Unity on pc

Well there was a lot of stuff about the games could be played on the pc/windows platform, but tell me: can the games be made on pc?

 

A lot of people ask us this question. It's nice of course, but unfortunately the answer is: No. A PC version of the Unity Editor has not been announced.

However a Mac Mini is only $500 and a perfectly decent machine (we have several in the office, and use one as a server). So getting working with Unity isn't far away even for all you PC users out there.


Later this summer a "publish to PC" will be released as a free upgrade for Unity Pro licensees so that PC people will be able to play your games.

 

On a related note, have you thought about allowing people to buy one-off Windows conversions of their Unity projects? They could send you their projects and you could convert them to run on Windows, charging per file size or some other easily quantifiable part of the process. I'm sure this would appeal to users who can't afford the pro version of Unity but might need occasional Windows executables.

 

Thats what i call sad story.
i do truly believe that you guys would earn at least double your money on making a windows platform as well...

because i think your software would be used by single persons around the world to make their own small games and i think that most of those people sitting home alone (just like me) are using windows.

hmm but i have heard that it is possible to have get a mac emulator to your pc. i don't know if this is legal... but if it is, will unity could work on one of these softwares?

 

Emulation is very slow, it usually doesn't work with 3D and games. I personally would suggest you save some money and buy a Mac. And if your so set on staying using Windows then wait till the Mactels come out in a few years and you can use Mac OS X and unity and have Windows on it as well for whatever you need it for. Jeff

(I understand that otee would probably make more money, and I just wanted to say to you guys that part of the reason I'm ready to get unity is that I know that as Mac users this is a much deeper situation than just how much money you can make, you have a passion for our platform, a vested interest in its development. i personally would rather you spent more time making the Mac version better than ever porting it over to other platforms, just my two cents)

 

the money part was just to say: DO IT!
hehe because i cant get the money to a mac computer and the pro license, cause the as far as im concerned the pro lisence is the only lisence which gives you the possibility of making windows games (which is the only platform my friends have!)

 

I understand your feeling and I'm quite proud you (and many other Windows users) want Unity so badly

And thanks for voicing your opinion, only that way can we know what people are up to.

However, for now only Mac users have the pleasure of using Unity... sorry about that.

Best regards,

d.

 

Just one note to outcast:

I personally dislike the idea if someone tells me what hardware i should buy/use to run a specific software, no matter what os we're talking about.

That's what i love about firms like propellerhead and their reason for instance. They don't tell me that i should by a PC or a Mac. They just provide the program for both platforms and let me choose where to use it.

And isn't it nice that i can use apps like Firefox no matter what os i have? I think that this is a very important factor of modern software that it's independent of the os.

Maybe i wanna switch my system the next time? And after that again? Or just use different ones at the same time? And there propitary software simply sucks.

And to come back to Unity and game-dev-tools, i would say that in the end the game-dev-software will have a good position which a) has a good technology/workflow b) can provide multiplatform and c) is available for a fair price/distribution rules.

Obviously there are a pack of other parameters as well but i think you get the idea. And till now each tool has it's failure in one or more of this sectors...including unity.

And as were talking about this just one thought to otee:

If there are so many windows users who are interested in a pc version of unity (by the way, what about linux at least for runtime?) why don't you just hire developers who port it? Unity would benefit from it independent of the os. More content would be produced, the word would be spread more and so on. This looks much more like "taking over" to me. ;O)


Greetings,

taumel

 

For all those asking for a PC version of Unity, I understand where you're coming from. But as a Mac owner since 1986 (although I do use high-end PCs at work) I've watched dozens if not hundreds of tools/programs go by on the PC side without a Mac version. Great tools and programs as a matter of fact.

The Neverwinter Nights and Dungeon Seige toolsets to create game worlds isn't available to Mac users. Gamemaker (from gamemaker.nl) a fabulous tool to introduce game programming isn't available for Mac users. The upcoming stellar MMORPG maker Realm Crafter isn't available on our platform of choice. Darkbasic, OGRE, most level creation tools, etc. Not to mention the dozens of A-title games that aren't available for the Mac.

So it's kind of interesting to see a great tool like Unity, capable of creating excellent games like GooBall and so much more, being available only for the Mac. It's, for me, kind of a poetic justice, although that's being slightly mean-spirited. I like the fact that i'ts Mac only ... that like the great Mac-only digital art program I use (Studio Artist) it is Mac only.

Sorry, but that's the way it is. And for once we Mac users get the cool tool. Please accept that I'm not trying to be mean-spirited or greedy, just excited that Unity is here for us. :wink:

 

Well i don't know when you last checked OGRE but:

- OGRE is available for all platforms (win,osx,lin)
- blitzMax is available for all platforms
- torque is available for all platforms
- and darkbasic is just bad ;O)


Greetings,

taumel

PS: And 1986 Mac sucked and Amiga ruled! :OP

 

But none have the absolute simplicity and ease of use curve that Unity offers. A simple marble/childs game through a complex FPS that outshines GooBall. A tool with a Mac-like workflow and interface, that Mac users can understand. I own Torque too ... but I'll never make anything in Torque the way I can/will/might in Unity. And I know I'm not alone. But one man's fish is another man's poisson after all :wink:

 

Yep, it seems that the ease of use (but as you know at a certain point you'll always have to code), reusability of code and other points speak for unity. But only supporting the ide on one os is definately a big disadvantage.

It might be, that if you've developed software on different platforms you get the beauty of multiplatform much easier.


