For the last hour or so, I’ve been reading up on Unity3D, a game engine that targets Mac, Windows, and the iPhone, among others. After having used Torque Game Builder for the last 2 and 1/2 years while developing Insectoid, certain phrases have really made me drool over Unity. They are phrases that shouldn’t mean much, but do:
“Like the rest of Unity’s asset pipeline, it just works.”
I’ve grown quite tired of Torque quite simply *not* working so much of the time. I’ve had to work around so many bugs, missing features, and limitations. So when I read a statement such as:
“Unity has undergone extensive compatibility testing, which means you don’t need to put an ounce of effort into making sure your customers can run your games”
… it makes me *seriously* wish I had been using Unity.
Not only that, but I spent quite a bit of time rewriting TorqueScript into native C, so my game would run fast enough — even on 2.0 GHz processors. Unity3D, on the other hand, compiles scripts into native code, so it runs 20-40x faster, automatically. Geez, they know how to get a programmer’s heart to melt.
Obviously, you can’t believe everything you hear, so I’m going to try this out before I make too many assumptions, but if the claims on their webpage are true… it’s quite unlikely I will be returning to GarageGames for future game development. I’ve reported many to bugs to them over the past 2 years that have never been fixed, and I’m quite frustrated. They have a new 2D engine coming out soon, but it will require OS X 10.6 on the Mac side, as well as only run on Intel Macs. Sorry, that’s too steep system requirements for my taste. Unity apparently has quite low requirements, and the developers work hard to make sure it performs well on older systems. Again, I don’t know if these claims are true, but if they are… Unity3D may just have a new fan.
Add to that iPhone deployment that “just works” right out of the box… and it all sounds too good to be true.