Yay Unity has a great new UI but...

Yay Unity has a great new UI but...

What if Unity worked on providing a larger out of the box toolset of gadgets, code, template and frameworks?

What gadget, template or framework would you think Unity should bundle as a standard asset?

E.g.

• Object Pooling/Recycling System
• FPS Counter
• Weather effects
• Procedural Destruction of Meshes
• Doors
• Elevators
• Homing Missiles
• Bullets
• Turrets
• Guns
• Options Menu
• Main Menu
• Hi Score System
• FPS Template
• Platform Template

What would be your top ten gadgets, templates, frameworks or assets you would like to see added to Unity as standard?

 

All of it of course!

 

None of those. The Asset Store exists for every single item in your list. I would much rather see them implement better ways to handling certain aspects of their engine. Such as a visual material editor rather than forcing us to learn shader coding.

 

Pretty much all of the items you listed are likely to be specific to each game developer and his/her project. But Unity can't do everything for the game developer.

By the way, UT has made a new version of the Standard Assets, called Sample Assets - and it includes a lot of neat examples and tools. Also, a lot of the things you listed can be found in the sample projects that UT has up for free on the asset store.

 

Yes they do. Good stuff too.

 

I'd like to see an asset creates dll files that allows asset developers can release a demo version of their product without worrying about giving c# code away, kind of like hoe Rain Indie file setup is.

 

But what if Unity had those assets bundled so that you could import an "FPS" assets package or Genre specific assets instead of having to download a tutorial project and then build your project out of it.

I just think Unity has a great component based system but then it fails to make it easy for people to quickly build games within known and understood genres with gadgets and components that could make it easier for people to throw together prototypes and make games faster and better.

What if Unity asked you if you were building an FPS, Platformer or Twin Stick Shooter and could set you up with components and prefabs and a default scenes that provide a generic main menu and game scene in that style.

I just think that Unity could provide people with a quick and easy way to start developing their dream games and then with tutorials show how to improve, extend and customise the basic 'game templates'.

And those templates could provide really good development approaches e.g. Object Pooling, Mechanim FSM, Particle Systems that make the best use of Unity's tools and features.

Then you can still have the asset store to customise, enhance and improve these but with common well developed good base projects the quality of Unity projects should go up a notch by default.

Unity could even take it further by adapting these 'templates' to work as Showcase Examples of what Unity can do and write tutorials of how they took their basic template up to the showcase level.

 

Unity's Asset Store has a template section. What advantage would Unity bring if they develop or bundle their own solution that isn't already handled by third parties?

https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/category/99/page/1/sortby/popularity

 

They are probably trying to avoid undercutting asset store publishers. Possibly.

I hear you though.

 

Thats not really useful or possible with .net in a good way since you can easily decompile the dll's anyway or browse it around for specific code.

 

No they don't need to cater to your laziness.

 

I would see it more as giving the Asset store authors a leg up, with common templates and components that they can rely upon then they should have a stronger foundation to build upon. In theory this could act as a seed for more diversity as the basics are covered.

 

Actually have this in one form or another.

Have no idea how well this works. Not something I need to do.

https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/10237

Cheers

 

You're quite right, I would like to be able to do less work to get more game with Unity, damn it is lazy of me! But if I can get more done in less time that makes me more cost effective, and Unity a better game development tool!

 

I don't want them to waste time on any of those suggestions, except Pooling.

 

You're not lazy you're efficient!

 

They already are are in their documentation examples and tutorials they are doing this work. If I was the tutorial guy I would love it if common tutorial components could be added as default assets then each tutorial that adds to the component library can do more in the same amount of time.

Or what if the documentation examples also had link to common useful assets and their examples and associated tutorials.

Admittedly it might take a bit more work to bundle up and componentize elements from the tutorials but once done they can more easily be re-used and improve the tutorial and game development efficiency of Unity.

 

Probably this. I don't even want to think about how many people gave up on making a procedural asset after unity made a free one that showed all kinds of crazy things you can do with procedural creation and manipulation of meshes. The asset has examples of sculpting, cool effects with procedural particles and animated surfaces. A moving texture offset is probably better performance wise, but if that was the feature being shown off you can get as close as you want to the mesh and still see it from every angle

 

OK use case example I begin an FPS project with Unity. It provides me with a build FPS template option. But the bare bones template option appears alongside FPS templates on the asset store as well as other asset store products that match that genre.

So in theory a few clicks later and after paying for any purchases I should have a Basic FPS built using a common template that automatically incorporates the styling assets and models I have selected with a Menu and one or more example Scenes.

Compare that possible experience to the current one!

 

@Arowx I see the point you're trying to make, but it doesn't get more barebones than a character controller, a script to handle ray casting and moving the camera and an object to destroy when hit by a raycast. I don't think Unity would spend their time on such a thing simply because it's really that simple

Why not set that up on a prefab and then save that prefab to a template folder? Without the knowledge of setting up the basics, the game isn't going to go very far. With basic understanding, you can expand upon your template later.

 

If you can do a better job, go make it and sell it. There are bound to be people who are in agreement with you and you could be making money while telling everyone you were right.

 

Why is it always some sort of rubbish conspiracy with you guys? The truth is Unity doesn't have time to make that list, they're busy making more full example programs and demos for learn section so people can be taught how to be self sufficient and do whatever they want instead.

 

Unity isn't here to make stuff for us to "customise". They provide a tool so we can build things more quickly than we otherwise could. They're not here to build the things for us.

If you think that a "make game" button with some drag-and-drop components and a template will make better quality games than people learning, honing and practicing their craft then check out websites from the mid 90s when similar tools were made for that.

 

I've heard less believable conspiracies.

Back when shockwave was the new edge in web gaming? haha

 

Back when thinking that owning a copy of FrontPage or DreamWeaver made you a "web designer".

The problem wasn't so much with the programs themselves, by the way. It's that the people who relied upon them thought that because they now had a tool which could make HTML for them that they were now skilled at making web pages. The issue there is that, as with all things code related, writing the code is only a small part of what's involved in making quality stuff.

 

Well in this case I know it to be a load of old bollocks

 

It's just a back and forth circle of... it's so easy that Unity has no reason to do it vs people saying if it's so easy then why don't they. Well if the most basics things are hard to do then perhaps some people should stick to being creatives >.>

The only thing I like about dreamweaver is the mess it makes when you attempt to position something on a web page, lol!

 

I believe he was implying more along the lines of the Clickteam's products.

 

Oh that one's easy. Most people are in fact incredibly stupid. It's a harsh reality but it's true. Since these things are so basic, they can certainly make them themselves.

Unity could make them. But these things actually fall under "game development" and have different requirements for each game. Unity would spend all it's time actually using Unity to make their games for them. It doesn't make any sense.

 

5 nights at freddys, wooo! The dreamweaver example was probably better, clickteam fusion already has Markiplier as their face. The games might just be complex powerpoints, but they can look fantastic! lol

It's not a harsh reality, it's just reality :3

How can you say people are dumb and then a second later presume they are making decisions based on sense?

 

Well, life is the context. A large chunk of people are indeed incredibly stupid, and usually very vocal about it too.

 

Well, individually it's easy. But what if they did the easy bits for my game? Then the easy bits for yours? And then for everyone else on the forums? They wouldn't be making an engine any more.

I'd much rather that they did the hard stuff that's general to lots of games, and left the easy stuff specific to my game to me.

 

Sure, but I don't see it as a personal attack against you or anyone here.

 

Move to Virginia. You'll find plenty of proof.

 

There are varying degrees and types of stupidity. Age and experience help to mask it to some degree. As an example I've known individuals who were very "book smart" but utterly lacking in common sense.

 

Woah, calm down. Nobody is insulting you.

You passive aggressively call me stupid, but get upset because someone said that collectively society can be stupid?

 

Ick!

Once upon a time I used to think things like this. "X group of people are less intelligent than y group of people" or whatnot. I've moved on from that, though - I like to think I've "progressed" in that regard.

Normally when one person thinks another is "stupid" it's because they disagree about things. Each person has views based on their experience. When the views don't line up, the default position is to think that it's because they aren't smart enough to come to the same conclusion you've come to. But really I think what's happening is that people come to different conclusions because they're based on different experiences. It's not that other people lack the intelligence to join the dots the same way that I do, it's that they're joining different dots - of course they get a different picture in the end!

 

Wow.

You are the wisest flightless bird I've ever encountered

Wiser than me.

Cheers

/logout

 

No, what I want is to understand why you feel a certain way. Understanding is an important aspect of getting along with those around you and allows you to determine how strongly someone is convinced of their beliefs.

Also I feel the word "ignorance" is probably closer to what I'm describing than "stupidity".

We have an abundance of college students in my area. I am approximately halfway between the University of Virginia and Liberty University. It is primarily due to the students that I referred to Virginia as being a good example.

My example earlier of being "book smart" while lacking common sense fits a good number of them.

 

Sure, but there you're not using "book smart" to mean "these guys know different stuff to me", you're using it to trivialise whatever intelligence they have. You interpret them as lacking common sense, but do they just see things differently to you and thus come to different conclusions? Plus, lets not forget that they're students, and that "common sense" is based on experience, and that as students they not have built up much of that yet.

If their prior experience matched yours, whatever that is, then do you think they would come to similar conclusions as you? If so then the issue is not a lack of intelligence.

 

Stating facts is reprehensible? If you don't believe that the human race, my fellow americans in particular, are dumb then try to disagree with the polls. Average americans think the employment rate is how high? Find out and be astonished Spoilers: they think it's 50% more than it was in the great depression!

As for other countries, you need look no further than a history book to see that all of human history barring specific ages is an epic of stupid :3 Let's not even get into the dominant anthropomorphic ideology of early humans that is still present today - that would be instant thread locking. War I count as evidence because I think non-peace is stupid (even if it's smart to intervene, the people you're helping are stupid for starting it ).

