Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Is Unity not state of the art?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
13 replies to this topic

#1 IceBreaker23   Members   -  Reputation: 608

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 29 February 2012 - 09:52 AM

I´ve seen a few youtube videos about games some guys made. Also looked at the new rpg from bigpoint(game of thrones). Then I found some videos about unreal engine and cry engine and found that unity looks a little bit old like a game from 2005. Is this a consequence from bad 3d artist or is this a fact?

Sponsor:

#2 lmbarns   Members   -  Reputation: 460

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 29 February 2012 - 12:22 PM

lol you're not going to make AAA cryengine games as an individual.

Models would cost a fortune (to benefit from directx11 vs 9)and the coding is 10x more difficult than Unity. Also Unity is hitting mobiles/web/console market for small developers where Cryengine is solely PC for large studios(yea they released an indie version, I have it, give it a shot, it's nasty). Unity is comparable to XNA, neither of which are comparable to cryengine. Also Unity and Unreal are comparable with pro version of unity. Unreal might be a little better on desktop but it followed unity into the web market and pretty sure they don't do mobiles/consoles yet.


At the same time you'll make 10x as many features with unity as you would on the others because it's extremely fast to work with(workflow and coding).

But to answer your question it's a mix of shitty textures, amateur artists, low budgets and not 100% reflective of what's possible with the engine. Whatever the model looks like in maya, 3ds, blender, or whatever 3d modeling software you use is what it'll look like in the engine. Also remember it costs $1500 for pro unity, so a lot of unity games you see from individuals are using a free version which has "polishing" features locked (dynamic lighting/shadows/render enhancements).

Is the renderer state of the art? Nope, but is the abstracted API that lets you convert your code to multiple platforms including web/mobile/console "state of the art"? Yepper, saves a ton of work.

#3 IceBreaker23   Members   -  Reputation: 608

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 29 February 2012 - 02:59 PM

Thank you for your answer :D
I have a few difficulties with unity now but i cant afford unity pro.
I think ill implement everything and if the games is finished ill maybe switch to unity pro.

#4 meeshoo   Members   -  Reputation: 508

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:20 AM

I use Unity too and it is great. It is very fast to develop with and it takes care of a lot of low level stuff. I also use the free version as I don't have money for the pro one, but you can get pretty interesting effects with it alone. Of course having the pro will help, but a good game is a good game, you can get away with not so much eye candy.

(you can check out my blog http://www.jungle-troll.com to see some clips about what can be done with the free version. Warning: alpha quality models/textures:) )

#5 EJH   Members   -  Reputation: 314

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 01 March 2012 - 02:25 PM

Angry Birds, Minecraft, and Farmville have more players per night than Crysis 2 or Unreal 3.

Game engine does not matter. If the game is good people will play it.

#6 IceBreaker23   Members   -  Reputation: 608

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 02 March 2012 - 07:25 AM

Except minecraft, these are casual games. I aim on core-games. But you all are right, I am not developing AAA titles :D

#7 meeshoo   Members   -  Reputation: 508

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 02 March 2012 - 07:27 AM

The game engine you will use has nothing to do with casual vs core.

#8 kunos   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2205

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 02 March 2012 - 10:03 AM

If you are serious about your project you'd be benchmarking and comparing all these engines yourself.. then decide what's the "state of the art" for your own project.
Stefano Casillo
Lead Programmer
TWITTER: @KunosStefano
AssettoCorsa - netKar PRO - Kunos Simulazioni

#9 IceBreaker23   Members   -  Reputation: 608

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 03 March 2012 - 06:30 AM

@meshoo: normally casual games have lower graphics than core games, thats what i meant with this sentence(for example battlefield3(core) and minecraft,farmville etc.)

@kunos: I did^^ and i decided to take unity because it is easy to use. Unity pro would fit my requirements. But i´ve seen that other engines look much prettier.

#10 Memories are Better   Prime Members   -  Reputation: 769

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 09 March 2012 - 08:25 PM

Angry Birds, Minecraft, and Farmville have more players per night than Crysis 2 or Unreal 3.

Game engine does not matter. If the game is good people will play it.


This,

The fascination with graphics is getting stupid, game companies are losing customers because they dedicate all their time on pretty graphics where patches & expansions are eye candy only, seriously take EVE Online as an example, they released content where they spent years making things shiny and pretty which resulted in a loss of players AND the graphic content was such a resource drain that only a few players could handle it. Sure its nice to have things pretty but theres a balance. People dont inject themselves with heroin because of how it looks, they inject because its addictive, make an addictive fun playing game and people will play, you think games like club penguin, travian and wow got popular because of graphics?

#11 Steve25   Members   -  Reputation: 130

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 10 March 2012 - 09:55 AM

lol you're not going to make AAA cryengine games as an individual.

Models would cost a fortune (to benefit from directx11 vs 9)and the coding is 10x more difficult than Unity. Also Unity is hitting mobiles/web/console market for small developers where Cryengine is solely PC for large studios(yea they released an indie version, I have it, give it a shot, it's nasty). Unity is comparable to XNA, neither of which are comparable to cryengine. Also Unity and Unreal are comparable with pro version of unity. Unreal might be a little better on desktop but it followed unity into the web market and pretty sure they don't do mobiles/consoles yet.


At the same time you'll make 10x as many features with unity as you would on the others because it's extremely fast to work with(workflow and coding).

But to answer your question it's a mix of shitty textures, amateur artists, low budgets and not 100% reflective of what's possible with the engine. Whatever the model looks like in maya, 3ds, blender, or whatever 3d modeling software you use is what it'll look like in the engine. Also remember it costs $1500 for pro unity, so a lot of unity games you see from individuals are using a free version which has "polishing" features locked (dynamic lighting/shadows/render enhancements).

Is the renderer state of the art? Nope, but is the abstracted API that lets you convert your code to multiple platforms including web/mobile/console "state of the art"? Yepper, saves a ton of work.


Just out of curiosity why did you think Cryengine 3 was nasty? Was it the workflow? Difficulty of use? Also have you tried UDK and if so what did you think of that? I haven't used any engines yet, only made games through starting brand new projects. However I'm thinking of trying one just to see what they're like

#12 Ectara   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2922

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 21 March 2012 - 11:07 AM


Angry Birds, Minecraft, and Farmville have more players per night than Crysis 2 or Unreal 3.

Game engine does not matter. If the game is good people will play it.


This,

The fascination with graphics is getting stupid, game companies are losing customers because they dedicate all their time on pretty graphics where patches & expansions are eye candy only, seriously take EVE Online as an example, they released content where they spent years making things shiny and pretty which resulted in a loss of players AND the graphic content was such a resource drain that only a few players could handle it. Sure its nice to have things pretty but theres a balance. People dont inject themselves with heroin because of how it looks, they inject because its addictive, make an addictive fun playing game and people will play, you think games like club penguin, travian and wow got popular because of graphics?


I agree. I'd be happier with slightly lower quality weapons and effects if there were more of them. Spending all your time on a game that requires a high-end machine to run is silly. It should be just as enjoyable to run at low settings, and not a mark of shame to run it at the lowest settings. I will not buy a new computer to run a game that requires more power than my current computer does. That's just foolish.

That's almost like paving a new highway with a speedlimit of 150mph/240kmh. Yeah, that's great and all, and it is wonderful, but few people will get to use it, no one will buy a new car just to drive on it, and ultimately, it will likely waste time and money.

+1 for the heroin analogy.

#13 IceBreaker23   Members   -  Reputation: 608

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 March 2012 - 04:25 AM

I´ve now worked a little bit with unity and designed a map etc.
And I have to say it looks really pretty. Not like crysis or something. But equal to current mmos(excluding gw2^^)

#14 lmbarns   Members   -  Reputation: 460

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 March 2012 - 09:56 PM

Yea I went out and got a new android to test my new free android license and it's really slick. I had to roll back to 3.4 version to get the accelerometer controller working with my setup but most of my code from other projects works perfectly on my phone, and instead of using the mouse to aim you tilt/pivot the phone. In minutes I was shooting projectiles, spawning killable monsters, and had portals to various locations and maps. Now I have to switch over my hud to Guitextures instead of the ongui functions I was using.

Most of the graphics related discussions tend to point out a need for custom shaders to make it pop.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS