I have never touched unity so i cant speak how much of that would be really necessary, but i've seen in unity foruns webdesigners with no experience in flash 3d, finishing games in days.
Printable View
I have never touched unity so i cant speak how much of that would be really necessary, but i've seen in unity foruns webdesigners with no experience in flash 3d, finishing games in days.
And they all suck. Just because Unity lets you "finish" ( I'd personally not call them finished ) a 3D game easily, doesn't mean that you the designer, by purchasing Unity, have magically become a good game designer or that your IQ went up to 200.Quote:
i've seen in unity foruns webdesigners with no experience in flash 3d, finishing games in days.
It's still a crap game, only it's crap you can view from all angles.
Being a good game designer and being a good programmer are not one and the same thing. There are many very talented game designers around with very limited programming knowledge, and I would dare say that there are even more programmers around who don't understand the first thing about game design. To have both talents is more of a rare thing than you would think, similar to being both a good programmer and a good artist.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMD
The fact that programs like unity allow you to create games with limited knowledge, does not mean (all) the games produced will be bad, and even gives opportunity for good games to be created that otherwise wouldn’t have.
Ali
So that's what I see kongregate and newgrounds: 2D Unity games! Strange, I could've sworn it was Flash.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMD
I dont think you can create game in Unity without programming. Yes, you dont have to write your own 3D engine but from engine to game is still long way. Correct me if I am wrong but you need to understand programming in Unity3D about same level as you need when writing game in Flash. At least for anything beyond "look, its in 3D and you can move around".
When you learn flash you dont make a Heli Atack 3 eitherQuote:
Originally Posted by MikeMD
Off course you need to know how to code, my point was that learn how to build your 3d engine in flash was not a requirement to get something done.
But the point is people are judging these games as finished, as you yourself said. If anyone sees another mouse maze Flash games, they automatically shoot it down. Because Unity 3D is so new, people tend to ignore the "crap" games, because they're the only games. I'm not saying that there won't be better games appearing, one's that I'll actually hear about, but you can't say you've seen people finish games (GAMES, not just a small demo/tryout of Unity) in 2 days. We know that that would be EXTREMELY hard because of our FK comp.'s. I don't think I've really seen any fullscale games being made...just unfinished, really original and fun though, games that other people would judge as crap...
P.
Splume is a very good game. It is not a 3D game but it has been made with Unity3D about 2 years ago. I don't think you can achieve the same smoothness in Flash even if I agree you could make a very similar game.
http://splume.flashbangstudios.com/play.php
If the programmer was good enough I think they could make it just as smooth in Flash. If I had navigated to that page without knowing it was Unity I would've assumed it was Flash (initially).
or if they just had enough time ;)
i installed unity plugin and it's slowww. Not sure if this is because i'm hosting windows into a virtual machine or not but i couldn't pan around that topical environment demo, it was lagging alot.
This was done on firefox 2.20
I just installed Unity to try out Splume, and had the same result as AluminX, it lagged, and the menu screen was distorted and unreadable...Firefox 2.20 also.
why do you guys still use that bloated and outdated firefox version?,- updates are beeing stopped soon anyway - get 3.0 its been out long enough.
Don't really like the look and feel of firebug on 3.0. And firebug is like air to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by renderhjs
Actually i justed tested it on safari for windows, ie6, opera 9.24 and get the same result. If you ask me, that plug in sucks. Lear Java.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AluminX
you and Pazil are the first two from whom i hear they have technical issues with it, so yeah, i was initially about asking what your system/browser setup is etc but yeah, with statements like those you instantly lower chances for being taken serious to zero.
I've managed to avoid this thread, 'cause I'm sure I've written in about 5 just like this in the past 6 months, but one thing I'd like to point out to redress the balance a little.
When I was last contracting my office pc was toilet. Low end dual core or so, but with a really poor graphics card ( Better than a mobo one, 'cause I was running two monitors, but still not good ).
All of the Unity demos ran so so badly on there to be unusable. I think from memory it may have been Incrue who linked to a game that was apparently done in a couple of days by someone new to unity of a moon buggy driving around a terrain. That actually hung my machine totally ( On / Off button reset ).
I remember when F10 requirements came out for GPU acceleration there was a lot of "That's far too high" comments, but actually they're not, and a hell of a lot less than unity's requirements.
( Ok, I know unity is in a totally different league in what it can do, comparing it to Flash in terms of power and rendering output is just silly, it's like comparing a plane to a shoe, but let's not fall into the easy trap of thinking everything in unity's garden is rosy ( Aside from the lack of windows version, which seems to be a major issue for a lot of people ).
