I am not fully sure on how game development works, i am a programmer looking to make my dream game so i am looking at my options for a already built system so i don’t have to code my own engine. I have noticed that most of the 3D games that people make using Unity seem to have last generation graphics (Xbox 360, PS3, Ect.) is this just from the people who make them or is this the best Unity can do at this time? I know that Unreal Engine 4 and CryEngine have amazing graphics in almost all of the games made in them, but i don’t want to have to pay for it, my game is a indie project and will be free, maybe even open-source.
I also would like to know if Unity will support DirectX 12 and AMD Mantle, or if it already does…
You’re comparing Unreal Engine 4, which is a much newer engine, to Unity 4 which is due for replacement soon. Better to research into the capabilities of Unity 5.
Engine features alone will not make a low quality game into a high quality game. You need to have the necessary quality in your assets as well. Those amazing graphics you speak of were made by teams with AAA budgets. Something you as an indie will not have.
The short answer is that UE4 does make better graphics easier than Unity 4.x does. I’ve never seen a single UE4 demo that couldn’t be done in Unity 4, but UE4 makes those kinds of graphics easier.
As mentioned, Unity 5 has a pretty huge rendering update coming down the pipeline, and once that happens, I believe the two will be on equal footing in that field. At that point, Unity’s other strengths (better asset pipeline, better multiplatform support, far better asset store & available plugins, etc) will put it as the definite frontrunner in this race.
You’ve been on this forum for almost 2 years and you are asking questions as if you’ve never used unity.
Let’s be honest, it’s unlikely that you will ever make anything.
Even though Unity tends to be bashed due to its out of the box state, Unity is actually pretty flexible when it comes to graphics. Sure, it can never be as flexible as your own engine with source code access, but using Unity as a solid foundation to build on you can produce some pretty spectacular results. And it lets you avoid a lot of the nightmares associated with starting from scratch.
It’s amazing to me that I haven’t been around these forums very long and yet a post talking about Unity3D and Unreal Engine seems to appear I swear it seems at least weekly.
And I know I brought this up before but I still don’t understand the tremendous emphasis on the graphics side. The actual game is the key. And the fact is if a person made a game that looked as good as the best PS3 and 360 games that is certainly more than enough on the “looks” side.
Now I can understand if the point is on performance. But I have seen many games in Unity3D that have awesome graphics and show no issues with performance. I am sure that is often the result of a lot of hard work optimizing but yeah anyway I think just focus on the game. Make the game so damn awesome it doesn’t matter if the graphics are in 2-bit monochrome.
Unity’s graphic limitations aren’t a big deal until you have a larger production team. From your post, it sounds like you’re working alone. Unity will suit your graphical needs just fine.
UE4 have more advanced particles and effects , and many advanced full screen and graphics scene features Unity don’t have , not planned in UE5 or not seen until now like Distance field ambient occlusion for example or static shadowing for translucency not announced in UE5 until today
But even with the best 3D engine delivering AAA quality , i doubt you can make some outstanding game if you can’t make outstanding level and characters quality graphics.
I would encourage you to use Unity instead of UE4 to learn game making and start a small project , it will be more easy to learn game making as Unity framework and programming is easy to take.
If that is what it is all about… trying to do a tech demo and show off all of the cool lighting effects and so forth that does make sense. I used to really enjoy the work in the demo scene. But I had the impression these were people actually making games. Yet the posts are always talking about graphics and how Unity3D limits them compared to Unreal Engine.
Sometimes I just wonder how many are actually making games that have the quality of Xbox 360 and PS3. There are plenty of awesome looking games on both systems. Why anyone thinks they need more than that for any game I do not understand. But that is just my view from a game player perspective. I don’t really think its the players’ expectations it is just the developers expectations.
why do most ppl fixate on graphical features when they should worry about aesthetics, which are what make a scene/level/world look “good”?!
Try n make a graphically amazing game for mobiles that has to support SM2.0; trust me after that you won’t be complaining about Unities “hurdles” but actually find them fun to work around in creative ways.
I actually really liked Crysis, not just for its graphics but because I enjoyed it as a game The first game that is, I have not played the sequels.
On topic, basically, if you have the knowledge required to make your own game engine, you have the knowledge required to make Unity look how ever you want it to. I finished this tech demo today https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/233290703/Alpha02Demo.html(requires DX11 to run).
As long as what you want to do does not include shader texture arrays, or you can work around that limit using an atlas, you’re set.
Oh yeah. I absolutely agree and that is the angle I am always coming from. Why put so much emphasis and thought on graphics flash when the point is to make something that is fun to play. There are many examples of excellent games that have simple, extremely simple, graphics and tech requirements. As a game player I care far more about how the game plays than I do about the presentation. And from a designer / developer perspective I find it much more impressive to see a game that is engaging that doesn’t require high tech to pull it all off. If you’re good at game design & development than you should be able to make an engaging very enjoyable game on the NES instead of needing a super computer. Just my view.
Anyway, short answer is every engine is based on a DX11 / OpenGL renderer. If said API is at the correct version and features available, it doesn’t really matter what you use.
I just prefer it when most of it’s done for me so I can focus on making a game, not writing a renderer. I wish I had the time / money to throw endless streams of cash at internal engine developers to throw out the latest graphical “shinies”.
On the other hand, you might as well kiss goodbye to a larger audience. Because most peoples PC’s aren’t bleeding edge. Current consoles are already a fair few years behind top spec PC’s…
Sexy graphics shots are for publications and media, in which you could do much better looking stuff in 3DSmax and a render farm.
The first game that is, I have not played the sequels.