Unity vs Torque
I am finding a good 3D engine in the last couple of days and found out these two offer what I needed for my project best (obvious? :P). So now the question is whether to choose Unity or Torque. Unity offer web deployment so that's a plus for me. Since I have a mac (need to share one computer between developer and artists) and pro price is not too expensive, I am thinking about going Unity's way. But Torque has more fellowers, and I am also thinking Torque is not so bad (and able to run on PC is also nice - doesn't need to share). So what should I choose: Unity or Torque? Any advises are welcomed!
I've used them both, though it was a long time ago that I tried Torque, and I ended up buying Unity (Indie). In general, I think Unity is much easier to use and has a shorter learning curve. But you don't have to take anybody's word for it - there are downloadable demo versions of both.
Thanks Diragor for your reply. I have already try both engine demo and go through their online documentations. I also think Unity is easier to use
Then I should probably let you know that I'm not exactly a pro and I haven't done anything serious with either one of them (yet).Originally Posted by hama
I like to know suggestions from pros who have been using them in real actions
From my small amount of time with Torque, I was confused... Really confused. I looked through the documentation and couldn't really figure out why things were implemented the way they were nor how to use them the way I wanted to. I've programmed a lot before in C++, Python, and Flash and read through a lot of APIs for both 2D and 3D games, but I was (and still am) lost with Torque.
At the same time, though, a lot of people seem to absolutely love Torque. Maybe they know something that I don't >.>
I haven't had an opportunity to mess with Unity... mostly because they didn't have a Windows version of the editor, but I hear one is on the way. I've seen the videos and it looks relatively easy to use, but I suppose it's a "you'll actually know how easy it is once you get your hands on it" kind of thing.
I've only used Torque and have no real reasons to switch. Those that say it's a steep learning curve are not exaggerating, unless you have previous experience with a full game engine it's going to be a shock to the system. Once you're up to speed though, the engine becomes a lot easier to work with and in many cases a pleasure.
I've heard from a few people that have used both Torque and Unity that they found Unity easier to get up to speed with and make something.
What puts me off of Unity though is the lack of full source. Although I've been told you don't really need to make engine changes and can get by with plugins, unlike with Torque where you're pretty much guaranteed to need to make engine changes. That said, there's always the chance you might want to step outside the bounds of the current engine to do something new, at which point you're stuck.
Unity provide a source code license option but don't state how much it'd be, but I can't see it been as cheap as it costs $1,500 just for a license to deploy builds to windows.
There are trials of both Unity and Torque, I'd suggest downloading both and having a play. From a Torque point of view, the demo allows you to do everything a licensed version does with the exception of been able to access to the source and rebuild the engine. You can access the mission editor, gui editor, scripts, import new models and so forth. With Torque, the only real limiting factor is developer experience. If budget isn't an issue, then the same can likely be said of Unity with a source license.
If source access isn't an issue, then Unity may be great. Personally though, I prefer source access even if the engine may take longer to get up to speed with.
Last edited by Gary Preston; 11-06-2008 at 02:53 AM.
Same here. Torque has the absolute WORST documentation ANYWHERE. I would love to give Unity a try, but no Mac
There seems to be a lot of documentation on Unity. When we first licensed Torque, it seemed like so much of the documentation was from the community, and could sometimes be pretty spotty, at least in finding decent support. We have kind of moved away from Torque, but I do think it seems like a nice engine as well... I've started poking around into Unity though as a result of this post, and it seems pretty cool, although some of the visuals aren't as "cool" as the new Torque Game Engine Advanced...
Poseidon
(www.ashianae.com) - A new Indie Game & (www.thegamestudio.com) - A new Indie Game Resource
Hey, Hama!
This is Deborah Marshall from GarageGames (oh no, a corporate spy!)
