looks like UDK has self shadowing, dof and more on their mobile engine...

It's changing times. Unity right now are examining the conversion ratio from april onwards from free downloads of basic to pro. They will see if this is more money or not. I would be pretty darn surprised if they didn't examine the data.

 

Hmm, i could see unity steping their game up, but since most phones can't handle infinity blade, I think unity's ok for now

 

I doubt the figures would be that high, there is a big void between $400 and $2600.... onless they changed there licencing prices completly i think there profits would suffer.

I guess time will tell though, if they change IOS basic and android basic to free and Antenna tree is driving around in a ferrari then we will know that it was better

 

Most phones can handle infinity blade though. At last from 3GS up. And that's all anyone has these days.

 

UDK has nice features but at what cost? Check out the UDK requirements and it requires you use Windows for the editor. Unity started out as a Mac only tool, and I don't think they will be dropping Mac for the IDE so they can get certain tool integration. I assume that is why Unity is making their own solutions to certain problems. They want not only the games to be cross platform but the editor as well.

So the real question is, why can UDK games be made for iPhone and iPad on a windows machine but Unity can't?

 

Strange....

 

The UDK allows you to develop iOS games on a PC. To submit them, you need access to a Mac.

UDK iOS Developer Info

 

That makes sense, but Unity restricts you from compiling to iOS if you are on Windows. I just got one of the free iOS basic license and Unity says "Building iOS apps is not supported on Windows." Why can't we do the same with Unity? I suppose its to curb user confusion and frustration? They don't want to avoid people thinking they can make and publish an iOS title using Windows? Interesting how Unreal handles it, I thought there was something in place by Apple that preventing Unity from offering compile to iOS on Windows.

 

I guess it's because there is no point, or they dont see a point.

iOS compilation in Unity just creates an XCode project. You then must compile the XCode project from XCode.

Also, the process automatically opens the project in XCode, and depending on your Unity pick (like build and run) XCode will be told by Unity to build and push to the connected device.

 

@MakerOfGames, I think its unity's personal preference. But I too thought you couldn't use a windows computer to build iOS games...

 

That clears things up. It seems the UDK must take care of that for you. But like you said, it seems like it would be a waste of Unities resources to devote time to essentially reinvent the wheel when you need a Mac to upload anyway. No point in enabling on Windows as no need to remake the tech that exists on the Mac. I bet Unity would build it out if you could publish iOS using Windows though. Then it would be adding the full cross platform support that they do so well.

 

The only advantage I can think of is that more Windows developers would be able to jump on the Unity iOS bandwagon. Finding a Mac user to help publish your game is a small thing compared to actually having to buy a Mac for development.

 

Really? C# support? Might have to give it a proper go at some point when then that happens. Cheers for the heads up I don't visit the UDK page or forums to often so must have completely missed that.

I don't plan on dropping Unity. UDK is a bit overkill for what I'm looking to do but it never hurts to try out other stuff.

 

do you have a source too? I never saw that someone of epic games mentioned C# support

 

Well for the sake of Unity and Cryengine lets hope this is not true, otherwise it means armagedon for those two indie engines.

 

Guess I'll be fighting the good fight from here then. Haven't any plans to move my fat bottom from Unity at present.

This isn't about what engine to use, the thread was never about that. It was to highlight that unity must keep current their mobile engine, and judging by feedback I'm sure most agree. It doesn't mean that we should suddenly declare unity as a sinking ship and that the mayan calendar means the end of the world.

It means due to the nature of our next app (which is going to be used by thousands and be free) is that I kind of do need mobile shadows, dof etc. It's almost finished now and these final touches missing did make me feel like my product could have been that much better on ipad2 and ipad3 and 4S.

 

I don't plan on dropping Unity janpec still waiting on that Dino Pack

But yeah I kind of agree with you there. If UDK does get C# support I could see alot of people migrating over to it. Though I don't see Unity or CryEngine dying out.

 

Armagedon usually doesnt mean ful destruction, there is always someone who survives It just means that plenty of users would migrate to UDK becouse it would spread ability of "only one possible game genre - FPS" to plenty.

 

If I made a game in UDK and it hit the royalty limit so I had to pay out 25% for a couple of fancy effects the game doesn't even need...

I'd. Be. Pissed.

