Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Dark GDK / I don't understand why DarkSDK cost so much more!!

Author
Message
Mnemonix
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: Skaro
Posted: 3rd Dec 2004 16:52
@Froggermon, the biggest expense to developer and/or publishers is unlikely to be the leasing of the engine. So while they do like to minimize the budget, the cost of the licence to the engine they are using is not that serious an issue.

The 3d chat is coming...
Rights For Traffic Cones!
Freddix
AGK Developer
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 3rd Dec 2004 18:11 Edited at: 3rd Dec 2004 18:11
@Bulleyes : we are not in the same country .. inf france, it is harder to create a company ... imagine that the state take 40~60% of all your benefit each year ... and you have money to spend to pay for registration and others necessary procedures ... It's harder in france that's why I ask this ... if you don't agree I can show you documents that prove what I say so, the more you economize, the more you get chances ...

ChrisS
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Apr 2003
Location:
Posted: 3rd Dec 2004 21:28
I dont see what the problem is with the price, just bung it on the credit card thats like getting it for free anyway.



If you are to young to own a credit card just look in Daddies wallet...Joke!

Sorry Im just excited....Im waiting for download autorisation.
AlecM
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 3rd Dec 2004 23:36 Edited at: 3rd Dec 2004 23:45
Quote: " Froggermon:
Sorry, you are wrong. Publisher will like to minimize their budget if possible. It's all about cost in business.
"


no, your wrong.. you ever been in a meeting with a VU representative? didn't think so. If you go to a publisher with a completed game and they are interested in it, they are more than willing to pay a few hundred for a license.. thats such an infinitesimally small amount of money for them.
If you find a publisher who won't pay a few hundred dollars for the license then they are likely scamming you.
If you have a good game a publisher should be happy to pay 10 or 20 thousand to make a quick buck.. I really doubt that TGC will charge that much though.

Shadow Robert
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 3rd Dec 2004 23:57
Quote: "no, your wrong.. you ever been in a meeting with a VU representative?"


I have, he offered me a donut before saying that we needed to work overtime. Kinda wish I'd refused the donut.

Publishers are the guys who back all of a companies costs. Often is the case you get a budget.. you can always meet if something is important but you can't afford it, like say upgrading the entire staff to Maya from 3D Studio Max. Usually though you'll be given a standardised budget, then explain to the executives why you've used so much.

Trick being to make sure you use all of the budget, else they think you can undercut next time and it's alot harder to get more.

However this all said, the Publisher are the guys who have to sign and make sure the technology your using is legal. Developers generally are left to develop, poked a bit with hot sticks if you work to slow heh

If TGC did do the License for $10-20,000 that would still be under-cutting a large majority of current middleware and engines.
Renderware is currently the cheapest business solution at $50,000 per title per platform.. you want Unreal Engine 3.0 or Source Engine and your looking to spend the better part of $280,000 per title, per platform.

Dark Game SDK is less than what most programmers and artists earn in a day. Somehow I very much doubt a Publisher is going to say no to that!


Freddix
AGK Developer
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 4th Dec 2004 02:58
now, with the answer of Rick vanner about the price of the commercial version, I can say that I'll not use DarkSDK for X4 .. Because it's highly more expensive than Shareware version ...
[ more expensive than GameStudio A6 ]

Kevin Picone
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posted: 4th Dec 2004 04:12 Edited at: 2nd Apr 2011 15:57
Freddix,

Why bother ?, if X4 is already written in DBPRO and you know a bit of C, you can also write your own Plug in interpreter. It might mean replacing some native Dbpro function with your own back end, but it'd certainly be a lot faster than doing that in native DBpro.

Chenak
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 4th Dec 2004 05:43
heh gamestudio a6 is what $190 to $890 for the marginally useful versions? heh you have to spend $890 to get rid of the splash screen and get access to everything in the engine, so if anything a6 is more expensive than darksdk
Freddix
AGK Developer
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2002
Location: France
Posted: 4th Dec 2004 06:14 Edited at: 4th Dec 2004 06:15
yes A6 higher price is 890$ ... I maintain my word on Commercial version of DarkSDK ... but I don't want to tell the price ... I think it's TGC that must tell officially the price ...

@uwdesign : Yes, I use purebasic for all calculations and only dbp for global work ... so final DBP game source is 2000 lines and PureBasic game engine ( via DLL TPC for dbp ) is longer than 15000 lines

shadow fork
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Dec 2003
Location:
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 04:26 Edited at: 8th Dec 2004 02:03
I totally agree with Bullseye.

