Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

I fixed Unity's home page :P

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by mQe, Jul 5, 2017.

  1. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57

    I love Unity but I couldn't help it when I saw this :D
     
    Alverik likes this.
  2. LaneFox

    LaneFox

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Posts:
    7,462
    Deterministic physics is literally the only thing missing from that list and is not considered standard.
     
  3. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    I guess they should add "... If you're willing to pay for plugins." then :p
     
  4. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    It can completely destroy destroy client side movement predictions, anything to do with physics driven creatures, etc. So this is literally a show stopper for some projects. I've also seen a whole bunch of other people complaining about it so that's why i threw it in there ;)
     
  5. DroidifyDevs

    DroidifyDevs

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Posts:
    1,724
    I find the most limiting aspect of Unity is its physics. It's so hard to make simple things such as a user-generated 2D rope. Also, isn't Unity multiplayer server/client networking?
     
  6. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    For me it's also the physics and the fact that you have to buy plugins to complete the editor which always has the risk of being abandoned or outmatched by a new plugin.
    As far as I know forge networking is the way to go if you want proper server/client networking without any limitations... And even that was a bit iffy when I used it a year ago, hopefully it's better now.

    Anyways didn't mean for it to be a hate thread, there's a lot of stuff about Unity that I think is excellent :)
     
    Alverik likes this.
  7. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    I'm pretty sure the most important thing by far missing from Unity is a 3d modeler, not any of the more obscure things in your edit.
     
  8. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    Obscure? I think you'll find that at least material editors exist in all the major engines and I know at least 3 of the major ones have a proper particle editor too. While none of them have a 3D modeler. There is a 3D modeler plugin for Unity btw, can't remember what it's called but it seemed pretty nice.

    If you don't come from a AAA background and you're more into small indie games though then I can better understand your reasoning :)
     
    Alverik likes this.
  9. djweinbaum

    djweinbaum

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Posts:
    533
    Is a user-generated rope with physics really a simple thing in games? Is there some other commercial engine that makes this easy?
     
    Martin_H likes this.
  10. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
  11. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    You can't actually say all the major engines. By whatever standard you measure it, Unity is a major engine. By some standards, Unity is the major engine.
     
    theANMATOR2b and Ryiah like this.
  12. alexanderameye

    alexanderameye

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,383
    Why would you include a 3D modeler? A pretty basic modeler for quick level prototyping, sure, but we have great 3D modelling software already and it's just Unity's job to make the exporting/importing pipeline as easy as possible.
     
    theANMATOR2b likes this.
  13. Rodolfo-Rubens

    Rodolfo-Rubens

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    1,197
    If they add a 3d modeller they would need to add a skinning + rigging system, joint creation tools, uv unwrapping tools, mesh boolean tools, texture painting tools, etc, etc, that would bloat too much the engine, I think this is better suited for a separated program.

    Now for a material editor.....
     
    theANMATOR2b, mQe and alexanderameye like this.
  14. djweinbaum

    djweinbaum

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Posts:
    533
    You can make ropes in the editor, which is more than unity has built-in, but now we also need to make sure ropes can be generated at run-time by the user. My point was I really don't think the example given was a "simple" thing. It seems like more of a garry's mod type specific feature.
     
    Schneider21 and Ryiah like this.
  15. alexanderameye

    alexanderameye

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,383
    What about things like a built in day/night cycle system, a weather system, decals,... those are things that most games need but should Unity really put effort into making such things? I think it's a wonderful thing that those 'gaps' get filled by the asset store's editor extensions.
     
  16. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    I agree wholeheartedly.

    However, the statement the OP "corrected," "Everything you need to succeed in games," is most wrong (by far) in its omission of a 3d modeler. Not a physics system. Or material editor.
     
    Ryiah, Kiwasi and Rodolfo-Rubens like this.
  17. neginfinity

    neginfinity

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Posts:
    13,554
    I think a member of the staff previously mentioned particle system editor. There's apparently a button on the particle system component to open it.

    See:
    https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/class-ParticleSystem.html
     
  18. Rodolfo-Rubens

    Rodolfo-Rubens

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    1,197
    ah, I got it now! haha, true, true. In this case we would also need audio tools, you can't create audio effects or music with what unity provides.

    But I think we would be taking the headline too literally..
     
    mQe likes this.
  19. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    "You can't actually say all the major engines. By whatever standard you measure it, Unity is a major engine. By some standards, Unity is the major engine."

    I never said Unity isn't a major engine? I think saying any engine is THE engine is maybe not the best idea? They all have their strengths and weakness, it's all about finding the right engine for your project.
     
  20. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    Lets add audio to that. While some games get away without 3D models by using 2D sprites, I know of very few games that don't use sound.
     
    Alverik and EternalAmbiguity like this.
  21. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    The worst thing is that there IS a day/night system that can be implemented in like 5 minutes of coding, it just requires you to use the half-assed and completely pointless procedural skybox.
     
    Ryiah and mQe like this.
  22. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    "I think a member of the staff previously mentioned particle system editor. There's apparently a button on the particle system component to open it."

    Good one :p I guess if that counts as an editor, then unity does have a material editor.. As in there's materials you can edit. What I obviously meant was a visual editor, like cascade... Which is pretty damn good. But again there's Unity plugins for that.
     
  23. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    Actually you did. You said all major engines have a material editor. Then you said Unity does not have a material editor. If both of these statements are true, then Unity cannot be a major engine.

    It would have been better to say 'other major engines have a material editor'.

    Why not? Its certainly accurate to say Unity is the major engine for mobile games. At a stretch one could say that mobile games are the major market segment (a lot of this depends on how you define market segments). So Unity could easily be the major engine. You will also likely to come to the same conclusion if you look at revenue share, or number of developers, or a bunch of other metrics. (Of course I've picked stats to show my point. You can easily choose a completely different set of metrics to disprove the claim.)

    I'm normally not this pedantic. But you did start off this conversation with a fairly pedantic stance on what basically amounts to marketing puffery. Plenty of developers have succeeded in games with Unity. Which clearly indicates that there is substance to the marketing claim.
     
  24. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    @Kiwasi:
    Oh wow okay, well in that case you are completely correct. I was/am careless with my choice of words I guess :p
    And such a programmer way of thinking btw, well thought out reply, I appreciate that ;)

    I don't think any of the things i mentioned is pedantic, they have been major issues in the projects I have worked on. So to me those were pretty severe problems and some of them were project killers directly. But I guess it all depends on what stuff you work on. I can only judge it from the projects and the environment I come from, and judging from that, these things are missing in a pretty major way.

    I just felt that it was a bit of a silly statement to have on their website when it clearly doesn't cover all games unless you are willing to spend the cash... And even then you can always think of something that Unity won't be able to do even with plugins. No engine is gonna cover all games right out of the box regardless of whether it is AAA or mobile. "succeed in games" - that covers all games, which was the only part I was trying to make fun of :p

    But then again it was only meant as a S***ty joke, it was not meant as hate, otherwise I wouldn't have used Unity nearly every day for the past 5 years ;)
    Something I feel the need to point out since people seem to reply way too seriously :p
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2017
  25. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    A day/night system can be implemented in 5 minutes. A good one can take a lot longer ;)
     
  26. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    You know times have changed when a joke doesn't include the dark UI. :p
     
  27. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    I am absolutely certain I have seen a plugin where you could model and unwrap models that looked pretty complete, if only I could remember what it was called. I prefer maya/zbrush for modeling myself, but I guess it would save time switching from maya and unity if you could make it directly in Unity.
     
  28. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    It's in the etc. part i swear!
     
    frosted and Kiwasi like this.
  29. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    Yeah, programmer thinking doesn't always lend itself to getting jokes first time around. Especially on the internet.

    So in the spirit of the OP, I do think the scripting reference deserves the same treatment every time it refers to JavaScript.
     
    frosted and mQe like this.
  30. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    People still use JavaScript?
     
  31. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    No.

    But occasionally beginners use 'that language that is nothing like JavaScript but is called JavaScript by marketing because they don't think programmers will be smart enough to notice the difference'.
     
    frosted and EternalAmbiguity like this.
  32. Rodolfo-Rubens

    Rodolfo-Rubens

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    1,197
    I think you're talking about pro builder, it's a very nice plugin. Now someone is doing something a bit like substance painter, Surforge. Lol, there's a whole world inside of Unity... and I'm suprised there's no audio plugins to create sound effects and music inside of unity, I think it's a matter of time.

    So after all, even though these tools are not made by UT, I think it makes sense to say that we have everything we need to succeed then.
     
  33. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    Note the word before "obscure."

    I suspect any AAA studio, as well as any indie, deems having actual 3d models as more important than the more specialized tools you mention.

    I'm not saying they aren't used. I'm saying a 3d modeler is used moreso.
     
  34. FMark92

    FMark92

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Posts:
    1,243
    If you can't succeed without those, it's kind of on you. :D
     
  35. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    Yeah I guess missing features that kill certain projects is on me, you're right :p I mean who really makes online multiplayers in 2017? Also read the rest of the thread and you'll see it was a light hearted S***ty joke :p
     
  36. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    I literally cannot think of one AAA studio that has a modeler inside their engine and doesn't have a visual material editor. Not even the in-house AAA engines where I've worked. So I guess we have two very different definitions of AAA. Or do you mean bsp brushes? Because that's not really modeling in the most commonly used sense :S
     
    theANMATOR2b likes this.
  37. FMark92

    FMark92

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Posts:
    1,243
    You could also read the rest of my post and notice the grin emoticon, whuch is what I used to indicate my sarcasm. But I guess that's too much to ask :p
     
  38. mQe

    mQe

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Posts:
    57
    That is too much to ask! How DARE you!
     
  39. Balthamet

    Balthamet

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2014
    Posts:
    56
    It wouldn't bloat the engine. If you want to call it bloat, it would bloat the editor. Creation tools should no effect on the engine performance.
     
    ShilohGames and Rodolfo-Rubens like this.
  40. DroidifyDevs

    DroidifyDevs

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Posts:
    1,724
    It's simple. There's already plenty of software to make 3D models (Blender, Maya, Sketchup, even Microsoft's Paint3D). Why does Unity need to make a worse copy of something that thousands of developers already know how to use? Unity's focus should be the IMPORTING process of 3D models and animations. I use Unity because it's an engine that can make software (usually games, but I've used it for other applications (ahem, cheating on physics quiz questions)). Unity does not need to be a game engine + 3D modeling software + Photoshop replacement + music maker + AI-assisted meme maker + whatever other non-engine related crap you want included. Just learn software that works for you to make models, animations and music, then import that into Unity.

    Simply put, I don't think Unity needs to waste time creating worse copies of software that already exists just so they have a right to brag "Look, we have a worse built-in version of something you already had!". What Unity needs to do is to improve existing features (such as the physics engine) and add features that aren't replacements for existing software, but rather additions that help the game development process.
     
  41. Rodolfo-Rubens

    Rodolfo-Rubens

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    1,197
    Yes, I meant the editor, not the engine. Sorry. But still, it could be optional like the build platforms in the editor installer.
     
  42. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    That said, an LOD creation tool in-editor would be pretty keen, even if there are tools that do that outside of the editor.
     
  43. rrahim

    rrahim

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Posts:
    206
    I find it funny that developers who are serious and focused on their projects never even bother to complain about the features missing from a free engine....
     
  44. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    Unity has a few million registered developers but only a small percentage bother with the forums.

    Regardless of how many people are complaining though the engine isn't free for everyone.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2017
  45. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    What a ridiculous strawman.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  46. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    Better integrations with DCC's and guidance from large engine developers would be a massive time saver, I've had so many issues with export pipelines over the years (plus a slurry of other issues) and every engine expects you to do something X way. Especially UE / LY / CE, if you've ever used the bridge between Maya LT and Stingray it's a beautiful thing, I didn't even comprehend how much time it saves.. Plus it already has things like a material editor inside it..

