Torque 3D 3.9 Release Candidate

39 posts Page 3 of 4
Skipper
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:25 pm
by Skipper » Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:42 pm
How's the 3.9 final release coming along?

Can I put in a request for out of the box Mac support?

Some of our users aren't gamers and they have Macs.
Johxz
Posts: 411
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:37 pm
by Johxz » Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:01 pm
Skipper wrote:How's the 3.9 final release coming along?


to my knowledge this weekend or next week.... but we need to wait

If you want to try the latest buildings you can download the binary from here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=665#p5508
JeffR
Steering Committee
Steering Committee
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:49 pm
 
by JeffR » Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:16 pm
Skipper wrote:How's the 3.9 final release coming along?

Can I put in a request for out of the box Mac support?

Some of our users aren't gamers and they have Macs.


Johxz is correct, shooting for this weekend, and if any snags pop up, it'd be next week. Really wanting to have it out for the weekend though.

As for osx, we'd done some work into that a little while back, and while it worked, it was kinda in a weird place stability-wise. JeffH was looking at beating it all up and getting cocoa in there for a stable layer. He had been doing the work here: https://github.com/JeffProgrammer/Torque3D/tree/macosx_cocoa

If you're able to help or help test, that'd definitely speed up that side of things. Part of the problem is not everyone has a mac to easily develop/test on, so if you can help on that front it'd be quite the boon. I'd suggest trying to hit him up if you can help.
Skipper
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:25 pm
by Skipper » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:02 pm
I don't have a Mac but some of my users do, maybe they can help with testing.

How can I contact JeffH about it?
Hutch
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
by Hutch » Sat Jul 02, 2016 7:36 pm
Mac OSX Cocoa branch is very unstable and broken as I was just getting it to compile and load a blank window on x64. The branch you will want to use is the macosx one as that is more stable. It requires compiling with the 10.7 SDK and 32bit only, because it depends on old deprecated (and removed in later SDKs) carbon API.

So in general, requirements:

- Mac OSX 10.7 Lion or later. (Not tested on MacOS Sierra beta obviously)
- OpenGL 3.2 compatible card (basically any graphics card that can run 10.7+ that isn't Intel GMA. Intel HD 3000 or higher works fine).
- You must compile with the Apple Clang/LLVM compiler and not GCC 4.2.
- You must compile with the 10.7 Lion SDK. Any other SDK is untested and will probably fail because of missing api functions.

The machine I developed on had this spec:

OSX: 10.10 - 10.11
XCode: 6.x - 7.x
CPU: Intel Core i7 2750HQM 2.0ghz (4 cores, 8 threads)
RAM: 8GB DDR3 1600mhz
GPU: Intel Iris Pro
SSD: 250GB

Advanced lighting is experimental and pretty much works as is. Basic lighting works pretty good. OpenAL sound works. Performance is jank and sucks really bad, but then again apple hardware uses mobile chips and Torque3D was most likely developed for desktop PCs in mind.

Its been 9 months and I don't know when I will get back to continuing it, if ever. Right now the branch is sitting at Torque3D 3.6.x and is really far behind.
Skipper
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:25 pm
by Skipper » Mon Jul 04, 2016 10:38 pm
I'm sorry to hear that.

Could I make a suggestion for the steering committee?

Instead of pushing the engine even further ahead in 4.0 and going for PBR which is ahead of the curve but maybe a little too far ahead of the curve, why not put all our resources into making the engine cross-platform compatible which will do more than anything else to bring it up to date and increase the user base?
It's been tried several times now and failed, how about putting all our resources into it and putting it on an equal footing with the other game engines and making a Mac, Linux and Android version before we go any further ahead?
Bloodknight
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:58 pm
by Bloodknight » Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:05 pm
if this comes across as sarcastic then so be it :p

keeping up with other engines... other engines have dozens of full time paid engine developers.

stopping work on advancing the engine just so that... cross platform compatibility work can catch up, is a pretty good way of ruining a product even if you have people available to work on that particular task, its even more ridiculous if you have nobody to work on that task.

macs are a tiny part of the PC market, i'm not even sure gaming on macs is even remotely on par with gaming on linux outside of the USA, i'm not even sure it has parity even in the USA tbh.

So just to re-iterate, there is no point in stopping the few people who are contributing to the engine, this wont get mac compatibility done any quicker, in fact it will destroy whats left of the userbase because the majority of the users who can use the engine are no longer getting updates.
JeffR
Steering Committee
Steering Committee
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:49 pm
 
by JeffR » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:47 am
Skipper wrote:I'm sorry to hear that.

Could I make a suggestion for the steering committee?

Instead of pushing the engine even further ahead in 4.0 and going for PBR which is ahead of the curve but maybe a little too far ahead of the curve, why not put all our resources into making the engine cross-platform compatible which will do more than anything else to bring it up to date and increase the user base?
It's been tried several times now and failed, how about putting all our resources into it and putting it on an equal footing with the other game engines and making a Mac, Linux and Android version before we go any further ahead?


I'd be keen on mac support happening, and lots of stuff has had the tangental benefit of making that easier going forward, stuff like epoxy helps a lot for making sure systems with flakey or out of date drivers work(such as osx or some units distros), and SDL shaves off a lot of the work in dealing with the platform layer work.

The big thing holding back mac being a minor drop-in effort is Apple putting very minimal effort into keeping osx working with modern OGL, which isn't something us full-in'ing on can change. We can work around odd osx behaviors, but we can't really fix them.

That said, the last attempt that was made a few months back showed it's pretty close, I recall some odd graphical behavior and some platform oddities with SDL, but it did compile and run. As we continue to refine the OGL gfx layer, and switch over to SDL for the platform core, it should be much easier to double-back around and have a bit of slap-around on mac ;)

Stuff like PBR - which is almost completed already and the entity/component work don't negatively impact osx other than it potentially coming about a bit slower, and stuff like e/c and PBR help a lot with standardizing art and gameplay paths, which do benefit the mac dudes too when we get that end working.

Another limiter that is slowly being resolved is anyone with the code know-how having access to macs which almost no-one did in prior attempts. I've got access to one from my work, and a few other people are getting them for testing and all that jazz. That means that when we look at it again, there's a much higher number of eyes on it so testing and fixing can occur much faster.

So yeah, I can promise you it'll be looked at and we'll make an effort to get mac support added proper - chances are better now than ever before - but I disagree that we need to stall on other fronts to get there, and quite a bit of work, if indirect, has already been pushed to making it workable going forward. :)
Skipper
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:25 pm
by Skipper » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:20 am
Thanks.

It's just a suggestion.

Most of our users are not gamers which explains why some of them have Macs.

I don't have a Mac but we can probably draught some of our users into helping with testing a Mac build.

There's always a balance with allocating what limited resources are available we all know that having worked with Torque3d for so many years and most of us having to work with others on our projects are well aware of limitations on budget and manpower.
It's not as fun or dramatic as a new cutting edge render engine I know but I think it's something we have to be serious about or we won't be taken seriously and the user base will shrink.
As you say we are closer now than ever, it's a good opportunity, I think we should keep the ideal of cross compatibility high on the list of priorities.
It's as if we are almost there and maybe with an extra push it will get to a point of stability and stay on the agenda that's what we are hoping for.

By the way the latest developments really are unprecedented and unexpected and all I can say is keep up the awesome good work.
Last edited by Skipper on Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Azaezel
Posts: 383
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:50 pm
 
by Azaezel » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:35 am
Let me be perfectly plain on this 'pbr *vs* mac' argument: There isn't one. Deferred was put off till opengl was in because mac support seemed to be following shortly. If folks with Macs wish to spend more time Acting instead of Asking, or I get enough cash to buy one and test it this end, hutchs work'll absolutely be incorporated into that and i'll help as time allows. Actually @
User avatar
Hutch
, would you want that https://github.com/JeffProgrammer/Torque3D/tree/macosx tossed in at present, or preffer folks held off on that end and contributed to https://github.com/JeffProgrammer/Torqu ... cosx_cocoa seem to recall it was a variant of the former we checked out on one of my crews macs, mostly worked, but kinda slow, which coulda been down to debug ect?
39 posts Page 3 of 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest