Is Unity any easier than UDK?

Do you mind asking me what exactly was bad about the documentation?

 

I agree. But for example importing assets, in Unity its very simple and straight forward. In UDK, if you dont use Max/Maya/XSI then it becomes a real pain in the neck to get assets imported and have them just work. So thats one area that Unity is much easier to do.

The visual editors in UDK (like Kismet and the Material Editor) are easier, especially for those who are more visually/artistically inclined.

Rendering abilities in UDK are more advanced, and I think its the main draw towards UDK for many. If Unity had the same capabilities and ease of use out of the box like UDK does for rendering (such as lightmapping, baking AO/directional lightmaps/radiosity, etc) then I think many would switch over to Unity from UDK (and it would certainly offer a boost in performance of Unity apps while maintaining high visual quality.

 

The problem with importing models UDK is on my list (which I am still updating) disadvantages bit back.

Import is poorly resolved, but the industry standard is *. obj and conversion of obj to *. ase is easy, the actual import is a matter for a few minutes when import several models, I do not think, just automatically clicking. Support of Collada seems a strange. The animation is also a problem and documentation on this topic pathetic.
However, I want to say that there are many more important things than just this, this problem is not unsolvable just steals time, a Unity thieves have much more time with his lowlevel focus.

Blender to UDK, you will see also complications with material.
http://wagner-usa.net/udk/blender_to_udk_simple.html
Max to UDK
http://www.jodygallagher.co.uk/Downloads/Tutorial Object.rar

 

it's either totally useless, or i'm pants-on-head retarded .. the documentation doesn't actually document anything, and doesn't teach you anything.

 

The Unity documentation is exceptional, actually...I guess you're missing something major. Generally people are doing stuff with Unity inside a week or two easily.

--Eric

 

I found Unity really easy to pick up. Prior to coming here I mostly played with Blitzmax and later helped develop Flow3D a Ogre game dev framework for Bmax.

I'm not really much of a coder, so when I decided to go it alone I was looking for something that bridged the gap between pure text IDE and a crummy point and click game creator.

I found Unity met things half way and provided me with most of the benefits of both. Unity is incredibly intuitive once you get past .fbx files loading with the wrong orientation. I managed to port a big chunk of MazeMonkeys I had been developing in Flow within a few hours when previously I had to rely more on a dedicated programmer to get most things done.

I can't really comment too much about Unreal, I got frustrated with the whole thing, there's too much stuff to plow through when I'd much rather just jump straight in and get on with it.

unity did this for me, I just need to cough up the $ for it towards the end of my project, Since the free version is lacking in a few important graphical areas. Pro covers all those though.

 

Unity's documentation is well above average, IMO, it's not awesome, but I think you'll find most documentation is far from awesome. Game development requires quite a few disciplines though, and is about the furthest thing from a turn-key operation as you'll likely find. I think if you know the basics of game development, Unity's documentation gets you what you need, and if you don't know the basics, Unity's no worse than anything else.

 

@Tysoe - I rehearse all UDK in 2 weeks, I'm far behind the middle, so you can too. And you have the advantage that you havent a problem with the language barrier. There are many possibilities, but no one is suggesting that you ever need them all.

All you get into those two weeks does not fit the study of programming in a text mode, but the question is whether he'll ever need, because it needs just a performance for demanding things like real-time combat based on the physics and complex AI.

Unreal is a beautiful thing, unlike Unity is the goal oriended, you want to do something and do it in GUI or set in some config, going directly in front, in the Unity drow in the lowlevel swamp, maybe more you understand how everything works, but do as a good programmer far less work than skilled Unreal clicker.

 

Ive been on Unity for about 3 weeks now and am more than halfway done with my first game.

But prior to Unity I did have a rather extensive amount of experience with HL1 and HL2 modding.

In all honesty. I'm finding Unity easier than Flash. The Unity developers I would assume think very similar to me as they did almost everything in Unity the way I would do it.

