And then download the latest release on github and start porting great features over to unity 
1 Like
Actually it’s a known psychological phenomena, if you purchase something you adapt your view of it to justify the purchase.
Some may, I sure as hell don’t.
Ditto. Case in point: Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII. To say I’m disappointed is a slight understatement.
1 Like
Fox engine REDengine3
Because: what I saw from Witcher 3 is just so awesome
Edit: Sorry, Wikipedia says it uses REDengine3, I thought it was Fox
Awesome. Im sure UE4 can do as much as RED because all we know about the engine is its rendering capabilities and UE4 can achieve that (CE3 as well.) Also saying that its your favorite when you havent even used it (you havent even seen what the desktop icon for the engine is) is a completely bias opinion.
My fav is Unity. Not because of the GRAFIEX but because it is an engine that is light on every computer, super easy to use, amazing community, awesome support, loaded asset store, determined engineers to make this engine better every day, and finally because ITS FREE!
I have valid reasons while most of these people here just vote on an engine that they never even used because the ARTIST (NOT THE ENGINE) created those nice graphics.
Has not aged well in a decade, I think it’s safe to say. The fact it only had about two updates in ten years probably didn’t help much either… and people think unity is out of date.
1 Like
Yes true, but I can dream.
That is not true. E.g. the witcher 3 scenes say a lot about the engine. The artist can be as good as he wants, if the engine cannot render view distances of kilometers and load tons of stuff on the fly, it would not be possible. As a programmer I watch the videos and think in term of awesome engine features, of course nice art helps make the videos cool too. I look for the details, but not because I think they are nice, but to see that the engine can render such detail level on 30 characters at the same time.
You could be the best artist in the world, you could never do such videos in Unity 4. For me these videos show mostly engine features.
2 Likes
I would narrow them all down to Unity and Unreal due to a conclusion taking into account cost, ease of use, flexibility, stability, power that can be achieved through simplicity(2d and 3d realistic worlds), community support, company support, and a pretty certain future that they will be here for the long run. Other engines have a lot of these but not all of them. I own both. I bought Unreal simply because I couldn’t see a reason not to spend 20 bucks to try it out. At the end of the day, I think Unity wins because it has the best learning curve for achieving any given goal. that is my humble opinion and nothing more, and I’m not looking for a crazy debate, just giving my view. 
If you want the best graphics, use Inform: because no amount of technology can match the power of pure imagination.
2 Likes
RPG maker is only for JRPG fans
Not for “any goal”. Nothing is best for “any goal”. If your goal requires something that UE4 has out of the box but not Unity (realtime reflections, GPU particles, landscape, huge levels, cutscene editor, …), the opposite is true for sure.
For some of them you can just lower your goal a little and it works with Unity. For others no chance. Use the right tool for the job. That can be Unity for some but surely not for all.
2 Likes
It is not enough that Unreal has those features, you would have to do a complete project with those “out of the box” features. The rest of the project would probably be probably easier with Unity, and of course with Unity 5 down the corner I think that will fix the gap. Also, remember every rule has exceptions of course , so for some things you may be right, but as a general rule, I think Unity will be the tool for the job.
The minor aspects of the project by themselves don’t justify Unity if it means a lot of additional effort getting the major aspects, such as huge worlds, to function.
Unity 5 may do the job when it ships, but the competition can do it now.
I’m not following here, UE4 has persona similar to mecanim it has a UI system called UMG. On top of that you don’t have to code shaders because you have a material editor, it has navmesh etc. It already covers what Unity has and then goes on to have additional features explained a fair few times.
I’m not sure what part of Unity is “easier” as such, coding shaders is harder. Building an updated terrain system / cinematics tool / post effects / world and tile composition / dynamic sky system / GPU cascade particle system / Apex / automatic layer streaming / point of origin. Would be much more difficult to do. You could easily waste a year of your game time just doing that!. Which if you have staff really starts to sting in the cost arena.
I wouldn’t say UE4 is more difficult to use and in some places I think it’s easier, sure it’s a culture shock because you do things “their way” especially if you spent a long time with Unity. I suppose I prefer C# and I always will do…
The only bad thing I can say about it is it’s a bit slow when compiling / compressing / running lightmass and it’s a bit buggy in areas. Oh and there is some impressive WIP’s going on, makes you feel a little inadequate when you’re new to UE.
3 Likes
For the hobbyist like me the answer is simple enough… and it’s not Unity. Sorry. But this has been debated so much, there’s really nothing new to say that doesn’t just lead to another round of “he said” and “she said”. We all have to chose what suits us.
For me, it is that with UE4 the hobbyist gets everything and the kitchen sink, including a fridge an over and a full set of cutlery and plates and glasses. No more tinkering around the limitations of Unity Free when you reach them. No need to buy extra to outfit the utilitarian game kitchen after a little while. It’s all in there in UE4.
What limits is the hobbyists ability and talent. And there’s a question to answer if the hobbyist will ever progress to hit the limitations of Unity Free, of course. That’s a valid question, but if the hobbyist DOES then… Another valid question is whether you get too much, and make no progress BECAUSE of the bewildering set of options.
Though, once the hobbyist makes enough progress to start to think of throwing him- or herself into making it a job, then there are a lot of other questions to answer, and there it comes down to what’s most suitable for the particular project.
But Unity has already given the answer how things go from here, so it’s pointless to argue.
1 Like
I wonder what’s the purpose of this thread, since the moderators are deleting threads which seems which shows other engines in better light.
Consolidation of the discussions. In theory at least.
I hope the moderators have finally realized that one such thread is needed, otherwise many other threads will just drift to be about UE4. Many of the now locked UE4 threads have been very popular, people just want to talk about it.
1 Like
Favorite for 2D and small games: Unity
Favorite for 3D and big games: UE4
Why I like Unity: C#, the new UI looks sweet. Playtesting is super fast.
Why I like UE4: Blueprints, open source. (And I say that not because I participate,I obviously don’t know C++, it’s because UE4 will develop faster than Unity…what is it, 200 Unity soldiers vs a legion of Epic’s community enthusiasts?)
Why I don’t like Unity: Too much of the functionality is behind the asset store. You can bet UE4 will have the same functionality built in in probably a year. Uber limited asset generation, I mean come on, cube cylinder and quad? not even a triangle or a cone mesh?
Why I don’t like UE4: Fat specs and C++. Also, testing is shit.
What can Unity do to approach the monolithic awesomeness of your chosen game engine?
The new UI is a step in the right direction. Some asset generation would be nice. I’m not asking for 3DSMax in Unity but it would be nice to be able to re-position a few vertices or remove a few poligons.
Also I don’t see another way but to follow Epic’s AND Crytec’s lead and do something about the pricing, at least giving us a choice: " Do you want to pay per month or do you wanna offload 5k and be done with it?" sounds way better than “Give me lots of money in one go”.
Last but not least, I don’t know how Unity will keep up with UE4 rapid growth (I mean the thing is catching up fast, the community is even writing a C# wrapper atm) and sadly I don’t have a solution for that. It’s just that things tend to be better when the general public can contribute and shape the software and I can’t see how this can be beaten.
Maybe I am overestimating the size of the UE4’s community, but the engines potential remains very much above Unity at the moment. I could be wrong, it’s possible that the devs here can compete with UE nonetheless, but look at other software that gave access to the public.
Skyrim almost turned into it’s own engine, there was even 1 modder that made an expansion all by himself, and was later hired by Bungie.
Minecraft has so many mods that some of them completely change the game, there’s FPS mods WW2 mods whatever you want mods.
And let’s not mention StarCraft 2, where people made FPS’s RPG’s and even an MMO (that was later banned by blizz).
There are other examples, but I think it’s wise not to ignore the success of these games. Sure you can say “But Unity isn’t a game” and I’m gonna say “Wrong, they are the same, but one is more fun.”. Unity is like Minecraft, where minecraft is a game about making things, Unity is a game about making games. And I suppose I could further the analogy and say that Skyrim is like UE4, with the little exception that the engine doesn’t have the limits of the the game.
1 Like