Ancestors

Written by Rune Skovbo Johansen on 2024-11-27 at 10:25

I haven't followed Unity closely, but I understood many employees were excited to show the new direction of Unity 7 at Unite 2024 and it was generally well received?

But this has since been jeopardized because the new CEO doesn't want breaking changes?

AMA thread on Twitter with Thomas Petersen who worked at Unity until recently:

https://x.com/QAThomasNoUnity/status/1861321957502767282

Obviously people still working there might have more info, but can't necessarily say much.

=> View attached media | View attached media

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from runevision@mastodon.gamedev.place

Written by The Seven Voyages Of Steve on 2024-11-27 at 11:03

@runevision They're in a tough spot. There's lots of things in Unity that really need to be better, but they have a vast number of customers who just need it to work. They tried squaring that with components which had their own update cadence (2019+ ish), but IME that just fragmented the system even worse in terms of reliability, compatibility and documentation, it's one of the main things that led me to stop using it. Improving something fundamental without breaking it is not easy

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sinbad@mastodon.gamedev.place

Written by The Seven Voyages Of Steve on 2024-11-27 at 11:06

@runevision Unreal has had an easier time, both because their underpinnings were arguably better to start with, but also because they've always had an accepted way to do things that devs are expected to accept. That was hard for me at first, Unity is more of a free for all, wheras you have to do things the UE way or GTFO. But the benefit of that is they have much more defined ways they can change things while knowing what impact it will have. Still painful sometimes, but more predictable

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sinbad@mastodon.gamedev.place

Written by Rune Skovbo Johansen on 2024-11-27 at 11:16

@sinbad Sure, Unity is all about freedom, but it used to reign it in in its own ways. There used to be one physics system, one input system, one rendering pipeline (although highly configurable, but so is Unreal), etc. It's the keeping adding new systems while also keeping the old around that makes maintenance prohibitive. Having all that overlapping functionality wasn't always part of Unity's DNA and appeal (if only because it was once too young to have gotten there yet). The contrary, I'd say.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from runevision@mastodon.gamedev.place

Written by The Seven Voyages Of Steve on 2024-11-27 at 11:48

@runevision IMO the underlying problem is that Unity's old structure was just fine up to a certain complexity of project, but they wanted more than that. I think they hired a lot of really smart people with really good ideas but in hindsight, probably shouldn't have been working on Unity at all, because they wanted to make another Frostbite or whatever. Stitching those kinds of ideas onto a base that was designed for something else clearly didn't work.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sinbad@mastodon.gamedev.place

Toot

Written by The Seven Voyages Of Steve on 2024-11-27 at 11:50

@runevision I had this sort of experience with Ogre back in the day, with people like Mike Acton throwing shade on us because we weren't designed from the ground up to be maximum performance etc. He was right, but also missed the point entirely.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sinbad@mastodon.gamedev.place

Descendants