    Also to say these DCC's are what we specifically use for games, turning them into an actual level building solution (as opposed to an ad hoc single mesh pusher) of any worth is quite the task. Houdini has to be the closest to an actual "game" solution. Yes massive games over many years have been made the old fashioned way (well actually most of them were custom builds of Max / Maya in which AAA developers got discounts for re-selling tech back to them, AD then slowly leak the features back into the DCC)..

    Even then many complain (even AAA) that the workflow pipeline is slow, seen platitudes of "endorsements" saying procedural / well integrated software (like Houdini) is the way to go.. But for us mere mortal dev's even Houdini has still isn't quite there yet as a complete solution. So I bet engine developers in some ways could do it better, although they already have their hands full.. It would be better to work together and get some cohesion in the industry.

    I'm pretty sure creating a live link bridge is far easier to create than maintaining a suite of tools (like a material editor) etc. Although Autodesk etc. want to push their own engine, so I'm not sure there's much chance of it happening. Which is a massive shame because I love Maya, it is the Unity of DCC's.. I watched a 10 hour video on somebody rigging a foot in Modo, with HumanIK I'd of rigged three characters by the time I'd watched the vid.. Baking things like NM's, no camera based dumbassery / selected one object / select another / twiddle some options / click bake and done.. Blendshapes / skinning (select one object, select another and transfer morph / bind) I mean the list goes on and it's as simple as it gets.

    On top of that with live link there's no guessing, WYISWYG.. Engines are so simple to use and so powerful at this point I think it's the art pipeline which needs some attention, but I agree I'm sure there are better ways than internal integration.. Although the CryDesigner tools are pretty damn good TBH..
     
    theANMATOR2b likes this.
  47. rrahim

    rrahim

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Posts:
    206
    For the people that it isn't free for, they are ready to spend the money on the asset store where it is required. If they haven't done the research (by using the free full featured version) to know that it can't suit their needs, why pay?
    I really don't know where people get the notion that game development is an easy turn key type thing.
    It takes research and development specifically in the things you need to achieve for YOUR project.

    Unity rightfully cannot cater to every project by itself but has provided many ways to extend for your specific needs (especially through the asset store).

    What I don't get is that devs continuously complain about unity not having something another engine has. Those engines are not aiming to do the same thing unity is doing, therefore if that other engine has something you want, weigh both options before committing and then choose one.
     
  48. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Unity should be investing in content creation tools with these criteria:

    - engine features depend on much more extra data (partitioning / terrain)
    - a feature will make the engine run better (lod generation etc)
    - a feature will make visuals better or easier (de-lighting tools, flipbook stuff etc)

    These are about smoothing the process or bringing some content creation closer to the engine where it makes sense. It doesn't make sense to do zbrush in unity. It doesn't make sense to add blender to unity.

    For modelling, it does make sense to have a bunch of prototyping tools you can quickly block out with... but that is not the same as a full major package with all the bugs that come with it :)

    Just my 2p.
     
  49. neginfinity

    neginfinity

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Posts:
    13,554
    Complaining does nothing useful - it is a waste of time.

    You got what you got in the engine right now. You have a project that needs to be completed yesterday.
    Complaining will either result in nothing happening, or in heated discussion, or in the feature you want being implemented 7 years from now. None of the outcomes will result in feature being added right at this moment when you need it.

    So, complaining will not improve your product. You can file a feature request, assume that it'll never be processed and meanwhile look for a workaround for a missing functionality.

    Also, the engine isn't free. You're bound by a contract agreement.
     
    zombiegorilla and rrahim like this.
  50. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    In today's world, complaining is merely the same as unfiltered feedback. It's super valuable for all businesses that actually make money.

    So you're wrong. Unity actually loves complaints. Complaints help the product become more successful. It lets Unity see where it needs to communicate better or improve the product.

    Complaining is the new constructive feedback. You can't change the world, so you get with it instead. 10 years ago, it was complaining but now it's just unfiltered thoughts.
     
    ScarabDevs, DroidifyDevs and Martin_H like this.