Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unity Software Inc S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 294 posts

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#241

Post by SXX »

johnfn wrote: post #155
xex70 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps your error is marrying yourself to your creative output and taking criticism thereof personally. Your essay is all over the place and plays a tune many folks in AAA have heard from many folks who got their start in Web development, and I was illustrating the broader context that, again, makes your intended audience develop that conclusion. Honestly, it reads like a projection of your expectations of software…

EDIT: Fair enough, I'll remove my lecturing. I understand your point about not elucidating the why . Thing is, I'm not an AAA developer, so often times I don't know. All I'd like to know is a bit more on why specific points my essay were wrong. Like, if you don't think the thing about clearing the Debug window is correct, I'd like to know why that is.

I'm too lazy to write 1000 word essay from my phone, but having a bit of experience in both webdev and c++ gamedev on custom engine I certainly can say one truth here.

FAANG literally spend billions of dollars on developer tools alone, not even including browser runtime itself. There are thousands of engineers who work full time to make web and tools both fast and easy to use. There is also tons of open source developers competing to create best tools for other developers. And let's be honest tasks that average web developer has it's not rocket science.

Gamedev is nothing like this: resources are ever limited, budgets are tights, and there is almost never ending crunch to release ASAP. Till recently every AAA company mostly used it's own tech and everything was not only proprietary, but always closed source so only papers were shared. Oh there also proprietary secret under-NDA targets called consoles where you cant just expect user to buy faster hw and more RAM. And skills you expected to have to work in AAA as C++ programmer can be more than in let's say SpaceX.

So first of all you don't see how much better gamedev tools became in last decade. Other issue is that no one gonna hold your hand and force you into best practices because all games are mostly built of hacks and if you gonna enforce some strict rules it's mean developers wont be able to get those extra FPS, or better network latency or some absolutely unsupported feature that no one ever needed before.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#242

Post by zemo »

_mkef wrote: post #147
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't UE4 free for all use cases under a million dollar of revenue ?

My joke was it takes a much larger team to get anything done in UE4 . I couldn't imagine solo dev on an Unreal Project .

https://www.playomno.com/ <-- very impressive solo dev project made in unreal.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#244

Post by boarnoah »

panopticon wrote: post #198
boarnoah wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lion king I'm fairly sure this is incorrect. Unsure about Lion King specifically but all of the other recent Jon Favreau titles (The Mandalorian, The Jungle Book) have done virtual production with Unreal Engine.

From Engadget[0]: > The workflow of The Lion King was vastly different to The Jungle Book. MPC worked on 'master scenes' in London with industry-standard tools such as Maya. It then developed an "asset management system" that could translate the scene into something that was compatible with Unity, a popular game engine. Also, this YouTube video[1] goes over the process in more detail. [0]: https://www.engadget.com/20…

Ah interesting, I guess it makes sense considering its a different workflow from the two titles I mentioned which were compositing people into CG backdrops.

Thanks for the correction.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#245

Post by bathtub365 »

alexbanks wrote: post #133
formalsystem wrote: post #22

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…

This is my first time being involved in a game. Is there a way to make dependency/package management not abysmal? I was legitimately shocked when I realized that if you wanted to install a .net standard 2.0 library, you had to manually walk the dependency tree of that library and download/copy every single DLL into your app. Did I miss something? (probably)

There is a nuget Unity library that will do this for you (and more) https://github.com/GlitchEnzo/NuGetForUnity

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#246

Post by DonHopkins »

johnfn wrote: post #232
DonHopkins wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Unity isn't an IDE, it's a game engine. Totally different things. Better for Unity to spend their time and energy on the game engine and editor, not making yet another half-assed IDE. Developing an entire IDE simply isn't in their wheelhouse. While it's a lot easier for somebody like Rider who already has a full blown C# IDE to support Unity.

The thing is, avoiding usage of certain functions - like Find, Invoke, SendMessage, etc - does not have to be done at the IDE level. In fact, it shouldn't be, and the fact that Rider has to do these things is kind of a kludge already. These methods should be marked obsolete - or at the very least, they should have docstrings saying not to use them. Observe how the docs for SendMessage don't even discourage its use, f…

Again, Unity isn't an IDE.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#247

Post by steve_adams_86 »

formalsystem wrote: post #22

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…

I used Unity for robotics simulations, and while it was incredible in most ways, it was really heavy. A lot of the scientists involved were working with old computers and the simulator was a little too slow for them.

Perhaps I could have optimized better, but I struggled to find ways to do it. Admittedly, their computers were laughably old and terrible. Building $250k robots and working on under-powered laptops from 2010 or so - I never understood it.

One of the main obstacles that could have helped a lot was reducing mesh complexity. We were working with models directly from Fusion 360 and the meshes were incredibly dense. No one was comfortable deviating from the original models, so interpolating meshes or even manually reducing polygon counts wasn't an option. There was concern that we'd end up losing important data and create inaccurate simulations.

Anyway, it was an incredibly fun project and Unity made it effortless to prototype. It was ultimately built from the ground up using another tool which allowed for much better performance, but Unity allowed us to finish prototyping way, way ahead of schedule.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#248

Post by glenpierce »

xex70 wrote: post #82
andybak wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they just bought the developer. I worry about all the good synergy I was getting from Unity stuff using Github as a default is going to dry up if there's a non-open, non-public VCS as the default. I love trawling Github for interesting Unity projects.

Game development historically and consciously does not use Git so you’re fighting a losing battle. There’s good reason for that. Git remains not a great fit for managing large projects of assets despite extensions and work put in, so I’d be cognizant of your projection of Web-centric preferences on another vertical. That’s a recurring theme from the Web vertical (why don’t you do things our way) and I can tell you I’…

I've only ever used Git with Unity and as long as we're disciplined in our process, it's not a problem. It's free, scales to any size team for free, and lets us open source our projects easily.

I would be willing to consider Perforce, but it seems very expensive.

What is the industry standard means of open sourcing a Perforce repository?

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#249

Post by bathtub365 »

DonHopkins wrote: post #246
johnfn wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, avoiding usage of certain functions - like Find, Invoke, SendMessage, etc - does not have to be done at the IDE level. In fact, it shouldn't be, and the fact that Rider has to do these things is kind of a kludge already. These methods should be marked obsolete - or at the very least, they should have docstrings saying not to use them. Observe how the docs for SendMessage don't even discourage its use, f…

Again, Unity isn't an IDE.

The Unity editor gives you compiler errors and warnings in its console window. Why shouldn’t it give you these warnings as well?

The Unity editor also has lots of features that IDE’s have already, including a profiler, ability to inspect the world hierarchy, inspectors for components on that hierarchy, and ability to pause and restart execution.

Re: Unity Software Inc S-1

#250

Post by ourcat »

Having only just installed Unity over the weekend and starting to go through tutorials and starting to understand how I can build AR/VR/XR 'things', I've started to see the light and wished I'd started on this a while ago.

I also see they acquired 'Bolt' and made that part of the free toolset. I think 'visual programming' tools like that could be a great help in adoption by young developers. I also like that visual aides like that can help the understanding of underlying code.

This S-1 is a surprise, yet not. If you know what I mean.

Out of the various IPOs I've seen crop up recently, this is the one I'd go for, due to the changes in the way people are to going to have to learn and work, since the pandemic.

Right technology. Right time.

Post reply on HN