Unity4 vs Unreal Engine 4

Does anyone know what features Unreal 4 will have that unity 4 will not? Any dx11 / lighting / other tools?

I know neither one of them is out yet, but I'm preparing a new project for the future because of some issues such as Unreal moving from unrealscript to c++. And unity does not really use c++ directly as a scripting language so I really have to choose now.

I love the new animation tools Mecanim and that unity is getting all the DX11 goods. What will unreal have that unity won't for a PC game? Has unity 4 finally caught up and all the engine's are on the same level when the new one's come out or am I missing certain graphical capabilities UE4 has or something else?

 

the main difference is that Unreal Engine 4 costs about $500k per project while unity is a flat per dev fee

Unreal Engine is not UDK in case you missconcluded that

 

Nobody knows what features will ship exactly with those new versions. But UE4 will become a lot easier with Kismet2 and you will have realtime GI. Something I'm not aware of in Unity 4.0.

But besides that UE4 costs several 100k. And when UDK will ship with UE4 is not certain. Could be next year, or in 3 years.

Edit: Oh dreamora beat me with the price tag.

 

Yeah I wouldn't compare the full engine I mean UDK 4.

I'm not sure how long until Unreal 4 is in UDK form, it could take years people are saying. That means I have to completely rewrite everything from unreal script to c++ when the time comes.

That's a long period of time to be wasting with unreal script. I don't want to commit to the current udk or be stuck with old ue3 tools and language especially when/if udk4 hits.

But if there's really nothing worth waiting for that unity 4 won't already provide then obviously Unity is the most logical choice for anyone who's smart starting a new project.

Unless I am missing something that the current udk / next udk will have over unity 4?

 

I have no doubt UDK will have very nice graphical quality etc. it is usually much more work to achieve this in Unity

 

Out of the box I expect UE4 demos to look far nicer than Unity demos. But both will need outstanding artists to deliver the goods for your own games.

 

Those pesky artists. Why can't people be happy with my various oblong objects moving around the world and enjoy the story? Pesky artists!

 

C++ isn't majorly different from UnrealScript. If you know UnrealScript, you know C++.

 

Not necessarily, there are some minute differences. That's sort of like saying you know JavaScript because you can code in UnityScript.

 

The minute differences most likely won't be major enough to warrant changing engines. I'm sure Epic will make it as easy to transfer your project.

Hell, they might offer an UnrealScript to C++ converter, you never know.

 

unity3d is best

 

The OP is talking about Unreal Engine not UDK. UDK is different.

In any case I'll stick with unity...

 

OP meant UDK.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please, detail to me why. I love Unity, but Unreal is more advanced in it's current state.

 

You should explain such bold statements.

Btw. It is "Unity" without the "3D"

 

Oh I see. My mistake.

 

I agree. He should xD

No worries

 

That seems to be a common misconception.

 

I think the only reason is because the site's url is Unity3D and not Unity, but ah well hahaha

 

Not again such a thread. It's starting to annoy. Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvfn1p92_8

What the F***? Why do you have to chose now and especially, how the hell do you want to prepare something for Unreal 4 if you don't know and won't know anything about it until you paid half a million?!

How do you know? Mecanim isn't even out yet. Unity is getting no DX11 goodies, it's getting DX11 support, that's it. But without native engine integration, like Unreal 4 has, this doesn't help that much. Its more for Metro App compat and to satisfy expectations at least on paper.

Everything? Just that Unreal 4 costs a bunch more and runs only on hardware that has to be invented yet. Look at the feature videos and besides that it's got dynamic occlusion culling, dynamic global illumination, deferred detail, and a lot of integrated special effects like subsurface-scattering, physical GPU particle systems, fully automatic PhysX destruction, just to name a few things Unity 5 and 6 won't even have.

You are the cutest... Unity 11 will probably catch up with Unreal 4.

 

We've seen little from both engines so far, one of them is more than a couple of months (possibly quite more than that?) away and the other is like a year away, but yeah, sure, let's start comparing them.... *now*.

 

UDK already has better DX11 features than Unity 4 will have out of box. Detail tessallation is just one of them, the rest are promised (from Nvidia pdf) to be delivered. Lighting is already superior in UDK to Unity, in UDK 4 or UE4 it will be even little better due to realtime GI. If i remeber correctly Unity is also planning on realtime GI, not sure if its for v4. Tools in UDK that are already far better than Unity are: Terrain, mesh vertex painting, material editor, and some few more. UDK doesnt need new version of engine to improve those becouse tools are quite good and very functional. Which means that saying Unity is or will finnaly caught up just cant hold, but neither could you say otherwise becouse neither UDK has leading tools on every area. Unity animation will surely make a huge difference, Linux is huge addition too. None of those engines are catching on each other, becouse there are plenty of features very different or missing on either side, you will need to decide upon what you think is that you need the most. Write down what you need the most for your game, make list of pros and cons of each engine and there you go. Oh and yes at the momment this list will be made on speculations and only two videos since none of engines versions 4 have yet been released.

 

As i read, the Unreal 4 demo was running on a GTX680.

 

Yeah, but it was only a demo... The real games will require better hardware and even then a GTX680 is far away from the average player, not to talk about console, which really have to be invented yet.

 

Depends, they will certainly optimise the engine further, you also don't have to enable all options, lower the resolution, the usual screws. It would be interesting to know how much the demo hits the CPUs. As for consoles, i'm sure they know already what kind of CPU/GPU combi they'll use and that those parts will be based on already existing technology which might still go through revisions.

 

the previous demo was run on a tri sli, games so far don't even used what was shown in the samaritian demo a year later now cause the hw isn't there.

means that the stuff we see now at best will land in 3+ years in 50M+ budget titles, not in homegrown stuff or indie studio work

 

So, what's your point?

That they already enhanced Unreal 4 so that it only needs one GTX680 instead of the three GTX580 which used for the previous Unreal 3.5 based demo?

There are features in Unreal 4 only big projects will benefit from as well as features also smaller production will take advantage of (once this technology shows up in UDK).

 

No what I'm saying is that independent of the enhancements: to run even remotely smooth, and that in a tech demo, not a 'free movement game' they need the upper end hardware. so mainstream hardware that can use it in real situations will not exist for years to come.

but anyway, its unreal 4 and it does not touch unity cause we are not comparing the same licenses and fees anyway. Thats like comparing an Opel to a ferrari, absolutely worthless

 

Your opinions about licence costs aren't helpful either because you often tend to present only one (maybe your personally experienced) point of view. Actually if UDK would be a nicer tool, i could imagine that quite a number of people would be better suited with UDK instead of Unity. There are many use cases, in some Unity is the better and cheaper option and in others it's UDK.

Back to Unreal 4, i don't know how much their demo stressed the CPUs but i'm sure that they can further improve the technology as well as that there is a market for highend games too and that you can also sell something if it feels fresh and sexy enough, something like Infinity Blade doesn't need a lot of game logic either, so i don't agree with your opinion.

 

Unity4 looks amazing

 

I don't see why unity can't get on the realtime GI stuff especially when all the research papers for the technique UE4 is using have been published.

 

Potentially, due to various reasons though, normally along the lines of 'people who have $100k - $1M for a license won't post here'.

The thread is about Unreal Engine 4 though, so independent of personal vs not personal, its obvious that you can't compare a $1500 per platform infinite title license to a $100k++ per title platform license.
That was the whole point.

The proper thread would be UDK vs Unity 4 but that one already exists while informations on future UDK versions with potential UE4 inclusions do not exist yet. (the only thing I take for granted is the inclusion of the editor)

I agree that it can be further enhanced. Yet its DX11+ only so it doesn't matter in the context of IB or any recent Epic title in any form as no platform they released anything for has that hardware level (neither consoles nor mobiles) so where are you trying to go with this point?
I really fail to get the point.