I've used UDK quite a bit and yes it's awesome for what it's designed for. That being said I spent days trying to get a simple ball rolling game working correctly. Back when I first got Unity within a few days I'd prototyped an FPS, 2D platformer, RTS and a puzzle game. Unity is so damn fast to get any type of game going it still blows my mind and that itself is the reason UDK will just be a bit of fun for me for the time being.

 

You would only pay the 25% on your sales over $50,000, so it would still be a net gain. In other words, if your game made $54,000, you would keep $50,000 + (75% of $4,000), or $53,000.

At which point some nice lady from Epic might call you to ask "How would you feel about releasing your title on consoles too?"

But yeah, I agree that for simple concepts like the one you described, implementation is much easier on Unity.

 

I agree. We're entering a very pivotal point, that will make or break certain engines out there now. Personally, I like Unity, I like its common sense work flow and just how it does certain things in general. There are certain things that I absolutely despise about it too, things that make me say "hmm, that doesnt fit the same style of doing it as the rest of Unity" .... like GUI ... which makes me want to put my head into a blender.

But as the gap between the pros and cons between Unity and other engines like UDK narrows in certain aspects, so will the decisions of whether to upgrade or not. UDK has a clear advantage in certain things like graphical power, but if it ramps up their user friendliness and common sense work flow to match Unity, then its basically game over.

Game dev is a gamble at best. Someone can create what some would say is S***, and it ends up being a mega hit when released, while at the same time someone could create something that some would say is fantastic and it could end up flopping. So when it comes to price points, they will gamble with the one thats free that has the most to offer, even if it means losing a chunk on royalty. Because of the gamble factor, paying nothing up front means losing nothing, and hitting it big (which few do) means nothing to them because they will see it as a price to pay for the privilege to have reached that height.

Its not up to us to decide that. Purchasers of games drive the market and trends. If they are used to graphical eye candy as the norm, they will expect it as the norm, and they will hold that criteria when they make future purchases. Consumers are picky, because they can be. If they want eye candy, they will buy eye candy. Many wont care about gameplay, as long as its playable, and "looks awesome, and cool" they will pay for it. Educated gamers care about gameplay and the finer details about games, but mass consumers out number informed consumers.

Thats why companies like Epic have to push the visuals, because the consumers expect it. Once the eye candy of mobile games increases from the AAA studios, indies are doomed in competition. It will be the same as how it is now in the PC/Mac market.

I disagree. I've been a gamer for a few decades (and a pro-gamer for a few short years during that time). What I saw and witnessed was that there was a massive shift in the beginning from PCs to consoles. Consoles became the new big trendy thing that everyone had to have.

But ever since the economic crisis took hold, there came a massive split in the gaming community. Those who were hit hard financially (which was a lot of people) started drifting back to PCs. The pricing coupled with the multitasking/multi-usability and upgrading was the main drive. They couldnt accept spending on a pure luxury item that had no other main use but gaming alone, couldnt be upgradable, and that cost more for extra things like online play (ex: Xbox Live subscriptions). So they stuck to PCs, because to them, they could always upgrade a part here and there if they wanted to, and not buy a whole system in one shot.

Those who werent hit as hard, or not at all during the crisis, continued their exodus to consoles ... even more so. They were more financially better off, but plenty not only bought consoles, they also bought high-end gaming rigs (like the top of the line Alienware systems). So they never fully abandoned PCs, they still use them for gaming, its just that more of them prefer consoles.

There is a lot of animosity between gamers in the whole PC vs Consoles fight. Its not going to go away anytime soon, because I think its more of a Less Money vs More Money fight, and its simply manifesting itself that way. The main target is online gaming. PC gamers are being hit very hard with hacks/cheaters, its ruining the gameplay in serious ways. Many have begun abandoning it. Not to mention, between 2008 - 2010 there was a big drop in online PC gaming, but it has begun to pick up quite a bit lately.

As long as businesses use traditional PCs, they wont go away. Mainly because whatever people use at work, they will want to use at home due to familiarity. And right now companies are generally too financially tight to begin switching to the future wave of computing.

Personally, I will always prefer the big-mega tower rig PC that sucks the electricity out my outlet with cooling fans that sound like jet engines. If they fully go away, I think its when my full interest in computers will begin to wane. To me those little rinky dinky flimsy PC's are for the kids. I want my lights to dim when I turn on my PC! LOL

But then again, who knows where technology will end up, there are always surprises that come about.