Just put it simply: "SAME TECHNOLOGY, DIFFERENT WRAPPER".
... go figure.

You guys (TGC) are slowly drifting away from the little guys (indie developers)



'Burn MS Internet Explorer... LONG LIVE "FIREFOX"!!!'
bitJericho
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 05:13
perhaps they are perhaps they arent..

fear not, however, when tgc moves on it'll open the doors for other 3d basic languages

Just because they're porting the dbp dlls to a usable c++ interface doesn't mean they're forgetting about dbp though

I really wish they would hire new people to clean up the bugs though x_x


Yarr join LoGD and defeat your fellow coders!
Cellbloc Studios
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 06:51
@Froggermon:

Why yes. I have been in a meeting with VU. Michael Johnson, Director of Retail.

And I agree with what you are saying. When we talked, they wanted to see a product (a working demo with no bugs) so they can pitch it and see if there is a market for it. If they believe so, they will be happy to pay $60 per developer for them to sell the product in question.

-This...is my boomstick!
Jeku
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 08:22
... especially when publishers fork out over half a million for other engines (Doom 3, Source, etc.)...


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
SoulMan
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2002
Location: In a house somewhere on the planet earth
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 08:55
@shadow fork - No. It's completely different technology. The way that the SDK works and the way that Dark Basic Pro works is quite different. In Dark Basic Pro you have access only to Types for a data structure. In C++, you have access to OOP. If it was the same technology, you wouldn't be able to use C++ to it's full advantage. At that point would it really be worth it to port DBPro to C++? No. Here though that is not the case and that is why you now have a product from TGC called Dark SDK.

@The Whiners - Wow, you guys need to take a chill pill. TGC releases this and everyone now assumes they've gone Microsoft? Yeeesh.

@Freddix - Not sure what your problem is. The whole TGC is trying to burn it's customer base thing has got to stop. Do you really think that they would just up and abandon what made them? No, but remember, TGC is a business, and for them to survive, they need to come out with new products that do a better job than the old. You can't sell an old dog as a puppy. However as Mike has said, they will keep both sides up to date.

@bullseye - You keep sitting there saying, I'm not going to buy into this. Well you don't have to. You can continue to use DBPro all you like. TGC will continue to support it as well as Dark SDK. That's already been said.

By the way, I would like to make a finally point. The Basic Language Syntax is dead. There is nothing there that can write clean looking code. That's why I won't touch VB(Even though I know how to use it) and why I think that the Dark SDK will be better. Think about it. When you move on from Dark Basic Pro and want to write games for a developer, what do you think their first question will be during an interview? That's right, Do you know C++ and how many years have you been programming with it?

SoulMan

This is as backwards as is This
Jeku
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 10:07
Quote: "Think about it. When you move on from Dark Basic Pro and want to write games for a developer, what do you think their first question will be during an interview? That's right, Do you know C++ and how many years have you been programming with it?"


This is hardly a fair comparison. DarkSDK is still a thousand times easier to use than straight up Direct3D. Going the full route and learning the ins and outs of Direct3D with C++ will still be more attractive to potential employers than a C++ game made with DarkSDK


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Shadow Robert
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 10:32
Quote: "Wow, you guys need to take a chill pill. TGC releases this and everyone now assumes they've gone Microsoft? Yeeesh. "


They went Microsoft a long time ago.

Quote: "If they believe so, they will be happy to pay $60 per developer for them to sell the product in question."


Christ i hope that deal was PLUS company wages.


SoulMan
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2002
Location: In a house somewhere on the planet earth
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 10:59
Quote: "They went Microsoft a long time ago."

So me where they went microsoft a long time ago. If they went Microsoft a long time ago Dark Basic Pro would require royalties for every game you sold. That's the Microsoft way.

@Jeku - While yes that is true about learning Direct X. I am talking more about people who only know Basic opposed to C++. I am making the case for Dark SDK on C++ on why it might be a good idea for some of the folks here to learn C++ with this. C++ is more of a real language than Dark Basic Pro will ever become. Dark Basic's purpose is to make games. C++ you can do just about anything you would ever want or need to. Plus Basic is a learning language. It's heyday was back in the 80's. That's why I am pushing more for the SDK now than I am for Dark Basic Pro. To get people off Basic.
SoulMan

This is as backwards as is This
JeBuS
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2004
Location: Undisclosed Location, Dominion of JeBuS
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 14:52
That's one of the best things about DGSDK, SoulMan. It offers a 'next step' towards learning game programming by getting you more into C++. If I remember correctly, that was one of the goals of DBP.


High quality models and graphics, low prices. Graphics for the rest of us.
Shadow Robert
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 15:57
Quote: "So me where they went microsoft a long time ago. If they went Microsoft a long time ago Dark Basic Pro would require royalties for every game you sold. That's the Microsoft way."


If you use Microsoft Visual [insert language name] Standard, plus DirectX... you don't have to pay Microsoft Royalties.
If you use Microsoft's complete Windows Library, you don't have to pay royalties.

In-fact very very very little Microsoft business is done via royalties. They make thier money by making sure you stay on thier Windows platform.
This is done by making sure you have the largest tool selection and easiest tools with which to create for thier platform, often by buying out or exclusively licensing technology (then later recreating it for themselves and out marketting the competitor).
That's the Microsoft way..

Go across TGC's Product Listings, from the past 2years they've been creating them. Let me know what doesn't seem Microsoft about them.

They charge you for add-on packs, which you'd of thought were part of the original package but really the original package was just a taster without the 'advanced features'.
They spend thier time creating new features to be bigger and better, and prioritise the 'end-result' components rather than the core problems.
Their product requires numerous patches and updates in order for it to become more stable, or stable enough to use in some cases.
Thier software requires online activation for gods sake...

Microsoft make one hell of alot of money and thier business plan while getting them into trouble now, served them well for over 2 decades.

Odd how some people are *only just* noticing this change.


Mnemonix
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: Skaro
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 17:56
Hopefully when the next IRC Q&A comes along there wont be a lynch mob ! .

The 3d chat is coming...
Rights For Traffic Cones!
MiR
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jul 2003
Location: Spain
Posted: 7th Dec 2004 18:42
It would get quite heated in there between the TGC fan boys and thier arch nemesis. Currently I´m leaning towards the fan boys. DGSDK is great. Shame it doesn´t suport 2 pads at once, as I can´t get that glfw thingy to work.


A bargain at 900000€ second hand
Libera tu mente y te liberaras.
SoulMan
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2002
Location: In a house somewhere on the planet earth
Posted: 8th Dec 2004 03:12 Edited at: 8th Dec 2004 03:13
Quote: "Go across TGC's Product Listings, from the past 2years they've been creating them. Let me know what doesn't seem Microsoft about them."

Developing new products isn't Microsoft like. That's called moving forward.


Quote: "They charge you for add-on packs, which you'd of thought were part of the original package but really the original package was just a taster without the 'advanced features'."

Name some add on packs which you thought would be part of the original package. None of those packs were promised in the beginning to be part of it nor free. I don't think it was promised that TGC would write your game for you. These are some things that they came with to help you write your game, but is not needed if you don't want to buy. You would have to code it yourself.


Quote: "They spend thier time creating new features to be bigger and better, and prioritise the 'end-result' components rather than the core problems."

They have been working on getting those core results fixed. However it takes a while to do so. 5.7 is very stable. I can get it to run without any real problems. If there are problems, they will be fixed. However there are times when you need to break off from doing all of that to come up with something new. You can't debug all your life you know. You have to write something new to keep everyone happy.

Quote: "Their product requires numerous patches and updates in order for it to become more stable, or stable enough to use in some cases.
Thier software requires online activation for gods sake..."


Let's see you write a bug free program on a Windows based machine using Direct X 9.0C to create games with. On top of that you have to come up with a language and documentation to go along with that. It has to be PERFECT.
Also on your little rant about online activation. Do you remember the deal where it required you to have your Dark Basic Pro CD in the drive to compile a program you created? The online activation took care of that problem and it solves the problem of illegal copies of Dark Basic Pro, at least 90% of them.

Quote: "Microsoft make one hell of alot of money and thier business plan while getting them into trouble now, served them well for over 2 decades."

For what, for writing one of the best operating systems around? Linux is not one of them, don't kid yourself. It still requires a lot of work to maintain and is not very clean. Who wants to sit there and edit hundreds of conf files to get something to work. When I sit down to install something, I want to run only one program. setup.exe. I don't want to do a make, I don't want to sit there and figure out if a program will install. I want it to install NOW. Windows may have it's problems, but it continues to improve. It's one of the best OS around. Mac OSX I would say takes second place. Just because it lacks some of the programs I like. However, I think it's what Linux should have been.