IB is a nice game but I don't see in which way and form its related to Unreal 4 at all as it does not even make use of vast parts of unreal 3 already cause its an on the on therail swipe game with very limited views and extremely well crafted camera paths.
Also the things shown of Unreal Engine 4 so far are all exclusively Windows Vista+ DX11

IB very polished and a really great showcase for what the visuals can do when the game design limits the interaction and 'user choice' to give you near absolute control over the viewable areas and angles to opt the hell out of the art and setup
I respect them for this achievement while keeping it fun.

But lets be fair: For real games we all know that Unreal can not achieve this quality, if it could then you could move freely in IB1 or IB2 and IB Dungeons wouldn't be a top down title where the steep angle again takes care of 'limited stuff to render'.
Again a smart way that does not impact the experience at all while giving them a lot of flexibility on raising the art

Anyway, I'm comparing it from technical point of view and from 'bang for buck'.
UE4 is powerfull and great if you can hire the arts to make use of it, for all others UDK likely already offers more than they can leverage or simply more than the hardware supports at all (mobile) so we shouldn't worry that much cause Epic surely won't either for the time being

 

UE4 or the next UDK (based on UE4) wont come any sooner. Unity4 will be released to the masses this year (and a public preview version will come before final version). So Unity4 it's the real deal! XD

 

@dreamora
Not only in the pricy region. You can also be better suited with UDK in situations on the low budget side, when you just want to play around, trying to build a basis or don't earn a lot of money with your game but want all the features.

There doesn't exist something like real games. There are games that we both like and games we don't like but nevertheless all of them are games. Infinity Blade is a horrible game in my opinion but there is a demand for such games and there also is a demand for DX11 only games where people want to see their systems stressed and see something new they aren't used to from the usual console ports they are getting since many years.

After all those years they are in the business i'm sure that Epic Games knows how to develop an engine which is able to power a game.

 

Unity need to learn a lesson with a material editor that's actually fantastically optimised. This should be baseline in unity (strumpy generates code that is too slow, and is not integrated, and isn't on the same page as unreal material editor, its good for free though!).

Doing this properly, enables unity to move forwards with any shader supporting tessellation and so on ...

As it is, unity is slowly but surely becoming more work than UDK which is a problem.

 

I don't know how much the material editor is in the focus but for my understanding Unity moved from a limited but all in one solution to a more complex tool where not every aspect is on the same level anymore, some aspects are outdated, some are very basic, others receive more love and care. So if you're riding the feature wave Unity is interested in, then it's good. If not, then it's up to you coming up with more sophisticated solutions or you make usage out of the microcosm of third party tools (were a few a very good and quite some are only half baked again) this enabled. If you're more up to a out of the box experience, things got more messy.

 

what exactly is the differences between UDK and unreal engine by the way?

 

With Unreal you get source code to the engine. With UDK you get partial script/code access on otherwise locked platform. Although unity pro is not a source code license either.

 

Unreal engine ships with source code, where it is much easier to bend engine into any game type, or change engine features. Unreal engine also costs 500k $, while UDK costs 100 dollars + 25% royalty cost after 50.000 dollars revenue. Unreal engine is also updated sooner than UDK, but timing of updates actually is extremely quick for indie developers on UDK. With Unreal engine developer can also purchase Atlas which is almost only solution to bend engine to MMO genre, or with other solution it is also possible to write full server and client structure with source code too.

Speaking generally, if you are developing very well known genres like RPG, FPS or platformer, and you are indie developer who is well known with Unreal script and engine itself, and you are still able to get decent amount of money with 25% royalty cut, the difference between Unreal engine and UDK is minimal. The only two valuable opinions to people who are pointing out that much difference of UDK and Unreal engine are income and source code that Unreal brings you in comparision with UDK.

