Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Unity 5 is coming and more!

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by Aurore, Mar 18, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TrentSterling

    TrentSterling

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2013
    Posts:
    99

    Yes, this model would be nice. I can't imagine too many hobbiest devs can justify the current pricing. UE4 seems to have upset everyone, and here I am, sitting on free, crying about not having a profiler. :cry:
     
  2. Meceka

    Meceka

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2013
    Posts:
    423
  3. nipoco

    nipoco

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    Posts:
    2,008
    Is Enlighten the only card that Unity has in it's sleeve?

    You don't even need Enlighten if you have UE4, because Lionhead contributes it's own realtime GI solution to UE4. A early version of this is already available.

    http://www.lionhead.com/blog/2014/april/17/dynamic-global-illumination-in-fable-legends/

    In some regards it is even better than Enlighten. Enlighten needs to precompute the whole level geometry. Thus that doesn't work so well with dynamic geometry (i.e. environment that changes, destructible environments) Dynamic models don't contribute bounce lights to the environment.

    And according to Epic's graphic programmers, there will be different realtime GI options to choose from.

    I'm also not so sure if it's a good idea to rely too much on third party tools.. The other question is, how well integrated will Enlighten be?
    Mecanim, Beast, Umbra etc. They all were pretty half-arsed when initially launched in Unity, partly unusable. And some of those still are.

    Enlighten alone does not sell Unity5 for me, nor does the 64bit editor, or PBR. UT has to try harder...
     
  4. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Posts:
    1,813
    The difference between Enlighten and LPV is that Enlighten, while it does need to bake some data, is super efficient and can run on just about everything with a decent CPU (even mobile platforms). LPV, however, needs a decent GPU to run.
    I mean, take your pick - dynamic GI that needs static geometry but runs fast on low-end machines, or dynamic GI that doesn't need static geometry but basically requires mid to high-end gaming rigs.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2014
  5. Game-Whiz

    Game-Whiz

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Posts:
    122
    Will Allegorithmic substances work with the WebGL plugin?
     
  6. Reanimate_L

    Reanimate_L

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Posts:
    2,788
    i'll take the first, but somewhat i agree with nipoco, it's still third party not a native support.
    but well i don't know how the cooperation between unity and geomerics, are we going to get better support and update for enlighten from geomerics or not. That's make me kinda worry about half arsed integration....
    and unity, umm really why we can't get speedtree modeler integrated to unity anyway?? that could be better to replace tree creator :/
     
  7. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    Same here, I don't like to rely too much on third party solutions, in fact we are almost at the mercy of our engine providers, on top of that, relaying on clunky third party implementations it's really bad. Just look at Umbra Mecanim, which never worked really well.
    Because you won't spend the whole game dev time creating trees, those are like most environments assets, you'll maybe re-iterate 1-2 times here and there then voila. Adding a tree modeling tool it's just a waste of resources and time (also will cost more to license Speedtree as IDV won't be able to sell Tree modelers licenses to Unity folks, so it doesn't look like a good business selling point for them). Plus, there's no need to make Unity any fatter, in-fact I would like to see Unity become slimmer by not polluting the editor with unnecessary extra editors and provide integrated (but independent editor tools, such as splitting mecanim editor into it's own editor instead of opening new scenes). Unity it's already slow and sluggish on big scenes i don't want it any slower. :rolleyes:
     
  8. Ippokratis

    Ippokratis

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,521
    "Same here, I don't like to rely too much on third party solutions, in fact we are almost at the mercy of our engine providers, on top of that, relaying on clunky third party implementations it's really bad. Just look at Umbra Mecanim, which never worked really well."

    You are suggesting not using middleware ?
    I am very happy that middleware such as FMOD, Physx, Mono, Umbra, Mecanim is included and available for every platform. Otherwise if I needed the said functionality I should license and integrate them myself. Which is still an option if you find that Unity's implementation does not fit your needs.
     
  9. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    No, I clearly said clunky third party implementations but now that you mention:
    Mono is outdated, PhysX is outdated, Umbra doesn't work well on big scenes (and it's possibly outdated too), Mecanim still need few more iterations to be mature and replace the old legacy system, no proper streaming system, no GUI and the list goes on. This is what people call half baked features.
     
  10. Reanimate_L

    Reanimate_L

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Posts:
    2,788
    ah i see, okay that's fair point :)

    Basically this...
    Third party is good and actually a great idea, if
    it integrated/implemented correctly and fully functional or optimized
     
  11. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    @tatoforever: Excuse me? I actually prefer to use the legacy animation system, simply because mecanim is SO USELESS!!!

    Actually, let me correct that. It's useless to me only because nothing in mecanim is obvious. with the legacy system, it's as simple as Animation.play(). no screwing around with state machines and variables and no unnecessarily complex code. also makes programming network games easier to do.

    I go with option 1, my friend, since i haven't had a single computer that has a discrete graphics card. my tablet is also pretty useless when it comes to raw power, so again, option 1 is better. means older computers can run it at full frame-rate. (or half, i find i can stand 30fps like it's 60 ;))
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2014
  12. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    That's what I mean yeah. I like third party middlewares (as long as they are properly integrated). :rolleyes:
     
  13. niosop2

    niosop2

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Posts:
    1,059
    Animator has .Play() as well if you want to use it. Just pass it a state name instead of an animation name. So it takes a couple of extra clicks to associate the states with the animations, but not a big deal. You don't need to configure transitions or anything, just create a bunch of states associated with animations. I use it frequently when I don't need blending for something.
     
  14. nipoco

    nipoco

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    Posts:
    2,008
    Well this is true. UE4 is really demanding. The editor and the builds alike. And that might be an advantage for Unity, depending what you're aiming for.
     
  15. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    Actually I was basically waiting for Mecanim to match all legacy features (API wise) so we can keep our current workflow which is all animations being fully scripted but it never came. In fact, I was working on my own IK system and my dear friend (and very good supporter guy btw) Partel Lang came to the rescue with his own amazing full body IK system. Pretty good time saver and really pull the trigger off to avoid Mecanim for a while.
    I really don't want to bash Unity, that would be quite hypocrite, even with all his flaws and half baked features, Unity have been a huge time saver for us, no matter what but I'm not yet sure if v5 will make sense for us now that there's others sexy solid and cheaper options around.
     
  16. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Posts:
    1,813
    I agree with the Mecanim sentiment. Honestly, it sounds at first glance like something that should make your life easier. But after spending days trying to make a third person shooter tree, I still don't have anything workable and I'm more confused than when I started.
     
  17. SilverStorm

    SilverStorm

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Posts:
    712
    My Friend - your solution to a perfect 3rd person character controller is Here : https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/#/content/368
    Play maker is CRAZY MAN....however I am waiting for it to go on sale....no way I am forking out $95 bucks....I wonder if theirs like a place where
    they schedule dates for the sales in the Asset store.

    Here is a video on how easy it is : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=od78RhlLXUI
    (It even implements a crazy simple fade in system and has dialogue systems and tweens -- I can't believe I didn't know about Unities Best selling product....wtf - I been searching the asset store and its a maze in there...pahh.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2014
  18. zoom

    zoom

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Posts:
    1
    I'm not entirely sure WHAT would work. But I think we need to see a response from Unity soon, not least because people might still be buying licenses at a fairly large cost that might come down or change significantly. If you're going to change your terms, just get on with it in whatever form it might end up.

    My 2p :)
     
  19. HeadClot88

    HeadClot88

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Posts:
    736
    I would have to agree with what zoom said :)

    Be pro active in getting your new license model out there. Get community feedback. So far we have heard really nothing from unity tech about a new licensing model.
     
  20. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    @tatoforever: Now that, i understand. hopefully, unity make it easier for those out there needing an intro to mecanim. (the tutorial was completely useless for me, since my models had no root motion...) And it would also be nice to have "auto-IK" for pro users, (IK only has pro support at the moment, except for foot IK, which i think works in free) or something like that built into an API, so that you could make animator calls just as easily as you can with legacy, and have IK automatically mapped for you. (it could also have some sort of "OnIK" function for animations like picking up a glass, etc. with rigidbody forces, realtive to IK measurements. just an idea that i reckon UT should integrate)

    Would also be nice to have more steamlined engoines out there, but since those so-called "good engines" have too many royalites and requirements to be even functional for individuals, it's better to stay here. its what Unity is for! :D

    @niosop2: really? I didn't know that! would still stick with legacy though, as with that, you can add blending with a few lines of code. Also makes internet RPC calls easier.

    @PhobicGunner: agreed! And BTW, it didn't actually state "easy" it stated "powerful, feature rich" Ha! And where, by any chance, are those features? ;)

    @HeadClot88: IDEA! Beg UT to bring this info out please! i need to know if enlighten is for free too!
     
  21. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,083
    Playmaker doesn't make Mecanim easier to use. They're not saying they can't make the controller itself, but the animation trees.
     
  22. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    POINT!

    The point i will make about my mecanim experience: I made the anim trees, but then got stuck on trying to do movement scripting as mecanim claims root motion will take care of this! but it doesn't: the walk anim activates, the character moves forward a little, but then it just stands there walking on the spot! i let the key go, it bounces back to start position!
     
  23. niosop2

    niosop2

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Posts:
    1,059
    Does your animation have forward motion in it? I use root motion all the time and it works fine.
     
  24. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    I was trying to do this Mechanim animation controller too. The controller was already existent from Unity Tech's Asset Store example from Spring 2013 and so I thought this will be easy. Wrong.

    Basically I setup a path (very simple path - like a T and 'baked it) for a NavMesh Agent character controller and all I wanted to do is send a constant speed to the character so that it would start walking across the stage runway to the spotlight and then off the stage (so correctly follow the navmesh path I made for it) but it wouldn't work.
     
  25. ARealiti

    ARealiti

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2013
    Posts:
    133
    Any chance we are getting something as basic as vertex animation, like honouring fbx vertex animation information built in by now? Sick of having to use roll my own or things like Mega-fiers.
     
  26. SilverStorm

    SilverStorm

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Posts:
    712
    Hmm If I am not mistaken the "Import BlendShapes button" is just for that.
     
  27. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Yes and there are several good assets, not just MegaFiers that use Blendshapes, including Unity's built-in functionality.
     
  28. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    Sorry, what's forward motion? i am an extreme mecanim n00b! (you may have guessed this already... :/)

    From what i am reading, it seems blendshapes is for vertex based animations. am i right?

    And BTW, we better sum this up quickly as this is kinda going off-topic... :/
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2014
  29. niosop2

    niosop2

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Posts:
    1,059
    When you view the animation in the Animation section of the Import, does the model move forward when walking or walk in place? Root motion doesn't add any motion to an animation, it just utilizes any existing motion that exists in the animation to drive the position of the game object.

    Before root motion you'd play a walk animation that was animated in place, then move the gameobject by some speed to make it match up with the animation. With root motion, you put the actual movement into the animation and when you play it back the game object is automatically moved.

    A good example is something like https://www.mixamo.com/editor/new/959

    Toggle In Place on and off to see the difference. In cases like this, root motion really shines. If you were doing it the traditional way with an in place animation, you'd have to drive game object position via a separate animation track so that his forward speed matches the animation. With root motion this is all taken care of for you automatically.
     
  30. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    That would be my problem with mecanim then: all my animations walk in place!

    But still, that would be a difficult anim to loop...
     
  31. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    I don't think it's offtopic if it's talking about how Unity 5 could improve mecanim.
     
  32. NutellaDaddy

    NutellaDaddy

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Posts:
    288
    I'm very excited about the new shaders because visual quality was one of the harder things to get in unity when going for realism. I would love to see maybe something to make terrains better. Will there be anything new for terrains?
     
  33. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,109
    I really wish we could get more details about Enlighten... how its' going to work and if we'll get add ons for common 3D tools like Maya or 3Dmax (as it comes with the product, or atleast it says it does on their website).

    enquiry minds want to know
     
  34. pauloaguiar

    pauloaguiar

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Posts:
    700
    My question is:
    The new GUI have auto Aspect ratios'
    For example if I have a button, automatically keeps the respective Aspect ratio size of the window!?
     
  35. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    @hippocoder: thanks for the info! just thought no mention of Unity 5 was enough to go off the rails... Anyway, any known info on the new GUI release yet?

    BTW, one thing mecanim could use... some docs! perhaps a guide on how to animate models for use with root motion, for example. would also like to see mecanim maturing into a simple "code Animator.Play with IK option and you're done" type of way in the future!

    @NutellaDaddy: you could try using Lux for now while Unity 5 grows up... But don't give me credit! that goes to lars for his brilliant shaders! simply search for lux, and click the second link!

    @pauloaguiar: that would be nice. almost like pulling your hair out doing aspect ratio coding!

    @tswalk: agreed! :D
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2014
  36. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    I second that: one of my first big surprises was finding the that 'scene layout' in the Unity editor for the UI didn't match when I play the game at the various pseudo UI settings. That situation shouldn't be the hardest part of making a game or rather the longest, most tedious, and most back and forth with testing. It would be nice is the scene layout in the editor was treated as just another pseudo UI screen setting on a game device, e.g. a 1920x1080 console and everything would be aspect ratio adjusted from there or you could use this new 4K Ultra HD although most computer TV monitors are only HD.
     
  37. TimGS

    TimGS

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Posts:
    70
    OK, new version look great, but..
    My dev guys working on Unity 4 right now. Wouldn't it be much trouble porting whole project to 5? Any compatibility issues? Or should I stick to 4?
     
  38. rbarbosa

    rbarbosa

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Posts:
    61
    I don't know if this has been voted for ... but fix high speed collision detection. Fast moving objects getting stuck in walls and floors is KILLING my current prototype.

    I had to add "DontGoThroughThings.cs" to my object...which is working...but the physics engine should be better than that.
     
  39. Dantus

    Dantus

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Posts:
    5,667
    This is not related to Unity 5. If you want that, you need to use continuous collision detection. If you have questions about it, start a new thread.
     
  40. Dantus

    Dantus

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Posts:
    5,667
    Of course there will be compatibility issues! Unity will try to minimize them, but already the upgrade to a newer PhysX version will likely mean that lots of parameters need to be adjusted if you are using rigidbodies, physical materials, ... .
     
  41. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    Will this mean that characters no longer have moon gravity? every time i make a character jump, they do a MOON jump, not a normal earth-gravity jump!

    @TimGS: Not even sure if Unity 5 would break a 4.x project, but the new PhysX engine would mean that certian things may need re-scripting...

    @rbarbosa: I haven't had problems with objects being stuck in floors and walls, but i have had problems with my characters stomping through the floor and falling out of the level, lol!
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2014
  42. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    Well, that depends on how you program your jump. It's always been possible to make a character jump to your exact specifications; certainly a different PhysX version isn't necessary for that, or related to it at all really.

    --Eric
     
  43. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    LOL, the jelly I dropped on the floor last week is still there.
     
  44. geroDev

    geroDev

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Posts:
    5
    https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/mono/commits/unity-staging

    There was a commit today :) so C# script development received 7 commits this month... compared to mono itself this implementation is a zombie already.
    I don't even know why the branches are listed in the mono project when there weren't merges for years now.... :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
    Looks like it's dead :(
    UT6 should take the roslyn compiler (packed with .net then(it is free to use now on other platforms)), develop a jit for the platforms and include the pcl only. I can't even port my game to unity because it uses not-so-current-anymore c# features (compiler feature only!) like async... :mad:
     
  45. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,109
     
  46. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    All those emoticons are cute. LOL
     
  47. crol

    crol

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2013
    Posts:
    30
    Will Unity free recieve something around shaders with version 5? And are all new features of Unity 5 for pro version only?

    Cause those limitations with shadows and postprocessing are terrible and its nearly impossible to pay 1500$+1500$ for indie android developer while for example for UE4 you could pay just 19$ once (but im too like UNity too much to choose another).
     
  48. Moonjump

    Moonjump

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Posts:
    2,572
    We have been given a list of new features, but have we been given a list of what will be removed?

    Forum posts have mentioned that Beast will be removed as Enlighten will replace it. Beyond that everything is unknown.

    I would hate to see legacy particles removed for example. Many of the particle effects in my latest game cannot done with Shuriken, and I dislike Shuriken's usability as well.
     
  49. cannon

    cannon

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Posts:
    751
    Saw the blog post on U5 WebGL. Pretty smooth on Chrome and Firefox, takes a while to start but no hiccups at all on the Dead Trigger demos. Wow.
     
  50. FuzzyQuills

    FuzzyQuills

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    2,871
    @Moonjump: You don't like shuriken? i found it easier to use shuriken as the legacy particle shad too many options!

    @goat: what do you mean by jelly? you trollin bro? You saw my post on passing through the floor? have no idea what you talkin' about!

    @crol:

    I think the moderators said that for now, all features are pro-only, but once they finalize things, the pro-to-free features will be announced. at least i think they said that...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.