91–100 of 294 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That means it's gonna be shouldering a burden for an entire industry > Unity is also gonna be a proxy for Unreal Why do you think it has to do all these things? Why can't it just be a stock on its own?
There's always a sector influence on the valuation of stocks - if an analyst writes a report saying the gaming sector as a whole is going to grow 1000x in the next 10 years, you can bet people will be looking for stocks to ride that wave. If Unity is the only buyable stock in the sector, then they'll feel the impact.
I really hope Unity raises tons of money , and inspires some decent competition here.
Unity is the worst game engine, aside from all others. UE4 is a convoluted mess. I've tired several times , but even getting it setup with the C++ build chain is a pain.
Godot ( which epic funded recently ) isn't done yet.
I'm going to stick with Unity until someone else can build an easy to use game engine. Ultimately Unity does tons of very difficult things, like I wouldn't want to write build systems for a half dozen platforms solo.
The asset store is easily Unity's greatest advantage. With about 1000$ and a month you can make a full playable games. I also owe Unity my career. I work far from game design , but Unity taught me how to program.
In my dream Valve releases Source 2 , it's just as easy to use as Unity and then game developers have a real choice.
Or I get a spare 600k to build something in UE4. I'm a fairly experienced programer and I still can't make heads or tails of it
There's no mention of Apple here, but I suspect the timing of this is directly related to Apple threatening to cut off Epic's SDK access due to the fight over app purchase fees. This was almost certainly in the works already, but now they need to accelerate it.
I'm quite bearish on Unity in the long run. Unity to me seems like a team with a fantastic marketing department to contrast with a much weaker engineering department. I've tried to use Unity off and on for years and every time I spend time learning it, I regret it. I'm a full-time React developer, and the difference in engineering culture and best engineering practices between Unity and React is massive. The Unity ex…
Unity definitely seems like it has lost sight of what made the engine rise to prominence in 2010-2015.
> I've honestly wondered a lot why Unity is successful at all
Unity was the least painful way to develop your hobby game and have it run on multiple platforms for people (artists, new game devs) who reasonably didn't want to leave a GUI.
> Why is it so hard to make a good game engine?
Really great question. I wonder if it's because the list of useful features grows so fast.
Imagine you make an engine from scratch. Great news! You have a 3D cube rendering successfully.
Now you'd like to walk around the cube. You now need a system to handle input.
Maybe you'd like to import geometry into the engine? You now need to write an import script.
Maybe you'd like a pbr shader on the cube. You've written a pbr shader, but artists don't want to edit the source of the shader. So then there's an ever expanding slider/node system as shaders get more and more complex.
Each of these small features quickly become giant wish lists filled with complexity.
One way to handle this complexity is to have a great open source community like Godot, which tirelessly develops feature and feature. In the last 10 years, the expected features of an engine have grow so large that it's hard for newcomers to compete.
In Unity it's not exceptionally easy to find the "correct" way of doing things because these engines are balls of mud, with system after system pilled on top.
Which is why we've ended up with hard to use large engines and easy to use small engines.
Ehh. I really hope Unity raises tons of money , and inspires some decent competition here. Unity is the worst game engine, aside from all others. UE4 is a convoluted mess. I've tired several times , but even getting it setup with the C++ build chain is a pain. Godot ( which epic funded recently ) isn't done yet. I'm going to stick with Unity until someone else can build an easy to use game engine. Ultimately Unity do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Card games use a lot of high res art. They take a surprising amount of textures.
Have you played Hearthstone? It was released in 2013 and I wouldn't call their graphics "high end" by any stretch of the imagination. If racing games or FIFA run fluently on a Galaxy Tab S4, so should Hearthstone... Even their PC version is laggy, check out streamers restarting the game (!) before important and action packed battlegrounds turns.
Users also have a lot more control over what is shown on screen. For a FIFA game everything is loaded beforehand. In a card game that has to hide information, it has to load as the game progresses.
Out of any software tools I use frequently, Unity is the one that brings me the most joy. Any reasonably complex interface is essentially a game whether it's a music composition app, simulator, MMO or even a basic form. The basic abstractions of entities and components sometimes feel like they could apply to any software project. It's seamless to animate something, add physics, style in ways that would seem mind bogg…
> Any reasonably complex interface is essentially a game whether it's a music composition app, simulator, MMO or even a basic form. I've been out of the game development arena for a while, but I can't help but pause here. Are people really writing DAWs and big desktop app interfaces in Unity ? The last time I played with a game engine, I would have said UI was its weakest aspect. Clunky, slow controls, visually unapp…
Out of any software tools I use frequently, Unity is the one that brings me the most joy. Any reasonably complex interface is essentially a game whether it's a music composition app, simulator, MMO or even a basic form. The basic abstractions of entities and components sometimes feel like they could apply to any software project. It's seamless to animate something, add physics, style in ways that would seem mind bogg…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really not as much of a stretch as you might think. Let's put aside everything that the two libraries actually do for a second, and just think about them in the abstract. React very clearly tries to guide the developer towards correct patterns and abstractions. It's clear that React developers have thought very deeply about how to lead engineers towards the happy path of code with fewer bugs in it. It throws lou…
> Unity doesn't mark old features as deprecated Are you sure? My IDE (Rider) shows gives me a tooltip for any methods that Unity has declared deprecated. There's also console warnings and big notices at the top of the docs. Package Manager also clearly marks certain packages as experimental or deprecated.
AssetBundles. Not marked as obsolete. Not marked as deprecated. Unity docs look fine, with no references to anything else you should do: https://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/AssetBundle.html. They are in fact obsolete anyways. See here: https://learn.unity.com/tutorial/assets-resources-and-assetb... "this tutorial has now been deprecated. We now recommend using Addressables for your projects"
EditorUtility.SetDirty(). Rider says "Marks target object as dirty. (Only suitable for non-scene objects)" and it's not marked obsolete or deprecated. Seems fine, right? Nope, it's been deprecated since 5.3. To their credit, the full Unity docs do reference this, but who is going to consult Unity docs for literally every Unity function they ever use, in their entire project? It should be right in the IDE. Better yet, the function shouldn't even exist! Unity 5.3 came out over 5 years ago!