If I tried to document all of the examples that point to the conclusion that most people are dumb, UT wouldn't need to lock the thread because the entire web server would crash.

 

I consider "book smart" to be someone who has knowledge in their field. It doesn't have to be the same as mine.

I do tend to observe those around me, their decisions and the consequences of those decisions, as much as possible to assist with my own decisions. It could very easily be throwing off my opinion.

 

How would you interpret the known interpretation? The observer effect could weigh in heavily here on all of your future interpreting if you consider that some people know you're watching Will you act differently because they're acting differently because they're being observed? Is there an infinite loop in the observer effect that will one day have people silently staring at each other forever?

Don't even consider it, because if you watch yourself, that can layer up and stack and cause a huuuuge delay in your information processing x_x

How heavily has my original message been modifed due to your observation? How much will your response change because of this particular observation? Will you go too far in another direction to avoid the possibility that this observation will have affected your message somehow, thereby affecting it either way? D:

 

Urge to click "Follow" rising. Must ... resist!

 

Of course it's easy to think people were being stupid when you're in your couch, looking back with the benefit of hindsight and access to years/decades/centuries more knowledge than they did...

 

But it doesn't have to! All you have to realise is that they're doing some variation on the same, but because what they're observing isn't the same as what you're observing it's leading them to different decisions. You're both doing the same smart thing, but because you're getting different inputs you're producing different outputs.

 

I have answered in line my thoughts and links to where we have already done what you have asked or someone in the community has already done it.

Some links:
Have you looked at our Recorded Live Training? http://unity3d.com/learn/live-training
Alot of what you want ( is actually covered in these videos or in upcoming videos (Which will be recorded, edited then uploaded).

We also have the new Sample Assets that contain a whole bunch of different models, scripts, particles and all sorts of bits and pieces that you can edit or chop and a change to whatever you want. I have already posted the link before, but another time wouldn't hurt: https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/21064

 

Cogent - you seem very upset and in the interests of a peaceful community I'd like to apologise to you, since it costs nothing and it might mean you can get on with things.

Sorry if I've offended anyone.

 

OK can we agree that 50% of humanity have below average intelligence, but 50% of humanity also have above average intelligence.

Anyway I don't think Unity should be an IQ test I think it should enable people to build and have fun building fun stuff.

The idea of this thread was to identify gadgets or assets that would enable people to get up to speed faster.

Now Unreal does this with a couple of clicks you can set up and play an FPS shooter project with enemies in glorious PBR shading or a more subdued FPS prototype with simple textures and meshes. For free, well OK you've paid $20 to get in.

And yes you can do that with Unity but how many clicks does it take?

For veterans and fans of Unity this may not even be something you need but for noobs, they pick up Unity and how long does it take them to get up and running with an FPS?

1. Download Unity
2. Install Unity (* No installation update manager)
3. Open the Angry Bots Project
4. Play the Angry Bots Project
5. Go online to find out how to make an FPS
6. Discover the tutorial page after being harangued by the community on the forum for wanting to make a MOFPS as first project.
7. No FPS Game tutorial!
8. Find FPS game on asset store try Free One not as great as Unreals?
9. Option to pay for 'better one' but does not look as good as Unreals demo project.

Now at this point they have not 'invested' in Unity so it costs them nothing to leave, but with Unreal they have already invested $20 and been wowed by a quality FPS demo with PBR shaders.

Now the old and bold Unity community you can argue about the asset store and what Unity should really be doing but for Unity as a game engine to thrive and survive it really has to up it's game. And not just with a new PBR shading and lighting system.

Yes you scoff at the idea of a one button FPS, RTS, Tower Defense Game, knowing that there is lots more to it, but noobs don't know this and to get them into using unity we need to get them having fun as quickly as possible.

And really do you want to keep answering the same boring how to handle input, setup a menu or can Unity do this game questions. What if you could just point them to the manual on how to setup the default FPS/RTS/Whatever Genre project or prototype?

Smarter people should be making things easier for people as smart or less smart than themselves.

Should Unity get into making games, isn't that an oxymoron as Unity should be in the business of making games more fun and easier to make not an IQ test to get started.

 

Personally I think it's a good idea to have more little `modules` or templates that you can use to do some of the common tasks of various game genres. I don't really agree with the whole `this is what Unity has always done and they should not change` angle... I know they're busy, but they could also hire more people to work on this stuff. I think I'd find it more useful to leverage a big set of pre-made or customizable components than to have a monolithic demo that I have to pull apart.

I also know this thread was spurred by the other thread which I created along similar lines ;-)

I know we're asking unity to kind of `specialize` with tools for specific game genres, but why not? Just because they didn't already isn't a reason. In some ways Unity already did this, e.g. 3d terrain, tree generator, etc... are suited to 3d games but not so much 2d. You could say that's genre specific to a degree. I would just like the development experience to be higher level in general by default, with the option to get into the lower level stuff if you want to. Imagine being able to build an entire game with no scripting at all?