Engine

[Sub-Human]

Unigine CEO offers over twitter a free license for Wastland2

Wow, that sounds great! The graphical detail in the benchmark at top quality can be fairly good looking, and it'd be interesting to see an isometric DX11 beast in a post-nuclear California. Although I'm wondering whether it'd take lots of development time to actually flesh out all the lightning effects.

[Leona]

Unigine sounds nice ) and especially if they donating it to Brian to be used in Wasteland 2.

[Leona]

... flesh out all the lightning effects.

What do you mean by that?

[Emmy Lou]

Man, that engine does look nice after doing a quick GIS of it.

In case anyone is curious but finds googling it themselves to be too laborious:

[Sub-Human]

... flesh out all the lightning effects.

What do you mean by that?

What I mean is, will it take a lot of time to actually make all the textures etc. for the game? If they stuck with a more simpler (graphically-wise) engine, wouldn't it be easier for them to create all the visuals considering you don't have to go into such deep detail, as you would in Unigine?

[dmazz]

The graphics capability of the engine isn't that important as Wasteland 2 doesn't have the budget to make really detailed game graphics.

Although the unigine price of free is nice, unigine being so new and not even at version 1, probably has little development tools and incomplete documentation. If adopted it will probably slow down development significantly compared to them choosing a toolset packed and fully documented engine like Unity. Since it's free though unigine will definitely be evaluated by the team.

Heres a list of games made with the engine. Still a very small list in comparison to it's competition.
http://unigine.com/products/unigine/showcase/
And a features list http://unigine.com/products/unigine/features/

[Sin2x]

What I mean is, will it take a lot of time to actually make all the textures etc. for the game? If they stuck with a more simpler (graphically-wise) engine, wouldn't it be easier for them to create all the visuals considering you don't have to go into such deep detail, as you would in Unigine?

Engine robustness does not necessitate the use of complex assets.

Although the unigine price of free is nice, unigine being so new and not even at version 1, probably has little development tools and incomplete documentation.

It's mature enough since Oil Rush has already been released using it. On Windows, Linux, Mac OS X and PS3, to boot. There simply is no engine on the market with such cross-platform abilities.

Their tools are probably built on open-source base like Troika did, which means rapid or non-existent learning curve for people familiar with open-source.

And where did you get that version number info?

[rogerdv]

i have used Unigine. You cant find a "version 1" simply because it doesnt works that way, they release SDKs periodically (every month or so). Im a bit outdated, because the last SDK I had access was from April 2011, but I can assure they have a world editor, exporting tools, sound support, physics, pathfinding, networking, GUI, flash support and perhaps something more I have missed. Currently they have added Tracker, an in-game cinematic creation tool and I think they added some time ago a tool for managing animations.
Cant say if it is hard to learn. For me was a big shock, but taught me a lot of things about how commercial engines works, with time I underestood much more about it. Im pretty sure that any developer better than me would get it in a few weeks, plus they have a nice and friendly forum.

[dmazz]

I was about to post your previous post rogerdv, located here it's the 3rd one viewtopic.php?f=7&t=62&start=80
Their website dates back news to 2004, last major version was v0.4 in 2007 here http://unigine.com/news/?page=8
Also have a development log here http://unigine.com/devlog/

Oil Rush doesn't really count as an example of the engines ease of use and versatility, as it was made by the owners of the engine, who naturally have supreme mastery over the engine.

The engines been around for 8 years, but only 80+ licenses? (most of them for simulations no doubt) Compare that to Unity's 800 000 licenses. The engine also isn't that expensive, there must be a reason why hardly anyone uses it for games development.
It does have open source roots.
But doesn't support any A.i middleware.
It does support speedtree
Supports a form of destructible environment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvNRSOju5JM
Has a visual scripting system in alpha stage, said not to be ready for production use, too bad.
Full linux support will save time.

Since the graphics capability of unigine will go mostly unused, it's not worth the development speed hit compared to more established engines like unity and gamebryo. But if Inxile is planning to spend practically no money on technology, (likely) unigine appears to compare favorably against it's open source and cheap competition, like ogre3D, C4, and Torque. Also considering they're being given the engine for free, maybe they'll probably get preferential support treatment.

[kasra5004]

I have experimented with Unigine. Compared to the unreal engine( the only engine other than unigine that I have used.) It lacks some features especially in the physics( at least to me , physics was a pain in the ass) And i personally have to admit that I prefer unreal,but unreal is unlikely to be used so... . But the graphic and smoothness is just incredible with it, given the hardware it uses , unbelievably every mesh looks great with little effort. The reason for that is the new polygon division tech.it uses. And the community is nice and quite rich in content. I can see wl2 going in that direction, it saves a lot of money that can be used in other areas. Unigine corp is probably doing it for publicity but I don't see a problem with that long as it's a win win for both sides.

Plus, it is one of the best options for linux dev. But after all, it is up to the team to decide.

[geezer]

It seems insane to not use Unigine given the situation. And knowing that the Unigine devs like Wasteland so much that they are willing to give away a license for free would seem to make it doubly a good choice. That's the equivalent of at least a $30,000 donation right there. If they want Brian to use the engine that much I think he should. It's true that InXile probably won't have the resources to do the kinds of AAA graphics being posted here but using a more advanced engine certainly doesn't seem like a bad thing. At least we'll know that the artists aren't being limited by the engine itself. If put to a vote I would vote for the Unigine 100%. I guess Gamebryo is also cross-platform, but I think that costs at least $40,000. Why spend that money if you don't have to?

