1 registered members (3s05bmmc),
740
guests, and 4
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Unity 2.5 for Windows - sooner than you think
[Re: lostclimate]
#256825
03/19/09 09:00
03/19/09 09:00
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,506 Germany
fogman
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,506
Germany
|
Normal maps are available in the indie version. Youīre right about everything that has to do with render2texture, though. But if youīve got a deal with a publisher, you wonīt worry about 1500,- bucks.
Itīs just the same situation as with A6 and render to texture. You get everything to make a full featured game.
no science involved
|
|
|
Re: Unity 2.5 for Windows - sooner than you think
[Re: amy]
#256834
03/19/09 09:37
03/19/09 09:37
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,225 germany
gri
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,225
germany
|
hi,
good luck and goodbuy to all who leaves the Acknexengine and turns to unity.
First I had the intension to check the trial of unity too. But after reading the Feature-list (Indie) I decided to let my hands of this and dont start working with another engine.
No RenderToTexture, poor Shadows, no reflection/refraction on water, no video on objects. No! I had to wait a long time until Acknex give me that in Com-Edition and I'm not willing to change to another engine with the same restrictions like A6 years ago! If I want to clicking together my gamegraphics and code it with C# ... I would use the NEOAXIS-Engine for that. Mighty features satisfy my needs more than a fast wokflow.
So I stay with Acknex until maybe "Unity 7" have the above named features in Commercial ...I mean "Indie" Edition;-)
greetings, gri
"Make a great game or kill it early" (Bruce Shelley, Ensemble Studios)
|
|
|
Re: Unity 2.5 for Windows - sooner than you think
[Re: gri]
#256837
03/19/09 09:48
03/19/09 09:48
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
amy
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
|
Gamestudio has poor shadows too. The stencil shadows are quite useless and the user shadow mapping contributions all are unfinished. In my opinion Unity is much more future proof. You can easily develop a game with Unity indie and if it turns out well you donīt have to worry about the 1050 like fogman said. With Unity you then have to possibility to go to Windows, OSX, iPhone, Wii or to a web plugin. With Gamestudio you are quite stuck. From what i understand, shaders are not included in the indie version. You got that wrong. Another thing I like about Unity is that its collision system is easier to use and works better than the Gamestudio ellipsoid one where it can be very tricky to avoid "getting stuck" problems and gliding problems.
|
|
|
Re: Unity 2.5 for Windows - sooner than you think
[Re: amy]
#256847
03/19/09 11:00
03/19/09 11:00
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 121
ortucis
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 121
|
OK, having tried the trial for an hour or two..
1) I got used to the editor almost instantly without reading any tutorials. I like to mess around without reading with all the apps I use and the editor on Unity isn't complicated to learn (having modded games with similar editors) and get into. Overall, it's pretty good.
2) My guess is that the trial is the Indie version so the Water looks pretty good even without reflection or refraction. I don't really see why reflective/refractive water is Pro only but still, Indie water looks nice enough (from a distance). Again, using the editor to modify the Water on the fly is fun. Changes take place instantly in front of you, no need to recompile.
3) Here's what kills the whole scene and makes this a really lame move that will end up being the reason most people won't buy it. Shadows. The demo Island level SERIOUSLY needs them, esp. the dynamic shadows. The level looks like the island level once posted here in 3dgs forums (made using 3dgs), only except the lack of shadows make it fuck ugly. You'd think that the shadows bit isn't a big deal but trust me, it looks like a Quake 2 level (umm, actually worse.. Farcry without shadows?).
You need Unity Pro ($1500) vs GameStudio's $199 version to get the basic shaders and effects gamers expect out of a 3D Game in the first place.
The Mac support is a bonus but do remember that you WILL need a Mac to test the end product eventually. Add another expense to the list in the end. The editor is nice but nothing I can't live without. In the end you will need all bells and whistles to make your 3D game look current-gen. You can obviously do that with Unity Indie, I am sure, but it will require a lot of hacks and work on your end to make it look good enough.
ANYWAYS, this is just a basic viewpoint. I will still try it out for 30 days before making my final decision at least. To those who already own 3dgs license, please use the trial before purchasing anything (I see on their forum a lot of people have purchased it instantly).
I am definitely interested in seeing how Conitec prioritizes the updates/features after this. If they keep the price less and features (all shaders esp.) available in 199 range, I don't see any reason to jump the ship for most developers.
EDIT: To those who want to know about the splash screen in Indie version (like A7 Commercial). Unity adds the splash screen (startup logo) plus a Unity logo on bottom right of the screen for some time (before fading away).
Last edited by ortucis; 03/19/09 11:27.
|
|
|
Re: Unity 2.5 for Windows - sooner than you think
[Re: fogman]
#256855
03/19/09 11:32
03/19/09 11:32
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
amy
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
|
|
|
|
|