Unity 5 is coming and more!

So, we have three releases in the works. 4.5 is in beta and 4.6 is in beta also. 5.0 is in alpha. Certainly 4.5 will be the first out the door. 4.6 has the new GUI, but is otherwise identical to 4.6. We want the new GUI to have a long beta, so we get lots of good feedback from the selected beta testers we know will give us good bug reports. So when this long-awaited, long-delayed feature ships we know we got it right. 5.0 will also have the new GUI in, so logically 5.0 cannot ship before 4.6. Except that we can't get two releases out at the same time, and it'll be a marketing/business call about which one should go first. The use of spring in the original announcement was a genuine error, not some attempt to stir up trouble/excitement. Everyone's human.

We've no idea about 6.0. I think it's reasonable to assume a 2-year time frame. To be honest the subscription model is meant to insulate customers from the exact release dates.

 

Um, with respect, I believe we announced 5.0 before the Epic announcement, and had no prior info that Unreal wanted to get into the same space as us and copy all our ideas. Maybe our 5.0 announcement scared Epic and they changed their subscription price from $69/month to $19/month at the last minute?

 

If you could give some info about Level Streaming, and where to download the song from the video, that would be great

 

Perhaps. But $75 isn't insulating when:

1. it's 300 dollars more than buying outright.
2. it's 1200 dollars more than upgrade.

Frankly, while I am a big supporter of Unity, I think the subscription model is useless and requires a dramatic overhaul. I understand the problems with users using it once for deployment and then stopping. I think that making the pro dev environment much more effective will be key in making it desirable to develop with pro full time as opposed to only using pro for launch.

There's no sane logical reason subscription is ever going to make sense vs paid. And with Epic's pressure, that's not good for you or us.

 

Really? Is that the narrative inside UT offices this week? That is pathetic.

As if Unity was never influenced, inspired or guided by Unreal Engine's successes over the past 16 years. Unity has been chasing Unreal's AAA market hoping to expand into the big leagues for years. Then when Epic pivots to make their engine indie friendly, suddenly they are bad guys and "idea thieves"? Give me a break.

I didn't plan on mentioning Unreal engine in this Unity 5 thread, but that comment cannot go unchallenged.

 

In the real world, software is analogous to fresh produce, it has a lifespan that is fit for consumption.
One can buy a fruit and own it forever, only catch is who would want to eat it after the due date.
Owning an old piece of software is very much the same. No one wants to be stuck at Unity version 3.5 when the latest is version 12.

 

Will Unity 5 solve the Editor issue with retina MacBooks (the game view doesn't use the available resolution, so I can't see an iPhone rendered at full resolution)?

 

It is called competition...

 

This is a bit irritating, for those of us whom have purchased 4.x within the past 9 months and are now being asked another 600$ for 5.x cycle... It's a great deal to entice a new licensee' as they get Pro now plus an entirely new edition which for the value (if the 24 month life-cycle sticks) yields 32 months of Pro advantages and updates (working out to about 47$/mo. if version 6.x cycle begins in Fall '16) . "if" the 5.x is released early (summer?), that reduces the value to existing licensee holders that much more.

However, if the 24 month cycle sticks (which isn't going to be the case it would seem), I'm being asked to pay 29% more than new holders if I purchased the upgrade today, and the release is in November (1500 / 2100) for the same benefits. And in my case, as I have purchased apparently dead in the middle of the release cycle, I'll be paying 58% more than a holder whom purchased a 4.x at the beginning of its' cycle ([11/2012 - 7/2013] * [1500/x]... where 'x' is 24 "if" the 5.x release is 11/2014, otherwise it will be greater than 58% ).

How is this reasonable? Can you see my irritation here....

 

*thumbs up*

 

It is a bit far and loose to say Epic stole all of Unity's ideas, but in a business model sense (catering to indies, providing an engine easily accessible to the masses by having free version AND a relatively cheap Pro version(at the time, compared to other engines), and a subscription to Unity Pro). Unity really doesn't seem like it ever followed Epic's, whereas Epic seems to have followed Unity. If Unity really did copy Epic's business model, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because Unity wouldn't be indie-friendly just yet.

Of course, Unity wants to improve their engine to end up in the AAA market...call it copying, or self-improvement, who really cares as long as the engine continues to improve.

One of the main problems I see here is that hardly anyone has mentioned that Unity still provides Unity free. Now one can argue that those Unity free users are not serious developers....but I'd think it's still a very large market, and if it's not that then it's a stepping stone for those new developers to become serious. As far as I know, none of the other game engines are offering this. I believe...sadly, in a sense Unity pro users are basically paying for the Unity free users, at least till they become pro users. Which is probably part of the reason why Unity Pro prices are higher than the other engines. But now Unity must re-adjust and try to balance their prices while factoring in what their competitors have to offer.


I just hope they won't really copy Unreal's business model, and kill Unity free and just have a low subscription fee. Imagine the cries and whines then too.

 

Thanks for the info,
I just preordered a Unity 5 Pro license

 

I'm not sure hobbyists would find UE or Cry easier than Unity, that's why most of them will come back after a couple weeks excitement and headache.

Maybe Unity may lose newcomers and kids, who can mess with UE instead of Unity (and Asset Store) before losing attention.

The problem is with Pro / business users, who need to make calculations for next projects. That said, re-training for UE or Cry is going to be hard and a productivity loss is money lost, that's why they're calling for a sweetener.

 

As the instigator of this whole line of thought (again...I hate to be "that guy"), I actually couldn't agree with you more. I DON'T want to learn UE...I DON'T want to learn CryEngine. I am so comfortable in Unity that it's become like a 2nd skin. But holy crap...these aren't MINOR price differences. Especially in the CryEngine case...it's $120/year with NO ROYALTY.

I just don't think anyone who is trying to make money in this space can ignore that cost difference. If we are all legitimately trying to create games as a business...we don't have the luxury of platform fanboism; we can't ignore iOS because of our personal feelings against the way Apple does business...or ignore Microsoft because we thought Windows Vista sucked. We have to look at the numbers and the commercials and make a decision what platforms we'll target.

Well the same has to be said for the cost of making our products. We have to look at all the options and consider the pros (Unity has TONS of pros; Asset Store and Mecanim to name a couple) and the cons (right now...Unity's pricing has fallen into the con category), and make a sound business decision.

Props to all the guys participating in this forum that are actually FROM Unity. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't take any of this personally and please don't take it as "that guy" just trying to stir the pot.

As a refugee from GarageGames' Torque 3D...I know not all engines are created equal. When I shifted from T3D to Unity...I suddenly became orders of magnitude more productive as a game developer. So I have NO interest in experimenting with new platforms right now.

I LOVE Unity and what it's been able to help me accomplish. I want to continue to use this product and access its evolving feature set, and I want Unity Technologies to make that decision feel like it was ALSO a good business decision.

 

Yes
new comers will surely be attracted by the idea of using Unreal or Crytek at that price, with all the heritage and features... but it will come down to easy of use for specific projects and how well Unreal/Crytek will perform on indie-friendly platforms like iOS and Android.
You maybe have noticed Unreal is investing in (they employed a training guy just to output training material many moons ago) and delivering training for new starters at the moment of the announcement... they released training videos including Blueprint stuff straight away. Again that must be to send a message to potential new users, to eliminate some normal block people will think of at the start... e.g."I can afford Unreal but how do I learn to use it... ho look, they already have video training material to get started... let me have a go"...

so you can see they have planned this well to attract hobby developers, new developers, advanced players wanting to mess bout and maybe make a game...

If Unreal/Crytek do
- make it easy to learn their tech
- offer built in deployment (no extra license fee for iOS and Android and Windows) to mobile platforms
- do quickly offer tested and reliable mobile platform output with good performance (I am sure they know it and must be working on it)
- if they should even start c++ video training on Unreal for those that have this other barrier of entry...
- on top of the wow factor one can feel knowing they are using a top tier AAA engine (not saying Unity is not AAA, but the other two have been AAA for long time with big titles under their belt in the past many years)
- engine source code (and code for epic games ?)

They will set themselves up for a very strong first port of call to develop games with.

Until then Unity still offers easy of use, possibly more tools for 2D games, a functional Asset Store, mobile SDKs for monetising... (but how long before Epic gets that covered)

I for one like Unity, do have time invested in it... I have 4.x Pro. But (if I want to upgrade now) I am now presented with a choice to spend $1800 to upgrade to 5.0 for Pro, iOS Pro, Android Pro... Actually I do not have Android 4.0 Pro so may have to pay full price for that...
Or in theory upgrade later (no early discounted price) which will be even more expensive. Of course we have to see if Unity will change their pricing after Crytek and Unreal announcements.

Or which is very possible alternative... keep working on Unity 4.0 Pro, and in the meanwhile get Unreal and start messing about with it... so in a few months when Unity 5.0 will be ready I will be able to decide if go to 5.0 or carry on with Unreal which by that time will surely have improved their own 2D and mobile support (or whatever Crytek will look like from May)

I am not interested in the Unity Free option or point of discussion.
You can get Unreal for $19 and stop the monthly payment and that's it keep using it... then only start again where there are updates you need... That would still work out cheaper than having Unity Free and spending maybe money on Assets form Asset Store to add features which are in Pro on Unreal built-in.

But we have to give Unity time to asses the situation... Unreal/Crytek prices have just been announced, they weren't there before... I wouldn't expect Unity to change their prices within 24 hours of Unreal/Crytek announcement... But of course the longer they take the more ground they will lose for those who where thinking to upgrade to Pro (from FREE) or get Pro in the first place... now that Unreal and Crytek are a VERY affordable alternative.

Also you do need to keep in mind that many recently formed Indie Teams were developers coming from bigger studios closing down. These seasoned developers very probably already have experience with Unreal and very probably used to code in C++. yes some may prefer C# but for some the Unreal factor may be enough to go back to C++) Now these 'old timers' have the opportunity to use top tier AAA tech for their indei/small team games at an almost FREE price... There would be little reason for them to use Unity FREE or wait for Unity 5 Pro

 

Amongst the Engine Makers, it all started out from a Love of Gaming, which then became the Business of Gaming.
As the masses caught on, the Engine Makers are now in the Game of Business.
Finally, it's all a Game.

 

Can i get an awnser to the question i made yesterday? Pretty please

 

With the integration of PhysX 3.3, will Unity 5 ship with better cloth physics?

 

that is the reason i stop using for now using Unity, because vehicle physics is poor, i think
they don´t use full vehicle PhysX SDK, vehicle staff.
Lots of vehicle staff the Unity não have
http://physxfiles.com/PhysX_3-3_release_notes.html

I never give Up on unity as hobbist normaly i do racings games is my focus. But always can do other styles of games, that is the engines is made for

 

If you're going to use that as an option, you may as well consider "Unity Pro from piratebay" as an option too, since you're exploiting their policies and effectively pirating their software at that point.

 

No, you wouldn't be exploiting or pirating anything. Tim Sweeney explicitly said this was fine. You lose the marketplace, updates and source access if you don't subscribe, and you're only licensed for the particular version you downloaded before the subscription ended. You're still contractually bound to the 5% if you release anything.

 

yes as orb said this is in Epic permitted use of their new pricing structure
REALITY is they know most people will pay monthly because you know that there will be updates and bug fixes and new features... so you will want to have the latest version...

What I mean, if you all wanted to do is have a look and use the video training to get a feel of the platform you could just get it for one month.... so you can see if you want to carry on or not... But if I was going to make a game with it there would be reasons for paying monthly. I hate piracy, not for me, I hate it for software, music... no thanks

 

Below was mentioned on page 15.

http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/23...more!/page13?p=1560498&viewfull=1#post1560498

Edit: Figured out how to link to a post.

 

Better link it directly - the last page for me is page 5

 

No you're not exploiting their policies. You STILL have to pay the 5% royalty, but on their own web site, they tell you that you are free to cancel your subscription at any time (if you don't want/need updates) and continue to use the system.

 

Unreal's physics seems much more realistic then Unity 4. With the new Unity 5 physic update is it close to the realism of Unreal 4?

With the low cost of Unreal, it's VERY tempting.

Thanks,

 

We call it the Standard Shader, as it is certainly not basic.

As per usual you will have access to the source of the shader and you will be able to tweak it to your heart's content. Reusable parts of the shader are in their own cginc files and you can use those in other shaders as well.

 

Initially there will be no per vertex lighting. We will certainly consider that as a possibility.

 

Man......
come on....give us more detailed stuff about unity 5.....
somekind of release notes or something...
the " Wait, there's more " in Unity 5 page make me really curious :/

 

Please don't be condescending. I am well aware of what sarcasm is. As I hope you know, it can be difficult to detect in text without emoticons or the /s tag. And since Graham is British, his sarcasm is twice as difficult to detect.

See. That is the proper use of sarcasm online.

Assuming you are correct, that Graham was just joking, then of course I withdraw everything I said. You have no disagreement from me that Unity has blazed a trail for indie 3D development. And I am grateful for that regardless of where I may be a year from now.

 

There will certainly be ways to accomplish what you're after.
Destroying entire buildings will most likely need two sets of data you'll need to switch between with some smoke and mirrors.
Opening doors (and blowing up roofs for that matter) will be something we will try to support directly ASAP.

Battlefield 3 4 are using Enlighten and I'd guess that level of scene modification/destruction is what you had in mind. It is certainly possible, we just need to find a simple way of exposing that functionality.

 

Sounds like we're all cool then.

 

How about dynamic light?? will it able to produce color bleed/ Indirect light??

and......is there any updates on Fog and shadows?? (like control every cascade distance)

 

*bump*

What about PVRTC2 Compression? Will we finally get it with 5?

 

That's exactly what Enlighten offers. All the lighting feeding into Enlighten (lights, their properties, emissive material properties and environment lighting) can be dynamic. Albedo can also be changed at runtime.

I'm not aware of any changes in that area. Also, I'm not sure what kind of updates to fog do you have in mind.

 

Awesome

Oh sorry, what i mean is something like Atmospheric scattering since The Chase have those, and maybe Volumetric Fog or shadow and Lightshaft for Fog

 

I agree. Right now to buy a pro license with iOS, android and WebGl it would be $6000 and then $3000 every year and a half or so to keep current. While there a so many free users who aren't paying anything. I think Unity needs to adjust the multi-license pricing to be more reasonable.

 

Thanks for the answer.
I already have the destruction made in my game (well, mostly made), where i have several sets of meshes for each destructible part, but since i heard Enlighten pre-computes the lighting meshes(or something like that), i thought that i couldn't add/remove certain meshes to modify how the global illumination reacts. Everything would still remain static.

 

Robert's light shafts are a good start (need 4.3 or up):
https://github.com/robertcupisz/LightShafts

They might become a part of Standard Assets or sth, but that was a quick way of getting them out there.

As for the effects from "The Chase" -- I'm sure they will get into your hands at some point. Someone just needs to poke ReJ a few times.

 

I don't understand how you can have all that and yet still require baking in the editor for it to actually work. Surely there is some way to allow a runtime bake (again, I mean just a bake or update outside the editor, NOT rebaking every single frame). It sounds like you guys are almost there... limiting Enlighten to only work on scenes that can be prebaked seems like a big loss.

 

Ah yes...those were a great effect i must say .
but will it work in large open scene, could be tricky to add it in full scene. But again, no worries it's not so crucial at the moment

Can you poke Him for us...???

 

You wouldn't want the nimble runtime to be as big as the Editor, would you?
Besides the size, the precomp would have to be supported on all the platforms where the runtime side of Enlighten currently runs.

There's a big discrepancy between the hardware you guys use and the hardware your games are played on (compare the Editor and the Web Player stats): http://stats.unity3d.com. Running the precomp step on a mobile device doesn't sound like a good idea.

Rest assured that we're not giving up on supporting environments more dynamic than previously mentioned. It's just that handling them will require a different set of techniques and the hardware from the future.

Anyway, I have a feeling that we're diving a bit too deep into the specifics of a yet unreleased feature.

 

Yes, I certainly would! I'm targeting PC and possibly console, so runtime size doesn't matter much to me, and I would gladly accept an extra GB or two of hard drive space if it meant runtime access to some of the editor features. But for those who do care, you could have an option to include it or not.

I wish you guys didn't always think like that... I understand wanting to try to keep things similar across all platforms, but there are many of us out there who don't care about targeting all the platforms with every project.

IMHO, that should be my responsibility, not Unity's. If I want to release a game that requires mammoth PC specs, then you guys should allow that, and not purposefully try to stop me from doing things because you're worried I'll later try to release it on a five year old iPhone and blame you for how slow it is.

 

+100

 

Has anything been said about updating the terrain generation for Unity 5?

Or are these still some surprises that haven't been talked about?

 

Lovely effect.

One thing that concerns me is how fast Unity 5 will be. How good graphics are, are often limited (esp on console or steambox) by the target hardware. With that in mind, is performance a bigger priority for Unity?

Also, how about things like camera motion blur and in general - the posfx pipeline handled in U5? For us, working with Unity post FX in 3 and 4 was a no-go not least because of all the redundant blits going on - being able to combine a few effects into one really helped.

In this way, sometimes having a "uber post" which does antialiasing, motion blur and depth of field together, can represent time savings, and are typically a high end look that everyone wants to just toggle on. What's your thoughts about that going forward?

Anyway, love your work!

 

I think after GUI, the Terrain system is the most requested feature to be remade in Unity.
Are you guys thinking about remaking the Terrain system in Unity 5.x? (workflow, features and performance)

 

+1 For not wanting to be limited by mobile performance when targeting PC.

Edit: Yes I did misunderstand this. Slim build is good.