 

Unreal also have some support of stupid iPhone
http://www.beyondunreal.com/view_story.php?id=13058

Playing on this crap is absolutely great, sometimes you see something other than your fingers.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnegDxDRT6Q

 

wow, looks like every month this guys at UDK are adding more and more feaures to it, March beta they improved the pipeline by adding FBX format support and some other goodies.

http://forums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=720560

 

With the announced Unity 3.0 direction I think interest in the UDK will be at an all time low though. :wink:

 

NO ! UDK is much much better from now on :x

 

It all depends on if the same division between Indy and Pro remain. I hadn't even heard of UDK before yesterday, but I'm already evaluating it for my desktop project. I have to point out that the people who claim it's "...only good for first person shooters," are just spouting off ignorant rhetoric. It only takes a minute to see diversity in the samples section. Also, a third person, multiplayer action/rpg that reportedly took only four weeks to develop has just been released.

I'm sure I'll be sticking with Unity for my iPhone projects, but UDK definitely has the potential to take away some PC devs.

 

Yeah. Unity is greate for iPhones, but it could have compiler for iPhone on Windows. It would win so many developers. But as I know it's not going to happen.

 

The Unreal Engine is a fantastic product and probably my second love right after Unity. However, make sure you read the license information on UDK very closely and make sure you're okay with the financial terms. It's not quite as friendly as Unity in that respect.

 

I really can not believe that people here write such a nonsence.those who even compare Unreal Engine to Unity seemingly have no slightest idea what this engine is and what are it's capabilities.Unity is really awesome technology regarding web , iPhone content quality as well as simplicity of use .But from here till stating that it is even close to UE is complete irrogance! Those who just heard about UDK and already are giving non experience based statements ,please give me a favor go and build a couple of levels with UDK and then start talking on that topic.

 

It really depends on what you want to use the engine for. I think Unity is much more intuitive and hands on user friendly than UDK because you can just sit down and use it with almost no experience.

UDK requires a lot of research and effort just to get started. It's huge and not as straightforward.

Also Unity and UDK target different audiences. Unity is aimed at cross platform, small teams, mostly small to mid size projects.

Unreal is aimed at large commercial developers and big projects with large teams.

They couldn't be more different. The licensing is different too. Unreal is best suited to pros making commercial projects, people that mod and think they might want to make their own game, and the bulk of people with pipe dreams expecting to make a killer commercial game at their first try.

For me I could just sit down and use unity within 5 minutes. And bang out a simple prototype without spending much time with docs. And I'm an artist with minimal coding knowledge. With unity the docs and tools are powerful, but also overwhelming. It's not always set up for ease of use despite kismet etc the engine seems too fragmented and needs a long and concentrated effort to learn all the processes required to get something good up and running in a short time.

 

Agree with you. UE is also much more robust. And it is quite natural . Epic games are game engine leader already for a decade. That co
company has made a long way from revolutionary Unreal game to developing most advanced and popular game engine on the planet.Unity is still very young despite it's hike potential. Also as above said these engine target different audiences at list for now

 

I personally use unreal development kit. I have been programing since I was a lad back in the day of the spectrum 48k, yes kismet in udk is not programing as we know it, but c4 game engine uses visual scripting aswell so it can make life easier, unrealscript adds to kismet and makes it easier for level designers to work the game editor and add features made by programmers via unrealscript. and saying udk is not the same engine as gears of war is talking rubish. udk has the same basic engine as unreal 3 or any other game made with UE3. unity is not that much different programing wise as udk.. in unity you are basicly scripting features needed for your game, unreal scipting can create any feature in a game you like, its not just a fps game maker..look at conitec gamestudio, it has uses scripting but would you call 3d gamestudio modding..

 

Unreal Engine is provably the most popular, not the most powerful or the (technically) best one.
Comparing Unity 2.6 to UDK is no sense. However, Unity 3 will catch up some of the major commercial engines and kick a lots of asses.

 

I suggest you to make the check . Most of the games that do not have their own engine use Unreal Technology .You sure mean Cry Engine or Source Engine ? They are quite advanced as UE but have you tried to build a map with them ? They are very hard to learn. Concerning the usage convenience and engine moderation Epics are the leaders. Many of them are not PC . About that Unity is catching up :you know , Epic games don't stand still too(already working on UE 4) .
Anyways Unity is really amazing soft in it's own field.

