Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Boris-ka

Member
  • Content count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

102 Neutral

About Boris-ka

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Interests
    Design
    Programming

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Its the second time i hear this. But what do you mean? Is editor in Unreal upgraded separately from engine and it is the main headache for version upgrade, not engine itself? If so, how properly to use Unreal? Do not touch anything at all after lot of work is done and only manually compare changed code in the engine and recompile it?
  2. Thanks. Yes, I'll not try to catch stars from the sky, just need certain requirements to be met which are not hard to do. EDIT: folks please, if you want to write something, stay on topic. I have come here to ask, not to be judged. After all, dont think there are many idiots who want to waste hard earned money without thinking carefully.
  3. I dont understand what's the point to argue. No matter what people say about gameplay, physics or anything else, people at first look at screenshots of the game. You can have minimalistic modern room which look very realistic or luxury renaissance room with huge amount of details and it will look realistic too. But if you have bad graphics, then no matter how good your models and textures are, they will look bad, its just wasting of time and money when AAA titles are ugly looking. Realistic look is not some abstract goal, its the way to respect artists by not f* up what they have done and show this to players for aesthetic pleasure. Why you dont try to set up proper lighting in software renderer of any 3d modelling tool and try to render that with gi? This look realistic, like new made from gypsum (or paper, if proper material parameters are set). Only imagination limit you from making a game from such objects.
  4. Thanks for answers. Of course you right guys, but no risk - no success. No, I dont meant that. Realistic look and realism of the game are different things. Modern high quality games use a lot of costly content to fill the world with tiny details which never used and bypassed by running player. I cant afford this obviously and dont like idea to spare time and money on things which not used. When graphics is good, then you can put some simplest non textured objects and they will look like real, that is what I need to implement first and make sure engine let me do this (Unreal can, in Unity at not big performance impact - not sure). Have all effects made already from previous works, just need to port. About indie games made by people who didnt know how to program games at all, can't tell examples, dont remember them. Just read accidently in different places about such games and they are good enough. Well, guess I've got all answers, thanks again.
  5. Thanks for detailed explanations. But regarding quoted I do partially disagree. There are good indie games made by folks who have no experience in gamedev. The budget for the game is around $50k and because will hire co-workers from Russia, this will cost me less than usually it is, "thanks" to bad economic situation. To reduce development time, planning to buy high poly models and do retopology of them. The things which not exist in the shops can do myself (but no sculpting or animating skills, the last time did that was maybe 8-10 years ago). I have fan database because of past projects, so there is a big chance to have interest and some financial support too. Also by same reason I hope that game will not be lost in between many other released daily in Steam. And I have no idea how to make simple yet perfect game to make people interested and catch their eye, usual 3d is only what get used to and what I know. Well, Im bad at business and getting old to work as programmer in office, have no other skills, developing game is only thing left.
  6. Well, for me to work on graphics is more fun and easy. When all effects and lighting is set properly, even simplest objects like boxes and spheres look great (Unreal is kinda good example about that) and often there is no need to put more meshes to the scene, trying to fill emptiness of flat and ugly looking environment which have nothing to catch the eye, except problems. So, I want to make renderer work and look the way I need, then experimentally fill level with models to measure performance limit for certain hardware rig. I cant just put everything in to level and at the end delete many objects because performance degraded much from using SSR or SSAO, its wasting of time. The idea to make code, but then optimize it do not work on practice, its very easy to see in most modern games and software, there is always deadline and other tasks, nobody come back to review the code. Of course I understand Unreal must be better for my goal, if I would not be limited by money and time, writing code in C++ means to recompile and test much longer than using C# in Unity. Maybe even working with Blueprints is faster than C++ by creation time, so only some complex and highly performance dependent things should be done in C++. While in C# of Unity, everything should be slow by performance, but faster by job done to implement something. This is how I see it after gathering pieces of information in internet. When somebody compare, what is better between these engines, none of them better for me, because the things they compare are irrelevant for me (:.
  7. Thanks for the answers folks, appreciate that. But could somebody please answer on my questions about making changes to renderer pipeline in Unity, is that have huge negative impact on performance cause of C# and something done in weird way with many potential troubles? For example, if I decide to replace shadows for point lights to draw them to render target of specific format and custom filtering between transitions of cascades, do I need to make everything from scratch, including build list of shadow casters in area covered by light, so performance will be degraded a lot on C# script? Or if I replace deferred buffers with my custom to have more or less data (as I understood, Unity have prepass draw of scene wasting dips)? I fear such kind of things are made just to have them and nobody care how fast they work. PS: I really want to avoid trying to learn both engines for making decision, somewhere at 2000-2001 did this mistake, was dissapointed and started to work on my own engine, wasted lot of time. Then around 2007 made another attempt and wasted around 7 months learning, fixing, adding missing things. And then abandoned this idea after finding out how much things must be done first to make engines to be complete for game development and stable, not just for some demos. Some engine can be good at first sight, but would take too much time to polish it for one programmer, while another may suck by learning curve, while summary development time will be way shorter.
  8. Hello there. It's a bad topic, but I'm asking particular things which bother me, so hope to get real help here. First of all, I'm interested in opinion of very experienced users/programmers of Unity (and even better if you have long time Unreal experience as potential alternative). Have no experience with both engines and not very interested to spent half year deep learning one of them to find out that just wasted time. The game will be similar to classic first/third person 3d games (like Alice Madness Returns, Hellblade or something like that) with me as the only one programmer and developer who hire 3d artists to make things faster or to make something I cant do myself as fast as they do. Because of my specialisation, want to make game look as much realistic as I can with not much content, no stunning physics or other fancy stuff. My skills: Mostly wasted time as graphics programmer last two decades, helped indies to improve graphics or modify existing games as hobby, but also have big experience with coding engines (c++) and feel okay with any parts of them (but prefer to avoid because of complexity learning and working someones code). I dont know C#, but guess will be fine with it. Have experience with visual scripting in engines (Virtools and Quest3D) and like it. What is required and what bother me: Working with visual scripting (blueprints) most likely slower process compared to native programming, even with C# which I dont know, so Im not sure if complex project will not become way more time consuming when using Unreal instead of Unity. Also from what I can see in tutorials, Blueprints of Unreal are not perfect and intuitive at first sight, they are mostly very tiny ops, so to make something serious you need to build hell many elements. So, how is this on practice for big projects, can it be that using blueprints be equal or faster development process over C# scripts? My friend told me that Unreal developers cant normally share their code and use screenshots for that, so I fear maybe there is no internal ways to copy-paste some blueprints from one object script to another and require do the same things again and again, right? I know that most engines with access to sources can be improved a lot by graphics, but its all about time, is it worth such investiment or not. Unreal have good prebuild graphics, but not okay for me, need to write my own screen space ao, change its blending code to much more complicated, better implement some other realtime ambient and indirect lighting features, make other tonemapping and eye adaptation, change temporal aa or disable it. In Unity not just these things, but some other need to be done from scratch and as I understood from googling, you basically define render pipeline flow there, if want to make any good changes, but without source code to do this in C# make me feel it cant work fast if you try to handle more than thousand visible objects on screen. Am I correct about this and Unity have very negative performance impact when trying to customize renderer (without making own .dll of course)? Texture streaming in Unity do not exist, so is this possible to develop in good way with no noticable stuttering using only included C# code? Is that easy and will work globally or something very tricky and add huge amount of time to game making? To bother with splitting up levels to small scenes and load them is much more work to do when no good streaming is available. In Unreal (not sure, but from what I can see in games), streaming is very weird, it preload low level mips slowly to make framerate smooth and its often much worse than get some delay and display full resolution, so Im not happy with that, but at least by memory requirements its way better than default Unity. Is Unreal have any simplifications for utilizing save/load game feature or like in Unity, it must be done entirely by programmer hands? Is it really true that projects in Unity rarely broke when migrating to new version, while Unreal can destroy all the job you have done, so for safety reasons you should stick to some build? if so, Unreal sounds not very good thing, unless you have army of coders who can fix all the bugs in huge engine. In general, is Unity for complex projects is good enough out of the box by features or require to program too many things which bring up when you start to work on game? Excluding purchasable assets with .dll files in them (prefer to avoid this for multiplatform). I already have bad experience of starting development using other engines and spending half year for each to try write missing, but required code for making game and its not acceptable for me, few months is okay, but no more. So how is it in Unity for usual complex 3d first/third person single player games like shooters or action rpg? Thanks
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!