Example of why i will stop using Unity

CullingGroup

What a great class! you pass to it some spheres, a camera, and it will tell you async what is visible and what not.

Then you want to play with some stuff, so a different camera to the main one is culling some unvisible items, depending on the orientation of this extra camera and some parameters.

Oh!, you setup everything, you think that CullingGroup will work with the FOV of the camera, not caring about if it's enabled or not (for what then you can set CullingGroup enabled to false?) But it will not work.
If you keep it activated, it will update tons of useless stuff even if it set to CameraClearFlags.Nothing; cullingMask = 0. Actually is taking 40% of time of the main camera, as seems procesing the bounding boxes of skinned rendered meshes (that is 30% of total, it is doing more stuff than that). cullingMask= 0, i repeat, cullingMask=0
If you call Render after a wait of end of frame inside a coroutine. It will have same problem.


So,

yet another thing you can't really use from Unity.

yet another thing did me waste time.

yet another thread nobody will care about.

yet another user will stop paying for this engine.

submit a report "issue", for what, so it is not answered neither? Even if they know the answer, they don't make it public, even if they know a workaround, they try to show like everything works smooth and great. I had this experience before, i had to ask other user reported the same thing if he got an answer, and surprise, he got it.

 

This sounds like venting more than asking for help. Everyone in this part of the forums are here to help each other learn and enjoy Unity, so this seems more like a topic for the General Discussion forums if you absolutely must.

 

Yeah I'll move it to general discussion, perhaps the problem can yet be resolved.

 

It's pretty simple, if Unity cannot solve your problem and there's no other workaround/solution, then stop using Unity and go look elsewhere.
If something is blocking your ideas/projects to become a reality, go find solutions somewhere else instead of wasting your time.
I don't mean to be harsh, it's a friendly advice and that's what I would personally do.

 

Long time, long time.

If such an insignificant thing was enough to drive you away, I don't think you ever paid for this engine tbqh.

Do you think it may have been because he actually reported it and didn't waste time writing a forum rant?

 

As a paid customer, I understand your pain. Unity support are human too, it takes time for them to following your case.

In the meantime, try fallback to earlier version. They are not totally legacy, e.g. the non-scene based lightmap from Beast still cool today.

If you want help, at least provide your Unity version, and issue id for people to vote up.

 

This.

The other side of the coin is to remember that there are normally no perfectly suitable options. You will always be choosing between the least objectionable options. Are Unity's problems worse then the competitors for your project?

 

And if there's really no other solutions outside Unity, then redesign ideas around software/hardware limitations.

 

Yeah I mean, personally, I think Unity solves more problems than the bits it causes pain for, so that's why I use it. I also love the staff, at least the ones that don't use capitals on me. They're really the most mean staff in the world. Sometimes they even do things like use italics on me! Oh the feels.

It does look like the OP has moved on so I guess for him, this was a feature that totally outweighed any benefits like ECS, Jobs, 2018.2 features I'm not allowed to mention and loads of other brilliant things.

RE: Culling Groups
I think culling groups are really quite useful things. They have distance bands, work with umbra etc... You can imagine populating an area then when you go out of sight/out of band all your instanced stuff can be swapped out or merged for a combined mesh. It's really useful, fully threaded and fast. I had hoped the OP might find a reason why it wasn't working for him.

If OP reads this at all, you should probably file a bug report or maybe make a thread in scripting to gain assistance with this feature.

 

Should be the most patient staff in the world
If every user submit issue with well format, less overhead for staff, would be best for the both side.

 

Like most class 2 trolls, who don't have the ability to learn to use unity and work out issues logically, a rant, queue the orchestral mighty style leaving music, is all they are reduced to as it is easier to blame others rather than themselves.

[edit]

Culling Groups have ruined this guys life. lol

 

If you're having a problem then make a thread asking for help. Plenty of people here can and will help.

But no one cares if you personally decide to stop using Unity. You don't need to dramatically announce your exit to the room as if making a ruckus would do anyone any good. This isn't a middle-school relationship.

 

I think I never managed to grow into that behaviour, let alone out of it. Seems so self defeating. Plus the computer was my friend and I would never leave it. At least not until the next one.

 

I looked that the OP's list of forum posts (5 as of today), and it looks like the OP was trying to build some kind of huge world game. The OP has mentioned various potential ways of building a huge world, and the OP was running into weird edge cases in those efforts.

In addition to this thread, here are more links:
https://forum.unity.com/threads/infinite-huge-world.477135/
https://forum.unity.com/search/9150260/

I definitely love Unity, but I understand how frustrating any engine can be when you try to push the limits. If somebody wants to build a small mobile game with Unity, it is relatively easy. Massive world games and/or games with many objects in a scene can require a lot of effort.

For my space game, I wanted to deliver thousands of simultaneous laser blasts flying around, and it took months of testing and experimenting before I came up with the best way to do that using Unity. Every possible solution requires odd ball compromises when you try to push an engine to the limit. In my case, I was able to come up with a very high performance solution to meet the needs I had for my game, but it sounds like the OP was not as fortunate. And the solution I came up with for my game would not universally solve the problem for all games.

In my case, the entire game is out in space, so I did not have to deal with streaming chunks of the terrain and dealing with lighting and shadow issues posed by such as solution. If the OP was trying to build an infinite world with a realistic terrain, then rage quitting was probably a good choice by the OP. I am not aware of anybody really nailing a solution like that with Unity at this time.

Rather than rage quitting, it would have been more helpful if the OP had created a very detailed thread about what the OP was trying to accomplish using Unity along with details about everything that had worked and not worked. There is still a lot of room for improvement in Unity for handling massive worlds, and the community would have benefited from a detailed discussion.

 

There is World Streamer plugin, it has a learning curve and you must follow some conventions but you got an open world streaming system with floating point support.
Until Unity would bring open world editing and streaming, or until you are already experienced with open world tech, this is the best solution.

 

Game development is about creative problem solving, and making interesting problems to solve. Sometimes, the only solution to a problem requires compromise or a workaround. Rage quitting and blaming others for your own inability to solve a problem is not a good attribute for a game developer.

 

Interesting that the OP would make this rant instead of first asking for some help with this feature. It sounds like the OP dove into this feature without fully understanding how it works, and without testing it put a bunch of work in, and then was surprised that it didn't meet his expectations.

Testing how features work and how they perform takes time. When you need to maximize performance you're going to spend a lot of time trying different things. If you consider all that a waste, then you're not going to do well with a project that is pushing the limits. It is rare the first thing you try is the best answer. More conservative projects are inherently more forgiving.

 

No. I've tried multiple searches with the information provided and nothing is coming up.