Unity Visual Scripting 2017?

First off i wanna say that i'm happy that Unity is working on own visual scripting and cant wait to see the results.
After i heard about this on Unity GDC 2017:


i go and check "Roadmap" where i find Visual Scripting waaaay down at the very bottom in the "Research" part of the "Roadmap"....Ok so i give this at least 2 years before this go live (if not more) based on the position where it lie on the roadmap. But then i see the Unity site home page where i read:

"Unity 2017
The next generation is coming. New features across graphics, performance, efficiency and platforms, plus tools for a new audience: artists and designers. Meet Unity 2017.

So there is chance for this in 2017??

1 Like

I wouldn't hold my breath... perhaps in version 2019 it will be great. Until then.. just learn to code, if I can do it.. anyone can.


Or just use Playmaker:


Which comes free with Unity Plus, at least for awhile:



Hope visual scripting doesn't come with it's fair share of problems.

1 Like

Not if you are a current subscriber. They do offer a discounted price of $75 for the whole pack. I suppose that is good if you really want all three.

The roadmap is out of date and I wouldnt assume much from it until it includes at least one version of Unity 2017. Stuff they have announced about what will be in Unity 2017 certainly trumps the roadmap in its current state.

I think the "Visual scripting" item has already been under the research section for almost 2 years, or at least from the day they made the public roadmap page :P


If it's anything like Blueprints for Unreal, then you'll loose all the performance of C#.... I've researched Blueprints an such and they say if a person makes an entire game with nothing but Visual Coding, it makes the C++ as slow if not more than C#.... So what would that make Visual C# in comparison in terms of speed? I'm sure you can still make pretty nifty things, but I can't really see any serious AAA game using nothing but Visual Scripting, i could see it only being useful for small repetitive things, but not every single thing.

1 Like

Does speed really matter in terms of visual scripting? I mean as long as its not magnitudes slower, the point of visual scripting is more to enable people who cant script traditionally, I think a speed tradeoff is fine in this situation. If performance was the only thing that mattered, you might as well make the argument for switching to Unreal and C++ over Unity.
@OP Don't hold your breath. By new tools for artists in 2017, they're probably talking about the iterative lightmapper, or cinematic tool, both of which have been shown off in various forms for a while now. Visual scripting on the other hand has never been demoed in any way or form. They talked up making things better for artists in that video, and then spent 5 or 10mins on another programmer feature(not that I'm not excited for the possibilities of scriptable renderloops, but as an artist primarily it was irksome).

1 Like

Well I only mentioned that because C# is quite powerful now compared to how it used to be, and in some cases can be faster than C++ if a C++ coder don't know how to code properly.... However, I've noticed with my game, I have 80 AI Spaceships and the FPS went from 60+ to like 49. The profiler says it's coming directly from the script that controls the AI Spaceships, so imagine that in Visual coding, it would probably be near 25/30 FPS because of the Milliseconds per frame time.

I mean I have nothing purely against Visual Coding, I mean too each their own, I just hope they never make it forced or I will have to change engines. I just dislike Visual Coding only because it's a tool that you can get comfortable with, and in doing so when it comes to a really trivial problem that the Visual Coding just can not do - then your lost and stuck because you never learned to code.

While I have zero affiliation with Unity, I'm pretty confident in saying they will never in their existence "force" visual scripting on its users over coding. That would be product suicide.


I learn how to code and even already learned a lot but this not disable me from curiosity how Unity execute visual scripting in their way. I hope this will not be copy-pasta from Playmaker and not because i dont like it, i'm simply curious about how Unity execute this feature.

1 Like

[quote=“N1warhead_1”, post:9, topic: 659025]
If it’s anything like Blueprints for Unreal, then you’ll loose all the performance of C#… I’ve researched Blueprints an such and they say if a person makes an entire game with nothing but Visual Coding, it makes the C++ as slow if not more than C#… So what would that make Visual C# in comparison in terms of speed? I’m sure you can still make pretty nifty things, but I can’t really see any serious AAA game using nothing but Visual Scripting, i could see it only being useful for small repetitive things, but not every single thing.

