Feedback It's time to make URP as the default renderer

URP And HDRP have been announced in 2017/2018, and their development probably started even earlier..

And they came a long way throughout the years of their development cycle till this day, they got so rich, so flexible, feature complete, very extendable, and most of all, battle-tested! And so, I do Really suggest starting from 2022.1 (which is still months away from now) to have URP as the default renderer in new created projects, what that means, if someone from previous versions upgrades their built-in RP project to 2022.1 or above, it won't be affected.

Now, that doesn't mean by any means built-in will be deprecated, at least for now, that only means new projects will have URP by default.

- Yes, Unity may put an option in Unity 2022.1 settings to revert back to built-in if ever needed..

Unity -years back- promised us that "it's a matter of time until URP is the default", and I think that time has come.

- ) So, what do you think? Do you think it's the time for a new era? Or should Unity wait a bit longer? Share your thoughts in the comments/Or you can just vote and that's it!

 

Leave this decision to Unity.

 

Yeah, sure, Unity who will decide -when- in the end, but we can also share out thoughts so they know as well!

And besides, it's very healthy and good to make feedback/surveys from time to time

 

Isn't it already possible to create a project where URP is basically the default renderer ? Using the template "3D Sample Scene (URP)", for example.

What's the point in making it the case everywhere ? how often are you creating a new project for that to matter so much ?

Personnally, I create a new "real" (not just for tests or bug repro) project once/twice a year top. So it doesn't bother me at all to setup the packages (or clean up the 3D Sample Scene) when I do.

Unity will do as they see fit, but I fail to see where that would be a "new era" (maybe I'm completly ignorant of something or missing the point, in that case please enlighten me !)

 

I think Unity should plan a default ecosystem. If you restrict assets for shader graph you could have one default ecosystem for URP and HDRP.
Then if you want too add some detail, mask textures in HDRP you could make upgrade but some minimal default could be running on both.

 

Like the Ninja said, it's solely Unity's decision to make. In my opinion, terrible idea. There are still things that are missing (or not even supported) in the URP that were once available/supported in the Built-in RP.

Just look and see for yourself: https://docs.unity3d.com/Packages/c...l/universalrp-builtin-feature-comparison.html

As long as a certain feature parity isn't given, it shouldn't become the default RP (yet).
.

 

Of course you can do it that way

Sure! Probably the point you're missing is that, Unity previously said URP will replace built-in eventually, and built-in will finally be deprecated, that will happen when URP is ready, you can see me even mentioning that if you re-read my first post, hence the "new era".. So the whole point of this thread, is to actually discuss the "Readiness" of current URP.

 

I completely agree with this line. And I saw that table you mentioned, lemme tell something, most of the "Not Supported" in URP side vs Built-In are now supported and being worked on, Look up this:

Spoiler: ProductBoard

https://portal.productboard.com/uni...sual-effects/tabs/3-universal-render-pipeline

I'm not even talking about URP being default in 2021.2, or even 2021.3, I'm talking about 2022.1; As we progress, URP will be completely efficient and fully replaceable by the time 2022.1 releases. -Yes, this thread is ahead its time!-.

 

Of course it's unity's decision. Everything is. Doesn't mean you shouldn't suggest or talk about it.
In my opinion I wish it would be, but it's lacking some important features still.
Temporal anti aliasing, screen space reflections, and so on.

The problem remains in new users getting confused. They press 3D and think this is it.
Or even worse, someone that isn't a complete beginner starts working on a project only to realize later on that built-in is on life support.

Or someone evaluates unity from a graphical perspective without realizing there's other render pipelines, in particular HDRP.

 

Those are found in HDRP, problem solved!

 

So, is it ready in your opinion? Why?

It is not in my opinion, not until it is a superset (or close enough) of the features and flexibility of built in, and I do not believe it is there yet.

With that said, I would be fine with the 3D URP template getting a more prominent position in the Hub, would that make it "default"?

 

What's missing that's preventing it from being the default choice? If it's some feature like -ray tracing-, then you should know where to go.

I can confirm that at least 90% of URP's features are complete, and by the time it's 2022.1 release, percentage will be much higher, and there's no -harm- from it being default if tiny stuff are still missing by that time.

