Search Unity

  1. Unity 6 Preview is now available. To find out what's new, have a look at our Unity 6 Preview blog post.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity is excited to announce that we will be collaborating with TheXPlace for a summer game jam from June 13 - June 19. Learn more.
    Dismiss Notice

Join us for #SRPLife Week!

Discussion in 'General Graphics' started by jbooth, Jun 18, 2020.

  1. corjn

    corjn

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Posts:
    168
    Can you access the shadow data generated by the HDRP lightning process ?

    Of course you can always do it in a hacky way. You even can do some custom post processing to have some sort of custom lightning.

    But for me, support for custom lightning means easy and optimized access to lightning data, just like in URP and Built-In.
    This is not the case, by design, in HDRP.
    In the end, that's what I said in my first post, HDRP just works like the Unreal Engine. If you want custom lightning, it's not designed for it, optimized for it, so it won't be easy, straight forward.

    A game engine is supposed to make things easier.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2020
    R0man and Ruslank100 like this.
  2. customphase

    customphase

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Posts:
    247
    Of course.

    But i see what you mean in general, yeah, i agree.
     
  3. corjn

    corjn

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Posts:
    168
    Oh well, I did not think this was possible, really. Probably beyond my skills though (that's the whole point, this being hard for indie solo devs with an artistic background rather than a technical one), but that's good to know, thanks !
     
  4. Carwashh

    Carwashh

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Posts:
    764
    This thread just shows that everyone should be avoiding SRP.

    Devs - because there's not enough support (docs/ tutorials/ assets)
    Asset publishers - because it's too much work to keep assets working with a million different versions and variations.

    I want to use URP/HDRP, but it's just not worth the effort to even try atm.
     
    OCASM, corjn and chingwa like this.
  5. fherbst

    fherbst

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    Posts:
    802
    No! Use it! Drive it to its limits! (which, honestly, isn't very far in some cases)
    That's the only way to make it better. Unity needs to understand which parts they messed up and which parts are great.

    Not
    using it will not improve the situation, it will just lead to "puh, we're lucky, slow adoption rate, which means we have more time to fix it"...
     
    NeatWolf and Ruslank100 like this.
  6. Carwashh

    Carwashh

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Posts:
    764
    I don't have time for that.
     
    MrBigly, funkyCoty, derkoi and 11 others like this.
  7. jbooth

    jbooth

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,461
    Given that Unity seems to be pretending that many of the issues don't exist, I don't expect many of them to be fixed without significant volume from users, hence my efforts to slowly ramp up volume until we start hearing something official from them on these issues. I'm at about a 6 now..
     
  8. GuitarBro

    GuitarBro

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2014
    Posts:
    180
    As someone who is a fan of @jbooth 's assets and would like supporting them to be as straightforward as possible, that would place me at 6 as well lol.
     
    R0man and knxrb like this.
  9. ROBYER1

    ROBYER1

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Posts:
    1,455
    I was hoping we would get a staff response here by now, we still have a few more days to make an impact though #SRPLife
     
  10. Rastapastor

    Rastapastor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Posts:
    591
    Well it doesn't have to be SRPLife week, it can be SRPLifeUntilShitIsGettingSortedOut :)
     
  11. jbooth

    jbooth

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,461
    It's been several years without a response, I don't expect they're respond any time soon. They think SRPs are perfect, after all.
     
  12. ROBYER1

    ROBYER1

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Posts:
    1,455
    Reminds me of when the URP Boat Attack demo was shown off and I tried to build and run it on different VR platforms to find URP was in fact not ready for VR. Being the 'default render pipeline for Unity', it was a horrible feeling. I won't stop complaining until the issues you raised earlier in this thread are dealt with. I think QA will know my name by now if they don't.

    @fherbst did some great investigation into what was needed to get it (barely) working in VR here
     
    R0man and fherbst like this.
  13. Elringus

    Elringus

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Posts:
    483
    R0man likes this.
  14. corjn

    corjn

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Posts:
    168
    Just discovered there is no grab pass in HDRP. Woah. That's terrible and absurd. I use grab pass all the time, it's so convenient ! The more I learn about SRP, the more I'm happy to keep using Built-In, expanding it with assets.
    It's like they designed SRP like "okay, let's remake Built-In, but with less features and less support for everything, so it will be harder to make things that were very easy to do before !".
     
