PDA

View Full Version : User Friendly : Source Engine Vs Unreal Engine


Littleberu
08-27-2006, 05:21 PM
Hi,

I'm no coder, and I want to do a small MOD, something cool for me. I looked at both mod Wiki, and it looks like there is a pretty good amount of info on both. My question is this : Which one of them is the easiest, the most user-friendly? Of course, I'm willing to learn codding. But I'm just doing this for fun.

DooFi
08-27-2006, 05:42 PM
i've never created a mod, so i can only talk about the editors. In my opinion UED is much more comfortable than Hammer, UED, for example has subtract brushes and Hammer lacks them entirely... Also you have to convert models and textures with external tools and you have to place them in special directories to use them in Hammer, if i'm not mistaken. That takes much time and is really uncomfortable.. For UED you just save stuff in a useful file-format and import it into the myLevel package. Then you can create Shaders and stuff in UED (and afaik thats also easier than in Hammer). In my view triggers and movers can also be created lots easier in UnrealED.

However, as i said, I have no clue about mod-creation and i heard there was some kind of a wizard helping one to create a Source-Mod, but i dont have experience with that.

Littleberu
08-27-2006, 05:58 PM
i've never created a mod, so i can only talk about the editors. In my opinion UED is much more comfortable than Hammer, UED, for example has subtract brushes and Hammer lacks them entirely... Also you have to convert models and textures with external tools and you have to place them in special directories to use them in Hammer, if i'm not mistaken. That takes much time and is really uncomfortable.. For UED you just save stuff in a useful file-format and import it into the myLevel package. Then you can create Shaders and stuff in UED (and afaik thats also easier than in Hammer). In my view triggers and movers can also be created lots easier in UnrealED.

However, as i said, I have no clue about mod-creation and i heard there was some kind of a wizard helping one to create a Source-Mod, but i dont have experience with that.

Well, don't get me wrong, I don't want to create the next Planetside, either. Just something simple using my own things.

Interesting, by the way. +1 UED. +2 since I've got the game.

Do any of you knows the major difference in the engine from UT2003 to 2004 (Bump mapping, displacement, etc..)

LaughingBun
08-27-2006, 06:29 PM
Unreal is definatly the best. Just look at all the source mods that fall flat on there face, out of the thousand that were announced there have been about 3 total conversions, released. The Main thing is just the ability to get content ingame and FAST! I dont believe there are any differences between Unreal2k4 and 2k3. I think the only real difference is the content they already have in game.

ArchangelTalon
08-27-2006, 06:37 PM
I'd agree that it appears much easier and faster to get content into the game using Unreal. It's a real fiddly business with Source.

I still prefer Source, however, especially as it's ever-improving and it's not so bad to get content going in once you get a workflow going :)

Gamedev
08-27-2006, 08:38 PM
you are however comparing very different engines in terms of 'genertions'. UT2004 engine does not support bump mapping unless you are licensee.

In terms of support however, there is far more content, tutorials, wikis, etc for UT2004 than source. The workflow is quite a bit faster and for the most part, use of external utilities to get things in game is minimal in comparison to source.

I'd say start w/ UnrealEd. If you have 3dsmax then you've got a 3d package w/ native support for basic static meshes.

Lastly, UnrealScript is quite a bit more friendly than what source has to offer.

Good luck.

Auctane
08-27-2006, 09:49 PM
Humm, I just finished DLing Source SDK... I am going to check it out. I have used UnrealEd with UT2004, and it is easy to get your 3D creations working compaired to Doom3 and Torque. From the documentation I was looking over, Hammer and Source seem to be really good and easy compaired to Doom and Torque. I started looking elsewhere (away from Unreal) because it is out of date, at least until UT2007 is out and UnrealEd 3 is public.

If you are going for NM Gen content, then I would either wait for UT2007 or go with Source. If not, go with UT2004.

Littleberu
08-27-2006, 10:07 PM
Humm, I just finished DLing Source SDK... I am going to check it out. I have used UnrealEd with UT2004, and it is easy to get your 3D creations working compaired to Doom3 and Torque. From the documentation I was looking over, Hammer and Source seem to be really good and easy compaired to Doom and Torque. I started looking elsewhere (away from Unreal) because it is out of date, at least until UT2007 is out and UnrealEd 3 is public.

If you are going for NM Gen content, then I would either wait for UT2007 or go with Source. If not, go with UT2004.

Well, as I said, I'm just looking to put my own mesh and characters (and animations) into a game, and maybe code a little. Of course, I would like to have all those things like Bump Map and Displacement, but, HEY, you can't always get what you want.

ChimpanG
08-27-2006, 10:33 PM
source is unbelievable bad for modders, its the most advanced engine of the two and supports FAR more technologies however its just bollocks to work with.
the SDK is a hellhole of bugs and half the time things dont work properly - updates break things etc.

benclark
08-28-2006, 11:48 AM
from my little experience working with Unreal it is easy to get models from 3DSmax into the game but Maya has much less support especially for non static meshes. I may be missing an update but I still have to model in Maya6 to use the exporter scripts which is really annoying

I dont mean to hijack your thread but if anyone knows how to export skeletal meshes from Maya7 complete to unrealEd I would love to hear it

ojko
08-28-2006, 01:51 PM
I dont mean to hijack your thread but if anyone knows how to export skeletal meshes from Maya7 complete to unrealEd I would love to hear it
You'll need to get hold of the ActorX plugin for Maya if you want to export skeletal meshes and animations.

This link (http://udn.epicgames.com/Two/ActorXMayaTutorial) should get you started. :)

benclark
08-28-2006, 02:32 PM
I read over the documentation for that before and I thought it was just to export characters with embedded animation

RO
08-28-2006, 03:56 PM
The unreal engine is the easy to use hard to master. The UT2K3 and UT2K4 engine is the same pretty much. a few changes are for optimizations to make it run maps better but besides that the engine is unchanged.



Source I heard is easier than doom engine but still the greatest low for any other engine is the fact that source does not have visible lights in the view port within the editor which unreal has had a for a long time already.



Another engine I would suggest is the warpath engine. Not many people know about this one since the game pretty much blows but the engine is a cross of the unreal engine with diff stuff. The editor functions very alike to the unreal engine one.



But in this case it has full normal maps and shader effects that would make a next gen game. Link to warpath below… the game is cheap price wise also. Why is this engine so alike to the unreal engine…. Because it was made by DE a company that worked closely for a long time with Epic games.



http://www.groovegames.com/Games/Warpath/index.php (http://www.groovegames.com/Games/Warpath/index.php)

ChimpanG
08-28-2006, 04:05 PM
RO, Warpath uses the Unreal Engine, they even call it the unreal engine - there is no warpath engine :P

RO
08-28-2006, 04:08 PM
doh never really read it :D

I thought it was a new engine since one of my buds was mentioning it like it was so diff lol.

Either way that is the engine that has normal maps and shader effects that is out right now from the unreal engine stuff.

ChimpanG
08-28-2006, 09:38 PM
lol, as far as a guess goes its likely Unreal Engine 2x (2.5) which was mostly designed for console use but it comes with the addition of all sorts of shaders, bloom etc.

Testament
08-28-2006, 10:40 PM
Having used both engines for years (including the HL1 engine) I gotta say im a Source guy all the way. It's true that at first you'll get an easier workflow with the Unreal engine. Not that its that hard with Source really. As for the comments posted about the SDK being buggy, can't say I've ever had any problems. I won't say the the SDK is bug free, but Unreal isn't either. Again, I've never really had problems anyways.

When the SDK was first release we had alot of people over at teh VERC community having trouble, but the thing was 99% of these people had pretty much never touched a modding SDK before, and the wasn't enough documentation at the time out there. Most of us figured out alot of things by testing out stuff, and gathering and sharing info at VERC and HL2world. You got plenty of documentation and example maps now adays to get you going right away. And a much more knowledgeable community to help you out.

