Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#ActualAngryAnt

Posted 17 July 2013 - 02:10 PM

Yes. Editors bad. Kodes gut.

 

Unity, Unreal, CryEngine, all those engines with straight up-designer only, programmers shot on sight, IDEs are for noobs anyway.

 

Unity gives you ($0):

  • A full engine with a modern component-based model.
  • The dreaded IDE for building scenes and blocks of pre-assembled serialised data. Don't worry though, if you're too manly for it, you can leave this stupid productivity booster in the dust and insist on handling everything from code or spend an appropriate amount of time building your own, better editor.
  • Mono. Not the latest Xamarin owned version, but the Attachmate version plus Unity tweaks. Still, most .net byte-code slips right in and C#, Boo and Unitys "JavaScript" - an ECMA script variant - are compiled automatically.
  • The asset store with loads of code, assets and editor extensions available for cheap or free. Don't worry though, you don't have to use it. That would probably be cheating.
  • Publishing to OS X, Windows, Linux, OS X/Windows webplayer (with special support from Facebook if you're into that sort of thing), Google Native Client, iOS, Android and Windows Phone.

 

If you want to pay for Unity ($1500+), you get additional things like:

  • RenderTextures. I'm sure no game can be made without this.
  • Native plugins on Windows/OS X (for the mobile platforms, this is already available for free). You will obviously need this one when you need to fix the hopelessly ineffective engine.
  • NavMesh baking. Getting things from the asset store, like some of the cheap or free alternative pathfinders, would clearly be cheating, so no way around the need of this one.
  • Various other high end things you cannot live without.
  • Console platform licenses which is obviously the only reasonable direction to take your game in.

 

Long story short, Unity is pretty useless unless you pay like a gazillion dollars to an evil corporation, so you might as well forget about it and start from scratch. After all, making engines is a whole lot more fun than games, right?

 

In all seriousness though, tharealjohn has the right idea. These "vs" posts only ever end up in two camps of supporters yelling at each other across the thread. Give both a serious try and form an opinion based on that.

 

And give it serious thought on whether you want to make a game or an engine. If the later, then Unity is obviously not for you and you should adjust your steering accordingly. As mentioned earlier, writing an engine is indeed awesome learning.


#3AngryAnt

Posted 17 July 2013 - 02:10 PM

Yes. Editors bad. Kodes gut.

 

Unity, Unreal, CryEngine, all those engines with straight up-designer only, programmers shot on sight, IDEs are for noobs anyway.

 

Unity gives you ($0):

  • A full engine with a modern component-based model.
  • The dreaded IDE for building scenes and blocks of pre-assembled serialised data. Don't worry though, if you're too manly for it, you can leave this stupid productivity booster in the dust and insist on handling everything from code or spend an appropriate amount of time building your own, better editor.
  • Mono. Not the latest Xamarin owned version, but the Attachmate version plus Unity tweaks. Still, most .net byte-code slips right in and C#, Boo and Unitys "JavaScript" - an ECMA script variant - are compiled automatically.
  • The asset store with loads of code, assets and editor extensions available for cheap or free. Don't worry though, you don't have to use it. That would probably be cheating.
  • Publishing to OS X, Windows, Linux, OS X/Windows webplayer (with special support from Facebook if you're into that sort of thing), Google Native Client, iOS, Android and Windows Phone.

 

If you want to pay for Unity, you get additional things like:

  • RenderTextures. I'm sure no game can be made without this.
  • Native plugins on Windows/OS X (for the mobile platforms, this is already available for free). You will obviously need this one when you need to fix the hopelessly ineffective engine.
  • NavMesh baking. Getting things from the asset store, like some of the cheap or free alternative pathfinders, would clearly be cheating, so no way around the need of this one.
  • Various other high end things you cannot live without.
  • Console platform licenses which is obviously the only reasonable direction to take your game in.

 

Long story short, Unity is pretty useless unless you pay like a gazillion dollars to an evil corporation, so you might as well forget about it and start from scratch. After all, making engines is a whole lot more fun than games, right?

 

In all seriousness though, tharealjohn has the right idea. These "vs" posts only ever end up in two camps of supporters yelling at each other across the thread. Give both a serious try and form an opinion based on that.

 

And give it serious thought on whether you want to make a game or an engine. If the later, then Unity is obviously not for you and you should adjust your steering accordingly. As mentioned earlier, writing an engine is indeed awesome learning.


#2AngryAnt

Posted 17 July 2013 - 12:54 PM

Yes. Editors bad. Kodes gut.

 

Unity, Unreal, CryEngine, all those engines with straight up-designer only, programmers shot on sight, IDEs are for noobs anyway.

 

Unity gives you:

  • A full engine with a modern component-based model.
  • The dreaded IDE for building scenes and blocks of pre-assembled serialised data. Don't worry though, if you're too manly for it, you can leave this stupid productivity booster in the dust and insist on handling everything from code or spend an appropriate amount of time building your own, better editor.
  • Mono. Not the latest Xamarin owned version, but the Attachmate version plus Unity tweaks. Still, most .net byte-code slips right in and C#, Boo and Unitys "JavaScript" - an ECMA script variant - are compiled automatically.
  • The asset store with loads of code, assets and editor extensions available for cheap or free. Don't worry though, you don't have to use it. That would probably be cheating.
  • Publishing to OS X, Windows, Linux, OS X/Windows webplayer (with special support from Facebook if you're into that sort of thing), Google Native Client, iOS, Android and Windows Phone.

 

If you want to pay for Unity, you get additional things like:

  • RenderTextures. I'm sure no game can be made without this.
  • Native plugins on Windows/OS X (for the mobile platforms, this is already available for free). You will obviously need this one when you need to fix the hopelessly ineffective engine.
  • NavMesh baking. Getting things from the asset store, like some of the cheap or free alternative pathfinders, would clearly be cheating, so no way around the need of this one.
  • Various other high end things you cannot live without.
  • Console platform licenses which is obviously the only reasonable direction to take your game in.

 

Long story short, Unity is pretty useless unless you pay like a gazillion dollars to an evil corporation, so you might as well forget about it and start from scratch. After all, making engines is a whole lot more fun than games, right?

 

In all seriousness though, tharealjohn has the right idea. These "vs" posts only ever end up in two camps of supporters yelling at each other across the thread. Give both a serious try and form an opinion based on that.

 

And give it serious thought on whether you want to make a game or an engine. If the later, then Unity is obviously not for you and you should adjust your steering accordingly. As mentioned earlier, writing an engine is indeed awesome learning.


#1AngryAnt

Posted 17 July 2013 - 12:45 PM

Yes. Editors bad. Kodes gut.

 

Unity, Unreal, CryEngine, all those engines with straight up-designer only, programmers shot on sight, IDEs are for noobs anyway.

 

Unity gives you:

  • A full engine with a modern component-based model.
  • The dreaded IDE for building scenes and blocks of pre-assembled serialised data. Don't worry though, if you're too manly for it, you can leave this stupid productivity booster in the dust and insist on handling everything from code or spend an appropriate amount of time building your own, better editor.
  • Mono. Not the latest Xamarin owned version, but the Attachmate version plus Unity tweaks. Still, most .net byte-code slips right in and C#, Boo and Unitys "JavaScript" - an ECMA script variant - are compiled automatically.
  • The asset store with loads of code, assets and editor extensions available for cheap or free. Don't worry though, you don't have to use it. That would probably be cheating.
  • Publishing to OS X, Windows, Linux, OS X/Windows webplayer (with special support from Facebook if you're into that sort of thing), Google Native Client, iOS, Android and Windows Phone.

 

If you want to pay for Unity, you get additional things like:

  • RenderTextures. I'm sure no game can be made without this.
  • Native plugins on Windows/OS X (for the mobile platforms, this is already available for free). You will obviously need this one when you need to fix the hopelessly ineffective engine.
  • NavMesh baking. Getting things from the asset store, like some of the cheap or free alternative pathfinders, would clearly be cheating, so no way around the need of this one.
  • Various other high end things you cannot live without.
  • Console platform licenses which is obviously the only reasonable direction to take your game in.

 

Long story short, Unity is pretty useless unless you pay like a gazillion dollars to an evil corporation, so you might as well forget about it and start from scratch. After all, making engines is a whole lot more fun than games, right?

 

In all seriousness though, tharealjohn has the right idea. These "vs" posts only ever end up in two camps of supporters yelling at each other across the thread. Give both a serious try and form an opinion based on that.


PARTNERS