 

Well... When everyone is doing the same thing at the same time and same place... you better not be part of "everyone".
Nintendo's head really knows where to put his feet.

 

Someone made shadows(maybe) for mobile.... here or you could make fake shadows just draw a sprite of your model then make it translucent put it onto a plain, aslong as you only have one light source that dosent move it should look fine.

 

Guys, I dont want to sound harsh but i think the message was clear. Unity devs knows that mobile needs depth textures, shadows and post effects. Now move on and get back to your awesome projects.

 

Just to be clear, this is valid if you only make ONE game with UDK. The 50k limit is on all your sales combined from all your UDK-based games or application. When your income reach $50k, you start to pay royalties even if the first game doesn't sell anymore and your income come from your second (or third and so on) game.

However, competition is good. UDK is an interesting platform and so is Unity. Having both of them in the same market is beneficial for us, since they will try to stay competitive and this means more functionality, evolution and choice for us.


Jacopo

 

Yes indeed, UDK being on mobile is good for us too. Healthy competition is never bad. Customer wins here.

 

True but when you reach 50k (in the UK) you live fine for 2 years. It's hardly something terrifying. And at that point they may well off you competitive terms instead. You just don't know.

Personally I have checked out various shadow options and they're all hugely slow due to being done in script and not part of the engine core.

 

That's true if you work alone. If you have a small team then the game changes.

 

Yeah that's true. There's two of us full time here, and some freelancers. It would work fairly badly long run for us, but then that is when you license it instead of use royalties (or examine the option).

 

That goes for mobile development only ofcourse, for PC development it still works, few games can be used as example.

 

And let's not forget about taxes, wich will cut another (not small) chunk of your income.
In the end, I think it's a matter of choice. In the long term, UDK will probably cost you more than Unity (I didn't investigate, but I think that one UDK license costs significantly more than one Unity Pro + IOS pro license, and if you choose the royalty option it will definitely cost you more).
However, having the possibility to postpone the licensing cost and to pay only if your products are successful (ie, they sell) could be good for someone who doesn't have money to spend. From that moment on, it's just a matter of managing your business.

 

There's no extra cost in publishing to iOS (except whatever Apple charges you) - it's free to develop, with just the one time $99 fee before you sell your first game, and later the 25% royalty if you pass the $50,000 sales threshold. So it's the same with or without mobile.

Also as Hippo said, licensing options would probably become viable at that point, opening up a whole new world of console publishing.

I think the most important question to ask is whether each engine can help you to achieve that kind of success. You take a license cost risk up front with Unity Pro, but benefit from no royalties if you hit a home run (or a string of singles and doubles). On the flip side, you remove that initial risk when developing with the UDK, getting the full tool set in all its monthly iterations, knowing you'll have to earn $50,000 in profits before a royalty kicks in (with a potential to license and expand to other platforms).

Now, add to the mix the fact that there are some wonderful community members here who have actually offered to help fund a Pro license for anyone who has a great free Unity product and would like to upgrade it.

WAT DO?

It really comes down to deciding which workflow and feature set make the most sense for your project. Unity users love their engine, so I don't see the userbase slipping anytime soon. And hopefully they address some of the issues Hippo raised sooner rather than later.

 

Hi TMichael.
I'm not sure if I understand your response (English is not my first language). I didn't say that there is an extra cost for publishing on iOS with UDK.
The rest of your message seems to be in line with what I said. Am I missing something?

 

Unity has a massive advantage over udk in the fact that it can be instantly played, code edited, replayed with about a 5 second lag between iterations.

As a self-taught programmer who uses a "write now based on best guess, fix after run" type iteration style (basically laggy pair programming with issues caught on run in unit test environments), unity is much better (I've tried udk) in the fact that the compilation build sequence is like 20x less. Similarly for materials and startup variables for the different aspects.

The rate at which Unity's 3rd party developer community has evolved is great too.. they just need the actual unity developers to expose more of the graphics buffer components.

For larger teams there's also source code licenses, which would be easily enough modified to support shadows in the various buffers as well.

