Unreal Engine 4.7 Released

https://www.unrealengine.com/blog/unreal-engine-47-released

by Red_Tarsius • 11 years ago

188 88 11 years ago

santaclaus• 11 years ago

Will the UI render correctly on a retina display? One (I know I know) minor quirk that always gets me about Unity is how crappy it looks on newer Macs.

tumult• 11 years ago

Yes, the UI used by UE4 (Slate) is resolution independent. It can be scaled freely.

alxhill• 11 years ago

Unless it's a new feature, the UE4 UI does not render at retina resolution - certainly looks pretty pixelated on my rMBP.

azakai2• 11 years ago

Nice to see this:

HTML5 platform + WebGL is ready to use -- run your game in a compatible browser with a single click!

jgrowl• 11 years ago

(WINDOWS ONLY) :(

azakai2• 11 years ago

I assume that's a temporary limitation, they have lots of developers on OS X.

vertex-four• 11 years ago

That's just building that is Windows-only, obviously the apps will work on any reasonably modern browser. And OSX support should likely come as soon as they can package the tools properly.

rl33• 11 years ago

More detail on browser limitations would be nice. I know the article states you can ship builds in 32-bit browsers, but are there any significant limitations involved? This would be problematic since, for example, Chrome 64-bit isn't yet the default release build.

I really wish there was more comprehensive documentation relating to UE4's limitations in a WebGL context. For example, lighting, shading, post-process effects, anti-aliasing, how they all behave relative to a full-featured desktop environment. The same thing for mobile compile targets wouldn't be a bad idea, either.

Also, it seems some otherwise popular third party plugins aren't supported in UE4 WebGL projects:

https://forums.coherent-labs.com/index.php?topic=691.0

I understand Coherent's reasoning, but I imagine developers who built their UE4 projects with Coherent UI aren't very happy that their prospects of easily compiling to WebGL are non-existent due to the total headache involved. Plus, webkit.js for UE4 would be really cool, and that's essentially what CUI running in a UE4 web-exported context would be.

Despite all this I'm really happy for this release, and ultimately it's a huge step in the right direction.

desdiv2• 11 years ago

This is problematic since, for example, Chrome 64-bit isn't yet the default release build.

Surprisingly enough, there isn't even an official supported build of Firefox 64-bit for Windows. Coupled with the Chrome issue you mentioned, I'll bet that at least 80% of users out there aren't using a 64-bit browser.

smooc• 11 years ago

Did you check the article? In the pictures they actually launch 32bit firefox.

TazeTSchnitzel4• 11 years ago

I know the article states you can ship builds in 32-bit browsers, but are there any significant limitations involved

There shouldn't be any. asm.js is actually a 32-bit target (probably by sheer coincidence since JS only has 32-bit integers).

daredevildave• 11 years ago

Do they mention output file size?

greggman4• 11 years ago

It's not nearly that easy.

It would be good to know what the minimum size is. If all you want to do is put a cube on the screen how large is the JavaScript blob you have to download?

Then, most games have tens or hundreds of megs of data. Does Unreal do anything to help this? An ideal HTML5/WebGL game engine would have many of the features of flash letting the game start with a minimal amount of data and downloading the rest in the background and/or on demand.

I know of no WebGL game engine that handles that in any graceful and developer friendly way though I'm sure it will come at some point.

On top of that you need to deal with where the user is coming from. Are they on a phone or tablet with only touch controls? A slow desktop? A fast desktop? Do you handle both mouse and touchpad?

I've seen almost no games handle these issues. Almost all assume you're on a desktop with a mouse which might be true for gamers but is not true for most people browsing the web (mobile or desktop).

For mobile you could check and tell them to download the app.

Does Unreal deal with any of these issues in a dev and user friendly way?

Until then though most Unreal->WebGL or Unity->WebGL apps will probably have relatively poor user experiences.

revisionzero• 11 years ago

As a semi-recent Unity Developer, I find myself really wanting to jump ship to Unreal, really great stuff all around.

Fr0styMatt42• 11 years ago

I really, really, REALLY hope that Unity fixes their editor UI in version 5 (I haven't tried the beta yet, so maybe it's the case already), but as it stands right now I can't use Unity for long stretches (visual impairment). The font rendering in the editor is terrible, even at 1920x1200 the text is too small (froget about Retina even). This has been a problem with Unity for YEARS, which is a shame because it's a great tool otherwise.