 

@hafizmrozlan,
UDK is the binary version of all toolsets provided by Unreal Engine.
UDK also comes with various scripting examples (FPS, mobile etc).
UnrealScript is your only way to program on UDK, which i found totally messed up, some of those scripts implements native functionality inside the scripts itself which you don't have any access to it and is a pile of mess. Still, your only way to create games in UDK is by modding what's come with and this is the main reason why there's very few games released with UDK (and have btw very limited functionality).
A good advice, stay away from the current UDK at all cost, or you will regret. XD

Though, if there's any future UDK (based on UE4), i would like to give it a go and see how good (and different from the current UDK) it is...

 

I don't see how UnrealScript is anything like C++ :\

 

To be honest, starting to get a little sick of all the Unity Versus Unreal posts.

Please just use the search function.

 

Because its based on the same principles as C++ and the syntax is mostly identical.

 

the only thing i always missed in unity are the unreal graphics. but now with dx11, customizable rendering engine linux support and much cheaper licenses i think its the way. also ue4 will have features that only future hardware will run. unity4 will have features for actual hardware because they don't waste resources in future things. you can even create a free-cost game modelling the assets with blender.

 

Unity is far from perfect, I'm one of those who like to highlight its weakness but still better than the current UDK/CE3 to produce a game from start to finish at light speed. UDK4 will see the daylight, but not tomorrow, I'm guessing that probably mid-end 2013. Unity 4.X will be out with plenty of stuff to combat UDK4.
So i give Unity the first round, once UDK4 will be out, we will see the winner! XD

 

Who cares, for the next iteration they will drop support for it anyway.

 

My experience with Unity 3 and UDK (Unreal Engine 3, that is) tells me that Unity is perfect for small teams making small games, but what most people call flexibility becomes a burden when your project gets bigger, and when you're planning on making a big game, UDK is the one and only Engine to rule them all. Between Unreal 4 and Unity 4, Unity 4 is designed for CURRENT HARDWARE while Unreal 4, according to Epic, is designed for FUTURE HARDWARE and won't run on any of the current platforms (PC, PS3, Xbox360, whatever). This alone should make it clear which is better in terms of graphics and features. And BTW, I wonder why, but Mecanim (or whatever they call the new animation system) looks very similar to UDK's AnimTree's...

 

That's entirely incorrect. Yes, UE4.0 is designed with next-gen console hardware in mind, but that level of hardware is already available in PCs. If it doesn't run on current PC hardware then how on earth are they showing off tech demos? How are they developing Fortnite with it? Epic have gone on record that the jaw-dropping demo they showed was running on a single GeForce 680 card. They whole reason it's for "future hardware" is because it's a DX11 based engine and current consoles are DX9. However, UE4.0 will be ENTIRELY scalable. It will support ultra-high-end development on cutting edge hardware, but it will also support mobile development for current mobile device.

Unity 4.0 supports DX11. If you watch the techdemo (http://www.jeuxonline.info/video/58...percu-capacites-graphiques-unity-4-directx-11) it is every bit as jawdropping as UE4.0's tech demo, if they entirely different reasons. As they're both DX11 orientated engines then, basically, any graphical effect achievable in one is achievable in the other.

UDK is far from "the one and only engine to rule them all." Unity isn't either. No engine is. No engine EVER will be. It's all a matter of choice, preference and picking the right tool for the right job. The gap between the two engines is being closed drastically, however, and from both sides. Unreal Engine is getting features which has previously made Unity the "better choice" and Unity is getting features which has previously made UDK the "better choice."

 

It does look, but why would that be bad thing?


That is well known that in base UDK is far more demanding than Unity in terms of hardware. But on DX11 side (at least for now) all those UDK features are way too heavy for common use, for example Cryengine DX11 features are quite good optimised and dont make that much of huge performance jump while on UDK is different story. I hope that Unity will follow the same path that Cry does and that those DX11 features wont be there just to be displayed on front page of Unity website, but rather being useful on some decent machines.

 

There UDK is apparently free but you can only publish to windows and IOS?? Why not a MAC anyway if you still want to use unreal (rather than unity) I'll put a link here: http://www.unrealengine.com/udk/ But I ink you should just keep using unity as unity 4 is awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!