 

Valve's Source engine is quite old and you cannot compare it to CryEngine or UnrealEngine.
Now, it looks like you haven't tried CryEngine editor at all. I worked on few studios in Montreal using both engines. And by miles CryEngine is better than UE. It have not only a more simplified and easier/user friendly editor than UE but also is more professional and less sticky or game specific (Unreal Engine still have lots of Unreal related functionality not related to general purpose game dev but only being Unreal specific, making you very Unreal dependent and swiching to a new technolog is very painful). Building a map in Sandbox, is 100 times easier than Unreal Engine. You don't even need any tutorial to start building your map. Cause everything seems very intuitive and logic.
CryEngine have an easier and more intuitive user friendly scripting language, LUA. UnrealScript, is 100% Unreal specific and is harder to lern than LUA. LUA have more world wide support.
The reason why Unreal is widely used (more than CryEngine) is because is older than CryEngine. The second reason is that it cost less than CryEngine. Theirs a lot of studios with an established Unreal workflow that you cannot easily change. Those ho uses UE, they will provably stick with even if CryEngine or any other is better. So again, UE is not the best game engine out there, is just too popular. Vision Trynigy, GameBryo and lot of major commercial engines can kick UE ass easily.

 

i agree cry engine and gamebryo are very good,probably more advanced than ue3 but now look at the price to use the other major engines, and where not talking about making a mod as such, where talking about creating a stand alone game..

 

Exactly,
Is a bit nonsense making comparison between Unity and UDK as they both are complete different gaming dev solutions. UDK is 100% targeted to current Unreal modders and designers. Unity is targeted for small and big studios, is a multiplatform dev solution, a general purpose engine and is quite different from UDK.

 

@tato, why do you pretend to know who Epic is targeting with UDK? Both solutions can be used for similar projects and according to THEIR OWN WORDS they are targeting EVERTONE. End of story.

 

yes but with unrealscript you still can make any genre of game..if u look at some of the mods for ue3 in the past there have been rpg's, 2d platform games and even beat them ups..so udk is versatile..its not just a mod engine..ok untiy is easier to make different genres but udk still has more potential than you give it credit for..

 

Because right now there is no clean way to develop games with UDK. You have to mod existing UnrealT Scripts, hack here or there most of the time. Look how many professional studios will use UDK (or are using).

 

So, uh, you're wrong. I've downloaded it and tried it out. You can create a game from scratch. Also, it's only been out for a few months so of course not as many people are using it. After all, UT had to give Unity3D away for free to finally break the 10,000 user barrier and it'd been out for almost five years.

Why do you feel the need to spread false information about UDK? Why?

 

i second motojt and firelord.

UDK is supplied with sample scripts, to quickly get you going, but you DON'T NEED those scripts if you prefer not to use it. Besides Unity supplies script snippets too, so no difference there.

 

Unity have more than 100 000 users not 10 000, and only in a matter of few months. That's a huge false statement about Unity.
With UDK, you cannot create a game from scratch right now, provably in the near future.
Now, if you feel like UDK is the way to go for your projects, go ahead and do something to prove your statements. I'll be so proud to see some results.

 

proof it cannot be done from scratch

All the hooks are documented, (engine function hooks and syntax), just like any SDK/API (binary engine version of x product) has, the scripts only show some working examples of how in a real life situation to use engine function hooks. Like every scripting/code language have examples available for the interpretator/runtime.

Thus learning the language/syntax for that interpretor/runtime. Once you've learned, you can even make new functions for the end product. (through external made modules (.dll's e.g))

Even Unity has this. Through you code, you need to talk to the engine function hooks, talking wrongly too it, it either doesn't work, or behaves unexpected.

coding is required in both engines, and code can be done from either scratch (once knowing the engine function hooks and syntaxing for it and logic behind it) or by modifying provided examples.

 

You need to read and understand before you reply. You are misinterpreting (or are intentionally twisting) my words. I said it took them giving it away for free to get the user base they have today. Here is HiggyB proving it in his own words:

From their 1.0.1 in June 2005 until October 2009 they had under 10,000 users. From the announcement of Unity Free to today they have 100,000 "users." What defines a "registered user" I don't know. It could just be a unique download of the software.

Like Saymo said, prove that you can't. The proof that you can is in the UDK docs and in the existence of a from-scratch game (Dungeon Defense) made in UDK. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you're simply bashing another tool because you're so emotionally invested in Unity.

 

if you look at every game engine forum..there is always an argument saying this engine is better than that engine..the proof is in finished games..as for udk, dungeon defence is a completed game made since udk was made avalible to the public..now how long has untity free been released and how many completed games have been made with unity. now most people who normally argue in these types of threads are shall we say hobby game makers..so tell me udk is basicly unreal engine 3..without source code..now how many games have been made with unreal 3 game engine..just look at what you get with udk an AAA game engine, that allows to make any genre of game you can think of..end of argument..