 

If you know what you are doing, you can compose your own depth textures (even your own grabpass which could be faster than the one provided by Unity) using camera buffers and replacement shaders. Unity have an unique flexible API (not found neither in UDK neither in CryEngine) but cannot be used by everyone cause it require advanced knowledge of 3D graphic programming. Though, the main subject of this topic is to enable depth textures on Unity mobile to let the average Unity user to blow out their games performance with desktop effects. If i remember well, Aras said they didn't had the time to enable them for mobile. To my guess they will enable them sooner than later.

 

There isn't much information about doing it on mobile though, and posts I made regarding finding out more were met with blank stares

 

Hi Jago,

Sorry, I must have misunderstood what you meant here:

Your English is great, no worries.

 

You could live on $25,000 a year(US dollars)? maby if you lived in a carboard box but if you wanted the luxurie of a wooden create....

No way could you pay:

Food
Petroll
Rent/house payments
Internet,
electricity
water
car repairs
etc.

Onless i misunderstood your statement Mr. Hippo

 

I guess you don't know how little you can live on in a week. I do though, I can get by at 12k a year (probably about $18k?) - sometimes I've had to do with less than that. Once you pay your essentials, you're left with nothing, so you focus on just working.

 

That shows the price of things in australia cheapest rent(median of units in Adelaide the cheapest city) is ~$290 so that X52 = ~ $15k then you would only have like ~$3K left to live on a year.

 

So... ~1160$ per month is the cheapest for australia? For a ... say 50m2 flat? That sounds insane.

 

A welfare recipient pays $420/month on rent minimal here this city was voted #1 most expensive city in the world and you would be very lucky to get that lower short of living on the street.

 

I'll put my two cents in this conversation. I use Unity because I have been making games with it in a very short time. It's easy, affordable, and the support is the best I've ever experienced.

I've used Unreal Engine 3 in the past and have had no games built, no mods that work, and there is no support because apparently nobody knows how to use it. I love their impressive demo reels and all the hype about the engine, but I've never been able to do any of that with it.

 

Don't turn this into Unity vs UDK (let's just talk about rent instead.. j/k ). The point is, Unity for mobile is falling behind FEATURES WISE.

Mobiles was the one area that it was mostly ahead from the competition. Now UDK is starting to treat ios more seriously.

So hippo is trying to say "hey Unity, you have more serious competition now, get back to work, now!". And I agree. So ease of ease of use/workflow etc etc don't come into play here.

And also as hippo is wisely saying a nice set of mobile shaders (written in GLSL for openGL ES 2.0) can go a long way in helping us optimize our mobile games. That seems like a no brainer and it will probably have minimal development time.

Edit: Well... I re-read what I wrote and you can probably sum it up as : HIPPO IS ALWAYS RIGHT

 

It depends where you live, in my country i could live with half of that money, if you count in that you have very cheap rent.

There is plenty modding support arround that engine, there are gazilion games built with it and you can find some of them with modding support, most likely you can learn anything you need from Unreal tournament 2 or 3. Epic also handled Make something unreal constest, which spread modding on their engine and produced some AAA mods. Modding for that engine is not hard, in fact its easier than on most other engines that support modding.

 

Since April 2011 I've been living with 1000€ (1308 us$) / month with a 700€ (915 us$) rent, which leaves me 300€ (392 us$) for phone, internet, and food. But this is clearly not a life. I cannot go to restaurant, buy myself things at times, and I have to limit what I eat each week to the strictest minimum (pastas, vegetables, cereals). And before my girlfriend and I separated last month (for other reasons), the only activities we could have were at home, or at friend's (which is great but after a long time you need to travel, or break the routine with restaurants, etc).

While living on the strict minimum of poverty to make a game is feasible, it is really not recommended for sanity's sake :/
Anyway I would never do that again if I had to.

 

^^^^^^

 

Sells games like you wouldn't believe though. People see videos and screenshots before they buy.

 

We all know it was the realistic real time shadows and pixel shading that made Angry Birds and Tiny Wings so successful!



Now, sarcasm aside: You should not worry that hard about unity's detailed shadows unless you making an extremely elaborate AAA game with a dedicated art team. As an indie you cant expect to compete with large studios even if you had access to the most optimized real time shadow and lighting mobile technology in the world.

We have to capitalize on niches, relatively tiny sectors of the market that have little competition, or intriguing experiments that may be catchy for casual masses but considered a waste of time to pursue by large studios.