Search Unity

  1. Good news ✨ We have more Unite Now videos available for you to watch on-demand! Come check them out and ask our experts any questions!
    Dismiss Notice

You know that thing where people constantly blame Unity for poor graphics, etc?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Master-Frog, Jul 3, 2016.

  1. Master-Frog

    Master-Frog

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Posts:
    2,302


    At this point I think it's just an inferiority complex or deep-seated insecurity responsible for this irrational fear that "Unity just isn't good enough".

    Maybe you're not good enough?

    I do tire of people taking a dump on the engine without really ever being challenged on it.

    There are other engines, after all... in fact there seems to be no shortage of them at all. Pretty much every major FPS game released in the 2000's spawned a new engine. Guess it's just odd that people spend all day online bashing one specific engine, lamenting its shortcomings as if it were the only engine available.

    If you hate it so much and just can't seem to get anything done with it... don't use it.

    Seems pretty common sense, doesn't it?
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2016
  2. zoran404

    zoran404

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Posts:
    519
    In Unity community there's a lot of beginners who "don't give a S***".
    It doesn't take them long to make a S***ty game and they often think it's good enough to be put on steam.
    Youtubers feed on anything they find and that forms a popular opinion.
    You really can't do anything about it.
     
  3. Martin_H

    Martin_H

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Posts:
    4,163
    I've seen that video on his channel already, and I like that he pointed out how good Unity games can look if enough work is being put into it.

    Imho your rant would have fit in well with my thread on MVPs vs vertical slices:
    http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/mvp-vs-vertical-slice.414938/#post-2704853
    Maybe share your thoughts there whether you'd rather make the game you are working on a highly polished short demo, or a "proper game", that lacks overall polish. I'm interested in your opinion.
     
  4. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    It doesn't make any difference to you personally, why you should care in the slightest is beyond me. If it "tire's" you that much then make something like Pamela and / or The Forest. That usually shut's people up... I've challenged other dev's on it before..

    All engine's have "shortcomings" hell all pieces of software have "shortcomings" it's part and parcel with the job. It just depends on what's the best trade off for the project at hand..

    Personally love every major engine in different ways.. I agree, it is "odd" but if I tried to make sense of all the odd things that go on I'd never sleep.
     
    Martin_H likes this.
  5. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    Yes. Better engines that often provide a better starting point than the default settings in Unity. That's why people hate on Unity so much. The default settings of Unreal 4 are just fantastic for someone who has very little idea of what they're doing.
     
    Martin_H likes this.
  6. antislash

    antislash

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Posts:
    646
    i'd not say unity has poor graphics, it has poor graphics for hi spec games, out of the box, poor basic features too (terrain, vegetation, already been deiscussed), other wise, graphics are perfect for any other kind of project
     
  7. Master-Frog

    Master-Frog

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Posts:
    2,302
    Yes, but I think the elephant in the room here is this, an inherent sort of contradiction that I think we have effectively covered... you can't afford to create high-spec games. It comes across as a bit off putting when a person with a shoestring budget, a PC they built themselves, some free time after work and moxie laments the engine's limitations for building cutting edge, wow-factor graphics that match last gen's pre-rendered. Not even worth discussing, really. When you're done building your AAA game by yourself, are you going to go start a new sports team and play every position yourself? Maybe start a political movement and become president of the United States? At what point do the bullshit detectors go off around here? Has anyone checked the batteries in them?
     
    theANMATOR2b and zoran404 like this.
  8. JamesLeeNZ

    JamesLeeNZ

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2011
    Posts:
    5,615
    One look at the Adam demo shows what the engine is capable of...
     
    theANMATOR2b likes this.
  9. antislash

    antislash

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Posts:
    646
    i said "hi specs" on purpose, not AAA.
    a good one can do hi specs graphics.
     
  10. JovanD

    JovanD

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Posts:
    206
    Well Unity is a subpar engine in context of AAA games as far as i know.
    It simply lacks a lot of features out of the box compared to Unreal and Cry also there's no source access for most people.