First, to the issue of documentation, the users of this forum are right. For a long time, Torque had a lot of documentation, literally hundreds of pages, but it meant almost zero because it was hard to navigate. New users like esrix and Acrod came away confused because they couldn't find what they were looking for. We fixed that problem by hiring someone entirely to leading the charge to fix our documentation system, and I'm happy to say, his results are apparent. If you're interested in Torque Game Engine Advanced (TGEA), our flagship engine, you should be able to find all you need in our doc landing page, including a getting started doc here.
That concern aside, we know there are plenty of pros and cons of using either Torque or Unity. You've already heard about Unity's initial user experience via documentation. On the other hand, you heard Gary mention Torque's source available model. We believe having source code is essential to making games because no one game engine can predict the specific needs of your game. There is always something you will want to add that neither Unity nor Torque can provide out of box, like custom lighting or an improvement to the GUI system. The only way you're going to be able to create a unique gaming experience is to have the ability to dive in and change things as needed, and that's the flexibility source code provides you.
Torque also has been a leader in cross-platform capability. Our original 3D engine and 2D engine have supported both development and deployment on both PC and Mac platforms for some time, and very soon, so will TGEA. Since we built Torque's major systems from the ground up to support as many platforms as possible, you can build prototypes in one engine and deploy to a variety of places: Linux, Xbox 360, Wii, and even the iPhone. This is not to say that Unity is not on already on Mac and aiming for Windows, but we are on more platforms now, and that means Torque users are already catching bugs and fixing them as I write this post so we can build more robust engine releases in the future.
And finally, we do have a registered user base of over 105K+ developers, who are very active on our forum site. People like Gary (who has developed a pretty awesome game called Shelled! Online with our engine) are constantly on the forums helping out new users, developing new resources that get absorbed into the engine, and just generally encouraging each other to make hundreds of games.
I've probably already talked too much, so thanks for listening this far.But do let me know what kind of game you are thinking about making. I can point you to developers who have done similar work and can also point out more specific features of Torque that can help you make your game. And again, any private questions, feel free to send me a line.
Cheers and happy game development!
Last edited by bamfina; 11-06-2008 at 10:14 AM.
So today I've decided to give Torque a try, and all of the games/demos I've downloaded crash when they try to go fullscreen (which is funny because some want to start in fullscreen and therefore won't even run).
Now, I have both episodes of RSPD from Penny Arcade and they run fine. I've also played all the way through Westward II so it's not the computer (which is a really nice machine).
So I went and tried the games on another machine and got the same results:
When the game tries to go fullscreen, it hangs (hidden in the process list). Games I've tried are:
Yard Sale Junkies, Shelled2, and TankBusterGame (the demo used to sell TGB).
Here's the console section when it happens:
Code:Destroying the window... Changing the display settings to 1024x768x32... OpenGLDevice::setScreenMode - ChangeDisplaySettings failed.
-James
Haunted Hotel I, Haunted Hotel II, Jane Croft
Sorry, I don't mean to hijack the thread with a support forum response, but,
@jpoag: Thanks for posting the console log. We've seen that issue dozens of times, and it's generally a video card issue. That means either the video card drivers need an update or your video card does not support TGB. Which video card are you using?
My concern is whether or not there is a way to 'catch' this error and possibly set a different video mode or enumerate and select a video mode that is close.
Also, which products have widescreen support? The engine I currently use keeps the desktop resoltuion and does arithmetic stretching...
PHP Code:------------------
System Information
------------------
Time of this report: 11/6/2008, 15:00:32
Machine name: OWNER-PC
Operating System: Windows Vista™ Home Premium (6.0, Build 6001) Service Pack 1 (6001.vistasp1_gdr.080917-1612)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: HP-Pavilion
System Model: KJ304AA-ABA a6442p
BIOS: BIOS Date: 01/17/08 16:23:04 Ver: 5.17
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2200 @ 2.20GHz (2 CPUs), ~2.2GHz
Memory: 4086MB RAM
Page File: 2163MB used, 6212MB available
Windows Dir: C:Windows
DirectX Version: DirectX 10
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 6.00.6001.18000 64bit Unicode
------------
DxDiag Notes
------------
Display Tab 1: No problems found.
Sound Tab 1: No problems found.
Sound Tab 2: No problems found.
Input Tab: No problems found.
--------------------
DirectX Debug Levels
--------------------
Direct3D: 0/4 (retail)
DirectDraw: 0/4 (retail)
DirectInput: 0/5 (retail)
DirectMusic: 0/5 (retail)
DirectPlay: 0/9 (retail)
DirectSound: 0/5 (retail)
DirectShow: 0/6 (retail)
---------------
Display Devices
---------------
Card name: Intel(R) G33/G31 Express Chipset Family
Manufacturer: Intel Corporation
Chip type: Intel(R) GMA 3100
DAC type: Internal
Device Key: EnumPCIVEN_8086&DEV_29C2&SUBSYS_2A6F103C&REV_02
Display Memory: 286 MB
Dedicated Memory: 0 MB
Shared Memory: 286 MB
Current Mode: 1440 x 900 (32 bit) (60Hz)
Monitor: HP w1907 Wide LCD Monitor
Driver Name: igdumd64.dll
Driver Version: 7.14.0010.1461 (English)
DDI Version: 9Ex
Driver Attributes: Final Retail
Driver Date/Size: 3/25/2008 15:50:16, 4800000 bytes
WHQL Logod: n/a
WHQL Date Stamp: n/a
Device Identifier: {D7B78E66-6A82-11CF-3976-650AA3C2CA35}
Vendor ID: 0x8086
Device ID: 0x29C2
SubSys ID: 0x2A6F103C
Revision ID: 0x0002
Revision ID: 0x0002
Video Accel: ModeMPEG2_A ModeMPEG2_C
Deinterlace Caps: {AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC1,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC1,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC1,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC3,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC3,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC3,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
{AEDC1D5D-8546-440E-AAB2-B69FA725AF82}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC4,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_FieldAdaptive
{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC4,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC4,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY VideoProcess_AlphaBlend DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch
DDraw Status: Enabled
D3D Status: Enabled
AGP Status: Enabled
-James
Haunted Hotel I, Haunted Hotel II, Jane Croft
Our engines do have widescreen support, although it is up to the developer to use appropriate assets to handle the widescreen format.
Holy system information!
I have to congratulate you on the updated documentation system. I was one of the really early adopters and jumped on board from pretty much day one but I must admit never actually used it for anything because it was an overload and I'm saying that from the perspective of somebody who has had to use many different engines in my day job. So, I am finally considering Torque again and wouldn't have done had I not seen your post here.Hey, Hama!
This is Deborah Marshall from GarageGames (oh no, a corporate spy!)
First, to the issue of documentation, the users of this forum are right. For a long time, Torque had a lot of documentation, literally hundreds of pages, but it meant almost zero because it was hard to navigate. New users like esrix and Acrod came away confused because they couldn't find what they were looking for. We fixed that problem by hiring someone entirely to leading the charge to fix our documentation system, and I'm happy to say, his results are apparent. If you're interested in Torque Game Engine Advanced (TGEA), our flagship engine, you should be able to find all you need in our doc landing page, including a getting started doc here.
That concern aside, we know there are plenty of pros and cons of using either Torque or Unity. You've already heard about Unity's initial user experience via documentation. On the other hand, you heard Gary mention Torque's source available model. We believe having source code is essential to making games because no one game engine can predict the specific needs of your game. There is always something you will want to add that neither Unity nor Torque can provide out of box, like custom lighting or an improvement to the GUI system. The only way you're going to be able to create a unique gaming experience is to have the ability to dive in and change things as needed, and that's the flexibility source code provides you.
Torque also has been a leader in cross-platform capability. Our original 3D engine and 2D engine have supported both development and deployment on both PC and Mac platforms for some time, and very soon, so will TGEA. Since we built Torque's major systems from the ground up to support as many platforms as possible, you can build prototypes in one engine and deploy to a variety of places: Linux, Xbox 360, Wii, and even the iPhone. This is not to say that Unity is not on already on Mac and aiming for Windows, but we are on more platforms now, and that means Torque users are already catching bugs and fixing them as I write this post so we can build more robust engine releases in the future.
And finally, we do have a registered user base of over 105K+ developers, who are very active on our forum site. People like Gary (who has developed a pretty awesome game called Shelled! Online with our engine) are constantly on the forums helping out new users, developing new resources that get absorbed into the engine, and just generally encouraging each other to make hundreds of games.
I've probably already talked too much, so thanks for listening this far.
Cheers and happy game development!
Last edited by Xiotex; 11-06-2008 at 03:18 PM.
As someone who went out and bought Torque and tried to create a game with it I'd have to say I was really frustrated and eventually gave up on using Torque. The UI for the editor was non-intuitive and the programming language was just not something I could wrap my head around.
Unity was a completely different experience. The documentation was great, the examples worked, and the language was something I could pick up easily since I'm already a javascripting type person. I've also seen some of the latest amazing things Unity can do as well as knowing what might create could show up on macs, pcs, linux, Wii's iPhones, and the web. It's hard to beat that.
This was about a year or so ago however so perhaps Torque has changed in that time, but I have to say that coding in Unity is very empowering and less painful experience.
Here's an example of a Unity3D based project that just leaves my jaw on the floor :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI3nd...eature=related
[Web Developer and RPG Fanatic]
AW Dot Com
I tried the demo of Unity, and really wanted to like it more. It felt as if the environment was mostly geared towards making a 3rd person perspective game over anything else... although, as I mentioned, I only fiddled with the demo. I mostly just can't understand why they limit the indie license to Mac only distribution. I don't expect them to give their software away, but to omit Windows builds under the indie license is just harsh in my opinion. It certainly kept me from exploring it any further.
As for Torque, I've got no experience with it (except for playing some of the very fun games that were made using it). I just figured there's plenty of other engines out there for free right now (Ogre3D, jME, etc.).
Thanks Bamfina and the rest for your replies. I have to agreed that Troque is more robust - I already found some bugs in Unity
Really? There's a pre-built first-person controller right there in the standard assets, and the big island scene included with the demo is first-person. The easiest thing to whip up in the demo is a first-person walkthrough.
It doesn't take long in their Showcase forum to find good examples of driving, bowling, RTS and lots of others. I don't want to sound like a Unity commercial, but I do like the product (ditto what whisperstorm said) and I don't want people to skip it because of mistaken assumptions.
I have to agree on the Windows build issue, though. Same with iPhone. They seem to be going after extra money with release platforms rather than with extra engine/editor features.
Do all Unity games play in their browser plug-in? Or is that two different products?
Bamfina:
Well, I'm really not interested in either of the 3d engines, just the 2d one. Get that guy documenting that stuff stat - it's very frustrating trying to make something work right for hours only to find out that it is deprecated. I've already got an engine I prefer for 3d
All Unity projects can deploy to the web player plugin. Build options are radio buttons--you can change from web player to Mac to PC with single clicks. The iPhone process is just as easy (it's one-button build--watch the demo video on unity3d.com). The difficulties with iPhone aren't pipeline, but optimizing the holy hell out of your content.
The company demoed the Windows editor of Unity at their recent Unite 2008 conference in Copenhagen. The Windows editor will be available starting with Unity 2.5, which also changes the licensing scheme. With 2.5, "indie" licenses will be able to deploy standalone builds to both Windows and Mac (adding a "Made With Unity" splash screen at startup). They haven't announced a date for 2.5, yet, but I expect it'll be sooner rather than later.
I disagree that Unity is purpose-built for 3rd-person games; it's a generic toolkit. For example, this video was captured at the three week development mark on Splume, and it's a 2D puzzler. Just look at the entries to this year's Unity contest.