Aside from the lower number of installed plug-ins ( I was surprised with this thread that people said they hadn't installed it ) you're also looking at a higher spec. machine, and I know it scales down etc. etc. but you really are looking at something a bit above and beyond the usual office pc, which is a very big chunk of any online games audience, and before I get the "But it's not just for online games, it's for Wii and iPhone and..." then perhaps this chat would be as relevant here as it would be on an unreal engine board. Compare like for like where we can, otherwise it just gets so skewed as to be a pointless discussion ).
Dunno why that whole last paragraph was in brackets, it just felt right. It just felt '09 and the future :)
Squize.
Very true, but i wasn't really serious. just said that i guess to close the post fast. actually i am really hyped up about unity, and can't wait for the ide in windows. I love javascript as a language and having the opportunity to apply my knowledge of js into unity and starting to create some serious crossbrowser and powerful web games is a dream come true. At work i have a crappy gf, it doesn't event support ubuntu special effects, so i wouldn't know how well the plugin performs into a mediocre system. However judging from the screenshot they have it looks amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomsamson
My general opinion is that Unity is not good at all for browser / internet games. It's just too slow, unreliable, and another plug-in to install.
Now, where I'll really be using Unity will be for Wii and iPhone games! It seems funny to me that (if this does infact happen) Unity might have a Windows IDE before even the official iPhone one!
But again, in terms of power, Unity is powerful in a very narrow road. Just 3D and such. But if I want to create a simple 2d app, (correct me if I'm wrong), then using Unity would be one of the most inefficient ways of doing it? To tell you the truth, I'd rather have a Windows iPhone IDE, and make a 3d engine from scratch...which I guess then narrows it down for me to using it for the Wii!
P.
I think there are to much speculations here,- unity is to young to much unproven in many fields.
Who knows perhaps it will do just great in 2d as well - all it needs are some good examples and perhaps some better marketing on the unity side.
What I wonder though about is compression,- I assume it has newer mechanics as SWF when it comes to compression so some comparisions would be nice because I still think that compression is a major key to success. A big reason why swf beat all the other competors back then was because they used mainly vector graphics instead of bitmaps.
Unity plus silverlight all being developed on a PC in C# - That will be a huge threat to adobe, which is why I think either MS or adobe will buy them.
That will happen after unity release a PC dev kit and people start to take unity seriously. At the moment, there's just not enough content out there.
the ide is mac only right now.
It had been a long time since i post in games forum. this thread got my attention.
I found out about Unity sometime ago while I was doing some research on games engine/developement tool. But the lack of IDE in window environment really stop my company from purchasing it. We go for Torgue Game Engine instead.
Although TGE doesnt support exporting as a browser plugin currently, but I believe I had seen some community work that port it to run under browser.
I think in the future will more likely be Unity vs TGE instead of Flash vs Unity.
Anyway, I install Unity plugin and view the tropical paradise demo. look very good :D
I'd like to take back on what i said, to just stick with java.
I actually tried unity plugin on my netbook and it runs pretty smooth. Very impressive piece of software, i will definitely keep my eyes on it.
About Unity guys going bankrupt:
http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=17740Quote:
Originally Posted by Unity CEO
And that in a year with economic crisis all around the world
Personally, I'm of the opposite view on it being slow and unreliable. I have a crappy g4 mac laptop (867mhz,512ram,osx10.5,ff3.0), that struggles with the most basic flash games and animations, yet Unity seems to mostly run surprisingly fast and smooth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pazil
I'm currently considering taking a few of my more personal 2D projects into Unity, ones that are really struggling to run smoothly and consistently in flash.
Also, I sort of agree about the difficulty of 'another plug-in to install'... but that's how progress is made right? If enough devs get behind it (I can't see any technical issues why we wouldn't want to), then plug-in penetration will eventually cease to be an issue.
I do agree in terms of it being another plug-in to install. It shouldn't be THAT big of a barrier. But I was referring to my own computers performance when I tried out Unity. Maybe since the IDE for it is for Mac, maybe the performance itself has been targeted for Macs, a bad idea, since PC users strongly outweigh the mac users (with good sense, too! ;) )
I really think that the IDE not being available for PC is a big technical issue (if not technical...then just an issue). I would never in my life start using a mac more than for just some small stuff, file conversion (if I ever need to do that), etc.
I think that what Unity needs to improve on is consistency among browsers/computers. Because so far, that's what's making Unity so unreliable.
That all being said, and my previous posts, I would still definitely turn to Unity for some 3d projects if the ide was only available on the PC...
P.
guys, can you stop with totally uninformed generalisation statements?
I tried unity stuff on more than 10 machines (pcs and macs, some pretty new, some more than 5 years old) and it ran great on all.
Maybe you should check YOUR system before accusing a whole technology as unreliable.
Next up its understandable (or not, but ok..) that you´re never into trying a mac and therefore think its a big problem the ide is not available for pcs but a) it will be in a few months and b) its a limited viewpont to think that something that allows deploying to so many platforms is this or that because it doesn´t run on your one pc.
As others pointed out someone who works on games professionally would seriously think about buying a mac anyway, if not for unity then for the many other apps that are exclusive to it or also to be able to test his content on different platforms.
like what other exclusive applications?Quote:
someone who works on games professionally would seriously think about buying a mac anyway, if not for unity then for the many other apps that are exclusive to it or also to be able to test his content on different platforms.
dunno about that but I have a way different view on that myself. Game development has always been mainly on the PC platform because of the great availability of tools- something the mac suffers in some areas. Its also often because of direct X - the 3d tools that use it and many other tools that follow or require the other tools,- its a big chain the apple cant replace- not in the game industry.
I have 2 students here at my uni hooked at Unity- and I already talked to some of the staff here regarding to test it- but we dont have hardly any mac computer (2-3 perhaps) in the 3d and multimedia pools. Communication Design and the Print department though have macs but not the many tools on it people like us Multimedia and Game design students need.
The point is Unity gets tested here as soon as the Windows IDE is out- anything else wont work out with the existing archtecture and that includes 3rd party software and tools such as 3dsmax, maya mudbox,...
Render, you´re off there on several ends. First game development hasn´t always been mainly on the pc, just like design and other sectors (check where many apps came out first on wikipedia).
Personally i don´t care about most stuff, most important to me is that i can develop for and deploy to the iPhone.
There are various things exclusive to mac, just like there are many things exclusive to windows machines, hence why personally i´d strongly suggest to have both.
I personally have a pc next to my mac and its great to be able to use the best of both worlds and test things on both.
You can´t afford a mac and a pc? (totally understandable) :
Then i strongly suggest you buy a mac.
Why?
Because there are many ways to completely legally run windows and mac OS on a mac, whether you want a full partition installation and choose which to boot or some other way. So you can easily and nicely running have both on a mac. Whereas when you buy a pc you can only get Mac OS running on it in hacky illegal ways (which then also doesn´t run that great).
a mac simply costs way to much if all that matters is alot of ram and a good GFXcard (thats what matters here for multimedia and 3d). A mac costs way to much if it fits those needs compared to a PC.
Not only that but often Mac Software licenses are often more expensive as Windows licenses. And even more important - what do you do if you work in a team - if other members of your team use tools or protocols that are fixed to windows?
I am already for a long time in the CG area (10+ years?)- started partly on the mac with quark Xpress and old Freehand. But today there is not one single software piece that comes to my mind that is exclusive to the mac and important - by important I mean not some kind of widget desktop tool. The mac had it strength back in the print days before 3d and flash got that important as today- but it doesnt stand out today anymore other than beeing simple to use and robust.
The whole Adobe Creative suite is available on booth- some functionality though right now exclusive to the PC (like 64bit in Photoshop, or QuadCore support in After Effects). Many 3d applications run booth on Mac and Windows like maya and modo but not XSI or 3dsmax booth very important packages in the game industry.
Not to mention the countless normal mapping bake tools, shader editors, animation tools, physics engines ect. they all run primary on windows because of Direct X and what Games meant in the past on windows.
man, did you read my post?
Again, you can install both windows and mac OS on a mac and that way run all apps available for both.
The only valid argument i see in your post is that macs are expensive pieces of hardware. After using one for several months i think its worth every cent but yeah, there´s no discussion about that, macs are more expensive than pcs. Still, if i´d have the option whether i buy a pc or a mac i´d buy a mac, again, because one can run both windows and mac OS on it and therefore all apps available for both.
Guys be serious. If you need unity now and iPhone development, sure buying a mac makes sense, but overall Mac is a Joke. They have almost no 3D software on that platform. Cinema 4D is about the only one. Maya and Lightwave on a mac are inferior versions, 3DSMax and XSI are windows only. I also use Fusion for compositing effects and green screen stuff, that is PC only as well.
None of the other video and audio apps I use run on OSX either. What the hell would I ( and many others like me ) want to buy a mac for? They want to charge me more for lack of apps and hardware choices. WTF?
And, no, installing windows on mac and running all of these apps is not without problems. But even if it were, why? when it's already running fine on windows.
i love it when people talk lengthy about something they have no propper first hand experience with. Always enjoyable.
I do. I was forced to use macs before and it was a terrible experience.Quote:
i love it when people talk lengthy about something they have no propper first hand experience with
Hey, you want to develop for iPhone and use Unity, fine, buy a Mac, but what you suggest for the rest of serious developers is absurd.
You want me to buy a mac, so I can start using their half assed apps instead of those I use right now. It doesn't make any sense. And it's not even about cost. Fusion and XSi together cost $8000, but like I said, why would I buy a mac when they already work fine on windows, and using any 3D app or compositing app on a mac after fusion and xsi would be idiotic. It would be spending money just to downgrade. It's absurd.
its about getting the good apps you can´t get on a pc, not getting apps that are worse than ones available on pc and yeah, overall about being able to get any app that is available for both OSes.
Anyway, yeah, don´t do that man, better stay where you are and cry some more about how bad it is unity is not available for windows..
Just had to negate some of your comment about 3d software. I used an early version of Mac Maya, I believe it was the first version they ported. It did crash a lot more than the Windows version, I'll give you that. But I imagine that it's been improved in the last few years, this was before Intel Macs even came about.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMD
Lightwave is a different story. It's been on Mac since '95, ported a year after the Windows version. I used both extensively in the late '90s/early 2000's and they were identical.
I've never used Fusion, but it looks comparable to Shake. Shake's an amazing node-based compositing software, which has been highly popular in big-budget action movies recently (LotR, Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc.). The Windows version was discontinued after Apple bought it.
Like Tom was saying, there's valuable software on both ends. I think Mac's are a great choice because they allow you to run both operating systems seamlessly. The hardware is expensive, but it's well made, which you can't say about most PC manufacturers.
I hate that this thread is pretty "flamey" but it brings up which I believe is an important discussion. The times are constantly changing, Windows operating system has become somewhat of a joke and OSX is gaining more market-share. We've got countless devices to deploy our games to (mobile phones, game consoles, web browsers). It doesn't benefit you to think close-minded, unless you really don't care where the trends are moving. The way Tom sounds like he's been working, it sounds like he's prepared for whatever happens. Because when that killer Silverlight app, or Unity app, or GarageGames app, whatever, when it comes it could push things in a new direction. Hell, you could be the one to set the ball rolling! :)
There aren't any. Unity is the only one that looks mildly interesting at this point, and still not enough to make me care. Not when I can get more plays on a single flash game in 2 weeks than your average Unity game gets in 2 years.Quote:
its about getting the good apps you can´t get on a pc,
I'm not being close-minded, I'm just sticking to the appropriate comparisons. Like I said before, Unity deployment to those other platforms is irrelevant here, this is flashkit. And it's ridiculous that the most popular thread on this board is a time waster about Unity. I have all those options open just like anybody else, but I'm not going to discuss them here unless it's relevant to flash.Quote:
We've got countless devices to deploy our games to (mobile phones, game consoles, web browsers). It doesn't benefit you to think close-minded
I can buy a mac and Unity tomorrow if I want, but why? I don't see the point.
to Son of Bryce:
cheers man, very motivating words :)
and yeah, i´m sad its flamy in some ways, too, but yeah, with some one can talk or discuss nicely and then there are others with whom one can´t :( :)
to MikeMD:
again, noone forces you to take part in a discussion you see as unworthy or buy this or try development target that or learn language or technology whatever.
Its your loss at the end when you miss a train.
Looks like you can't discuss anything nicely or not nicely. You just want to post Unity spam on flashkit and then expect everybody to agree with you.Quote:
with some one can talk or discuss nicely and then there are others with whom one can´t
That's not a discussion, it's called something else.
If you see it as unity spam,then fine, why do you even bother reading the thread?
I just post about things that interest me and could be interesting to fellow game developers too.
A while back i dabbled with xna so i posted about that,too and just like that i posted about many other things, your comment that sounds as if i´d hype one particular product or technology is therefore not right.
I also accept other views and also change my own view if i see someone has a good argument. If i disagree with someone then its not to force him to have my oppinion but because i think its interesting to discuss interesting topics :)
With some its interesting to discuss things because they bring interesting thoughts/arguments to the table.
In your case you most times haven´t brought up good arguments but post statements that sell your view as a fact so yeah, in that case i feel the need to post pretty much everytime because i can´t let something like that stand there as if it was a fact.