 

Is this thread closer to a theological debate or political debate?

 

Neither. It's fact vs fiction. Some people spout rhetoric while others are making the facts known.

 

certainly both with a zest of ideological / fanatical one too

 

To firelord and motojt.
Alright,
You provably realize that you are in the Unity forums, wich means that Unity users will defend Unity products, even more thoses users with successful games as us.
UDK documentation doesn't prove anything. Directx documentation is fully loaded with API examples and well documented. It doesn't means that you can create an engine with, there is a lot of step and things to learn before get to that point(or goal). Is what you do (not others) that prove all your statements.
Now, I'm not telling that UDK is crap or a S***. I've already worked with UE3 and CryEngine, in the past. Not in a amateur way, nor in game making way, in a professional studio.
Go and get UDK and show what you can do in days.

 

tatoforever...see thats a stupid argument,just because you can make a game in 5 minutes does not make the game engine good.there was a game engine called rad that could prototype games really quick but the end product would of been very out of date.unity is probably easier to use than udk...and that does not make it a good game engine..its all about talent and does the game engine you use, allow you to use your talent..the end product is the main thing about choosing a game engine..i have used a few game engines, ..I have been making games since the day of the spectrum 48k, so i seen technology change so much and then udk came out and my team was looking at unity, BUT we decided on udk..im not saying untiy is crap and thats the thing each to there own..what ever works for your team or if your a solo designer..

 

@tata, we are not required to prove anything to you. You are the one making false claims so the burden of proof is on you. I have several iPhone games on the app store that were made with Unity iPhone do don't attempt to imply that your experience with Unity is better than anyone else's. Besides which, that experience is irrelevant to the false claims you are making. If John Carmack were to make these same claims he would also be incorrect.

The fact that this thread is in the UT forums is also irrelevant. A lie is a lie. Your ownership of a product gives you no right to lie about its potential competition. Your comments regarding DirectX are ridiculous and also irrelevant. By the same logic, the fact that my wife can not make a game in Unity would prove that Unity can not be used to make games. Just plain ridiculous.

Instead of pretending to know what you're talking about why don't you just say you don't know because you've never actually tried to make a game in UDK and leave well enough alone.

--------------------------------

To answer the original question of the thread: Ease of use is subjective. Some people will find it easier while some more difficult. Development with the Unity game authoring tool is generally simpler than UDK, but that is because UDK has more to work with. Things that don't exist in UT so they obviously require no editing or coding for such as AI, SpeedTree, destructible environments, etc.

Like most have already said, try it for a while. Follow the getting started tutorials. Design and develop and small sample project that would act as a tech demo for the game you want to create.

 

@Motojtits, my nick is not tata, is tatoforever.
I don't need to try anything, I've already told you a couple of times that i know what UE3 is, as i worked with on professional studios. Btw, i have UDK from day one.

If your wife cannot make a game with Unity is not my problem sorry.

You are completely wrong, a successful game is based on your resources and your talented team, not on the engine that you chose to make a game. Most of the success full games in PC and console, are proprietary in house game engines.
By the way, stop saying that i can make games in 5 minutes, i never say such stupidity and false statement. Would ya? What am saying is that you can create games quicker with Unity than UDK, whatever you are a dreaming bedroom amateur or a fully talented game dev team.

To both of you:

If you think that you can create an AAA game with UDK... Stop dreaming. It wont happend. You don't have the resources to make and deal with such projects. If you have the money and resources to make an AAA game, you wont be here or looking for UDK.

I don't really get what are you trying to prove? Whats your point? Your goal? Would you tell me? Because i don't get it.

You are in Unity forums, this is not UDK forums. If you like that much UDK and you already chose UDK for your personal stuff, what should be your next logical step?
Tanks and i will not respond anymore to all your replies, so don't waist your precious UDK spare-time time on me.

 

The best way to settle this in an objective manner is in The Octagon. :roll:

 

@tata, maybe you're having a language barrier issue or something, because you are seriously missing every point I'm making. It's like you see the words, but you're not grasping the thought they make up.

By the way, you're comment to firelord is wrong. A successful game is 1 part game play, two parts marketing. Again, however, that wasn't the point he was making. Are you just skimming replies or do you just not understand them fully?