    I personally like the lack of features since it forces me to learn everything from ground up and have good understanding of computer graphics that can be applied to other software.

    IMO a perfect engine would be Cinema 4D with game engine component where you could script it with xpresso, that's just my dream... Hope Maxon takes the hint one day.

    Altho i must say a lot of "hate" that Unity gets is undeserved, it feels almost like people are judging a utility van by sports car criteria if you know what i mean. Id call Unity a great engine considering what it's intended for.
     
    Perrydotto, Rombie and GarBenjamin like this.
  11. KnightsHouseGames

    KnightsHouseGames

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Posts:
    826
    I was under the impression that the engine doesn't effect the graphics, given that your engine doesn't effect one's ability to make 3D models and textures (or lack of ability)

    It seems like Unity handles any kind of combination of textures you want, and the Unity 5 lighting seems pretty nice, and it seems like most of the people talking about how Unity is inferior are people who don't make games.
     
    theANMATOR2b and TonicMind like this.
  12. zoran404

    zoran404

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Posts:
    519
    Why do artists keep thinking that visual scripting makes sense?
     
  13. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    They love to annoy people who think visual scripting doesn't make sense.
     
  14. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    You know though nobody has commented on the game itself. They actually provided a demo to download to assist you with your decision to fund the Kickstarter and it's a very solid one at that. They've almost hit their goal after only a few days.

    Anyone who wants to create a Kickstarter should learn from and/or imitate this example.

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1598858095/system-shock
     
    zoran404 and GarBenjamin like this.
  15. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    7,138
    I don't think it looks very good. Small corridors, exaggerated (low res) normals, boring lighting. It looks dated (reminds of Doom 3, with more post and particles). If people think that's proof that Unity can do great graphics, Unity's in trouble. You really must have a really low opinion of the engine to think that.

    Unity can do better than that.
     
    frosted likes this.
  16. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,734
    There are a couple of key points that set Unity apart as different from the other engines
    • Unity is the only engine that has gone out of its way to make itself accessible to brand new developers.
    • Unity is the only engine that requires brand new developers to display the Unity logo on their games.
    Put these two things together and its no big surprise that Unity is associated with terrible first games.
     
    TonicMind, CDDelta, Ryiah and 3 others like this.
  17. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,726
    * asset store
     
    Ironmax, Deleted User and frosted like this.
  18. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    It's far better than the majority of Kickstarters. :p
     
  19. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    7,138
    It doesn't look bad. Looks like a good remake and it's very polished. I just don't think it's the technological marvel that's proof of Unity's capabilities.

    As I said, tech wise it feels like Doom 3 with more particles and post.
     
    frosted likes this.
  20. Meltdown

    Meltdown

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Posts:
    5,491
    I think the ADAM demo can now silence all the critics. Any complaints about Unity looking bad, can be redirected to that demo.
     
  21. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    2,960
    The cramped spaces were part of the original design. I'm not sure it would feel like System Shock if you didn't have barely enough room to swing at a mutant that suddenly pops out of a corridor.
     
    Master-Frog and darkhog like this.
  22. antislash

    antislash

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Posts:
    646
    talking about ADAM demo...the grass looks really terrible, that's a part of unity that's nor emphasised in the demo
     
  23. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    5,397
    1. Too many threads on this already 2. Example shown looks like a typical kit from the store 3. No way to prove anything one way or the other 4. Too much vicarious emotion going on here. 5. ZZZzzz...
     
  24. Master-Frog

    Master-Frog

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Posts:
    2,302
    See, this is where people have got their wires so fundamentally crossed. When you say "it doesn't look very good" what you actually mean to say is that "it doesn't look better than most other games that I have seen, regardless of budget and the engine that they're running on". You don't modify your expectations based on reality. You go to Sizzler and order a cheap steak and say, "This steak is not the best steak I have ever eaten, therefore your cook is not very good." It's just disorganized thinking, in general. Too many late nights, death matches and caffeinated beverages.

    They are remaking an old game that consisted of small corridors. That's what they are doing. The actual design of the game goes a bit beyond the way that the rooms are shaped and how shiny the metal stuff is, but I suppose that is advanced game designer stuff that apparently most people can't immediately grasp so it's easier just to say "this isn't as pretty as other games that I have seen."

    And yet, they clearly are not in trouble in any way. Because the graphics do look great. Look, I get it... you're one of those jaded developers with a can of sour grape soda in your left hand and a bottle of haterade in your right hand. Everything sucks. Everyone sucks. Unity sucks. People who use Unity suck... cool. You've mastered the art of unwarranted negativity. Here's a cookie.

    So non sequitur that it rattles my brain to even think about the place you have to be in to declare Unity "in trouble" and then afterward say "it can do better". Can it do better or can't it? I mean what is the message, here? That you think someone (unnamed) who is not you can make a better looking game in Unity, or that Unity is fundamentally crap and therefore...???

    "Oh yeah, it's got particles and post, man. I'm not entertained by the lights. In my professional, AAA expert opinion this game is trash."

    You haven't influenced my opinion in any way, except to prove my point that the criticism of Unity really is pretty thoughtless and automatic and doesn't even need to be backed up by anything other than this sort of circular reasoning, whereby the previous criticisms of Unity are the only real evidence that Unity is deserving of such criticism.

    And anyway, who cares. What game are you working on right now that is going to put the System Shock reboot to shame? I won't hold my breath for the answer.
     
    theANMATOR2b and JasonBricco like this.
  25. Master-Frog

    Master-Frog

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Posts:
    2,302
    I'm calling them "Unity Goggles".

    When a jaded person finds out that a game is made in Unity, they put on their Unity Goggles and "oh yeah, that's looks totally S***, doesn't it?"

    I've been looking closely at Doom 4 and Overwatch and CS:Go lately, and I see graphical quirkiness, oddities, I see the shortcuts and the places that don't scream "Godly perfection". You play old games and you see the polygons, you play new games and sometimes you can still see a few jagged edges, you can see how things were built. It's not perfect.

    If you zoom in 10x on a texture, guess what? Yes, that texture actually has physical resolution that is limited because games are not real life and the majority of gamers... don't give two S***s. Y'all are just so jaded that it's not even worth it. Seriously makes me question how strong some people's grasp on reality is in the first place.
     
  26. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    I don't believe that was the point, out of Unity titles in terms of graphics alone it's not the best I've seen of the engine. In terms of modern "AAA" type games for the moment I'd give that to Pamela as some of their latest video's were just downright impressive. Not just for "Unity" but for anyone using any engine in any team size big or small.

    Not that there's a specific issue I find with System Shock..

    Although Pamela does use completely custom shader (Alloy I believe) frameworks and post more in tune towards what they're trying to achieve, even though I'm digging Unity's new post stack.

    Fact of the matter is, if you have the skill / knowledge / time / money / access you can make anything look impressive. Even a game made in notepad++! The engine itself doesn't really matter unless you're let's say an indie (not even a small indie some times) with finite resources.
     
    theANMATOR2b and frosted like this.
  27. Master-Frog

    Master-Frog

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Posts:
    2,302
    Okay, let's do an experiment.

    For the timid, I would suggest you avert your eyes for what you are about to see can not be unseen.

    This is your beloved Doom 4:



    Does it look good? Do you like it? Well prepare to have it ruined forever...

    Take a closer look:

    WHEREISYOURGOD.jpg

    ZOMG look at that excessive bloom filtering! That lightning looks fake. Look at all the slimy, slippery normal mapping... what are they trying to do, make it look like all the characters lubed up with Vaseline before the fight? Ugh. So amateur. It's like they are TRYING to look AAA (and failing miserably). Seriously, if this is the absolute best that the engine can produce then I'm sorry but I think UT might as well call it a wrap.
     