Now you say you just want to get your own animations and models in-game.

This won't really be any hard in Source, you'll just export your models from your 3D software, then compile this exported files with the SDK provided tools. And you'll also convert your materials to valve VTF format with SDK provided tools, you could also save your textures directly to VTFs with the Photoshop plugin. You'll create a VTM file , wich basically tells the engine the material's properties, here's where you kinda mold the shader setting for your material. You'll also create a QC file for your model giving , here's where you pretty much define the model's properties, be it the kind of material it's made of, or animation sequences, physics properties, etc.

It may sound like alot but it's actually pretty quick and basic. Specially if you keep template VMT and QC files like I do.

Now, the main reason why I recomment Source also is because it's because it's a recnet, mor up-to-date engine. You can prepare yourself for nextgen decelopment with it. You'll have support for next-gen stuff like normal mapping and HDR. So it serves you as a preparatory pipeline for next-gen engines. You won't be able to get this kind of stuff in the Unreal engine:

Here's an example of a bathroom I was working on but had to put on hold for now,
Here you can see the shader properties the egnine offers, including the refract shader used on the bathtub's sliding doors.

Click for hi-res.
http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/800/monkey010109_800.jpg (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010109.jpg)

http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/800/monkey010125_800.jpg (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010125.jpg)

http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/800/monkey010126_800.jpg (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010126.jpg)


Here's and example of a normal mapped prop in HL2, the detail you can fake with normal maps is priceless. You won't be able to get this kinda detail in such a low poly object in Unreal 2.

http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/800/monkey010122_800.jpg (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010122.jpg)

http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/800/monkey010123_800.jpg (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010123.jpg)


Here's a couple of more images:

Image1 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010106.jpg)
Image2 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010107.jpg)
Image3 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010108.jpg)
Image4 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010113.jpg)
Image5 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010116.jpg)
Image6 (http://topazsunset.com/images/screens/monkey010117.jpg)


As for programming, I've never done any programming in Source, I did a bit in Unreal 2, with fair ease. But I take it your more interested in the art side, models, textueres etc.

You mentioned something about displacement maps, don't know what you mean by this, are you reffering to displacementes as in, topology affecting maps? Like parallax mapping. Or are you reffering to terrain displacements? If you're referring to terrain, both of them have terrain mapping tools. Neither has parallax though, although it seems the Source engine will be supporting it sometime in the future.

That's a big post, I don't know why I did that.... Anyways, I'd recommend Source big time, really it's not hard. And there plenty of documentation out there now anyways. So have a stab at it. Oh yeah, and in source you'll be able to make single player campaigns for HL2, so if you're a level designer you'll have that too, in Unreal 2 unless you code a mod, you'll be stuck with deathmatch maps. Plus the possibilities with HL2 physics engine is awesome, you can make alot of gameplay enhancements with it.

Ok i'm done now, good luck.:thumbsup:

Littleberu
08-29-2006, 11:11 PM
Well I'm set. I'll use Unreal for starter, using the 2003 version though. I'll make a small map with water and try my boats on it to see if the game is fun at all. :P

Maybe I'll try Source soon, just for the normal maps and all that.

thanks a lot!

Lee3dee
08-29-2006, 11:44 PM
Unreal engine is artist friendly. If you want to import a model, you can easily and see it in the engine immediately unlike Source which I heard that you have to compile your model first. I learned on the unreal engine first, I tried to learn the Source engine and doom3 engine tools, but coming from unreal they just seem too clunky.

If you look at which engine is more widely used in the gaming industry, Unreal is the one that you want to learn ;)

Ghostscape
08-30-2006, 12:02 AM
Unreal is easier but to be honest I prefer source solely for the more advanced shaders. It's a pain to learn at first but once you get used to it it really becomes quite easy.

RO
08-30-2006, 02:50 AM
And some games that have next gen tech that use the new unreal engine will come out pretty soon.

I mean warpath has all shader abilities from Doom3 or HL2 pretty much just needs a good level designer/artist.

eirenicon
08-30-2006, 03:43 AM
I haven't done much with Source, but I would like to say that Hammer is the worst level editor imaginable. Can't preview lighting, and it's really, really slow. Scenes with polycounts that 3ds max wouldn't bat an eyelash at slow to a crawl in Hammer, and it's all flat shaded! A bollocks editor if you ask me.

psychojohno
08-30-2006, 09:23 AM
how about the farcry engine. I havnt used any others so i dont know how difficult they are to use but i can honestly say the sandbox editor for far cry is very easy to use! Its a lot easier than using maya and 3ds max and i picked it up in about 2days, And im useless with programming :thumbsup: and it looks very nice!

ChimpanG
08-30-2006, 01:44 PM
how about the farcry engine. I havnt used any others so i dont know how difficult they are to use but i can honestly say the sandbox editor for far cry is very easy to use! Its a lot easier than using maya and 3ds max and i picked it up in about 2days, And im useless with programming :thumbsup: and it looks very nice!
thats not nearly as powerful though, infact you couldnt really use it for portfoloio work at all.
none of the assets are yours your simply editing pre existing stuff.
the actual mapping is simply pushing pulling the terrain geometry, its easy but its not really useful to us

MrCup
08-31-2006, 02:55 AM
Unreal. Its dead easy and real soon 2K7 will drop and you'll already know how to use it.

DooFi
08-31-2006, 02:32 PM
Unreal. Its dead easy and real soon 2K7 will drop and you'll already know how to use it.

yep exectly. If you just want to choose Hammer because the Source-Engine is more powerful, you should rather take UED and later use UED4 (its 4, ain't it?). I don't expect a new source-engine (or however they'll call it) in the near future.

Seebaer
08-31-2006, 03:23 PM
it's UED 3

UED (Unreal and UT Classic)
UED 2 (UT2k3 and Unreal 2)
UED 2.5 (UT2k4)
UED 3 (UT2k7

I have done mapping in UED and UED 2 and it's very simple, just read a few tuts and you will build up things you never imaged.

Mapping with Hammer is hard, that's right, but it does its job.

Getting stuff ingame: i have never done it in unreal but in source. it's a truth that you have to compile all your shit, but when you have done it a few times, it don't bothers you much, it's some kind of time period to relax :thumbsup:

it's up to you which you choose.

i have choosen source engine because in my opinion the worlds you can create with source are much more believable than unreal worlds: colors, effects, that all looks too cartoonish in unreal (like the name unreal says :D).

Testament
08-31-2006, 03:33 PM
i have choosen source engine because in my opinion the worlds you can create with source are much more believable than unreal worlds: colors, effects, that all looks too cartoonish in unreal

I'll have to agree with you, Seebaer. The engine feel is different, it's one of the reasons why I keep going back to Source, even if Hammer isn't as artist friendly as UEd.

DooFi
08-31-2006, 03:46 PM
i have choosen source engine because in my opinion the worlds you can create with source are much more believable than unreal worlds: colors, effects, that all looks too cartoonish in unreal (like the name unreal says :D).

Well UnrealTournament2k4 looks kinda stylized or "unreal", but I suppose they did that on purpose. The texes are not from photosources (afaik), while for HL2 nothing but photos were used. So whether your maps (or your game) looks realistic, is left to you and your game-art-skills. (doesnt mean ut-artists dont have skills. well, you get what i mean xD)
Of course Source is capable of a great deal of stuff like Normal Maps and has a much better lighting, but UT2k7 will allow you all that too, and your artistic abilities won't be limited by stupid compiling and typing scripts any longer. At least not for simply importing stuff^^
Does Source have a script language like UScript, btw? And incidentally UScript is build within UnrealED, if im not mistaken

Testament
08-31-2006, 03:50 PM
I don't think he's reffering to the style of the map, whether they used photosourced images or not, wich they DO use too in Unreal anyways. It's the feel of the engine that's different, everything seems to have a soft look (even in mods)...It's hard to explain.

Don't get me wrong I still like the Unreal engine as much as the next person, that's just the feel you get from it.

Alex McGilvray
08-31-2006, 05:54 PM
yep exectly. If you just want to choose Hammer because the Source-Engine is more powerful, you should rather take UED and later use UED4 (its 4, ain't it?). I don't expect a new source-engine (or however they'll call it) in the near future.


it's constantly updated

psychojohno
08-31-2006, 07:17 PM
thats not nearly as powerful though, infact you couldnt really use it for portfoloio work at all.
none of the assets are yours your simply editing pre existing stuff.
the actual mapping is simply pushing pulling the terrain geometry, its easy but its not really useful to us

Not really because everything can be made in 3ds or maya and imported :shrug: everything can be changed from chacters to vehicles even buildings and textures. Yes you can use the tools in the editor to change the landscape but it doesnt do it for you! Isnt the source and unreal editor used to do exactly the same thing i dont see how you can say that the far cry cant be used for portfolio.

ChimpanG
08-31-2006, 08:34 PM
ah well ive only tried the console version which they said "is a direct port from the pc editor to allow the same level of power on a console" so :/
sorry i'll not make uninformed comments in future

ChimpanG
08-31-2006, 08:38 PM
it's constantly updated
tis true, there was recent additions of phong for models and HDR before that etc, its updated quite often, i still retain that its buggy though - the last update broke one of the viewports (it was fixed tho) and day of defeat has has troubles for ages now with editing, you have to mess about editing gameinfo.txt when you want to edit your map and then again when you want to run it

Alex McGilvray
09-01-2006, 12:04 AM
tis true, there was recent additions of phong for models and HDR before that etc, its updated quite often, i still retain that its buggy though - the last update broke one of the viewports (it was fixed tho) and day of defeat has has troubles for ages now with editing, you have to mess about editing gameinfo.txt when you want to edit your map and then again when you want to run it

that sucks man, I'm doing character weighting/imoprting and mapping/coding for a HL2 mod and there have been a few snags that valve screwed up that caused me to have to wait for an update....


the trick is to play around with the appversion, dxlevel, and beta sdk switches until something works.... not a nice solution but it's all I got :D

ChimpanG
09-01-2006, 01:16 AM
yeah its silly we have to do such things:/

Auctane
09-11-2006, 08:06 PM
Now that I have been digging into Source, I am going to have to go ahead and say that Source/Hammer is not nearly as easy as Unreal/UnrealEd.

I seriously hope that UnrealEd3 offers tools that make material creation simple, without having to use notepad.

Gamedev
09-12-2006, 09:14 PM
I seriously hope that UnrealEd3 offers tools that make material creation simple, without having to use notepad.

it does :)

Alex McGilvray
09-13-2006, 05:52 AM
yeah even the current unreal has a decent material creation subprogram


but the advantage to the notepad edting is you can make modifications to your shaders without having to restart the editor

Gamedev
09-13-2006, 05:56 AM
UED now used shader networks much like Maya - I'd say that beats notepad over the head :)

Seebaer
09-14-2006, 03:04 AM
I don't think he's reffering to the style of the map, whether they used photosourced images or not, wich they DO use too in Unreal anyways. It's the feel of the engine that's different, everything seems to have a soft look (even in mods)...It's hard to explain.

yes, that's what i referred to. for example:

look at Red Orchestra for UT2k4 (?) and Day of Defeat/ DoD:S

Both use the same game setting, but the Half-Life Version (DoD/DoD:S) of World War II is much more believable, it's like you are on the Battlefield for real, and not only looking up some comic strips of world war II, like it's in Red Orchestra...

Gamedev
09-14-2006, 04:19 AM
its the lighting.

gslavik
09-14-2006, 05:20 AM
I say learn OpenGL and write your own engine :P

CGTalk Moderation
09-14-2006, 05:21 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.