Greetings,

taumel

 

I do something supposedly easier than code million line software apps on multiplatforms for a living ... I design and code (XHTML/CSS) W3C Priority One accessible compliant 15,000 page websites for municipalities and corporations that have to be perfect across all modern browsers on all platforms.

Multiplatform, especially when IE6 on a PC is involved, is never what I call beautiful. I could cut 25% off my coding development time if I wrote only CSS without hacks for those other browsers that are more compliant. Without worrying about simple things like my strict doctype declaration needed to make IE do the box model correctly not interfering with my clients needs for .NET functionality. Ugh.

To finish ... it would be nice if Unity were there for PC developers, but I'm thrilled that it's here for the Mac.

 

You've misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about the ease of the developers who do unity. I was talking about the ease of developers who develop with unity.


Greetings,

taumel

 

You make it sound so wonderfully easy: "just hire a programmer to do the IDE and it will be there" (inexact quote, sorry ; )

As such I'd love to have a really good IDE for Windows. I like the egoism of DaveyJJ, but on the other hand sharing is a pleasure: it would be really nice to be able to hand out Unity Windows to the world.

But thing is of course, we're a startup with low resources so we require a lot of focus. Monomanical focus. We focus on doing things insanely well, and a windows port of the editor we can't do insanely well, so we won't do it (for now).

I really hope you Windows users don't take it as a personal affront. It's not because we want to keep good things away from you.

Good vibes,
David Helgason

 

Hello David,

>>>You make it sound so wonderfully easy: "just hire a programmer to do the IDE and it will be there" (inexact quote, sorry ; )<<<

No problem. Well i would say that's the real magic: to make it look as it's just an easy task! ;O) Don't panik!

But seriously i don't understand being excited by this "egoism" as you described it. Maybe as written before because i've used too many systems in my life to be glowing follower of one os and a hater of the others. I've learned my lessons with c64 (ok only for playing :O), amigaos, windows, linux, aix, solaris, irix, beeos, nextstep, macos so that i'm not interested in this "egoism".

Anyway you at otee know the best what your resources are, what you can manage to do and what your goals are. If you wanna produce the best niche product for mac gaming or the best product for gaming over more than this os.

And it's quite a logical step to first do one version well and then beginning porting it over to other platforms if you don't have multi-support in mind from the beginning.

The idea only came up as you said that there were a lot of people from windows interested in the program so question popped up if an investment on porting it would be easily refinanced later by a certain amount of people from windows so that it wouldn't be a handicap by now.

Anyway i've to work again and also no bad feelings from me. :O)


Greetings,

taumel

PS: I once was very excited about havok. They did a lot of things very very well. They did by far not have the best physics engine in the beginning. Havok improved significantly after they merged with ipion and Oliver Strunk with the other members of ipion moved to ireland for some time to work on the successor. But what they did right from the beginning very well was that they offered every platform their engine, well documented code, gave examples out did a lot of help to the developers and so on. They overrolled the market. I wonder how well they would have done with "egoism".

 

This is actually something I do not understand. I always have to buy my hardware according to the software I plan to use. This starts with the exact specs (like cpu, gpu, memory etc.) and "ends" with the exact platform (Mac, Linux, Win).

I actually never saw a tool, that benefited from the fact that is available on different platforms (my day job is maintaining the os x part of a crossplatform app). Crossplattform usually means, that your app shows all the weaknesses and none of the strengths of all the "os'es" it has been ported - exception to the rule if you develop your whole set of APIs, which abstract from the OS behavior, custom fit to your app (e.g. Luxology's Modo or Adobe's Photoshop) or if you "recreate" it more or less from scratch for the new platform (don't know if anybody does that).

Of course I think - even long term - it will be pretty hard for a OS X only app to take over the world, but I do not want to imagine ( except in some of my darker nightmares ) what Unity would look like/be capable of, if OTEE had decided to use e.g. QT.

 

Did I say that? Or anything like that? I wasn't aware that I did.

I'm not at all "egoistic" about the Mac. It is currently the very best hardware for what I need it to do. Whther that's Unity or Studio Artist (both coincidentally Mac-only) or Photoshop or CSS coding etc. But a computer and it's OS are just pieces of hardware/tools, and nothing to get all egotistical or religious about. I've never involved myself in the Mac versus PC debate because it is, in the end, an individual's choice and it's simply a tool like a rake or spade used solely to get work done. I far prefer discussing history or art or politics or Roman coins or my kids etc :wink:

I said I was pleased that the OTEE guys created such a wonderful tool for the Mac. The fact that it's not availble for PC doesn't affect me one way or the other and isn't my decision to make.

Just so you know: I am not affiliated in any way with OTEE. I am simply a very enthusiastic end-user of their software and volunteered my time for free to help create tutorials for Unity. I have no other ties whatsoever with OTEE. I assumed most people here knew that, sorry.

Agreed. But this is something potential PC users of Unity need to take up with OTEE. And from what I've read (earlier postings by David Helgason, Joe and Nicholas) they don't have the resources and/or desire at the current time to make Unity for PC. They wanted to create Unity in the form they did for their own personal and business reasons.

Ditto. I didn't want this to turn into a debate, I just originally wanted to add my own opinion that I think the direction OTEE went in in creating Unity made me personally very happy. Back to work for me now too.

 

Man you got it wrong i was answering to David Helgason.. ;O)

Anyway nice evening,

taumel