Quote: "Odd how some people are *only just* noticing this change.
"

You are comparing two different companies. They have different goals and different styles. How is that fair for a comparison?
SoulMan

This is as backwards as is This
Don Malone
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Apr 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posted: 9th Dec 2004 12:28
Just because the OS lacks the programs you want does not make it second best. It (Mac OS) was far mor stable than Windows for a long time. Windows XP finally closed the gap but has little issues of its own such as unfixed security holes that included some dating back to Win95 code.

Linux is a more fair system based on what I have read and I will be setting up a Linux box after the holidays to try it for myself. Linux has better default security than XP. I mean an OS that makes you jump through hoops to run some programs as well as install them but would let a download have free rein of the system if it ever got inside is/was bad design.

I do agree with all of your other points but I think we will agree to disagree about Microsoft and the way it obtains / develops its products.

Wasting CPU Cycles since the 286 was a hot machine.
SoulMan
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Nov 2002
Location: In a house somewhere on the planet earth
Posted: 9th Dec 2004 13:53
I'm not saying Microsoft is perfect and the way they develop some of their products leaves a bad taste in my mouth from time to time. I think they just have a better method that Linux needs. Such as the binaries. One thing I would like to see happen with Linux is a more unified standard. Like I said, I think Linux should be more like OSX. OSX is better than previous incarnations. Plus I like the fact it's more Unix based now. However it is still lacking programs that I like. Plus it is currently not a top preformer for games.

Linux in all it's glory would be great, but like I said you have to edit quite a few .conf/.cfg files to get stuff to work. It still lacks some hardware support(namely ATI but that's ATI's problem), it needs a default desktop(xwindows is a little old, I prefer KDE and think that it should be made THE desktop standard) and having to compile your own programs as opposed to just installing is a little wacky. There are better systems in place to install programs(portage is one of them) and the desktop software has gotten better. If you want a good distro for Linux, try Mandrake or Suse. You can try Gnome, but your best results will be with KDE. It is a very clean and fast desktop.
Believe it or not, I am an administrator for Linux Server where I work at. We use Red Hat ES 2 which is Red Hat 8. I like Linux. I just won't use it for a main os. Probably not until they are more unified. It is currently too divided.
SoulMan

This is as backwards as is This
Mnemonix
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: Skaro
Posted: 9th Dec 2004 19:53
I use linux and Windows both. Cant go wrong.

The 3d chat is coming...
Rights For Traffic Cones!
DMXtra
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Aug 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 11th Dec 2004 12:33
Quote: "Just because the OS lacks the programs you want does not make it second best. It (Mac OS) was far mor stable than Windows for a long time. "


I take it you never used OS 9.x or any OS before OS X.
Macs used to crash all the time, just as much as Windows 9x did.

Dark Basic Pro - The Bedroom Coder's Language of choice for the 21st Century.
David T
Retired Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 11th Dec 2004 18:00
Quote: "If they went Microsoft a long time ago Dark Basic Pro would require royalties for every game you sold. That's the Microsoft way."


They almost did

Get 15 new commands, all the date / time commands left out of DBPro for free!
DOWNLOAD PLUGINS HERE: http://www.davidtattersall.me.uk/ and select "DarkBasic"
IBOL
Retired Moderator
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2004
Location: @IBOL17
Posted: 11th Dec 2004 18:20
business ethics
is like
military intelligence
self-contradictory.

where is my stable, bug-free DBP?

re faze
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Sep 2004
Location: The shores of hell.
Posted: 12th Dec 2004 01:12
since the ide is no longer supported....
can i reverse compile it?
OSX Using Happy Dude
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 12th Dec 2004 01:27
No, it would be illegial.

Beware the cat... The alien... The heretic...
D Man
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Oct 2002
Location: Germany
Posted: 12th Dec 2004 09:00
@Raven: Full ACK.

God is real, unless declared integer.
re faze
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Sep 2004
Location: The shores of hell.
Posted: 12th Dec 2004 13:37
but who would care? it sounds like guy fell off the face of the earth or something. i bet his friends buddy dude and pal are out looking for him right now.
**just kidding**

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2019-07-20 01:56:15
Your offset time is: 2019-07-20 01:56:15