Unity is very focused on workflow. It doesn't feel like a bunch of features mashed together, but rather a tool that actual people were meant to work with. The asset pipeline is amazing (just drop PSDs or Maya files into your project), the ability to view/modify any script's variables while playing in-IDE accelerates design iteration, and the company and support are incredibly responsive. We've been extremely happy with Unity since we adopted it.
We're actually going to spend 2009 working on Blurst, a collection of our Unity games. We have four games up right now, with a fifth out this month, and then games every 8 weeks in 2009...
Acord:
The documentation for Torque Game Builder, our 2D engine, also saw a rehaul about 2 months ago, similar to TGEA's so people using both engines can work in a familiar format. You can see the online version here. If there's anything in there that you think is necessary that we don't currently have content for, we have a forum thread running that our lead doc engineer checks daily for suggestions. Please give him specifics so he can improve our 2D engine experience.
So Torque isn't made for people? :-)
Hm.. With Indie Unity licence you can't do windows games? Then indie license seems almost useless? I am buying a used mac mini to (finally) try to play with unity a little but this is changes some variables :/
On the other side this thread made me look at Torque again. I thought before torque was getting somewhat outdated, and I also bought TGB few years back but never used it, but the number of (recently) published and WIP games on their list totally overwhelmed me. And I didn't even know TGE Advanced is there now.
It would be great if they would somehow make their Instant Action's browser plugin available to developers in a similar manner that Shiva/Stonetrip and Unity make it. I played IA games and it seems very solid and instantaneous.
Currently Unity indie can deploy web player builds to Mac and Windows, and standalone builds to Mac. They're changing with this 2.5 so indie will be able to deploy standalone builds to both platforms.
I think a lot of software gets sidetracker by fulfilling feature requirements first and usability second, that's all. I haven't looked at Torque in awhile, but I got this sense with TGB when I evaluated it. They also had a very strong "well, you have the source--you fix it so you like it" attitude (not sure if this is still prevalent or not).
Well i think its the a good attitude actually (its a very cheap engine afterall), having the source means you have no boundaries. Personally if i was going to use Torque i would get the standard version -more mature, better documentation since more people know about it- and modify the source to my needs. Of course i don't mind going head first into the source, so that's me. Some people might not care about this and prefer Game Maker-like interfaces instead of having the source code (note: i'm not saying it in a negative manner, i just cannot think of a better way to describe it :-P). However i believe that having the source for an engine is the #1 requirement and everything else follows.
I think this attitude makes sense for some people. For the record, though, Unity isn't really a Game Maker-like application. Scripting is Mono in C#/JavaScript/Boo, with full .NET 2.0 class libraries available, so it's not like you're limited to what Unity chooses to provide with their own API. You can do quite a bit yourself (there is a C++/plugin route, too, although I've never seen anyone use it).
Unity is still reasonably accessible for artists--it's easy for them to assemble components and tune things. They could use the standard assets examples and set up a first-person controller, camera follow, etc, without any oversight from a programmer. Unity provides a mechanism to set all public variables in scripts via the IDE, so artists can set up a quite a bit on their own (for example, they would drag in their character to the target variable on the camera follow, for example). All of these sample components are C# or JS behind the scenes, though.
I would rate Unity as slightly more complex for non-programmers, probably somewhere a notch or two above Flash.
That is excellent news. I shall take a look and see if I can get my t2d projects restarted
Is Unity good for simple 2D games? I looked through the 2D platform game tutorial on its web site, but that involves a constrained 3D world with 3D models. I'm more of the "blit an image at X, Y" type of game programmers - my feeble brain gets confused if a third axis is added. Does Unity easily support development of these kinds of 2D games?
Right now I'm working on a retro platform game in Pygame (Python + SDL) but the allure of the iPhone is strong...
I don't think so. I tried Unity for one month and also followed that 2D platformer tutorial. What it means by 2D is just having a camera on 2D axis. So I think every game scene in Unity is 3D.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote