EPIC Unreal Development Kit - now free for non-commercial use!

[grantmoore3d]

Wow, first Unity3D and now this... I don't know which one to seriously work on now!

[R10k]

Yeah, this is huge. Whether it'd be a wise move for an indie to use it or not is something else altogether, but there's no argument that Epic just went and swept the rug out from underneath pretty much everyone looking to conquer the non-commercial arena.

[ViCoX]

Well, this shiz is really something! I think this is going to be great!

[grantmoore3d]

Yeah, this is huge. Whether it'd be a wise move for an indie to use it or not is something else altogether, but there's no argument that Epic just went and swept the rug out from underneath pretty much everyone looking to conquer the non-commercial arena.

Just read the licensing, and it's 25% royalty fee on all revenue once you've made anything above $5000. It's a steep price to pay, but considering the engine's capabilities and the end-user expectation to see that level of quality, I'd be tempted to say that with the right product it could potentially be a good investment for an Indie company. For small casual games though, I'd probably look elsewhere.

[ctguitars]

Hiya's,

For clarity:

http://www.udk.com/licensing-faqs.html

Is UDK really free for me to use?

Absolutely. Download UDK, create your project and distribute it completely free of cost.

Can I sell works created using UDK?

The short answer is “Yes.” However you need a commercial license. Please view the information at our licensing page.

So as was said elsewhere "... making free games for free is fine :D"

Aidan

PS

Dont forget that DARKBASIC also went free this week:

http://darkbasicpro.thegamecreators.com/?f=free

[R10k]

I'd be tempted to say that with the right product it could potentially be a good investment for an Indie company.

I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable putting 25% on the line, when utilising what UDK has beyond what Unity Pro or Shiva (and others) offer wouldn't be a cheap exercise to start with. A balancing act, for sure.

[ThomasMahler]

This is a great, great move by Epic. Two thumbs up, you guys! :)


I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable putting 25% on the line, when utilising what UDK has beyond what Unity Pro or Shiva (and others) offer wouldn't be a cheap exercise to start with. A balancing act, for sure.

Not so sure if it's a real balancing act. Remember what it cost Epic to develop the engine to this point - and if you wanna even come close to that result you'd have to spend millions of dollars just to have the tech ready. 25% for an indie development where your team immediately has access to triple a tech isn't that bad.

It'll be interesting to see if CryTek does something similar now with their CryEngine 3. I certainly hope so.

[R10k]

and if you wanna even come close to that result you'd have to spend millions of dollars just to have the tech ready.

If you want to use Speedtree, FaceFX and other advanced goodies, sure. Otherwise, there are many engines on the market for far less that can match Unreal 3's visual prowess.

High end art assets are costly to produce. The closer you get to working with everything Epic provide, the more you move beyond the realms of where most indies like to tread. There are some cashed up indie teams out there with time on their hands, but in general, the idea isn't to hand over 25% for an engine that you wouldn't be using to full potential. Unity Pro and Shiva can produce visual results that are more than good enough for the best of indie 3D titles. So, Udk really needs to offer a lot more outside of awesum visuals to make that kind of a long-term cost worth while.

[grantmoore3d]

Those are both good arguments, all it boils down to is a business decision that would have to be carefully considered if the cost of using Unreal would yield any substantial benefits for the particular product you are going to create. Either way, game development is getting more exciting by the day!

As an aside, does anyone know of any really good resources for learning to program / script using this UDK? I have some great videos by 3DBuzz on how to use the editor and do some minor hacking of an Unreal Tournament editor, but would like to know more about programming custom games.

[Sandr0]

25% for an indie development where your team immediately has access to triple a tech isn't that bad.
Yup, not bad at all.

However, indie developers don't usually have budget for aaa art and aaa marketing, which makes aaa tech kind of overkill.

[Buexe]

wow, I wish I had time to get into it! I`m happy to hear that non-commercial users get choices to advanced realtime tools.

[ThomasMahler]

Depends on what kind of experience you're shooting for. I think it's just about indie devs being smart and doing things that don't require a xx million dollar budget.

For example, flower is by far one of the best gaming experiences I had in this generation, it's a wonderful indie game and didn't require tons of high end models. That's why I don't think that the 25% cut is that bad - cause in the end you'll be able to create things and make a name for yourself.

Of course you could use Unity (wonderful engine, too) as well, but the more independent teams get access to good development tools the better. And I'm pretty damn sure this is just the start of engine devs wanting to make their engines popular just in the right time before the new console generation arrives.

[Venkman]

Not to mention that this is an amazing tool for people looking to learn on their own, hoping to one day break into the industry where UE3 is in fairly wide use.

Access to UE3 as a free version is a great move by Epic to bolster those using their products.


I applaud them. Whenever a company gives you access to tools for free, it can really help someone out there get started, or find out in a cost free way that they may or may not like game development.

Thumbs up, Epic, Unity, SideFX, and everyone else out there making powerful tools either free or very affordable to those who are willing to learn.

[THX1311]

I applaud them. Whenever a company gives you access to tools for free, it can really help someone out there get started, or find out in a cost free way that they may or may not like game development.

Thumbs up, Epic, Unity, SideFX, and everyone else out there making powerful tools either free or very affordable to those who are willing to learn.

Quoted for complete agreement....bravo!

[ultramedia]

Does anyone know what level of speedtree integration is built into this version? Is there any additional cost involved in launching a commercial game that uses it or is it covered by the 25% royalties (which I think is a pretty good deal btw).

[SLiTHER]

if i where to speculate on the reason for this move, it might be in response for a major buyout by Autodesk of a rival engine, or maybe Apple or Microsoft. but i would put my money on Autodesk :) if that was the case, kudos to epic, this should give them restless nights for sure and throw a big leg in their big buyout plans :)

[SheepFactory]

Awesome news, cant wait to play with it tonight!

[j00st81]

this looks very nice, been messing about with some game level editors but this looks way beyond anything I've seen

now I feel a little less sad that Modern Warfare 2 won't have a level editor :p

[Bullit]

Either way, game development is getting more exciting by the day!

This is much much more than game development. I am very critical of how traditional 3D application don't have a bias by default to earth ambiances, after all most of scenes made are in earth. Games arrive to the animation world with ambiances already defaulted to earth set. They only need now to give flexibility. I have no doubts that they'll start to get into factory, accident simulation, architectural presentation, stores that doesn't need a top render engine. Then maybe some render engine even releases plugins for them.

[Kabab]

The price war has begun lets see who is left standing in a few months time :)

[R10k]

Dude... wait, what?

You took the words right out of my mouth. Thankyou :)

EDIT: Oh oh. Cgtalk post order issues again.

[ultramedia]

This is much much more than game development. I am very critical of how traditional 3D application don't have a bias by default to earth ambiances, after all most of scenes made are in earth. Games arrive to the animation world with ambiances already defaulted to earth set. They only need now to give flexibility. I have no doubts that they'll start to get into factory, accident simulation, architectural presentation, stores that doesn't need a top render engine. Then maybe some render engine even releases plugins for them.

Dude... wait, what?

[ThomasMahler]

Dude... wait, what?

Bonejaw Macaronis.

[DuttyFoot]

did anyone get this error when they tried to run it after the install

Error loading .xaml resource dictionary from file
c:\udk\udk-2009-11\binaries\win32\..\..\engine\editorresources\wpf\resources\contentbrowserstyles.xaml];
reason[The tag 'dropshadoweffect' does not exist in xml namespace
'http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation'. Line 71' Position '3'.]

[FreakWizz]

did anyone get this error when they tried to run it after the install

Is there a 64bit SDK?

[R10k]

Is there a 64bit SDK?

Recommended for Content Development:
Windows Vista 64 SP2
2.0+ GHz multi-core processor
8 GB System RAM
NVIDIA 8000 series or higher graphics card
Plenty of HDD space

I assume this means it'll work under a 64bit environment.

[DuttyFoot]

i just checked the forums at their site and found this

I actually use Vista 64 SP2 — which is the recommended system, but when I run the editor, the splash screen says "32 bit". Is there a way to launch a 64-bit version of UDK that I'm missing?

I'm afraid the November 2009 version of the UDK only comes with 32 bit binaries.


i run vista 64 so i dont know if this is whats causing the issue.

[SheepFactory]

That is lame. I hope they make the 64 bit version available too.

[R10k]

I'm sure they will in time... if for no other reason than to match their own system requirements ;)

[ultramedia]

btw, anyone know how big the download is? (I've only got 3GB left for the next five days)

[R10k]

btw, anyone know how big the download is? (I've only got 3GB left for the next five days)

It's 562 MB. Like it says on the site,

EXE file (562 MB)

[Bullit]

Dude... wait, what?

Okay it was too cryptic.Traditional 3D applications don't have seasons, lights , physics pre- set. Games already have that.
Game engines will compete with traditional 3D applications in the market. For now they can't go to top commercials but can compete in simulation, architecture etc.

[Kabab]

Okay it was too cryptic.Traditional 3D applications don't have seasons, lights , physics pre- set. Games already have that.
Game engines will compete with traditional 3D applications in the market. For now they can't go to top commercials but can compete in simulation, architecture etc.Its all very situational and specific...

Once you dig deeper you will understand.

[ultramedia]

r10k : oops, thanks *blush*

bullit : ah ok, I think there might be more to it than that, but I see what you're getting at...

[Per-Anders]

Okay it was too cryptic.Traditional 3D applications don't have seasons, lights , physics pre- set. Games already have that.
Game engines will compete with traditional 3D applications in the market. For now they can't go to top commercials but can compete in simulation, architecture etc.
What traditional 3D apps are you using? Every app these days comes with a physical sky and atmospheric shaders, they all have implementations of various types of physics, and they all sure as hell have lights and presets.Games engines do not come with half the stuff out of the box.

What you see in a game is not a bunch of presets that came with the game engine but a ton of work put in by the developers and artists creating custom shaders and effects specific for their game and their game alone, they might reuse some assets in other games, companies constantly reuse assets created in all applications. Most software is bare-bones, that's especially true of games engines.

[heavyness]

This is really great news and I'm sure a lot of smaller studios will take advantage of this. 25/75 is a good deal.

Very smart move by Epic.

[Bullit]

What traditional 3D apps are you using? Every app these days comes with a physical sky and atmospheric shaders, they all have implementations of various types of physics, and they all sure as hell have lights and presets.Games engines do not come with half the stuff out of the box.


Maya,XSI,Max, Cinema.
The only application that came near to what i mean is Vue D'Esprit. But of course it is limited in other areas. There is a reason some people go for Machinima instead of starting in a 3D application. Games approach it from real world, things are much easier to start. 3D applications - you are right to refer physical sky which is a step in right direction- start with a clean sheet. I view the birth of Machinima as a failure of traditional 3D apps.

[darcbark]

My only wish is that i would like to use Python or maybe Lua for scripting.

[eem]

25% is a bit steep I think. Although I think valve took like 15% of revenue from source engine mods. But that was for not only engine but also stream distribution. So it included all costs of bandwidth, even included advertisement.

Although Unreal is the nicer image, but seriously, 25%?

How much percentage does steam take for just digital distribution? I mean, it it's like 10%, then that means a UDK game distributed on steam would only give the developer 65%.

It's a bit greedy on Epic's part I think. When your a multi billion company do you really need to milk every small indie developer?


On a slightly different subject, who thinks that places like autodesk or adobe need to do a licensing scheme like this? Not 25%. But imagine if autodesk opened up all there applications for a trade of just like 8% of your revenue or something.