    R0man, OCASM and Elringus like this.
  15. valarnur

    valarnur

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2019
    Posts:
    440
    Would it be possible that in 2021 cycle built-in and URP/hdrp renderer gets merged in one having all features and more together?
    It could make easier development to have one unique renderer.
     
    natereesedev and Ruslank100 like this.
  16. bgolus

    bgolus

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    12,379
    Nope. That'll never happen. The whole point of the SRPs was to have a clean break from the past renderer and its limitations. That's been successful. The URP and HDRP are different enough from both eachother and the built in paths that it is effectively impossible to merge them.

    The problem is they've introduced a whole new set of limitations that feel self inflicted rather than necessary meaning the built in rendering paths are still more flexible in a lot of ways, at least for most people.
     
    NotaNaN, SenseEater, Lyje and 7 others like this.
  17. Coroknight

    Coroknight

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Posts:
    26
    I think most of the people in this thread would be happy if Unity settled on a common set of abstractions, where applicable, so that the two pipelines were more compatible.

    For example, we use to have a unified post-processing stack but now each pipeline has its own unique stack. It seems silly that I can't just enable ambient occlusion, color grading, etc and have that setting transferable between pipelines. If there are differences in settings then that's fine, just group the settings together that are universal.
     
    knxrb, ROBYER1 and jbooth like this.
  18. bgolus

    bgolus

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    12,379
    Yeah, but that's different than "merging the renderers". There's almost no reason why post processing needs to be unique per SRP like it is. That's an example of a self inflicted limitation.
     
  19. Coroknight

    Coroknight

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Posts:
    26
    Totally agree, just wanted to clarify.
     
  20. valarnur

    valarnur

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2019
    Posts:
    440
    Then 2021 dev cycle could make URP with the same feature set as built-in. Having only 2 renderers would be more than enough.
     
  21. GuitarBro

    GuitarBro

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2014
    Posts:
    180
    Unfortunately URP will likely never have the exact same features by design, much less in a single year.
     
    Ruslank100 likes this.
  22. BattleAngelAlita

    BattleAngelAlita

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2016
    Posts:
    400
    Somewhere in 21-22 cycle unity will abandon URP/HDRP and create one solid render pipe;
     
    NotaNaN, R0man, natereesedev and 9 others like this.
  23. Tzan

    Tzan

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Posts:
    736
    Sorry I'm late :)
     
    Ruslank100 likes this.
  24. GuitarBro

    GuitarBro

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2014
    Posts:
    180
    Better late than never? :p
     
    Ruslank100 likes this.
  25. Ruberta

    Ruberta

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2019
    Posts:
    114
    Why can't they just make a single graphic pipeline that scalable insted of spilt it to URP and HDRP that break compatible of custom shader on each update?
     
    Marc-Saubion, natereesedev and corjn like this.
  26. Rastapastor

    Rastapastor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Posts:
    591
    Wondering if its impossible to build single pipeline but configure it like RN with the sriptable object where u swtich on/of features and all other stuff. Isnt it possible ? I am completly noob at graphics programming so sorry if my question is ignorant.
     
  27. jbooth

    jbooth

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,461
    It's possible, and there are many other engines which take an approach more like that, even using graphs to setup the rendering. But I think the idea was to get away from the complexity of having everything in one and instead have a simple top down c# system controlling how the rendering works.

    When I was at my last company and we had a small team of graphics engineers and highly technical artists, being able to control the pipeline top down like that made a lot of sense. We could own the rendering stack, top to bottom. Our games often replaced the lighting and shading systems of Unity completely, so being able to script exactly what the renderer did and didn't do was really great.

    But this isn't what most companies and teams using unity do; they don't have graphics engineers, who are the most expensive and hardest people to hire in the industry. They might have a few people who can do a bit of rendering work, but I've seen teams of 30+ people not have a single graphics engineer that could write their own shadow system, for instance. Mostly, they want to take the existing pipeline, and insert various features into it, without having to modify the pipeline's source code. They want to extend it, not replace it. They want to download an asset from the store, and have it just work, inserting whatever features it needed into the pipeline. They don't want to download the HDRP code and customize it, because that means porting those changes through upgrades, etc. No one wants to own a million lines of someone elses code. And they certainly don't want to download the HDRP code, SRP code, Shader Graph code, and VFX graph code and modify it to work with a custom pipeline- because right now many of those features are hard coded to only work with Unity's pipelines, so if you want to modify the "Scriptable" render pipeline significantly, you just might have to own all of that code as well.

    So Unity has scrambled over the last year to try to invert this system. For instance, people asked for Grab Pass, because a lot of effects relied on it, such as water. At first, they resisted, and said you should just modify the SRP you are using to add the passes you need. But obviously if your trying to sell a water asset on the store, you're not going to ship your own SRP with it- and then once you have two assets, what, ask users to merge the code? So over the last year they have been refactoring from a top down model, to one which supports various insertion points so users can do grab pass like things.

    However, this, like many other changes along the way, represent a significant vision change. And as anyone knows, if you build a rather large system and try to refactor it into something different, you usually end up with a lot of mess. And Unity did it even worse, because they had multiple teams do it.

    So the URP team added a CustomPass class, which you can use to do grab pass like things. So did the HDRP team. However, the two classes work totally differently and have little in common, each with their own quirks and bugs. So now instead of 1 rendering engine which has been refactored to have a totally opposite philosophy than it was originally designed for, we have 2. And since neither is as flexible or battle tested as the original, it means many of us now have to write things for 3 different rendering systems (4 if you still support LWRP).

    I have no particular insight into how this happened. But if I were to guess, it started with the best of intensions, and a large team of new hires, many who maybe hadn't used unity a ton and were used to writing custom in-house engines. Had I been given the mandate of having the render engine be scriptable at one of my previous companies, so teams could customize it, I suspect I would have ended up with something similar to the original design. Top down code that you can quickly modify instead of a framework that lets you insert things in places? Yes please. But in that environment, each team would have a few graphics engineers to make that happen - and there wouldn't be an asset store or a large community of people using the engine, all trying to make their stuff work together.

    And you know what's not going to fix it? Sticking their head in the sand, pretending that this stuff isn't an issue, and basically having no communication with your users about it. Sure, corner any of them individually at Unite and they'll tell you they know it has issues and promise that it'll be fixed, but then years go by and there is no motion, not so much as a word, on any of this from official channels.
     
    Lanre, NotaNaN, SamOld and 30 others like this.
  28. CDF

    CDF

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,321
    What a mess this all is
     
    NotaNaN and Cynicat like this.
  29. Noisecrime

    Noisecrime

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Posts:
    2,057
    Nothing really to add to the discussion. Every time I think of experimenting with URP or HDRP I take a look at their sub-forums and just see thread after thread of issues that I think life's too short and nope out.

    I do want to say I like that the new avatar is ugly and blurry - it kind of sums up where we are at the moment with SRP and Unity in general.

    It hurts to say that as Unity has been such a god send for me and client work, its future does not seem to be looking good.

    My biggest fear is that Unity have ventured so far down this path now with multiple new features taking multiple years to develop and not even into a truly production ready state, that they can't turn back! That there is this feeling that everything can be fixed just by putting in more work, when really what they need to do is step back and regroup, possibly even scrap URP and HDRP and start from scratch making use of the knowledge gained and understanding the requirements of developers better.
     
    MrBigly, SamOld, Marc-Saubion and 4 others like this.
  30. Neto_Kokku

    Neto_Kokku

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2018
    Posts:
    1,751
    If you go back and read the original blog posts, you'll see that the main problem the Scriptable Render Pipeline system was designed to address was writing 100% custom renderers. This was around the time Valve did the Lab renderer for VR, because neither the built-in forward nor deferred renderer suited Valve's needs. Creating fully custom renderers with built-in is quite messy, and required adding more and more injection points, so for that use case, SRP made sense. In that context of specialized renderers, LWRP and HDRP were born.

    After some time someone said "hey, what do we do about built-in?" and the response was "oh, crap, just take LWRP and morph it into a replacement", and that's when the problems began since neither of the SRPs were designed to be extensible, the HDRP team was too far down on the "let's match UE4" hole to be pulled back, and nobody remembered the asset store existed (*).

    (*) My personal theory is that some devs at Unity actually resent asset store devs.
     
    funkyCoty, R0man, Ruslank100 and 5 others like this.
  31. Elringus

    Elringus

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Posts:
    483
    Not really. They've partially covered particular use cases (eg, refraction), but didn't add any alternative to the feature itself, leaving a lot of other (less popular) use cases abandoned.
     
  32. jbooth

    jbooth

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,461
    And ironically they've made it nearly improbable that anyone will actually do this. If you make a custom SRP and diverge from HDRP/URP in any significant way, you also have to have your own version of the shader graph and VFX Graph, and will run into numerous hard coded cases for HDRP/URP. Not to mention writing all your own shaders, etc. The core vision of what they set out to do has essentially failed, because they've made something too large and convoluted, with too many hacks, to actually be useful.

    Not really. They've partially covered particular use cases (eg, refraction), but didn't add any alternative to the feature itself, leaving a lot of other (less popular) use cases abandoned. [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, that's why I said "grab pass like". Grab Pass was a stupid feature from a performance perspective, but super useful in a "I just want to hack this in right here, screw performance" kind of way.

    This has also been my feeling for a long time. When Tim presented the idea of SRP to me at GDC about 4 years ago, I asked about how they'd handle the shading pipeline, because it seemed like that would be a major concern. He kind of brushed it off with a "We'll figure something out" - so I'm not sure the vision for how to actually pull this off was even there from the beginning. It also seems heavily catered to the types of teams I describe above; that Unity thought this + DOTS would take over the console world. But things didn't stay still, and now it's looking very last gen compared to what other engines are offering.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2020
    NotaNaN, PutridEx, R0man and 15 others like this.
  33. Voronoi

    Voronoi

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Posts:
    593
    I just started an AR project yesterday, as a prototype and it was just painful. Unity has always excelled at quick prototyping, just to work out if an idea is viable or not. It was great because it 'just worked'. My AR project experience:

    1. My last project in AR was 2 months ago, so let's just get the latest AR Foundation samples up and running.
    2. Cool. Sample runs fine, in 2019.4 LTS
    3. Lately, I've been using VFX and Shader graph, and I have done AR using URP, let's start a new URP project!
    4. Past experience, the latest AR packages work best (often better than 'verified'), and 2020.1 is about to be release, let's use it!
    5. Black screen. Oh yeah, that happened before, now what did I do to fix it?
    6. Search forums. Black screen.
    7. Follow URP for ARFoundation instructions exactly as written.
    8. Black screen.
    9. Spend a half day trying out various fixes/ideas/packages/settings/preferences/profiles/XR load thingies in the project folder (What??)
    10. Why is Xcode reporting all the possible joints for a human skeleton on a build, but still giving me a black screen on device? I have no use or desire for a human skeleton rig and it's not in my project.
    11. Black screen.
    12. Give up. Write down my idea in a sketchbook and pick it up again when things 'just work' again...
    Settings for AR/XR are just scattered all over the place. Get the right package, and the right other matching package. Oh, both of those rely on this other package, that's not mentioned in the docs, found that on the forums.

    Now, there is a weird folder in my project XR, with various loaders and setters and general settings, WTF? Why isn't that in the project settings? Why do they rely on each other? URP requires a special profile, again in the project, but also be sure to set it up in the Project Settings! It's extremely chaotic at the moment, so much so that I just gave up and plan to wait until things settle down in Unity land.

    I'm not adding a lot to the discussion, but it just was so painful. If it takes me a couple of days to learn a 'new' system every time I start a project, why not just learn a new engine?
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2020
    R0man, led_bet, Garen_ and 3 others like this.
  34. Peter77

    Peter77

    QA Jesus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Posts:
    6,629
    Let's pretend Unity Technologies see them as actual issues worth solving. But solving them would take 2 years.

    What do expect them to do during this time with the current state of URP/HDRP/Builtin/ShaderGraph/VFXGraph? Continue to fix bugs, drop it, iteratively transition it to the new SRP tech?

    What would you do during this time with your assets?

    I don't believe Unity pull the plug and pretend URP/HDRP never existed. SRP would probably still cause you additional effort to maintain your assets during this time. Would you just drop SRP compatibility now until Unity solved those issues?
     
  35. Elringus

    Elringus

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Posts:
    483
    Well, something similar already happened with the networking system. :rolleyes:
     
    NotaNaN, WaaghMan, R0man and 6 others like this.
  36. Coroknight

    Coroknight

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Posts:
    26
    I bet all these issues are being cataloged for the next big system that replaces SRP. That way they can give it a fancy name and market it.
     
    Noisecrime likes this.
  37. AlanMattano

    AlanMattano

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Posts:
    1,501
    If takes several yr for making the default PBR one. Making 3 fully-featured and robust takes much longer. When Unity says it is out of preview, it means it is fresh new "baby". So be patient.

    A new way for feature requests vote system...? Default PBR 1800fps and HDRP go down to 300fps as stating point. Hmmm... you have my support!
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2020
    Ruslank100 likes this.
  38. recon0303

    recon0303

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Posts:
    1,634

    This is not new for Unity though... They have never cared much about people wanting to produce games production wise ..SO I seen this behavior for the past 13-14 years that I been here... its why I can't get many investors/clients wanting me to use Unity anymore in the past few years....Much better engines out there that care...Now I do like Unity for certain aspects and I met some great folks that I worked with here... SO hard to leave all together, and I always had hoped Unity would listen to developers who been a part of AAA releases as Jason I know has, I have and tons of others here has....and yet we are always ignored.......

    Unity I wish you would make a game, so you can see our pain.....This would only benefit Unity them selves as well....

    PS: Jason is a damn good shader programmer, if they don't listen to him, then I'm lost for any hope at this point...
     
  39. recon0303

    recon0303

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Posts:
    1,634

    COD Mobile, RUST, The Forest, and many others did well.. Some started as indies...and all made a ton of money...So the engine shouldn't prevent you from making a great game..I work in the AAA, AA industry for decades, and use some piece of junk engines, in larger companies... but we built some great tools...So this is possible as well with Unity... (UE, is still my favorite free engine... over Unity, but I do like Unity for how easy it is to use...and writing Editor custom scripts are easier and fun.....

    So AAA has nothing to do with much, to be honest... Unity does not make games and this hurts them.....and they tend to NOT listen to those who do...So that is part of there problem, they need to be more of a partner with there developers who make games, assets etc... Games, they do little to nothing for anyone I ever known.... Epic has done a lot for those that do... Again, Unity has those issues to deal with...as well...

    But all engines have pros and cons...at the end of the day, Unity knows the issues, but they need to manage these issues, in a more timely manner and properly... and partner with asset devs and games that are serious about production....... I have not seen this as much... as they should be....

    Networking is a whole other can of worms in Unity too....
     
    R0man likes this.
  40. GuitarBro

    GuitarBro

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2014
    Posts:
    180
    I use UE4 for my job and this gave me flashbacks... UE4's editor extensibility reminds me why I put up with this stuff from Unity.
     
    PutridEx likes this.
  41. jbooth

    jbooth

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,461
    I think my plan would be:

    1. Admit there are problems
    2. Engage with the community about them, and present a public plan to fix the most egregious issues.
    3. Focus entirely on stability, filling in features from the regular pipeline, and ease of use (both code/editor wise and by documenting/examples)

    My personal plan to fix many of these issues would look something like this:

    1. Surface Shader 2.0 system that lets us write text based shaders which are compatible across pipelines and automatically handle lighting code, upgradability, etc. This would be a c# based system to take a hand written shader and inject it into various passes, etc, so new pipelines could write their own layer for this, and automatically have shaders work on them as well. I'd refactor SG to use the same basic system as well, such that updates to the lighting model only have to be done to one system, and propagate to shaders written in graphs or text.
    2. Unify interface for things across SRPs- so Custom Pass as an SRP class instead of a version for each SRP, etc. I would have them implement common examples such that they compile under both pipelines with minimal conditional compiled code.
    3. I'd work with top tier asset store authors to help port their stuff to the new pipelines, instead of basically shunning them as they do now. This would provide lots of use cases while propagating knowledge out to the community.
    4. I'd write some freaking docs on how the lighting/shading systems are supposed to work.

    For my assets, I would likely stay on 2019.4LTE versions of the pipeline until this work is done. Even though I charge for my HDRP/URP modules, and they sell very well, the money they pull in is not nearly enough to pay for the work the pipelines demand. If a SS2.0 type system was available, I'd port to that and be done with it.

    Yeah, Unity never drops systems before they are production ready. Never..

    Sarcasm aside, now that I've basically written my own shader generation system that makes surface shaders work under URP/HDRP, the bulk of the work for me comes down to a few cases:

    1. Unity updates something and makes undocumented changes
    2. Unity adds new features which need to be supported
    3. I need to use a feature I haven't used in my products before (such as Trax using Camera.RenderWithShader), and then have to reinvent that wheel for all 3 pipelines.
    4. User finds something that behaves different between the three pipelines and affects some feature of mine.
     
    NotaNaN, led_bet, OCASM and 13 others like this.
  42. recon0303

    recon0303

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Posts:
    1,634
    Unity's is easier for that aspect, but that is about it, I USE UE since the early days, and still do...but Unity better react soon, because after seeing what I have, with using UE over the years and the new version, there will be almost no reason to use Unity.. because with any engine there is pros and cons, but Unity pros are getting less and less these days.......