To your point directed at both of us, we've never said we're trying to make AAA games in UDK. In fact, I'm not making any games in UDK yet as I'm still working on a game with Unity. Where did you get that idea from?

I have stated SEVERAL times that my point is you are wrong to say that you can not create a game from scratch in UDK. You can make a game from scratch from UDK. Do you get it yet? That is the point.

If you don't have anything productive to add to he discussion then you shouldn't have posted to it in the first place. The original poster asked specific questions which you did not answer. Instead you simply spread lies and rhetoric in an attempt to discredit a fine product. Good riddance.

 

tataforever

its all about talent and does the game engine you use, allow you to use your talent..the end product is the main thing about choosing a game engine.
by the way unreal engine was epics in house game engine..

tataforever

 

in the end, both are quality engines.

Unity, for "light" projects (meaning not heavy rendering needs, which is good for certain projects), and for iphone publishing.

UDK for "heavy" projects (meaning heavy rendering needs, which is good for certain projects).

Both have their audiences (unity is more commercial casual class, speed, size, feature wise. UDK is more commercial AAA class, speed, size, feature wise.)

The renderer for one:
UDK is faster: handles more triangles on screen without losing framerates, and is build for big projects. (the tools are made for it)

Unity is slower: handles less traingles on screen without losing framerates, and thus more geared at smaller projects with less demand for AAA class features. (casual games, iphone games e.g.)

so again, both are top notch in their own target audiences/projects.

anyway, for now i'm sticking with UDK for this project i'm doing. But, maybe when Unity 3 releases, i might switch to it, for another project. (smaller demanding project)

 

Am not fluent in English, am a french Canadian, do you have any problem with that? I perfectly understand all your points, is just that you are bitc**ng and replying negatively to all my statements, trying to make other believe that i don't know anything. I provably know more UE3 and UDK than you, as i already stated several times i worked in a professional environment, with a professional team on a commercial console title. I'am in a good position to give others real advices about UE3 and UDK. So please, stop trying to make other believe that i don't know anything about UE3.

Btw, your comments about whats make a successful game have nothing to do with our main discussion. We are not talking about design (gameplay) or marketing, we are talking about tools and resources to make a good game. So is a no sense point.

Now to re-answer one more time to the main subject of this thread:
Unity is 100 times easier than UDK.
One last thing, if you don't like my English or the way i write in English, don't just reply to my posts. Would you?
Tankyou and have a good day.

 

I repeat, is not about the engine that you use. Is about your resources (money) and your talented team that makes a successful game.

I never say such a thing, i told you just to show some results in days (it could be anything), to prove that UDK is easier than Unity, the main point of this thread. And then you start to complaing about 5 minutes games, and games made in days...Ppsssss... Stop, ok?
Have a nice day...

 

@tata, you're seriously confusing yourself. First, I never said you didn't know anything about UE3. I said you don't know anything about UDK. Huge, HUGE difference. Second, you're the one who brought up "what makes a successful game." I was merely replying to your ridiculous, irrelevant comment.

Finally, you're wrong. Ease of use is subjective. I'll bet you money that teams who have already released titles with UE3 or UDK will say that UDK is 100x easier to use than Unity. Shiva users think that Shiva is easier to use than Unity. Hell, I've talked to Torque users who said it was a lot easier to use than Unity.

Since you don't understand that point, think of it like this: Programming is easy for me, but electrical engineering is not. To my cousin, who is an electrical engineer, his job is very easy while programming is not. Unity might be easy for TATA to use, while UDK might be easier for FIRELORD to use. Do you get it yet?

 

@tata, the only thing you've contributed to this thread is insults, lies, and baffling remarks. Here are a few:

Oh really? Tell that to all the teams who are making and have released their games.

So you're honestly saying that Unity 2.6 is as powerful as UE3? Wow.

Because somehow not having the source for Unity is better than not having the source with UDK? Wow.

I'm sure all the UDK devs would love to know what you think of them.

Not according to Epic. I guess you just know better than they do.

I'm speechless.

That's hilarious. Especially considering how many professional titles have been released using UE3 compared to Unity.

Maybe because you don't know how to use it you had to rely on reverse engineering?

CryEngine? Where'd that come from? I thought we were talking about UDK?

You're not?