That's right, buddy. In fact, I really could have done "just another traditional Street Fighter game" in like 6 monthes, but I thought it would give nothing worthy to gamers. So I decided to dig the hell out of my brain and create a more original concept. In the first place, I just wanted to make this game for an addition in my Curriculum Vitae, so there was no real deadline. But as the project was building up, people kept enjoying it, from live demos to simple screenshots. So I didn't want to deceive them, and bring it to a higher level. If it can please thousands of fighting game fans, let's work hard on it I'm putting a lot of efforts in gameplay, controls, framerate, replayablility and graphical/animation polishment, too. So that gamers would have most of possible pleasure playing it. Fighting games are not overcrowding the appstore yet, which gives me enough time to bring the best that I can Another part of the strategy is to somehow oversize its quality, so that it could be exported to iTablet, PSP, and even Xbox Live Indie Games (just a matter of 1 click with Unity, for supported platforms). Finally, if the game is successful enough, I'm not excluding chances to make a partnership with a big studio in order to build a AAA console version (with more ideas, features, and a complete revamp, of course). Concerning Unity, something funny is that this game is following Unity iPhone's growing performances Back in April 09, it couldn't afford 3D backgrounds, for example. It is a really interesting experience to follow Unity's evolution from the inside of a game development
I mod halo pc and crysis and would just like to say that it is not always about the hardware itself. If I put I high poly model in crysis, add alot of other low poly stuff around it, such as grass, and then play the game it will run very well because the games engine can handle the amount of polys on screen, if I did that for halo my computer would die because halos Blam 1 engine is terrible at when high amounts of polys are used. Tl:dr alot of it has to with how good the engine is at handling high poly. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, I do more animation then modeling and compiling.
This is the case for almost any engine on any hardware. People need to understand that game making and assets for said games are artfully crafted and primarily smoke and mirrors. If you approach any piece of hardware/engine with unoptimized assets/code, you're going to fail. I've used most every commercially available engine at one time or another over my 25 years of game making and I can safely say that Unity is one of THE BEST engines available to the public, with the exception of the Unreal engine and the Unreal engine has yet to prove itself on the iPhone. There are a TON of Unity games in the AppStore and many of the "big" ones are made by talented developers, who know how to get the most out of Unity/the iPhone. Your choice, but to answer the original post; "Unity engine, the future of iPhone games?" NO. Because it's the present, not "the future" and until there are some MAJOR updates to Shiva, Torque & Unreal (BTW, there's NO WAY the iPhone can run UE3... the PS3 has a hard time), Unity is it.
To say that, you haven't used Shiva, plain and simple. It's got more and better working features out of the box than Unity does for one price, including, built-in server, bluetooth networking, tons of iPhone and rendering optimizations, and working examples. I agree about Torque though. I'm a fan of Unity and Shiva both BTW, but Shiva has got Unity beat in all but the dev community size. Straight up. You'd know it if you used it
Use Unity. Don't use Unity. I don't really care. As a consumer, the only impression I get is that Unity is that cube logo thing. Seeing the Unity Cube instead of a proper startup screen always tees me off. To me, it says that the developer doesn't care very much about his game. When I tap the icon on my phone, I want to see a proper splash screen, then the game. I never want to know what the engine under the hood is. Because it just doesn't matter to me. I want the game, the whole game, and nothing but the game, so help me God. If Unity pops up anywhere except in the credits, you're going to take a hit for it. In short: Keep your eye on the ball and remember what is important when you're developing. The technology is the tool, not the end product. ________ Ford Xy Falcon
That's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. You're dinging someone for using a particular technology to get to the point of making their game, instead of writing their own engine and giving up-front credit (either by choice or because they're using the "basic" version of Unity). That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard on "teh internetz" and there's a lot of dumb things said. It's like saying, "I'm dinging those games that have a Bink logo, a PhysX logo, an Unreal logo" or "those movies that hve Fox logos, Dreamworks, Pixar, etc..." stupid bastards didn't keep their eye on the ball, worrying about Dolby 5.1, THX.
True, haven't used the latest. The last time I looked at Shiva, it was no where near as complete as Unity. I'll give the latest a shot, but I've got to tell you, the two major things that attract me to Unity is; impeccable asset pipeline (Unreal could learn a thing or 3) and an EXCELLENT community. The community on the Unity forums are more forthcoming than the private dev forums on UE3 (although, Unreal's problem is primarily the fact that retail developers don't like to share most of the time, because they often feel that their knowledge or trial-and-error is their biggest advantage over other developers, but that's another topic). The third thing is not as big a deal but also important and that's the ability to deploy to multiple platforms with a small amount of effort. Like I said, I haven't used Shiva in 9 months, so I'll take a look. A lot could've happen, but I still stand by Unity for; ease of use, amazing asset pipeline, power for price, multi-platform & community. Kind of like the poorly written previous post, use Unity or don't use Unity. It doesn't matter to me. Just make great games.
You really weren't paying attention to what I was saying, were you? I don't care if developers use Unity or not. It simply doesn't matter. But I do care if their game lacks the appropriate amount of polish. Seeing the Unity logo on startup is an instant ding for any download that isn't a tech-demo. I'm not playing "Unity". I'm playing a game. I want to stare at the logo of the game in anticipation while it's loading, not some engine that I don't care about. If I'm seeing the Unity logo because the developer failed to obtain the appropriate licenses, what does that tell me about the quality? Nothing good, I assure you. I think you're missing the point. When you start an iPhone game there's an expectation that I will see the games's logo on startup. When that doesn't happen, it looks really bad. I think you make a fair argument about having a fade-in/fade-out splash. You are right that such splashes are fairly common on the PC and consoles. Seeing one for a few seconds on the iPhone won't kill anything or make the game seem any less professional. However, waiting at the Unity logo for 10 seconds while the game loads will make it seem less professional. Like it or not, if a developer fails to appropriately brand their game, the users are going to notice and will not like it. I know I'm getting to the point to where I want to delete games just so I don't have to stare at that stupid Unity logo any longer. ________ Honda That's specifications
I don't understand - how simple logo at the start up can tell anything about the quality of the game? Every AAA PC game has heaps of logos when starting up, but it doesn't bothered anyone I know. It really tells one thing only - indie developer(s) who made the game can't afford Unity Pro license which is around $3000, that's all.
I think this engine and the Unreal engine will be used alot on the iPhone, and I'm convinced we can expect much better graphics on the next iDevices, Apple has to put some serious hardware in the iPhone, if they want to be one step ahead of other phone developers. Some smartphones have 800Mhz processors, and a few can be overclocked to 1Ghz. In 2004, a good processor (single core) had 1Ghz(1000Mhz), it could run like all games back then(remember, with a higher resolution than the iPhone). Some of the games that were games released in 2004: Half life 2, GTA:SA, etc. If the next iPhone gets a better processor, higher than 1Ghz, it could run these games too(theory, ofcourse). Correct me if i'm wrong.
Let me put it this way. When you start a PC game or program, the splash screen during initial load (before it goes into full screen)... does that say the name of the technology or the name of the game? Unless the two are one and the same (e.g. Quake, Unreal, etc.) it always says the name of the game. It would be really strange to double-click on "Elite Forces" and immediately get a splash that says "Quake III". It tells *you* that. Because you know the ins and outs of the tech. To the consumer, it suggests you don't care. Even if that isn't really the case. Though to be perfectly honest, it's rather a disgusting business practice that Unity charges ~$400 but reserves something basic like the loading splash. Forcing you to pay another $1500 on top of the engine and iPhone fees you've already paid is simply ridiculous. Someone should really start a petition. You're mostly correct. The only thing I'd point out is that the CPU is actually a lesser part of the equation. The GPU is far more important to producing quality graphics. Which is one of the reasons why the iPhone does so well. It's amazingly uncommon to see quality 3D hardware in what is effectively a smartphone. ________ Teen vids
