Yay Unity has a great new UI but...

There's nothing stopping you from making such assets yourself, and putting them on the asset store.

 

But I'm one of the less smart people, sorry been tested and I have a below genius/mensa IQ!

And the changes I'm asking for are to have some Unity standard assets and features based on the best ways to do things with Unity and I can program but do not claim to be a Unity game programming genius.

But after struggling with Unity to make great games I do have What If ?! daydreams about how Unity could make making games easier.

@imaginaryhuman Well think of it as Unity providing you with a more technical lego set of building blocks, OK the electric motor won't work for a sailing ship but the hinge could mean you can build cannon positions that open and close and an accessible cargo hold.

Not all of the bits of more technical lego with work across all genres but some of them will.

And an FPS project would just be the most appropriate bits for an FPS game provided with FPS specific components.

Which comes back around to my idea for a Library feature in Unity, a Library acts as a store of freely accessible knowledge from which people can learn and improve their knowledge. http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/sh...rary-feature-to-the-asset-store.288587/unread

But any Library needs good basic reading 'learning' material as well as more advanced material and the feature to add your own stuff.

 

I'm not ashamed to admit that bias. However, I grew up in a log cabin in the middle of nowhere yet I still naturally developed logical faculties on my own that were NOT anthropomorphic. I always said "what is that?" rather than "who is that?" when observing nature for the first time. Time and place - that trait gets you killed back in the caveman days, but in modern times it's just an ego trip lol

You apologized and I cited a poll that shows that most americans thought that the unemployment rate in 2013 was 32% while in the great depression it was just over 20%. It will be looked down on in the future by our descendants that you chose not to enlighten everyone you could have But you're a damn fine moderator, so again, free pass.

@Arowx if you're saying that because of an IQ test (since you mentioned them), don't fret - they're incomplete. Consider the human brain a computer - what most IQ tests I've seen test is CPU and ALU speed. The speed at which with no cached information that you can execute a series of problem solving steps. It does not take cache into account at all. That completely ignores other crucial components of computers, caches, RAM, bus and other things. A test of general knowledge / remembering sequences would be a good test for that. The speed at which you could retrieve information from memories would be a good measure for the bus between our RAM and HD (hippocampus)

I could go on for a while there about brains and their comparable computer functions, but this post is big enough ._.

 

I've got 1 follower currently. What does that even mean?

And you can save that for another time, my statement was unfair. You know English, the greatest language in the world! You can change sentence structures around and leave pieces out to change the way the brain will understand them. Leaving out insignificant pieces forces an attempt to find implicit information. Combine that with the very difficult to process subject matter (maybe it's an existential problem that causes the infinite loop of the observer effect on the self?), and it's just a total mind-f* for anyone reading

Seriously though, don't try to figure it out, it's like pi. The longer you go into trying to find the final layer of the observer effect that involves yourself and your present environment, the longer the delays become. Not to mention the problem doesn't become any easier to solve

 

@superpig UT already supplies a bunch of complete games for people to study from and video tutorials for setting up the basics (and more) AND unity's documentation is on par with Java's! How can you possibly be more accommodating to newbies?

You all can focus on development and moderation, the community's got this

 

Thank you superpig, you understand the idea or concept or direction I'm thinking in.

I wouldn't even get hung up on 'best practice' as simpler solutions should be easier to understand, support and extend within the community.

But why not ask the community for what basic assets or gadgets they would like to see within the standard set or sub-sets for specific genres?

Then you could ask for submission for components in a competition or set of competitions!?

Or let's stop reinventing the FPS/RTS/Insert Genre wheels in Unity and start providing basic toolkits that work out of the box and can then be leveled up and styled with purchases on the asset store!

 

Your post was about me watching people so I was joking that I would be watching you.

As to how it works, I have absolutely no idea. My first thought would be to the Alert system pointing to posts.

 

A generic object pooling system is absolutely trivial to implement, if you need it. I don't see why UT should provide one, given how they have more important stuff to do.

The FPS Counter is something I think Unity should have in the first place for profiling reasons. This shouldn't even be a component, but a command line option, given that profiling is something universal. It doesn't depend on your game.

Weather effects and procedural destruction of meshes depend on where Unity will go in future. The latter is less of a component and more of an engine feature, whereas the former is closely tied to one. If Unity were to switch to using a skydome, rather than a skybox, then adding (the basic) weather effects would certainly be something that should be done by them.

The rest of your list fall under the "too dependent on the actual game" category.

On a side-note:​

You could make the argument that Unity could provide them as samples, to demonstrate a good way of implementing them. Personally, I don't think that is what UT should be doing in this regard.

Rather than creating small things like sample assets, I think they should create a complete game.
My argument is that nothing shows you the shortcomings of your software, like having to use it yourself.

Look at Blender. It keeps getting better and better, partly because from time to time they just create a movie with it. They experience the problems, weaknesses and flaws first hand, fix them and everybody benefits greatly from this.
The Facebook app for Android is an even better example.
It was an awful piece of garbage. That was until Facebook forced its employees to use Android phones. From that point on, the Android app improved; And it improved A LOT.

 

Ok, that is much clearer and makes sense.

I've got a follower named @tamojeet and I have no idea what it means :s

Heh, we went from calling people stupid to joking about something completely different. The evolution of unity threads is remarkable.

 

I stand corrected there is a Unity FPS tutorial tucked away here - http://unity3d.com/learn/tutorials/...raining-archive/merry-fragmas-multiplayer-fps

And it looks quite good as you end up with a multi-player fps. But it does only use capsules and 'candy bar' guns. But what if Unity included (built in) a rigged/animated humanoid character, something prototypical like an animators/painters wooden 'poser' doll.



So developers could quickly have playable abstract prototypes with humanoid characters, that could then be easily replaced with a textured model or asset store item.



And just like this story on lego Unity could ask the experienced community what components they use most often when building a game in Unity.

 

Pooling really is fairly trivial to write. We wrote Pool Boss ($15) in 1 day. It should cover all your pooling needs, however you can buy Core GameKit for $30 which includes Pool Boss, a versatile automatic combat script, a complete enemy wave setup, spawners, and a lot more which requires zero coding to use.

Unity doesn't need to write a pooling system when there are at least a couple good choices that are pretty cheap and have no errors at all.

 

@Arowx I think if you setup your model in mecanim, you can pose each bone with sliders. I've seen it before, not sure what the context of the video was.

 

Nice work. But don't you think that Unity should have most of these components as standard components as you said they can be made in a day or less and provide a great service to game developers.

I know some people are making money and even a living off the back of the asset store. But if a new game developer can pay $20 a month or for one month and get a quality multiplayer FPS in a AAA level game engine or get a free version of Unity and then have to pay $30 for part of the basic core components needed for an FPS game. Which one will they choose?

And if Unity provided these components out of the box. You as an asset store developer could build upon them to make more advanced frameworks e.g. a Turret Defence Game Templates or FPS Templates or Wave Management Systems etc.

Maybe it's just that Unity have grown a community and are the top dog at the moment. This is probably the most dangerous time for Unity because if they start to think that an improvement to their graphics pipeline, lighting and audio system will be enough the could be on a slippery slope. They need to look at how easy it is to pick up and get a game running in Unreal and compare and contrast that with the Unity experience.

OK I bought Unreal just to try it and I was impressed, it has a Unreal Library style system so you can download example games, it has a Unreal 'Client' that checks for updates and downloads and installs newer versions.

Or Dear Unity I would just like better more technical lego blocks to play with, shucks christmas has already been and gone and all I go was a capsule fps with a candy cane!

 

Or put it another way take $20 and make an FPS in Unity?!

Does it match this?

Or a tower defense game match this?!

Now in theory asset store developers could make game templates of these standards in Unity and release them for $20 or less but I think they won't or can't and that's why Unity should improve it's game as Unreal can't beat Free.

But prove me wrong $20 or less AAA game prototypes on the asset store.

Well the game development industry has gone for a race to the bottom it was only a matter of time before the game engines followed.

In a way Unity has already gone for the free to play and IAP model, what next Ads?

 

Those examples may look very impressive, but they aren't as complex as you're making them out to be. If you need your hand held every single step of the way, then you simply aren't ready for anything beyond the very basics (ie Pong).

 

Seems that everything boils down to what UE has or does and what Unity does not once again

 

Well I think in this case it's probably art. So by showing these videos what you're really asking for is for Unity to make more learn / demo projects?

Well that's great! because that's exactly what Unity plans to do too, and what they've been doing all along.

 

Unity


Unreal


Cryengine

 

That's not the point you want to make here. Legos are more modular and extendable than the other images, which show pieces made to fit together a certain way with very little flexibility. You've inadvertently praised unity and made unreal out to be worse than it really is

This forum is entertainment through the nose, please don't end it here and now with a simple realization xP

Pff, I'll be the first person to stab unity in the back and walk away as soon as github gets to that application for free unreal access I submitted 3 months ago, but you don't see me comparing them in every thread

 

OK let's get back on track:

Q: Could Unity provide better out of the box components to enable developers and designers to build games and prototypes faster?
A: Hell Yes!

Q: Could Unity then use those components and more genre specific components to allow developers and designers to start with a game prototype or template for that genre?
A: Hell Yes Please!

Q: Could Unity also provide Tutorials and Documentation to support the extension and expansion of those templates into Genre Specific Showcases or Demos?
A: Yes! Yes! Yes!

Q: Could Unity Asset Store Publisher provide more advanced model, textures, sounds, materials, animations, code and gadgets to specialise and improve those templates at a modest fee!
A: You're starting to get the gist of it!

Q: Why hasn't Unity adapted and updated it's core components, assets and features to provide these features in the face of rising competition?

A: Fingers crossed for Unity 5 but the community seems to think that the asset store is the answer and not part of the problem?!

 

why does everybody always whine about engine comparisons? Isn't there anything else you would rather be doing than rambling on about why X is better or worse than Y?

 

I'm not comparing engines I'm comparing toolsets and default/prototype projects you can build out of the box. An area I believe Unity could really improve upon.

 

In your description:

Unity may not have flashy out-of-the-box 'OMFG AAA GRAGIFX' but its modular, can be customised into different types of results and has variety in what is made with it.

The other two examples are great at fitting together to make their target goal (And looks flashier) but good luck with building a tree or a house out of a tank's parts.

I take this as a compliment, thank you!

 

Have you not used Unity 5 yet? Those out of the box shaders are fantastic!

 

But, we are already doing this. Do you purposely ignore my posts? I have answered in line again.
Our Engine Developers are always working to a better Unity in core features/maintenance/support and our content teams are always working on content that shows off what our Engine Developers are making and demo scenes that you can download and hack apart into whatever you want! And this is what Unity has been doing for years and years.

 

Of course I have and all the new goodness is incredibly fun and easy to make lovely looking stuff, right out of the box. Im talking about Unity 4 in that description.

Bonus Pic: Here the first thing I made with Unity 5 and some of its out of the box visual stuff (PBR, Reflections, Lighting). It was pretty much drag and drop.

 

that needs a spoiler warning on it, that anvil hurt my eyes D: too much good! The flappy bird shadow amused me.

 

That's nice and you're doing a good job, but what items would Unity users really like to have as basic assets or tutorials? Why not ask them instead of arguing with me?

 

Sure, but I somehow suspect that you weren't raised in an environment where such anthropomorphic reasoning was an explicit part of your upbringing. There's a reason that we associate such styles of thinking with tribal cultures - it's the tribes that teach that style of thinking. (And it must have worked to some degree. I mean, sure, "praying to the water god" probably never helped anyone directly, but the fact that they looked after their water sources out of respect for their water god meant they were behaving in a way far more suited to their long term survival.)

 

Unity isn't meant to give you the pieces of a game, it's the toolset you use to carve the pieces and assemble them into a game.

Seriously, this is a billion times easier than game development was 20 years ago. But now everybody's impatient that they have to write a door script in an engine that handles all your 2D and 3D graphics and physics for you...

Did I mention we used to have to code uphill both ways in the snow to compile? Seriously, you kids...

 

Urm, im not arguing with you? You are raising points and asking questions and I am responding to them; which was the purpose for you starting this thread.

In terms of 'most requested' tutorials, they tend to be more specific game use-cases that show how a particular mechanic/typical setup is achieved, through using Unity's built in features. For example "How do I setup a Level Selection menu using the new UI?" or "How do I do a scrolling background for my 2D platformer?". These use cases (And many more, that yourself have raised such as object pooling) are being covered by our very regular Live Training : http://unity3d.com/learn/live-training

 

The Flappy Bird is using the same shader as the Anvil.

 

So you think the community need shields, anvils, pillars and flappy birds, OK!

 

Personally I don't think Unity should focus too much on small easy crap because that's something anyone can do. Door scripts, shooting scripts...I mean yeah sure, make tutorials or simple example projects if it's really necessary. But most of those little things are things that
A) You could easily do yourself. Just do it once and reuse it forever, now you have your gadget. Maybe even put it on the asset store and make extra money on the side. If it really is so desperately needed as you believe then people will buy it.
B) There already is a version of it available on the Asset Store
C) Is really project specific and would sort of need to be developed in a "universal" way to account for every possible use-case. Making it a little less simple than simply programming one for your game specifically.

The other problem is that for any actual serious game being developed, indie or otherwise, you're already going to have at least one dedicated programmer. A programmer who can most likely whip up these "gadgets" within a day or less (if he can't do that, how can he be expected to program a whole game?). So who does this really benefit and how beneficial is it when compared to the other things UT could be doing?
If you don't have a programmer who can do that stuff then you have much bigger problems because you're simply not going to have a game. Sure you might have doors that open and other simple things like that. But not really a coherent game, certainly not anything that is even remotely original or interesting. So if you're going to be having a programmer who can do that stuff anyways, why not let Unity focus on the stuff that a programmer can't just whip up in a day? Would you rather Unity save you a day's worth of work or a month's worth of work?

 

I can't determine that at all by looking. The extent of my shader knowledge is that they make things look good...

It'd sure be nice if the politicians pushing for fracking believed in such a thing. I was going a little further back than tribes. I forget where it comes from, but the reference I'm making is that back in time it was better to be 'stupid' because if a bush rustles and 9 times out of 10 it's just the wind but 1 time out of 10 it's a predator, the people who think "who was that?" will run every time while the more intelligent "what was that?" would investigate and die

 

That's a very selective interpretation, isn't it? Someone who thinks "what was that?" and doesn't consider the risk before investigating, or investigate in the safest possible manner, isn't much more intelligent than the "who was that?" crowd. There's also the assumption that a "who" is necessarily always malicious where a "what" isn't, along with other flaws with the reasoning there.

It wasn't ever "better" to be "stupid".

 

It was the context of 9 times out of 10, it's the wind and 1 time out of 10, it's a lion. If you fear the unknown and assume "who", you run 10 times out of 10. If you are unafraid of the unknown and reason a what instead of a who, you will see no reason to run and you may even investigate. It is assumed in the context that the who - if any - would be a lion and the what would be the wind. Also in the era the conversation was talking about, being eaten by a lion was a valid concern

I still can't remember who said it, but the conclusion drawn from this example was something along the lines of "It was necessary to be stupid at that time, but not anymore". I'm sure looking into it would just get the thread locked, because of any possible connection it would have to modern times.

 

The crux of all of that has nothing to do with "who" vs "what", though. Consider that there are plenty of "who" that aren't dangerous, and there are plenty of "what" that are dangerous. The actual decision is being made based on whether or not they fear the unknown. The rest of that narrative is just fluffy dressing to make it sound more logical than the faux reasoning that it is.

 

I don't get the `you can hack it apart to use it how you want` ... the hacking apart part... why is that so cherished? why require hacking of any kind to use really easy-to-use fast-to-implement, reusable, configurable components? And the people that seem to poo poo this whole idea seem to be those who are good at programming who say `oh yea, you can whip this up in like 1 hour` .. well that's a pain in the butt. Why should I take ANY time?! Just to prove how great I can program?

 

I don't have a problem with the concept. I simply disagree that it is Unity's job to do so. The Asset Store exists to allow Unity to focus on the aspects that cannot be handled by their customers (at least those who lack a source license).

 

Because absolutely no prefab can ever cover all possible use cases (or if it does, it will be far too unwieldy to actually use effectively). You need to be able to modify things the way you want, or you're forever stuck with the limitations of stuff that's basically the same as everybody else's stuff. Which gets boring fast.

Imagine you have a dozen Lego pieces. Yes, it's simple to snap them together, and it's fun for a while, but there's only so much you can do. Now imagine you have a 3D printer and some plastic. Yes, it's more complicated to figure out how to use it, but the possibilities are vastly increased. What you can do is no longer entirely defined by what other people have done for you.

--Eric

 

It's not the "hacking" that's cherished. It's the flexibility. And flexibility goes out the window real fast if you're presented with pre-made templates to tweak rather than tools to build your own, custom stuff.

 

Peoples! Chill! You're all wrong.

There are only two ways to make games properly:

• From scratch in C.
• A mod for [insert GOTY].

Everything else is wrong and makes you a poo poo head.

Now go forth and use this to make the bestest games evar. You go first, I'll be right behind you. I promises.

 

Hacking may have been a bad word. Perhaps.... Tweaking and expanding? Let's say I download the Sample Assets package and get the car prefab. That's great! But now I want a tank. I can then take the car prefab, adjust the variables on it to make it slow and sluggish and make it handle like a tank, then write extra scripts for a turret, swap out the model of the car for a tank that I've made in Maya/bought from the Asset store... You get the picture!

As SuperPig has commented on so well earlier; its difficult to make a one-size-fits-all bunch of prefabs for ALL different varieties of outcomes possible in what the Unity Community wants to make. That is both the strength, and a weakness, in Unity. Its open-focused for whatever you want to make (Trust me, ive seen some pretty bizarre and ambitious and wild things made with it) but making supporting content for developers isn't going to be possible to hit everyone's wants and needs and skills.

It seems like you want to plug in a bunch of info and then push a 'make my game for me' button; which I really doubt we are going to be implementing in Unity any time soon.

 

No no, everyone knows that you hand code everything in assembler, for a CPU you hand crafted yourself using only tools of your own design...

 

First, I go to the silicon mines in deepest Africa. Once I've crafted my circuit board and CPU, I come up with my own machine language. I like to pick a different base numbering system to base it all on. Last week was base 3; trinary is so much cooler than binary.

Then, I am finally able to make my game, the pinnacle of a quest for perfection and quality for which I have crossed the earth, each a unique creation never to be seen again!

My first one will be finished this year. It is a Flappy Birds clone. I call it Slappy Birds.

 

The Door Prefab

1. support sliding horizontally, vertically, diagonally in chunks, iris, saloon, trapdoors, loft doors
2. open via built in motion or pluggable animations
3. have its own built in colliders and trigger system for proximity
4. optionally open if using keys or swipe cards (access a database)
5. optionally open after important event or on demand with tickbox
6. various sound effects should be included and can add own
7. built in perlin noise stuck effect for slightly worn or stiff doors (optional)
8. the above in all shapes and sizes possible
9. optional delay before it closes again
10. optionally close while still in door area
11. support for damage if closing on npc or player
12. various visual styles of door raging from primitive settlement to scifi future.
13. mobile versions
14. doors for horses

I could go on, but its really, really clear that people are asking for playmaker since even for a single door, Unity can't cover all the use cases.

You ask for door and you're going to get a different answer from everyone you speak to.

Imagine unity being the laughing stock of the game industry by *charging* customers for a major door feature that took a year to mature. Imagine how pissed pro owners would be knowing that their money isn't going toward a new feature that mattered but instead on a door that should please everyone.

And of course someone's going to complain.

 

My new new year's resolution is to make the ultimate door prefab that fits ALL use cases of a door in any game/visualisation imaginable. There will even be a dog-flap option.

(This is a joke, btw. I don't think there is a 'door' prefab that fits all use cases, and I don't think there is one that could be made)