Nice to see Jim isn't taking anyone to task for a change. For all the SHIT Unity has helped produce, we do need to remember that quite a few gems owe Unity for existing in the first place.
I use Unity a considerable amount and it truly amazes me how great some games are compared to some of the awful ones. Its a shame that the awful ones are usually the ones people relate back to the engine.
Simply put, the fact that more games are coming out more than ever, it means the tool is doing its job very well.
Nonetheless, Unity has all the things needed to make a really great game, I just wished it was easier for content distributors, such as Steam, to push forward good games and obscure the ones done in 2 hours using pre-made stuff from the asset store.
Unity's flexibility is what drew me to it in the first place. It's interesting because anyone can see the game they want to make in Unity, no matter what style.
Another nice looking game that he didn't mention is [url=http://store.steampowered.com/app/317100/]Republique[/url]. It's a very professionally crafted game, recently remastered with Unity 5's PBR system.
Anyone in the development sphere knows now that Unity is a more than viable engine for professional products, so that is what really matters.
Who cares what a bunch of uninformed gamers think? Chances are they have no idea what engine a game is made in if they are trying it, unless it has that splash screen, and if they decide to judge a game based off that, then their loss.
Sturgeon's law in effect. Because we pay more attention to the current state of the game industry including tiny indie games, we become more widely aware of the shit-pile that good games emerge from every now and then
Seeing as Unity and UE4 are both free now and game development has become completely democratic, this should be expected. It used to be that the AAA companies had their own engines and made the only good games, but I think it's great that anyone can make games nowadays and tell the stories they want to tell, however if you buy shit on the asset market and instantly repackage and resell it then you're automatically a twat
it's not about the engine/type of crayons/charcoal pencils you use, it's about [I]you[/I]
Ori and the Blind Forest is both impressively beautiful and fun (And incredibly depressing within 10 minutes, too). I admit I had a stigma over Unity thinking it only produced awful games up until recently, so much so that I had stopped thinking of it as a viable game engine and just kept looking towards UE4 as the holy grail of engines.
[QUOTE=Gamerman12;47966615]it's not about the engine/type of crayons/charcoal pencils you use, it's about [I]you[/I][/QUOTE]
It's about both, really. Some people, like me, just don't like using Unity even though I know it can and has been used for some pretty great stuff.
He is right though, we place so much stigma on a name that even when something amazing comes out, we initially shun it or dread playing it. Like his example, Grow Home. Coming from Ubisoft during the height of their fuck ups and also being on Unity almost made me not even look at it at all but i'm very much glad i did. It's definitely something that needs to change.
If you actually download and run Unity for yourself, it's easy to understand how so many shitty games are released because it's SO EASY TO USE!
I had never touched a ui-based 3d game engine before and within 30 minutes I made a first person game where you climbed up the side of a smoking volcano, crossed a rickety bridge over said volcano, and walked down a dirt road path to a magical purple forest with some furniture and a giant gun that I modeled and imported myself into the game.
I did all of that without even looking at a tutorial it was that easy to understand.
Jim really hit the nail with this video, I've been saying for years that Unity is not a shitty engine, but rather, shitty people just use it sometimes.
When I was using Unity 4 there was a conspicuous lack of some features (no breakable 2D joints, no 2D "fixed" joint, no resizeable grid, no way to measure "tension" or stress on an object or joint, etc). Hopefully Unity 5 fixed some of these, but because of the way the physics coding works you can't create your own joints, at least in Unity 4 (because joints operate on a more in-depth level than what control you have over the physics through coding).
It really frustrates me when a commercial engine doesn't give you enough control, so hopefully some of these issues are solved in Unity 5.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;47969318]When I was using Unity 4 there was a conspicuous lack of some features (no breakable 2D joints, no 2D "fixed" joint, no resizeable grid, no way to measure "tension" or stress on an object or joint, etc). Hopefully Unity 5 fixed some of these, but because of the way the physics coding works you can't create your own joints, at least in Unity 4 (because joints operate on a more in-depth level than what control you have over the physics through coding).
It really frustrates me when a commercial engine doesn't give you enough control, so hopefully some of these issues are solved in Unity 5.[/QUOTE]
Of course you of all people would want more physics-based joints to break :v:
Oh come on, not a single mention of Wasteland 2?
[QUOTE=Veggies;47969609]Of course you of all people would want more physics-based joints to break :v:[/QUOTE]
If you're making a game with destructible physics you need a way to test tension or else you end up with the Angry Birds problem of a single vertical pane of glass holding up 5 tons of stone blocks.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;47969318]When I was using Unity 4 there was a conspicuous lack of some features (no breakable 2D joints, no 2D "fixed" joint, no resizeable grid, no way to measure "tension" or stress on an object or joint, etc). Hopefully Unity 5 fixed some of these, but because of the way the physics coding works you can't create your own joints, at least in Unity 4 (because joints operate on a more in-depth level than what control you have over the physics through coding).
It really frustrates me when a commercial engine doesn't give you enough control, so hopefully some of these issues are solved in Unity 5.[/QUOTE]
I've always found Unity really awkward to use for 2D. Shameless plug: I just discovered [url=http://www.godotengine.org/wp/]Godot[/url], which is a free, open-source engine that behaves a lot like Unity with much better 2D functionality; though I can't comment about its 3D capabilities though.
On-topic: you don't blame the hammer for a shoddy house.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;47969318]When I was using Unity 4 there was a conspicuous lack of some features (no breakable 2D joints, no 2D "fixed" joint, no resizeable grid, no way to measure "tension" or stress on an object or joint, etc). Hopefully Unity 5 fixed some of these, but because of the way the physics coding works you can't create your own joints, at least in Unity 4 (because joints operate on a more in-depth level than what control you have over the physics through coding).
It really frustrates me when a commercial engine doesn't give you enough control, so hopefully some of these issues are solved in Unity 5.[/QUOTE]You can probably do this. All constrained objects flex, which means you can take their initial relative positions when instantiated and measure tension by the deviation from that position. Joints always flex before breaking. Measuring the pressure a single rigid body is under is a tad more difficult though.
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd-nkLFUUqE"]Shameless plug of my unity project[/URL]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.