  28. Carve_Online

    Carve_Online

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    557
    I have always said this too. The problem is not that Unity´s graphics are bad, it is that Unity is the only 3d engine that makes it possible for a complete newbie, or a really lazy person, to actually complete a game.
     
  29. ZimM

    ZimM

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    957
    Unity is capable of producing nice looking graphics, sure. The problem is that it requires a lot more system resources to do so, compared to other engines. I can run DOOM at 50-70 FPS, but System Shock Demo floats around 20-30 on a GTX960M, while definitely looking much worse that DOOM, especially in the texture resolution department.

    On the other hand, doing a simple 2D game (something that Unity is strong with) with Unreal is a bad idea as well.
     
  30. AngularJS

    AngularJS

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2016
    Posts:
    40
    Escape from Tarkov is the best looking Unity Game to date. I must admit from a consumer stand point I was disappointed that Escape from Tarkov was using Unity simply because I have a good PC and love to max out UE4 games on it amazingly at first glance i actually thought escape from tarkov was using UE4 which shows just how good it actually looks for a Unity game.
     
    theANMATOR2b and frosted like this.
  31. TonicMind

    TonicMind

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,211
    I think the reason Unity gets a bad rap is, as BoredMormon said it enables a lot of new developers to start making games right away, and there is nothing preventing Unity devs, beginner or not from releasing their products to the world.

    Many, many, many games are made with Unity. Not all of them are "good". Many of them have sucky graphics but that's the devs choice and its not Unity's fault.

    Its an engine after all! Anyone can make the poorest or the richest graphics depending on budget and a few other factors but just because a bunch of beginner's make a lot of crap games doesn't mean the engine itself is crap.

    People like to simplify things, most times a bit too much. Most of all they want to think whether a certain thing is "good" or "bad". I might only consider something good or bad if the thing itself were run by an evil person, like Superman's Lex Luther bad. Yet most people like to have ideas about whats good or bad. Considering a game engine terrible or great is absurd. Its a tool. Something to be built off of.

    Like others have said there's nothing you can do about the public opinion. Yet I will say that any developer worth his salt will see past this "good or bad" bullshit and use whichever engine suits them anyway. Its only the gamers and the rookies who care about the engine popularity contest. Whether that matters is arguable.
     
    Perrydotto and GarBenjamin like this.
  32. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,734
    Pokemon Go was made with Unity. And that has poor graphics. Case closed.

    Oh wait... Pokemon Go has a bigger user base on the first day of its limited geo launch then any other game, ever? Turns out that the engine and graphics aren't as critical as people are making out.
     
    ramand likes this.
  33. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    3,822
    Hrm, you're right... far more important than graphics is definitely having a cross generational, global brand name with product tie ins to film, tv, and video games. Especially when the IP was almost entirely designed to be product friendly including a theme song that repeats "gotta catch em all" over and over! ;)

    I agree with your point at core, but pokemon is really in an entirely different cultural class, like starwars and lord of the rings. Actually, is it bigger? Is star wars or lord of the rings as popular in asia as pokemon was in the west?
     
    theANMATOR2b, Kiwasi and Martin_H like this.
  34. Martin_H

    Martin_H

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Posts:
    4,163
    You're comparing apples and pokeballs here... SCNR
     
    TonicMind, theANMATOR2b and Kiwasi like this.
  35. Mwsc

    Mwsc

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Posts:
    189
    I get confused when people question whether graphics are important are not. Many games aren't really meant as games, they are vehicles to deliver interactive graphics. People like interactive graphics. Wondering how important graphics are in these products is like wondering how important speed is in a race car, when you are looking for a minivan.
     
    Kemonono and frosted like this.
  36. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    DOOM is a finished product whereas System Shock Demo is in a very early alpha stage. That's not a fair comparison.
     
    kB11 and Martin_H like this.
  37. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    5,397
    Yeah but how many games with good graphics are able to identify a toilet seat in an image and transpose a pokemon onto it in such a way that it actually looks like the pokemon is on the toilet and you can really imagine that a pokemon is taking a poop in front of you?

    ps I went to a park the other day and everyone's walking around waving their phones around like a bunch of whacky gold prospectors. Definitely makes me wonder whether I'm in the right vocation ...
     
    tatoforever likes this.
  38. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,734
    That's actually pure chance. The game doesn't recognise any thing in the real world. It just superimposes a model onto the camera feed. It's pretty low tech stuff in Unity.
     
    tatoforever likes this.
  39. gian-reto-alig

    gian-reto-alig

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Posts:
    756
    And that is a good thing how?

    Because more people actually don't like interactive graphics. They like games. Many modern AAA "Games" are just what you described, yet they get sold to the public as real games. With the developer and publisher praising their gameplay and whatnot.

    Some people buy it believing the hype, and get burned with QTE Fests and not-so interactive "gameplay". No matter how good the graphics have become, nothing can make up for this.


    I bet most people would prefer to get a movie or TV Series if they just want to see cool graphics. Even the best game cannot match the rendered FX galore of modern action movies... and at least you are not asked to mash the X button repeatedly every 2 minutes or watch the last 2 minutes again.

    A game should deliver more than good graphics. And while current AAA trends seem to point in another direction, I wouldn't go as far and say they are representative for what people want.
    AAA Studios are driven by a lot of other factors besides what the market wants...


    It wouldn't be as much of a problem if developers and publisher would be straight up with their customers as to what their product offers, if its a game or interactive movie. Then people could make an educated choice.

    I for my part will use the Steam refund mechanism in the future for just that. If a game hits me with QTE in the first 2 hours, gonna ask my money back.
     
    Martin_H likes this.
  40. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    5,397
    @BoredMormon yeah it was sort of a joke, but the fact that it feels like it's interacting with the real world is probably one of the main reasons for its popularity, it's really the first mainstream augmented reality game that I know of anyway.

    I did see a coin bounce in one of the videos in a fairly believable manner for the angle that it was thrown and the angle of the camera to the ground, but I guess you could probably make quite a few assumptions about how people will generally be holding their phones relative to the ground. I haven't played it though and probably won't.
     
  41. Mwsc

    Mwsc

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Posts:
    189
    I agree with you, the problem is that these interactive graphical toys are sold as games, and praised as games.
    In the days of the original Doom and Quake, it was an open secret that these are not games, but rather, ENGINES, with Doom and Quake being examples of what can be done in the engines. The purpose of releasing those games to the public, rather than to developers, is to allow hobbyists to mod.

    If people really wanted games, in the sense of gameplay, then we wouldn't have things like virtual reality, high polygon count, ever-better GPUs, and whatnot. Fun games have been around for decades, without good graphics. Graphics are their own reward, as is gameplay. No need to conflate one with the other. People are perfectly willing to spend money on new hardware, not for better games, for for new games with better graphics.
     
  42. Carve_Online

    Carve_Online

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    557
    But that blending of interactive graphics vs ´games´ has been around since the very beginning. I am not sure it is reasonable to have a discussion about it because it all ends up boiling down to what your personal definition of a game is. I mean look at the example of Quake and Doom used in the example above. Those are two of the most played games of all time, and at the time of their release, they were played by millions..yet the above poster states these were not games? despite that fact that millions played them without having any interest in modding them?

    Just a worthless debate to have since everyone will define the major terms to however they want to prove their side of the argument. Like I find it hilarious to think of Doom as not a game.
     
  43. Billy4184

    Billy4184

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Posts:
    5,397
    I agree it's a worthless debate. I personally like interactive graphics. Does everyone else? I don't know.

    @gian-reto-alig I don't agree that if people want graphics, they can just go for a movie. The interactivity together with the graphics is what for me makes a killer experience. I have zero interest in blockbuster movies that have great graphics (with the possible exception, despite the story, of Avatar!) but I consistently admire and go for games with very high quality graphics. The reason being that it's not just the graphics but the feeling of being able to do whatever you want in this rich setting that does it for me.

    The funny thing is that I actually think games should be more unafraid to be linear, and to rail the player along from one scene to the next to some extent. But it's absolutely important for me that inside that graphical experience, I'm the one doing things, and I can choose to take a few moments to do something that wasn't scripted. It's like a big piece of cake with a bit of icing on top - without the icing it would be boring.

    I've never been very interested in movie experiences, I'm not very good at living through other people. The greatest movies for me are those which you can almost feel like, as an observer, you're playing a role - like 2001 Space Odyssey - or ones which present an idea so fascinating that you don't even need to try to enjoy the chitchat, like Gattaca or Contact. But if nice graphics were all the movie offered, it would be much more attractive to me in the format of a game, where merely the ability to do my own thing gave it enough substance to be able to enjoy the graphical experience for what it was.
     
  44. TonicMind

    TonicMind

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Posts:
    1,211
    IMO "Interactive graphics" is essentially a grossly oversimplified matter of opinion.

    Why? Because they are not just "graphics" with interaction built in. The Witcher 3 is one of the most complex games I've ever seen. It also has some of the most convincing aesthetics of modern times. And its a modern AAA title. I've never worked on a triple-A title but I do know from reading about it that its not an easy job. In fact triple-A games are some of the most complex and solid pieces of software which exist.

    Its hard to make something complex. Its even harder to make something complex but make it run at 60FPS in 1080p. And then make it do all that without nary a bug.

    Its not easy, and if you were any developer at all you'd know that making even a simple game isn't easy.
     
    Perrydotto, frosted and theANMATOR2b like this.
  45. theANMATOR2b

    theANMATOR2b

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Posts:
    7,782
    Agree.
    And on top of that it makes it extremely hard to make it beautiful - as Witcher 3 is.
     
    TonicMind likes this.
  46. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,726
    Good job one of Witcher 3's terrain guys is working at Unity then.
     
  47. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    16,207
    I'll reserve judgement for when we finally have a new terrain system.
     
  48. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,726
    Same. Although I don't know if that's foliage or actual terrain. Or both. We'll have to see!
     
  49. gian-reto-alig

    gian-reto-alig

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Posts:
    756
    If we are talking about a game combining good graphics AND good gameplay, I can agree. Its not the same as a movie though, and I guess many people still prefer the more passive expierience of a movie.

    If we are talking about QTE Fests, how about no. A game with a cheap mobile button mashing puzzles gameplay combined with cutting edge PC Game graphics? Sounds like Myst, only Myst actually had some deep puzzling going on besided the ridicolous combination of gameplay and graphics.

    The on-rails games tend to bother me less. As long as the on-rails aspect is confined to only certain aspects, and hidden well. I don't mind not being able to go all openworld and immerse myself in pointless fetch quests for hours to drown my anger over the lacking main story line by squeezing the last bit of distracting side quests out of the game.
    I don't mind being herded from story event to story event, as long as the story events are non-obtrusive (no hour long cutscenes for me, QTE or not, thank you), cool, and the game sequences in between deserve the name "game sequence".


    Really, to me graphics can enhance a good game. They cannot replace it.
     
    GarBenjamin and Billy4184 like this.
  50. Ironmax

    Ironmax

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Posts:
    892
    Unity 5+ has great graphic rendering capabilities, thought the standard sharder doesn't really show the real power. Look at normal map compression in UnrealEngine 3-4 = its crappy . Normal map rendering in Unity is very smooth and clean. People should really learn more shader programming to see the real beauty of Unity rendering. I will soon post some new screenshots of my late's project with all custom shaders.
     
unityunity