UE "Infiltrator" in Unity + Adam Characters (4K Screens)

Imported the Infiltrator map and applied a couple of my own materials, added some lightning also ( a couple volumetric from Adam tech demo).

I'm building a FPS game and wanted a rough idea of whether Unity could handle something of the scale of The Infiltrator demo.

NB: Comparing my result after spending the week-end on it and using my personnal simple materials vs complicated multi-layer+Multi-masks materials of the original demo done in 8months by a team of Epic artist and engineer is non-sense.

The Original demo has fully baked GI and rely heavily on really complicated materials. Meanwhile over the week-end i was able to add precomputed realtime GI and several Volumetric lightning thanks to Unity. Just a fair reminder, there's no realtime GI in Unreal Engine.

*New - 4K album: http://imgur.com/a/nJ7PX

 

Looks incredible!

 

It looks fantastic, indeed ^^. I love this first shot a lot.

 

Looks pretty good....

Gonna be interesting how the performance compares between the similar setup in Unity and Unreal. Not that I expect parity, that it is really an apples to apples comparison or that it will silence the "Unreal sooo much better Unity sux!" fanboys that seem to hang out quite a lot in these forums.
More to satisfy a more personal curiosity as to how much Unity managed to catch up to Unreal performance in the 5.X cycle.

Thanks for sharing, anyway.

 

I was indeed really curious to see how it works out.
So far, it looks like the biggest issue with project of this scale in Unity is the baking/GI Precompute, and i also don't get as good TAA as i would like (should check how to set this up properly), performance aren't that far from Unreal Engine. There's tons of GI baked quite easily on this scene in Unreal Engine. In Unity i've to pick carefully otherwise i'm stuck in baking loop hell.

 

Kind of underlines the main issue left in Unity 5.x... which is lightmap baking and Enlighten. Which works well in some setups, but not so much in others. Large outdoor spaces and terrains being the notable problem children for baking.

Here's hoping that the 5.6 new baking system will bring good stuff back to Unity when it comes to baking lightmaps. And that Unity will soon after look at Enlighten baking again.


TAA... it never really worked for me in Unreal. Maybe I expected too much from it. Maybe I should have gone with medium to low settings from the start and just expected slightly above FXAA performance from it.
It is what I am getting with Unitys TAA right now. It is better than FXAA alone, it matches 1.3x SSAA, with way better performance (SSAA is expensive even at low settings), but with way more artefacts (blurring of moving foliage, and I have a weird flickering problem with one of my own shaders which uses the stencil buffer I don't get with SSAA).

SSAA still is the only really good AA algorithm available for deferred rendering in Unity. At a high performance cost. Though I am pretty happy that Unity's TAA implementation gives you a ton of options to tweak the algorithm. I am already feeling like I am getting better performance with less artefacts from Unitys approach than what I was able to achieve in Unreal with the limited options I got (low, medium, high and epic... the last two blurred moving parts too much. The former two didn't do much AA IMO). So while I feel TAA is a dead end that will never evolve into a serious contender for the next gen AA that solves the deferred AA woes, I do feel it is at its current stage a worthy option alongside FXAA and more taxing AA approaches like SSAA.

Having said that, what issues are you facing with TAA? I feel the additional tweaking possibilities in Unitys TAA implementation are a godsend, but of course force you to try-and-error for quite some time to get better results out of it than the simpler config approach of Unreal engine for their TAA implementation. What are your settings? Are you using the standalone TAA or the new postprocess stack one?

 

I was just going to post that it'll be interesting to compare a working 5.5 setup with the released 5.6 later on...

 

Forgot to mention i'm on 5.6 *

I'm using the post-process TAA.

 

Think i'm done with the testing.

I've added precomputed real-time GI at some places and will make 2 build: DX11 and Vulkan.

 

Awesome !!!

 

I think the main problem here would be texture streaming, i don't think unity have this kind of system at the moment.
Except if i missed it. @Schubkraft is there any texture streaming system in unity?
or @hippocoder since i remember finding your thread about texture streaming

 

It looks bad, not even close to Unreal rendering capabilities and effects.

