[quote name='FableFox' timestamp='1349458748' post='4987189']
I mean, how far is Crystal Space go actually after all these years?

Have you actually used T3D for any significant amount of time? Having used both, comparing Crystal Space with T3D is really apples and oranges.
Their documentation is somewhat weak though, I can agree with that.
[/quote]

I was one of their early supporters, buying it at $99 to get the source code. But like I mentioned, those were "the source code is the documentation" times. I ended enjoying using Dark Basic Pro more.

I'm not comparing CS with T3D as in ease of use, but what I'm saying is that making it free and oipen source is not going to save it. Questions people have to ask:

- does getting used to this engine will get me a job (answer: no. using the free unity, does. Specially now that Nintendo is licensing it for Wii University).
- is the engine cutting edge? (answer: no. unity, cryengine and udk does).

i can go on and on, but I think they already missed the boat.

- Professional will go with professional tools.
- hobbyist will go with tools with many documentation because they want to create games, not doing research reading source code to know how to implement save games. They want engines with multiples book that teach end to end so they only need to tweak it to make the game they dream of. Inventory system? Read this book. Saves games? Read that book. Change clothes? Check online tutorial.

They can pull off a Blender, but even Blender knew the importance of documentation. One of the key moment to raise income to do development was to sell a book on Blender (pdf), if I remember correctly. And Ton mentioned that documentation was important.

Anyway, now they are going MIT. What will happen next? Too much branch of Torque?

Even bigger question is that studios that develops game in two or three year time frame will they go along with a company that being sold again and again?

I don't know... but they almost had it awhile back, and what they do know maybe just prolong what is going to happen anyway.

- does getting used to this engine will get me a job (answer: no. using the free unity, does. Specially now that Nintendo is licensing it for Wii University).

Not sure I agree. If you do something great with T3D why would it look worse than doing something great with Unity? There are a lot of companies using Unity, but there are also a lot of companies that don't use Unity at all. Tbh if I were one of the latter, I wouldn't really consider Unity experience a significant plus for a software engineering applicant. It would probably at best be a net neutral.

edit: To clarify, I work in Unity every day. I honestly think it is making me worse as a software engineer. It's making me more productive for this game, but I think it is hurting my progress on any other platform.

does getting used to this engine will get me a job

Well I learned gameplay programming on GoldSrc but then got a job programming on Unreal and then my next job on Gamebryo -- experience is still experience.

- is the engine cutting edge? (answer: no. unity, cryengine and udk does).

I can't agree with this, but it depends what you're comparing it to. If you compare T3D to Unity Free then I think T3D blows it out of the water. It doesn't have as slick editors but the features are more advanced, and you can't beat the MIT license. But obviously if you're thinking of Unity Pro then there's no discussion, but it's also not free. Which doesn't matter for anyone but the hobbyists I guess - but still.

Even bigger question is that studios that develops game in two or three year time frame will they go along with a company that being sold again and again?

That's going to get tough, I agree.

Well I learned gameplay programming on GoldSrc but then got a job programming on Unreal and then my next job on Gamebryo -- experience is still experience.

What Gamebryo game was that? If you're allowed (and if you prefer) to say.

Regarding that job thingy, maybe I should add "your mileage will vary." From where I came from, jobs always "software based". Sad but true. This lead to colleagues produce "click monkeys." It a scenario where everyone says one thing and do another.

college says they teach all kind of thing when they produce click monkeys. employers said they hired skillset but actually hires "software users". *(eg: What, you made this using Ligtwave? Sorry, we are looking for Maya user.") Hence, college train click monkeys.

I can't say which is right and which is wrong. Maybe the problem is lack of standard. And technology changes too fast. For example we have moves from box modelling to high poly model first, retopo later (with all kind of map thrown in). In the differences from an application to another is liking you want to "fly" from point A to point B, and company A uses helicopter while company B uses airplane. But both are air transport. People who used to "modelling stack" on Max will really have to transfer to Maya, even though under one company (AD).

But this is of course differ from country to country and mentality to mentality.

While I'm happy for you, in certain location, if you are looking for a game programming job with your CV mentioning Blender and Torque, good luck. Keywords based CV processing system doesn't help either. If a company uses Maya, and your CV mention 5 year experience in Lightwave, good luck since keyword doesn't match.

Anyway, looking at the publishing point of the Torque engine at the moment, it seems it doesn't target Android or iOS. Whoa. Who was your target market again?