 

Unreal?

I don't have to tell you. Unity has a nice list themselves that someone already linked but you keep ignoring:
https://docs.unity3d.com/Packages/c...l/universalrp-builtin-feature-comparison.html

Personally, I also really like writing shaders and the workflow for doing that in URP is subpar. I also use replacement shaders a lot, and I've heard you can do a custom pass for it, but it's still really awkward. It was also slower than built-in for my game, which -in fairness- is purposely playing to Built-in's strengths for performance.

Your turn, you haven't actually expressed why you think it is ready, or what you think should happen if it is. What more do you need than the URP template getting a bump in position on the hub?

 

Stop fooling around, I'm not gonna say it, because you already know what RP is it!

It seems you're the one ignoring my posts, or you just playing dumb, go to my previous posts and re-read them again, I already mentioned the 'table' is a bit outdated, you seem to be only writing your stuff without any effort to reading.

 

Ok.

Personally I think they should have HDRP as the default and deprecate everything else. I will not elaborate any further.

 

some proper socratic dialogue i see in here, very nice.

 

I had to look that up ..for anyone else like me, "philosophical method of systematic doubt and questioning of another to elicit a clear expression of a truth supposed to be knowable by all rational beings."

 

I believe he is a troll.

In the threads he is starting he is contradicting his positions, (URP should be default, but also is dead apparently?) and they are all the same provocative style about what Unity should do.

https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity-should-combine-urp-and-hdrp-as-a-single-rp.1180195/

https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity-should-make-lts-a-one-year-long-term-support.1140154/

 

I think there is a gross misconception here. Whether or not URP is already good, it has nothing to do with whether or not it should be default.

Any feature should be default when the majority of the user-base use it by default. Doesn't matter if you think it's garbage, doesn't matter if you think it's excellent. One and only metric matters: will making it default helps the majority of the user base or not. (or at least sizable enough to help the adaptation rate)

And no one else knows the answer, only Unity itself. That's why I think the only sane answer to the question is to leave this decision to Unity.

Edit: and even this is kind of moot, because what you guys are arguing about is this: should the blue frame be in the I position by default or it should be in the II position? One click (and some understanding).

 

All I'd really want to happen is to have actual blank templates for both URP and HDRP without the extra bloat. I was going to point out same as Lurking-Ninja here that there really isn't a "default" option even because you get to choose the starting point for every project yourself... unless you really count the default highlighted position as such.

 

This really summarizes and clarifies the whole point of this thread in few words:

Spoiler

https://forum.unity.com/threads/urp-vs-standard-render.852004/

Spoiler

https://forum.unity.com/threads/does-the-urp-intend-to-replace-the-default-rendering-system.881515/

Look at the #3 comment of each thread, they're from 'hippocoder', a person who has immense knowledge about Unity, Unity forums etc and a real veteran in this field.

I hope it gives some insights and helps a little bit.

Plus, this thread as well is coming to also assist and inform Unity about stats and how 'ready' URP is, so it's a little of a help++.

 

If I had any power over this, I'd just redo the whole template structure on Unity Launcher:

- Have a separate option for 2D, 3D and VR
- Have a separate option to use Built-in RP, URP or HDRP (omit HDRP if 2D selected)
- Have a separate option to include sample content

This would let you easily mix and match what kind of template you want to start with. Unreal users know what I'm talking about

 

Yeah, it would be great having the option to save a project we prepared as a template for future projects. With current selection of packages and imported assets/code base and all. So you could have the totally empty basic URP project and I could have my basic project setup in my new temp projects I'm making for development.

 

I believe that's what I was trying to do when I directly asked:

So let's give it one last try.


1. Why do you think it is ready?

Personally, I do not think it is ready. I think if it was "ready", I would be tempted to move my current projects to it, because it would have most of the features and would potentially be faster and nicer to work with.

But it IS missing features compared to built-in. As I already said, I'm missing easily writing shaders and using replacement shaders, trying do these in URP currently is a nightmare. It also doesn't have SSR, its shadows look fairly ugly and there are more aggressive limits in amounts of lights than built-in.

It also doesn't perform amazingly if you really don't play to its strengths. With a medium effort port job to URP, I'm getting worse performance. I could potentially get better performance with more radical changes to my project, but I expected that from a more modern, leaner, and with a smaller feature set render pipeline, I would get on par performance more easily.

All the above, make me feel URP is not "ready" to be a full replacement for built-in, hence it is not ready to be "default".

Do you disagree with the above statements? Why?

Addendum: Here are some tweets from the graphics programmer of Darkest Dungeon 2

a. Not liking working in it:
https://twitter.com/ManuelaXibanya/status/1422158041139589122

b. Having difficulty finding what's better about it over built-in
https://twitter.com/ManuelaXibanya/status/1451272475174711298

I would argue that a render pipeline that is "ready" should easily and obviously be better than what it is supposed to replace, but it seems it's not there yet. It currently feels a bit undercooked, and many of it's parts are a side-grade instead of a straight up up-grade <- which is where it should be when it's ready, IMO.


2. What do you think should happen if it's ready?

You said you don't want built-in deprecated, so what is left to do? A more prominent spot on the hub? Something else? How do we make URP more default?

Is it just a statement about Unity's state of mind, so that we know Unity puts more of its focus to URP?

Do you not want URP and HDRP to merge any more? How did you go from statements like "URP is a pointless investment, everything it offers HDRP already does." to wanting to make it default? Why not HDRP as "default"?

And if you are still pushing for the merger, doesn't that mean it would be ready after the merge of the two render pipelines?

If a more prominent spot on the hub is what you're asking for, then I think that's fine. But is that it?

Personally I think @rz_0lento 's suggestion about a more Unreal-like launcher experience (choose type: 3d / 2d / vr / Arch viz / whatever, then have sub-choices: URP / built - in / HDRP and then asking if you want the default assets would be ideal). But this makes pretty much *nothing* default.

(also I don't think we'll get it, since the hub just went through a major revision and I don't think we're getting another one soon, but anyway)


Please answer my questions.

 

Sure!

First of all, why do I think it's 'ready'?

I think it's ready, and will be more ready when 2022.1 releases, because:

1. It's already much faster/lightweight than built-in and gives more performance by default on the same project.

2. It has completed roughly (and still doing) all the 'basic' features, and even ones that built-in doesn't have: (ShaderGraph, VisualEffectGraph), Post Processing, 2D, 3D, Camera Stacking, Anti-Aliasing, Decals, Light Cookies, Lens Flare, and the list goes on.

3. Plus all of the above, if you want really cutting-edge project, then HDRP is your choice.

I think what should happen is that, making URP default by hiding built-in renderer in Unity Hub templates so that:

1. Encouraging new users and adapting to URP.

2. There's no point in still continuing to support built-in after URP/HDRP have been announced.

3. I believe this is a misunderstanding, but, I never said "built-in" shouldn't be deprecated, I'm only saying "hiding" built-in templates as mentioned, in fact, built-in should be deprecated in the end, URP/HDRP offer much better performance, quality, and much more presets and features.

No, absolutely not.

Ok, this is a bit off-topic because I already talked about that in another thread, but I'm answering it anyways..

Do I wish URP and HDRP were a one RP? Yes, absolutely; And, I already mentioned the reasons in that thread.

I believe Unity has made a big mistake by splitting them into two, because you're wasting your time by duplicating the same HDRP features to URP instead of focusing on HDRP/One RP that could be much better going forward/building up the time, hence "pointless investment" in the first place.


HDRP should never be default, most users are not making high-end only projects.


And this thread actually goes like this: A mistake has been made, what can we do? We can't change the past, but we can change the future, so, let's focus on what we have right now (URP/HDRP), and discussing the readiness of the Unity's promise to replace built-in with URP in some time in the future, and I said, I think it's the time when 2022.1 releases.


I hope I answered/handled your questions properly. Thanks!

 

It doesn't though. My personal experience contradicts this, and a lot of anecdotal forum evidence / social media point to the same conclusion. If you don't design your game around it, it doesn't get you better performance by default. I understand that my data are anecdotal, but if you have a better source for your claims, it would be appreciated.

For a new project designed around it, sure. You can probably tailor it to URP and get better performance. But get an optimized built-in project and port it to URP and you get worse performance.

(and vice versa obviously, I'm not claiming that built-in has better performance by default or anything, I'm just saying URP has made too many concessions in features and ease of use to be just a "sidegrade" in terms of performance).

https://twitter.com/ManuelaXibanya/status/1422165623497531400

Why? Lots of people use built-in, and there are many things that you still can only do in built-in / are much easier to do in built-in.

I'm confused.

But let's forget that and maybe you can state your intentions more clearly now:

Is this more about deprecating / hiding / removing built-in rather than URP being "ready" or whatever?

 

Don't be confused! -at least for now- is the key, I also said Unity can have a setting in 2022.1 to revert to built-in if ever needed.. that means, you can still use built-in -for a long time- but not by default, that's all what it means!

Why not? Is there any benefit from still using built-in after URP/HDRP? I doubt it's a bit more of a "I'm used to built-in" than what the reality is. URP/HDRP are the future of Unity's rendering, not built-in anymore.

 

FYI it is missing in 2022.1 alpha, I personally missed its existence because of it. I checked 2021.1 and 2022.1...

 

Oh that's nice! I missed the change but it's also less obvious on current Unity Hub 2.x. 2021.2 doesn't even show "3D HDRP" template at all, it does show 2D URP and 3D URP but they are all shuffled around without any real order and templates with sample scenes just say "Universal Render Pipeline" and "High Definition RP".

I was actually on Hub 3 beta earlier but had to revert to old one since the new one doesn't remember your engine choice for new projects, it just keeps pushing the latest LTS for every new project which got too annoying.

 

Did they ever bother making URP feature complete with Built In? I gave up on it and went back to Built in...
https://forum.unity.com/threads/urp-opacity-and-shadows-is-this-even-supported-anymore.1045252/

Seemed like the whole thing was a complete mess HDRP is like the new Built In, URP turned out to be a more of gimped version of Built In. Which sucks as I know a few plugin devs went full support for URP with the thinking it was the new Built In... and now it's like oooh.. wish you could have just supported HDRP instead.

 

Except that every single asset someone downloads will be broken by default, even if they ship URP versions of those assets. Why? Because Unity provides no mechanism to make shaders cross compatible with pipelines, or deliver assets in pipeline specific ways.

If you ship your assets for URP10, for instance, then they will likely be broken in URP13. If you setup a demo scene for one pipeline, it not only won't work in another pipeline, but all the values for things like lights will need to be adjusted for that pipeline, and in some cases pipeline version. If you ship different versions of your shaders (One copy for URP10, one for URP11, one for URP13, one for HDRP10,11,13, and finally one for built in), then all your materials will point to the wrong shader, and any shader written for the wrong pipeline will throw errors when added to the project.

So currently, the only way to ship across URP versions and pipelines is to do one of the following:

1. Ship and maintain 5 or more copies of all your shaders and demo scenes and have the user unzip or install the right one
2. Write extensive abstraction layers which, on install, figure out which SRP is installed and unzip the right data for the user. (My shader packaging system does this for shaders, but not scenes/lighting/etc).

Now compound this with things like custom passes, which need to be coded differently for HDRP vs. URP, and will cause compile errors if installed into a project which doesn't have that pipeline installed, and it's obvious that you can't have anything but BiRP be the default render pipeline until all of this mess is properly cleaned up.

For Unity to possibly switch the default to URP:

1. Packages for Unity need to be able to be installed and actually work out of the box.
2. Defines for which pipeline is installed need to be set, so C# code can be compiled based on the installed pipleine
3. Shaders need to not be the brittle mess they are right now
4. Something close to rendering parity, with proper documentation and examples.
5. Unity needs to ship actual assets across pipelines to get the kinks out of this process. Currently Unity has never shipped an asset that supports more than a single version of a single SRP. (For instance, Snaps runs in 2018.4 ONLY)

Given the likely timeline of this, we are at minimum 3 years from being able to switch the default pipeline and have new Unity users not have a horrid experience.

 

I've mentioned a few things in my posts. Also the table you keep saying is outdated, is not really that off.

I couldn't make my game with URP, or it would take much longer, since I rely a lot on being easily able to write shaders and use replacement shaders. Isn't that proof enough that it's not ready?