    .... because that is one of few only reasons is there editor for writing custom scripts is easy in Unity, but using UniEngine, its like Unity as well, but better in many ways...So, Unity is falling behind for reasons people are using it...for there Production aspects, and now with this whole Pipeline issue, with there new rendering, being such a headache...it just gives investors, companies, people just to walk.... I use what ever the client is paying me to do....but I can tell you its way less in the last few years with Unity and more so else where, my co-workers, and freelancer peers, see the same.......

    So, glad this post was made by Jason, because if they don't listen to him and the rest of us, they aren't going to....ever... and this would give me and others more reason to just say screw it and leave..( I been here for over a decade...) and its growing on me.....since I see little to no real good contract work ...for Unity, and if I even think about mentioning it to any client, I get ripped into it.... Due to stuff like this....^^ I guess we will see...
     
  43. recon0303

    recon0303

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Posts:
    1,634

    You hit the nail on the head right there... but I see the same nonsense, with networking , physics and shader/rendering issues... meaning the same behavior..

    1. They don't admit there is a problem, when asking for support... ( its takes weeks, and when in production, we can't wait weeks from Unity...or our game is dead... In development, everyone knows we can't wait either.. So, its sad they we need to stay the hell away from HDRP, URP...for most games.

    I agree on all of your points.. .100%... but we all have the experience to understand what is needed...to address such issues, and yet Unity does not play nice.


    Unity take note....on what Jason suggested, we are not here to bash you but hopefully help, but many users are losing there patience, and I know for a fact many of us, do this for a living and been here for many years.....Lets hope they listen...... or more will leave and have enough of this ...... we don't like losing money and having extra headaches......
     
    Ruslank100, Cynicat, led_bet and 2 others like this.
  44. enhawk

    enhawk

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Posts:
    833
    This was really painful for me to read as this is what happens to me every-time I think it's safe to start an AR project with URP.

    It shouldn't be like this. Game dev engines should take the pain away not dish it out.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2020
  45. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    11,975
    Unity has historically dragged their feet in complying with (admittedly bizarre and arbitrary) platform requirements and always passing the pain to users.
     
    Cynicat likes this.
  46. Voronoi

    Voronoi

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Posts:
    593
    To be fair, I decided to open 'another' engine to try out AR. Just reading their forum and lack of responses or fixes for ARKit made me want to give up! Not minor problems either, things like poor camera/image quality and latest release breaks everything.

    I suppose Unity is still the place to be for AR development, painful as it is right now...
     
    R0man and Cynicat like this.
  47. neoshaman

    neoshaman

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    6,493
    The quality and frequency of help have generally decrease on forums and elsewhere about unity, it's getting harder to even have simple answer to simple problem. Some years ago, I had people attempting to help even most obscure problem, now it's silence unless it's a well documented problem. That doesn't feel good for unity idk.
     
    Marc-Saubion and Ruslank100 like this.
  48. enhawk

    enhawk

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Posts:
    833
    Slightly OT but #webXR can do AR. A-Frame is a very painless way to do AR in Chrome on Android (albeit missing some features, it's early days)
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2020
  49. Rich_A

    Rich_A

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2016
    Posts:
    338
    I'd like to see Unity make a commitment to keeping its Demos technically maintained across two LTS versions, and to develop simple games (eg. Boat Racer) on both URP and HDRP, explaining the pros, cons and differences (including performance) of each in detail.

    The point is not to burden their teams, but instead to encourage de-siloing of the HDRP and URP teams, and generate actionable reports on how to improve the upgrade/maintenance process. If a Demo project cannot be maintained, this should be explicitly explained to interested users, so that they can be aware of the same limitations for their own projects.
     
    NotaNaN, PutridEx, Cynicat and 7 others like this.
  50. Noisecrime

    Noisecrime

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Posts:
    2,057
    Absolutely. I'd go further and make it a requirement that every new feature added to the engine must come with a basic example project ( maintained on a Unity.Technologies.Examples github ) and that it should be maintained in at least LTS versions and where appropriate minor releases ( e.g. 2019.2 etc )

    This would not only provide a useful learning resource for customers but would force Unity developers to ensure their own features and projects work across versions and when they don't get inter-discipline communications and bug fixes done within Unity.
     
    NotaNaN, R0man, Ruslank100 and 10 others like this.