 

I haven't seen Infiltrator before and was just searching for a video and screenshots. In case anyone hasn't seen it as well, here is what I found.

 

Don't get fooled by comparing 8months of team work of polishing a demo for Unreal Engine vs the work of a single guy over a weekend using simple materials

If you open the demo in Unreal Engine you realize that there is a lots of complicated layered materials that i have nor time nor will to import or replicate in Unity.

Meanwhile all the GI is baked, everything is fully baked, there's no real-time GI like in the screenshot i put earlier.

One of the fancy window Material as example of the time it would require:

 

You never used UE4 it seems ? You can also use the default PBR material in Unreal 4 without needing to make custom materials.
The shader editor allows you to make custom materials to simulate materials that behave specifically snow drops on surfaces or water effects and flow, or micro surface details like micro fibers to have some real cloth look. For Unity this is Shader Forge if you want ot make custom materials or try writting them by hand.
Making complex materials can bring a better look to surfaces sometimes, it's up to you to decide and choose where you should use some.
Anyway if you was using both engines you would know that UE4 proposes more advanced rendering features like distance field shadows , contact shadows, characters materials out of the box to achieve a better look

I was meaning you have too much specular on your screenshots , polygon flat surfaces has all been smoothed and materials are not showing good compared to original demo.
What makes it amazing it's because of the great level design and great modeling and texturing inside the factory or outside of the city, this demo levels will look good in any 3D engine.

 

And that's not because the original has polished materials made by a team vs the basic setup of materials one guy did over a weekend?

 

Sure, but isn't this just some geometry that's been brought over and had "simple materials" applied? I wouldn't expect that to look as good or to perform as well.

 

Where does he keep the grenade/rocket launcher?

 

Not sure we understood each other lol... Of course 90% of game engines have their "kinda" Substance Designer embed. The point is that the Original material is complex and i have nor the will nor the time to waste trying to replicate those complex materials in Unity, by any mean (Forge or whatever else solution).

The pictures are all screenshots from the preview panel of the editor, i assume there's some optimization going on of course. Find that it still looks pretty good

New pic:

 

just curious is the texture all applied already? seems like you missing the roughness and normal map.
also you might getting some problem setting up the lights due unity and ue4 have different light atten/falloff

 

not sure what you mean by all applied already. I imported the blankmesh of the entire city into Unity and started from there. No material, no light, just a mesh.

I exported the skybox from UE, added some volumetric fog from Adam tech demo, some volumetric lightning etc...

The original normal map of all the materials are in Unreal Engine and it would be a huge amount of work to export fully every asset and reconstruct it from scratch.

 

in your materials, are the textures assigned already? or is it just a blank materials?

 

There were no material at all before i started. All the materials are in Unreal Engine format and can't be exported.

 

Added 4K screenshots*

 

I mean the material in unity

 

Make games instead of ripping 3D art that is not made by you, and trying to impress people

 

It can be. If you write a plugin for that.

 

I think it's interesting, to take assets from a free unreal demo and see if Unity can product something similar in look and feel. He did this over a weekend, which you know full well can't compare to a group of dedicated artists and such producing the demo. It's not like he's trying to sell it, or say he is better than them, or even that what he made is of superior quality. It's an exercise in something positive. I'd like to see more, personally.

What's your personal problem with his efforts?

 

I think this is really cool, the indoor screenshots look kind of amazing actually.

Is it one big scene or are the outside and inside separate? What are the poly counts or visible poly counts for some of these shots? Or I guess number of objects or draw calls / batches matter more?

Did you into sound like a tool?

 

Ripping demos 3D art and trying to impress people with it, it makes no sense. Anyway if he like that lol

 

No need to be a dick. You need to re-read the OP again or leave the thread. He made it quite clear in his first post where these are from and why he did it.

 

Do you know why it makes no sense? Because you're completely misinterpreting the goal of this thread. He's not trying to impress anyone with his own abilities. He's simply trying to show that Unity is just as capable now as Unreal 4.