I'm still torn between the two tools, they're both fantastic for different reasons, but if Unity 5 can't fix their editor then I think I'll have to jump ship just out of necessity.

philtar3• 11 years ago

Same. Can someone pitch in please?

fr0styMatt22• 11 years ago

Unfortunately some more Googling has turned up a disappointing result:

http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/how-to-change-font-size-in-...

The thread has a recent answer down the bottom.

It amazes me how this has seemingly been such a low priority item for the Unity Editor team for so long. This is a tool that people are expected to live in for an extended amount of time. This problem needs more widespread recognition than it's getting.

benihana• 11 years ago

People who develop on Unity: How does Unity compare to Unreal performance-wise? The only experience I have with Unity is playing Kerbal Space Program which is often a performance nightmare and I'm wondering if it's Unity or the game developers.

lelandbatey• 11 years ago

I suspect it's a bit of both. My money's on Unreal as the highest performing in terms of fancy graphics. However, the "game programming" can vary hugely from game to game, even in the same engine. It's probably hard to compare the efficiency of game logic outside of game-to-game cases.

felipesoc• 11 years ago

I don't know compared to Unreal but Unity has several hidden performance issues. I am currently working on Bullet Boy [1] and we had several obscure problems that you have to fix with a lot of trial and error. Specific combinations of components and attributes can cause frame rate to drop because of the internal organization of the engine (moving colliders without rigidbodies comes to mind).

That being said, it is really easy to use. The asset pipeline is great and artists learn to use it very fast. It works really well for small teams.

My recommendation is that you should consider it if you are not planning to make a very performance intensive game.

[1] http://bulletboygame.com

conover• 11 years ago

Off Topic: For some reason on Chrome 40.0.2214.111 I can't click the play button on the YouTube video of your bulletboygame.com site.

Edit: The cloud-right div covers the top three quarters of the video player.

keyle2• 11 years ago

Great game! Good luck finishing it!

unoti• 11 years ago

Bullet Boy looks amazing.

Regarding Unity vs. Unreal, it looks to me like Unity is better for targeting mobile devices, at least if you're planning to deploy this year. Last time I played Tappy Chicken, it devastates my batter and makes my phone hot enough to cook on. Unreal has amazing advantages for the desktop, but it doesn't look to me to be a good way to make mobile games.

If I'm wrong about this, someone please tell me, because I'd rather use Unreal, but I need to deploy mobile, so I'm using Unity.

pragmar• 11 years ago

I think developers looking for Unreal performance from Unity 3d will be disappointed. What Unity has over Unreal is C#, great interactive tools (a live stage within a running game), and the ability to publish to just about anything.

scott_karana3• 11 years ago

live stage within a running game

Isn't that also a big selling feature of Unreal 4?...

and the ability to publish to just about anything

Likewise with Unreal 4, except that they have a flat-rate for platforms, instead of expensive add-ons to support more platforms. (and no browser plugins required!)

cwyers• 11 years ago

Xamarin supports C# for Unreal with Mono:

http://mono-ue.github.io/

sparaker• 11 years ago

I have had faster development using unity.

teamonkey• 11 years ago

Two different engines optimized for different purposes but in general Unity will run much better on low-end hardware than Unreal. Unreal has a renderer that is (out of the box) definitely aimed at high-end hardware.

KSP's performance is probably bound by a physics system that is abnormally complex for games. Unity's version of PhysX is based on an older, slower version. Unity 5 brings that up to date so if Squad decide to continue development on 5 there should be some improvements straight away. Unreal uses the same physics middleware out of the box.

rdudek4• 11 years ago

Quick question, have there been any UE4 engine games released yet? I see tons of Unity stuff. I really wanted to try Unity but just can't afford their pricetag.

evanwalsh• 11 years ago

There have been a few. Murdered: Soul Suspect, Daylight, and D4: Dark Dreams Don't Die being the biggest ones.

Wikipedia has a list of a lot of titles either out or in development: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games#Un...

desdiv2• 11 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games#Un...

rdudek4• 11 years ago

Wow, thanks for the link. Looks like a pretty decent sized list of games.

blister2• 11 years ago

What price tag? Unity is free. It doesn't start costing money until you need to start doing slightly more complicated things or your revenue goes over 100k annually. That's plenty of time to experiment.

dhritzkiv• 11 years ago

$19/month for the SDK + 5% of your sales.

rdudek4• 11 years ago

Not exactly free. I would like to learn from the pro version, but not at the price tag they charge:

http://unity3d.com/unity/licenses

I can learn from crippled free version, but eventually I'll be running into things stating "you need the pro version features for this, this, and that".

With UE4, $19 got me full engine to mess around with.

AndrewKemendo4• 11 years ago

Can this be used as a standalone 3d Engine without it being scene based for iOS applications? That is the big issue with Unity - and most engines actually - which keeps us from using it.

We can't find a robust (UE/Unity level) mobile 3D Engine that is not scene based or just built for level based games.

Jare• 11 years ago

Engine-supported scenes are a convenience, you don't need to use them if their cons outweigh their pros.

ChrisClark• 11 years ago

I only have one scene in my Unity games. I load and do everything I want with my own custom code. The feature to use scenes is there, but I don't bother to use it. Just like Minecraft clones built in Unity, the scene is empty, the code does all the work dynamically loading and displaying the level.

philtar3• 11 years ago

Why is that an issue on iOS? Genuinely curious.

AndrewKemendo4• 11 years ago

Depends on the application. For us we just need an open 3D rendering engine that allows for good lighting and textures.

moron4hire3• 11 years ago

I believe the issue is that scenegraphs tend to make spatial partitioning more difficult, which means culling objects that are out of view is more difficult.

Impossible• 11 years ago

Not sure what the exact ask is here. Are you building an open world or virtual world game? Do you just want a 3D renderer without the game engine? Both Unity and Unreal 4 can be used for non-level based games, and Unreal has some special facilities to support that (world compositor specifically - https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/LevelStreami...).

AndrewKemendo4• 11 years ago

Looking for an open world/3D renderer for AR rendering that can handle a lot of Polygons, textures and lighting. We don't need a game engine with physics and all that as it is but down the line, physics might be handy. A lot of the renderers like Ogre3D do too much file handling - we need something more bare bones.

OpenGL is what we are using but we would like something more powerful.

dysoco2• 11 years ago

I've never really considered Unreal Engine. I'm more of a hobbyist making small 2D games, recently picked up Unity (been using SFML and LibGDX before) to make some small games.

I guess UE doesn't really target small games? When I think of Unreal Engine I think of AAA FPS Games with amazing graphics, but has anyone actually used it for small indie games?

Also nice to see it's opensource, I guess I read the news a couple of months ago but I forgot. I had no idea.

Athas• 11 years ago

Point of correction: Unreal Engine is not open source, the source is merely available for perusal. You still need a license for most uses.

evincarofautumn2• 11 years ago

So the source is open, it’s just not free.

(I don’t want to sound like I agree with Stallman. I’m just trying to clarify definitions.)

dysoco2• 11 years ago

Oh I see, thanks for the info.

michaelbuddy• 11 years ago

That being the case, it still has benefits of open source. For example if your game isn't working and you have the skills you may be able to find out exactly why and then have it requested to fix and verify the fix. I would credit them for that and I'm pretty sure that exact scenario has happened for a dev agency.

markdown2• 11 years ago

It's 2015 and people still don't know the difference between open source and free software?

As you describe it, Unreal Engine is open source.

moron4hire3• 11 years ago

I believe that is still considered open source, just not Free, Open Source Software (FOSS). It's basically one point shy of the GPL in that you can't redistribute the source, but modifications are allowed. I believe they even take contributions.

Open source doesn't depend on whether you pay for it.

leppr• 11 years ago

Indies have been using it a lot recently. Off the top of my head I can only recall Antichamber [1] as a successful UE-made indie game but there are also a ton of small games made with it. You should check out RockLeeSmile's videos [2] if you want to see some.

[1] http://www.antichamber-game.com/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/user/RockLeeSmile/search?query=unrea...

fsiefken• 11 years ago

How does the Unreal Engine compare to the CryEngine? I've the impression it's more efficient, this is important to get the best performance out of VR games.

Unreal Engine 4.7 Released

Related Stories