Blueprint just hides a C++ code generator. I’ve read it’s 20% slower on average than handwritten equivalent code. I would imagine Unity also plans to go the codegen route, and I would guess they’d choose C++ for the same reason they’re investing so much blood, sweat and tears on IL2CPP.

It’s also worth noting that anyone fantasizing that visual programming in Unity will have feature-parity with real programming is likely in for serious disappointment. Get on Google and take a long hard look at actual visual programming “languages” in the real world. There are actually two I’m aware of that can output C# … Microsoft’s own VPL that was part of the now-dead Microsoft Robotics platform, and DRAKON, pretty much a glorified flowcharting program used by ROSCOSMOS. VPL was little more than a state-machine graphing tool, and DRAKON doesn’t have normal, largely mandatory programming concepts that would make it useful for complex interactivity (they’re more along the lines of single-function console programs). If visual programming is such an obvious, valuable feature, why aren’t there a huge variety of examples to choose from?

Ironically (given it’s association with game dev), 3DS Max’s MCG is probably the one visual programming language I’m aware of that approaches the flexibility of real programming in a visual way. And guess what? The resulting programs look pretty complicated.

As Euclid said of geometry, there is no royal road…



I would hope before they rush the visual scripting feature, they will speed up their work on the terrain system which has been promised since at least 2014, if not 2013, and has been in the Research part of the roadmap for just as long.

IMO an updated and modernized Terrain system is way more important than a visual scripting tool when you already have a) one of the best and most comfortable C# APIs available, and b) can choose from a ton of thirdparty visual scripting tools on the asset store for fair prices.
Even before we take into account that other stuff in the research category is just as highly anticipated by other people, and stuck in this development limbo for way, way, WAY longer than this new kid that is visual scripting.

Update us on the current status of the terrain system rework already, Unity!

i would have never thought Epic would do that... but then they went and made Blueprint the de fact standard for UE4 development, and wrote all documentation for it, leaving C++ documentation for later (and never got around to do it).

So even if Unity does not intend to force their visual-scripting-thing on anybody... if they are not ready to DOUBLE their documentation effort and write the same documentation for C#/Unityscript AND visual scripting, and vote for documenting visual scripting over the programming languages, they are in fact forcing visual scripting on people, especially the newbies.


That's the part that always kills me about the Visual Programming Debate -- there are so many other far more important problems to solve, and limited resources available.

Hell, Unity isn't even the right place for a visual programming feature. Unity is a scene editor, not an IDE. It would make more sense as a Visual Studio extension.

Maybe we programmers should start ganging up on Unity, demanding that it's imperative that they turn the editor into a dumbed-down Maya so we can design models for our games without having to learn any of that pesky art stuff. Unity's time and money is a limited resource, we might as well push for our interests, right? :P

1 Like

You DO realise that these features are helmed by like... entirely different teams, right?


You DO realize they're all paid by the same company, right?



You do realise that Unity is loaded as balls, right?

I wonder how many people gunning for visual coding have even tried playmaker or something, to see if it's even going to be any more approachable than written code? If so, what were the things you did/didn't like about the visual coding tool you've tried, and how far did you get making any sort of game with it?

Right now, I could be wrong, but I just see people basically looking at visual coding with little understanding of where the real difference lies. Put it like this, if you can't draw a flowchart on a piece of paper (or ten) to describe all of the class declarations, variable assignments, calculations, information passing and handling and so forth in your game, visual coding is not going to be any more easier.

I'll say what I said before - I think Unity should provide an empty blueprint system and let the asset store figure out exactly how micro or macro the interface should be. My guess is that a very macro blueprint produced by a good traditional programmer is going to end up being worth a lot more to non-coders than the ability to spawn something that has more right to the term 'spaghetti code' than any written code could claim.

1 Like