 

It's crazy but.. It's all one big scene, the indoor and outdoor. The main issue i'm having right now is that the post-effect setup i use indoor looks awful outdoor, otherwise i'll make a walk-around video.

I also tried the brand new Vulkan API and had a positive impression, but the client is kinda bugged with Multi-monitor, i can't go fullscreen or use both monitor at the time, resolution keep resetting,...

I'll take a screen with the 'stat' tab open and update this post with pics!

 

You used UE4 ? You should know that Unity is missing lot of UE4 features out of the box (Distance shadow fields,contact shadows, Forward rendering +, automatic LOD reduction, shadow map caching, noise for materials, mesh decals, pose driver animation node, per pixel trenslucent lighting,cable component, characters shaders etc ... )
So you are capable indeed to reach something looking similar, but not to the same level about graphics or animations.

This could become interesting if you could compare with and without Vulkan about performance.

 

How close is the quality and appearance? Features are wonderful but if they don't make a big impact on the overall game then it doesn't matter that much. Plus at least two of the features in that list sound more like a convenience than an actual necessity.

 

Amazing! How did you manage the volumetric fog in the middle and near ventilation top left please? i'm a struggling a bit with those!

 

Ha, volumetric fog.. Unreal isn't that advanced, in my game I do actually use volumetric inscattering and advanced stuff (a lot of it's from asset store TBH).. But in this demo it's the biggest bunch of fakery ever, which isn't a bad thing..

Two ways to approach it, you can apply a "fog" material to a plane that follows camera postion. If you want to know how they do it just open the material in UE and try it in shader forge. The other way you could do it is via particles although it tends to be heavier.

Most stuff is "faked" in UE, like area lights are faked by using bounce cards as a diffuser. Then letting the GI system do it's magic.

But the same techniques can be used in any engine really, just to note I do use Alloy which is more akin to how UE does things (also needed it for deferred decals). Inverse square falloff (lighting) and a GGX implementation, Unity now supports GGX but when I did this it didn't by default.

 

Fantastic, amazing feedback. It was also my impression that there were a lot of advanced tricks in this demo i couldn't believe the number of layers i had to remove to reach the final mesh.

I'm still considering UE for my game (mostly because using the assets from this demo, even if i've to tweak/modify them, would give a huge head start to my project). But i feel that Unity is clearly the rising star that soon enough will have the edge on any other engine. (there's just so many R&D dedicated to the Engine and so much people contribution: the store is insane).

I checked the Cryengine marketplace earlier today and couldn't stop but laughing out loud. Cryengine seems to be a straight "no-go" if you don't have several artists/3D Modelers to build your assets, and if you don't, you're stuck building a game in a forest ^^...

I wanna build a high-end PC (maybe consoles?!) oriented multiplayer FPS game and i really struggle to chose an engine. It's especially hard when most people commenting on the subject aren't rational at all, but instead passionate and without any facts to support their points. If i had built this game 2 years ago i would probably have not consider Unity, but right now, i truly don't know, it's scary.

I've no technological/knowledge limitations, i'm actually a general Engineer and good programmer, not exceptional, and between CryEngine, Unreal Engine and Unity, well, i don't know.

Played some Titanfall 2 earlier, and i'm pretty sure Unity can pull this off easy. But i would like to go a bit further on the graphic side.

Anyway, if you've any insight i would appreciate it. Trying to build this Infiltrator demo in Unity is really a good learning process, both on advanced layered/blended materials but also scene lightning for instance. It's a good exercice i would advise anyone.

 

You will see it in animations quality, or cinematics, or camera coming close in game with a character. Something like contact shadows makes , micro surface custom shaders etc ...makes visible difference when you take time to move slowly in game. Uncharted 4 is made of lot of techniques that seems useless, but that makes the game gorgeous used together.
http://advances.realtimerendering.com/other/2016/naughty_dog/NaughtyDog_TechArt_Final.pdf
If i needed to push graphics a lot for a game or a 3D showcase i would go for UE4 that has out of the box lot of features towards bringing more for animations or graphics, you don't need plugins or to write specific code or shaders.
I am not saying UE4 is the best, it has it's downsides also like anything, but about pushing graphics or animations it's the tool out of the box in my opinion.

Did you play Recore made with Unity ? Loading levels are too long, distant objects looks bad, some textures on big objects are low res, terrain was one or two layers only, and the game was not always very smooth. It's a great game but it could have been better with better tech or if it has been with next releases of Unity. To make TitanFall 2 on Unity i would say it's too early.

 

Hey, I remember you, you're the guy from the Crysis thread. I completely forgot about that thread, let me skim it before I annoy you more here. Okay, there was nothing new there.

It's a bit hard to judge where you're coming from with this. Is this a solo project or are you the leader of a team? How experienced is your team? How delusional are you? Looking at this purely from the standpoint of available art assets or rendering capabilities won't get you a game. What about actually coding the game, are UE and Unity equally capable in that regard? Is your team equally comfortable with both engines?

Frankly, the game you want to make is what UE was designed for from the beginning and in my opinion still is most suited for. Everything Epic has ever made has been a shooter and isn't the new Unreal Tournament being developed open source? Isn't that everything you want for your game? And I'm sure there's thousands of examples and assets you can use in UE which were specifically made for modern first person shooters. From what I remember even the API uses naming conventions associated with shooters.

Choosing Unreal Engine for you project seems like a no-brainer to me, but in the end your team, even if that is just you, is going to work on your game for many, many years so you should pick what you're most comfortable with.

And to be honest I can understand the irrational responses you get because your idea is irrational. You're saying you want to compete with almost every AAA developer out there and as far as we know you're just one guy, that's irrational. Doing high-end art is the most time consuming thing you can do in game development. There's an extremely good reason solo or indie developers avoid going that route and instead focus on what AAA developers can't afford to do - take risks. Because making high-end games is so expensive the big guys have to limit risk as best they can and that's why we get endless sequels, this is also what we see in movies, because they're very similar industries now. Making high-end computer visuals is extremely time consuming and therefore extremely expensive. Indie developers on the other hand can afford to play around with ideas and take those risks because we don't need to sell to the mass market to be successful. And for us to try and compete with the big guys on what they do best would be considered irrational.

 

To answer your question see below:

 

I don't think those features were available when the infiltrator demo came out, so I don't know why you keep bringing them up.

 

So the scene is from 5.2 (I believe 5.3 introduced GGX?).

It would be interesting, if you still have the scene around, to open it in 5.5 or the 5.6 beta and see if performance has improved at all.

 

4K album: http://m.imgur.com/a/G39u6

I also added a bunch of light probe since the screens which were taken without any optimization. Everything turned to 11. I'll add a couple character from the Adam tech demo and make a video of it. Then I'll be done with this! :d

 

Could you make 1080p or 1440p screenshots for better FPS comparison? Because with 4K, even high-end hardware and software is not making much of a difference with the less optimized.

Also, nice work!

 

I would need to remove real-time global illumination, volumetric lightning and fog to start being fair ^^

 

I wouldn't put it that way. However, the reason why I suggested other resolutions, is my experience with Cities: Skylines, Heroes of the Storm, and my own Unity Mark Zero at 4K and 1080p resolution.

You know, I do have a mere GTX 970. But I can play Heroes of the Storm which is based on the StarCraft 2 engine, with a very good 60 FPS in many scenarios. Now Cities: Skylines in the other hand which is based on Unity. Even if there is barely anything on screen, or even on the map, the FPS goes down to -30 FPS. My Unity Mark Zero with the Adam interior demo ran bad even on 1080p. Turning off effects didn't seem to help.

Yeah, these subjective benchmarks are inaccurate. Sadly my GUI prefab for my Unity Mark Zero project broke down. So I can't give accurate numbers for the simple Adam interior benchmark until I re-implemented it.

 

I decided to use UE4 for my FPS project. Yet, it was an interesting exercice. I'll do a video with different resolutions and optimization levels. I'll also make a DX11 vs Vulkan. I just need to add a couple characters at interesting spots. (I'll use Adam's Lu/guards/.. )