charge $50,000 for it's new engine.
What track record? How many people have gotten wealthy off a game made with Torque? They have some very dedicated developers that (with a lot of work to get around the engine drawbacks) have made some cool games, and some groups have used it for some pretty unique things, but you're still not going to find any millionaires in the group.
In any case , as soon as I get enough money I'm getting both Torque3D and Unity
And there it is, everyone is going to get the big fancy engine 'when they get enough money'. So everyone should just wait until they get enough money to buy an expensive engine before they get into development?
People buy what they can afford, or what they want to spend on a hobby, and that's what they work with. If you can afford a bazillion dollars to buy a whiz bang engine that's great, but it seems there are a few people arguing for an engine being a great deal when they can't even afford it themselves.
Personally, I think $180,000 for a loaded Lamborghini is a great deal, and as soon as I get enough money I'm going to get one. Or maybe one of the Torque millionaires will float me a loan...