[Brother None]

It seems insane to not use Unigine given the situation. And knowing that the Unigine devs like Wasteland so much that they are willing to give away a license for free would seem to make it doubly a good choice. That's the equivalent of at least a $30,000 donation right there.

$30,000 isn't as much. Choosing the right engine is important, and while Unigine does have awesome advantages on cross-platform capability, from what I've read it's not the most capable engine on Mac, and is a little focused on graphical capabilities for Wasteland 2's purposes.

Let me confirm for you guys that Unigine is a *very* serious candidate.

[Crusader_bin]

Unigine seems to be a very good choice, but still it would propably be wiser to buy license that would allow them use Unreal Engine... Hate it or love it, it is an engine that can deliver basically any game type from small pinball game to advanced strategy games, RPGs (or a mixture of them all). It allows for use of huge maps, comes with set of tools that are really most powerfull I have ever seen and it cartainly is my favorite editor. Creating maps alone is really fast and easy with it, unlike some other editors I have used. Also adding textures takes seconds, preparing them in photoshop (or even using real pictures) would take more time.
I can't say anything about it's limitations, there are platform games, pinball games, MMO games (APB Reloaded)... It's not just Unreal Tournament and Mass Effect games. The only thing is that it propably costs much? Epic made games like UT and Gear of Wars propably more as some sort of demo, they get real cash by selling the engine...

[scratch42069]

I would love to see the game use Unigine. Not only does it look great but a free licence is being offered to the team. I'm sure it could be modified to fit the needs of WL2.

[DerRidda]

The support Forum for OilRush for Mac is not really a busy place. That being said: What engine actually is great on Mac? Most of the time it's not the engine's fault but Apple's bizarre OpenGL implementation and bad graphics drivers.

From my first hand experience the Engine scales quite nicely on different hardware. See this post on the OilRush forums http://oilrush-game.com/forum/index.php ... y-netbook/
And that should reflect directly onto Mac because (3D accelerated) Ubuntu usually performs worse than OSX in Phoronix benchmarks.

[geezer]

The UDK is simply not a realistic option regardless of what you think of the graphics. It's far too expensive for a project like this. Do you really want InXile to spend 1/4 of their funding on an engine when they have ones that are available for free or at least for far less money? I think the UDK was mainly intended for devs even smaller than Iron Tower Studios or for free open source games. As of now the licensing for UDK would be at least $575,000.

[SXX]

$30,000 isn't as much.

Yes, but engines like Unreal and Unity cost much more for source code licenses.
As well they ask you to pay % from sales, but Unigine guys won't ask any license fees after release.

Some people doesn't think about that moment, but it's probably biggest problem with UE and Unity3D.
I pretty sure that they are have lot of features, but UE/Unity doesn't seems like good choice for project with very limited funding.
Only if some of them give same free license it's could be interesting offer, because licenses and fees is big and isn't suitable for kickstarter project (UDK ask you to pay % of sales, not from profit).

Let me confirm for you guys that Unigine is a *very* serious candidate.

That is really good news, because Unigine it's small company and they very can give inXile more freedom than any other company can give.
Probably they could allow to release all tools for modding and even some source code.

As well they are just one company which support latest OpenGL 4 technologies, x64 versions and Linux.

[dmazz]

Unigine prices in 2010 were $25k for binary version and $40k for full-source. And that's for a full team on one project. As an engine company they seem to be struggling to get games made with their engine, this free engine offer is probably worth more than 40K in free publicity. Especially throughout Wasteland 2's lifespan. Maybe they won't be the first small engine company to offer a free engine?

Forgot to mention the Neoaxis commercial engine which uses Ogre as their renderer.

Brian has specifically said they won't be spending alot of money on technology, which seems to be aimed straight at disqualifying the Unreal engine, since it's the most expensive. Then again there's always the chance that Brian was talking about upfront costs, and the unreal engine has zero upfront costs. But it's unlikely Brian meant solely upfront costs.

In the 6 month predevelopment stage they'll be a planning the entire game and be able to make a educated choice about which engine is best. Cost of engine and related middleware are only two numbers in a very long and complicated equation.

And in regards to modding. I don't think the engine choice matters much. I know the engine tools themselves if the company offers a free version of their engine, may be able to be included in a modkit. But otherwise no. Unigine in this regards only offers a evaluative version of their software to developers. So I doubt there will be any advantage modding friendly wise if unigine is chosen. They could make an exception I suppose, it would certainly be a good precedent for their fledlging business and engine, modding and user created content is the future of gaming after all.

[geezer]

Let's not get carried away with assumptions about the publicity value of giving away your commercial engine for free to make Wasteland. I highly doubt that anyone but the Unigine guys are going to make such an offer. Let's give them some credit for their generosity. Let's not forget how much of a niche product Wasteland is. The vast majority of modern gamers will not be interested at all in any game with turn based combat. InXile is not Blizzard or even Bioware or Bethesda.

An engine that looks as good as theirs is the kind of thing that sells itself. Some of those screenshots remind me of Crysis. Also consider the fact that InXile probably won't have the money to make full use of Unigine's capabilities, which makes it distinctly less appealing as a means of advertising their engine, of showing off its capabilities to other developers. I think it's fair to consider their offer similar to a donation. Whether it is a practical possibility for this project to make use of it is another matter.

[PiPboy]

Donating Uniengine seems like a good marketing ploy also.
By giving it away for free, your basically indirectly advertising it.
So more serious game studios will consider the "versatility" of the engine if used.

They can argue it can be used for turn based or even live action rpgs. An still make the game look great.
I know in basics economics class, "There is no such thing as a free lunch"

Not that its a bad thing, but what matters most is the engine most capable for the game.