A Unity ID allows you to buy and/or subscribe to Unity products and services, shop in the Asset Store and participate
in the Unity community.
Discussion in 'Universal Render Pipeline' started by Tim-C, Jul 9, 2019.
This is what I love about the Unity community: we are in such good company
I think it's good to link that here - all the fun things happening with URP + PostFX on Android VR.
Quick visual summary:
I don't see the issue....
Can we please get a definitive answer what you should use for new projects?
This whole built-in and render pipeline stuff is so confusing to me as someone who never spent a second thought about graphics programming. If I was completely new to Unity, what exactly should I learn?
It doesn't feel like there is one currently, rock and a hard place comes to mind! We are just in this horrible limbo until pipelines get feature parity it seems
i do not see that pipelines will become feature parity in the nearby future.
i haven't checked 2019.3b and URP yet but LWRP currently lacks a lof of handy features which are present in built in forward.
just take light cookies as an example. no light type in LWRP supports them.
even spot lights do not support light cookies. but how do you create a believeable flash light without a cookie?
missing point light shadows are another story. as well as real time GI.
LWRP's light loop is a nice improvement. Just like the SRP batcher and i guess Shader Graph.
but apart from PBR lighting (including SH and lightmaps) LWRP is bombing us back into the times of Unity 1.0.
you have to decide globally if you want per vertex or per pixel additonal lights? not per material? well, we can if we hack the shaders
I would imagine it will take many years (2+) to have any sort of feature parity of any kind. These are huge projects, and instead of developing internally, they're releasing "beta" stuff as it comes out. So it looks especially messy. Oof
I can tell you what you should learn, UNREAL ENGINE!...
THESE PIPELINES ARE THE END OF UNITY....
Unity are in a messy messy messy situation that is all their own doing...
Let me remind you people HDRP does not and will not support CUSTOM IMAGE EFFECTS!!!
UNITY PLEASE CLARIFY THIS SITUATION.. CAN WE OR CAN WE NOT DO CUSTOM IMAGE EFFECTS WITH HDRP? IF YES, WHERE IS THE CLEAR DOCUMENTATION...
To be hones with you I'm embaresed to introduce a new comer to Unity..
Please stop with the caps. I know you're frustrated but caps are the equivalent to yelling and that's just not professional.
I'm pretty sure HDRP is going to support custom image effects. Last I heard their developing the api for that rn. Remember it's still in preview so documentation is very light.
Dude.. It's so obvious you're fanboy or some sort of a troll or damage control person for Unity.. They are caps, they are not a physical object, I don't need your permission on writing styles. If it bothers your eyes don't read it, very simple. LET ME SAY AGAIN...UNITY IS NOW A FREAKIN MESS..and no body is giving a straight answer to anything.
I'M ASKING UNITY, WILL HDRP SUPPORT CUSTOM IMAGE EFFECTS????, WHEN AND HOW...This is a very simple question.
joshcamas also said 'Remember it's still in preview' what's in preview? So, HDRP is preview is it?
Take a look at this https://forum.unity.com/threads/urp-post-processing-ambient-occlusion-availability.740726/
And This, https://forum.unity.com/threads/custom-post-processing-on-lwrp.745070/
And This, https://forum.unity.com/threads/the-basics-of-urp-post-processing.744281/
And This, https://forum.unity.com/threads/lwrp-postfx-not-working-on-oculus-quest.739061/
Many, Many More if you want more frustration examples..
and this, 'URP doesn't render a geometry normals texture', are you kidding me?
Do you get the picture now?
Frankly, what would you have preferred? Unity to develop these in isolation over two or three years with no visible development from our perspective as developers and no input and feedback? It is clear that the graphics pipeline needed rewriting. At least now we have control over the pipeline, if I don’t like how something in it works I can go and change it. It does raise some questions, like why on earth does AR keep breaking, there must be some miscommunication between the teams there because I have implemented AR on four different versions of LW/URP now and it’s never been difficult in any way.
The problem here is the marketing department featuring things still in development like if they were done.
They have been featuring the new render pipelines for two years now as the new shiny feature.
Unity started this drift for the worst when they hired the ex-ceo of electronic arts as their CEO.
You can do that by creating your very own SRP or even tweaking certain options in the settings. These are just templates.
I would love to see templates from others in the store. Or particular renderers now that it is possible to do that as an asset.
But you are correct that those of us who can't create their own SRP and lets be honest, who would prefer to spend so much time and effort creating an SRP from scratch when competing products can offer ,more out of the box? We should of course be able to achieve all basic features of the standard pipeline in URP.
And most definitely yes for default support of 2 direct lights, and of course, AO is a must. They can't possibly suggest URP for VR without AO. This is very sad if you compare it with the competition. Why should anyone after the removal of the old standard pipeline, use Unity for VR with such poor rendering feature set?
Well, they wouldn’t really. Which is why the standard pipeline is not being removed just yet, it’s just getting no new features.
Definitely not. I will not let it
since you asked permission...
stop littering with the caps. You were politely asked.
superjayman is not completely off with his extreme frustration over the current state of things. Having used Unity off and on for 10 years, I thought it would be fun to teach a college class how to develop using Unity last spring. TBH, it sort of confirmed to most of them that Unreal was where they want to be making things. Granted, these were mostly 3D artists and not programmers, but with the competition they can just put their models in and 'it works'.
I personally see the benefit of a more generalized engine, and I trust that all these changes will lead to a more performant engine....eventually. New users don't have that patience and just want something that is easy to use and looks great. It was a total nightmare trying to show/explain the features available. For example, there is a really cool node-based shader editor...BUT you have to use LWRP or HDRP. Same with VFX. There's a really cool cross-platform AR Foundation thing, but now you have to scrap LWRP and all your VFX and shaders. I can't even explain why this is happening, or when it will all be 'just working' again.
The examples above are not trivial exceptions - light cookies, stacked cameras and on and on. How do you explain to new users that they need to ignore most of the search results and tutorials that exist using these basic concepts if they want to use the shader editor and vfx graph – both of which seem to be targeting new users?
They should really consider re-naming the engine to UNITY DOTS or something. Keep the old Unity working with existing workflows and people would know to search for UNITY DOTS tutorials for techniques that work with SRP.
LOL, not Unigine, no...
If I switched, I would go to Unreal or even Godot.
Not that I'm switching anytime soon, since I'm a big Unity fan.
But if they remove everything that made me enjoy Unity, like the C# component system, an easy way to write my own shader code or the rendering flexibility we had until now, then maybe.
Granted, if they broke compatibility with all the code I already have and all the assets I purchased in the assetstore by making mandatory the new data oriented thing instead of monobehaviours and force us to switch to the new render pipeline, then I would check other alternatives for sure, since they would be throwing away everything that makes Unity comfy for me and it would be like relearning a new engine from scratch.
Take note Unity:
Support for legacy features = Customer loyalty
Why do you think Canon and Nikon users don't switch from a camera system to the other? Because they already have thousands of dollars invested in lenses that don't work in the other camera system. Switching would be throwing away all this investment.
All of us have a lot of code and shaders bought in the assetstore. Break compatibility with them and you will lose users.
It's like they want to throw away all the work that was done in the past but keep the Unity name as an empty shell.
Godot?? Make me laugh(Godot is Rubbish compared to Unigine) Before you make comments like that get your facts straight! And read the features..Tell me what you know about Unigine, they are 100% in the right direction. NOT AN ABSOLUTE MESS LIKE UNITY AT THE MOMENT. Let me guess you work on just 2D games?
Can you please show me Feature Comparison Chart between Unity vs Unigine..
Ok, go purchase Unigine and be happy.
I don't need to, it will be FREE very soon!..And I can import all of my Unity Assets Instantly. How is the feature comparison coming along? Unity now have an engine where you cant even get the world space normals??? are you kidding me.. Don't even get me started about lack of RTX (Raytracing) support, it's only experimental for HDRP with major issues. Again take a look at Unreal Engines Implementation of RTX, they are on their fourth iteration, and it just works.
Oh sorry, I missed your answer...
Now, by chance - looking at a forum thread - and I saw it.
-I have not been on the forum for a while and there have been too many notifications.
BIG Thanks! -Everything is working now! Perfectly!
Volume framework... HDRP doc section... -I would not even think...
I'm sorry... I saw your answers only today...
Thank you very much for the help! Everything works now!
I'm with postprocessing, again!
P.S. Sorry for my "English"
If you are going to promote another engine at least keep relevant to the topic at hand, how hard it is to write shader at any complexity level.
Relative to that i looked at Godot and they seems to have a very straight forward shader edition, that separate vertex, fragment and, but don't make much a difference between texture, screen and buffer, which help simplifying thing since for a noob they are essentially the same thing.
Not on topic i always add more problem doing procedural mesh and custom game physics on unity opposed to blitz 3d so power and feature lists is not the problem.
Some people don't pick an engine purely due to how many shaders and effects and fancy stuff you can pump your screen with. There are other things to think about when choosing an engine, and that's why many people are interested in Godot, for example.
See an example image attached of what I am seeing, see that if nothing is between the camera and the surface using depth-pass, it renders fine, however if any object is in between it is included in the depth pass.
This thread is getting a little out hand.
Can I politely ask you keep on topic and be courteous to each other? The content here should be purely LWRP/URP related.
Speaking of purely LWRP/URP @UnityMaru, in this video at 10:45 he says that it nows supports volume even in Universal and demonstrate the volumetric fog, Am I missing something? because I can't find anything related to volumetric fog on 2019.3.0b3
I think he means only on volume box which can set up PP. No volumetric.
I have reported a bug for the issue I was posting about with LWRP/URP if this was in response to me! Please look at Case 1184489
is this going to be the URP deferred gbuffer layout?
8 bit for normals only?
and what is metallic good for if we have specular?
read and write to gbuffer4?
Official source please
I just saw this as well, but you beat me to posting this. Some more information on the future features would be very nice.
I want to build just an app, not a game. So it's relying on Canvas UI only. Should i use standard pipeline or universal would be more performant?
Built-in Forward and URP should be both as fast in your case.
Just choose the one you like the most. (URP for the shader graph or Built-in forward for maximum compatibility with third party shaders and overall stability)
Keep in mind you will have to control the frames per second or your app will drain the batteries of mobile devices lightning fast.
I’d use standard for that.
did anyone was able to upgrade the URP version to "7.1.1" like in "LWRP-CustomRendererExamples" ?
Did you mean i have to set up targetFrameRate manually? I read somewhere here that it's not necessary while use vsync.
60fps for an app is still a lot if the app is doing nothing but wait for user input.
I think Unity included a way to only render on demand on a recent update, decoupling the logic from the actual render. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I only half remember it.
Standard! Universal is useless in every way.. Shader Graph is a joke, going back 10 years in progress. Unity just wants to copy unreal engine.
No, it is not useless “in every way”, you are extrapolating from your needs to everyone’s needs. You have made your views clear, I even agree with some of them, but this is now getting rather childish and unhelpful.
Yeah the real complaints aren't about the srp and shader graph, it's about breaking continuity and lacking consideration about benefit the old way did. I'm probably going to switch to another solution to prototype stuff quickly, which doesn't help me as it fragment my workflow, ease of use used to be unity's call.
I think it would be convenient for app usage. Only one problem, i have to wait many months for stable 2019.3 release =))
oh, fog is broken in LWRP 5.16.1. when using _ALPHAPREMULTIPLY_ON.
the capsules visible altho they shoud be hidden by fog use the built in lit shader and a simple shader created with shader graph...
Here you go, https://unigine.com/en/get-unigine There is a now an unrestricted Trial version
Always a great idea to read the fine print (aka EULA / ToS / whatever) first:
(under 6. Updates, replacement, trial version, other conditions, 3)
Don't feed the troll...
Knock it off with the trolling. I said earlier in the thread not to do this.
Still, could be helpful for people who are believing this guy.
i still have some problems with LWRP and WebGL. Materials made i nshader graphs does not work in WebGl.
Hi there! Another question about performance...what would be more performant for 2d game like picross(nonograms), universal or build-in?
Okay now I vented, i want to give URP a run for its own strength.
Where I am, there is a lot of people on cheap tablet and smartphone (mali400 midgard architecture) so I use that as basis, it's a very weak gpu but trying to find way to push it scales up.
One major thing I had no influence on is that because it's tiled architecture, it limit a lot of thing, anything that want to access global memory have a high cost. Generally it's not advised to do deffered stuff because it mean doing multiple pass that goes back and forth between the global and local memory.
Turns out I read someone figure out that if we could just keep the result of the previous pass in local memory AND be sure we don't have access to random pixel adresses (ie a typical blending with the pixel below) we could do deffered on that architecture.
Now my use case is not deffered, I want to do an outline shader that is a feathered alpha with a fresnel and blend according to the depth to simulate "crappy" SSAO on dynamic objects.
Given that URP is specifically design to help target specific hardware with custom pipeline, how can I ensure the local memory isn't flush and reuse it for the next pass, is it something we can do? Does renderpass allow us to specify that we ensure next pass don't have random pixel access as an optmization?
I know a similar trick has been done to do performant shadow on midgard, ie avoiding context switch of memory (if I use the correct lingo...).
Can these be done? and how?