[R10k]

How much percentage does steam take for just digital distribution? I mean, it it's like 10%, then that means a UDK game distributed on steam would only give the developer 65%.

That's some misunderstanding of indie gamedev ;)

Portals that indie games sell on take between 40% and 60%. There are a few (very few) who work to 30%, but it's best not to hope for that. 10% though? Never in a day.

[grantmoore3d]

It's a bit greedy on Epic's part I think. When your a multi billion company do you really need to milk every small indie developer?

They aren't "milking" anyone, they are offering a product at a competitive price that takes a lot of hard work and millions of dollars to develop for a specific market. Not to mention they just made the development FREE? How many applications do you know of that will let you develop your product in it's entirety without paying a single dime until you actually start selling it?

[SGIFreak]

where is the setting for antialiasing?

[switchblade327]

That's some misunderstanding of indie gamedev ;)

Portals that indie games sell on take between 40% and 60%. There are a few (very few) who work to 30%, but it's best not to hope for that. 10% though? Never in a day.

Bingo. Steam is a great service but their take is a helluva lot more then 10%.

I don't get all the 25% freakout (here and among some of my friends). There's never been an official MSRP for UE3 but by the time your 25% totals up to what Epic would make on the royalty free version of the engine, your 75% will be a LOT of money (maybe even after you get a publishing/distribution deal :P).

If you don't like the 25%, use another engine. There's plenty and UE3 is definitely overkill for a lot of indie type games anyway.

But I think this is an awesome move by Epic.

[heavyness]

25% is a bit steep I think. Although I think valve took like 15% of revenue from source engine mods. But that was for not only engine but also stream distribution. So it included all costs of bandwidth, even included advertisement.

25% is a good deal.

[Bullit]

25% seems also a good deal specially the fact that first 5000 are for you. It is a very good for start ups, you can start slowly and survive at first without a big burden. I would like to see more firms do this, that their income is linked to client success.

[eem]

That's some misunderstanding of indie gamedev ;)

Portals that indie games sell on take between 40% and 60%. There are a few (very few) who work to 30%, but it's best not to hope for that. 10% though? Never in a day.


Are you sure...

I've been looking for info on this, and cant seem to find any website that lists the actual percentages.

[eem]

They aren't "milking" anyone, they are offering a product at a competitive price that takes a lot of hard work and millions of dollars to develop for a specific market. Not to mention they just made the development FREE? How many applications do you know of that will let you develop your product in it's entirety without paying a single dime until you actually start selling it?

Unity is completely free till you make over $100,000

Which I know unreal is way more advanced and much better. But I mean to say, Epic is gonna make a profit, a very steep profit off of this. I mean, all their development is already covered by the games they make and the full commercial licenses of the engine. They don't lose any money on Unreal Tournament, Gears of War or the licenses, they completely cover there costs and then some for millions of profit.

And releasing this engine is just releasing work thats already been paid for and profited off of to then make more profit. It's not like there needing to cover costs with that 25%, the costs are already covered in the production of their games and their own game sales a million times over. That 25% is all profit for Epic.

Which I know from a business standpoint, 25/75 sounds REALLY generous. But from an indie standpoint, if your indie developer, you produce a game that manages to make like $40,000 in year. Well thats $8,750 of straight profit for epic for just releasing tech that has already had it's development costs covered. But then the rest of the money has to cover all of your development costs. That 8,750 could mean the difference between an indie developer continuing to be a clerk at a grocery store, or actually being able to take the year to finally focus on there game 100%. Where as the 8,750 going to epic is going to be nothing but a TINY little .2% on top of the million yearly fiscal income, that will mean pretty much nothing to Epic.

So don't use it? I know. I KNOW

I'm just saying, this isn't super generous move by Epic. It's a bit greedy. If Epic took only 10% instead, I bet there yearly fiscal income wouldnt change more than a few percentages, at best. That 15% would mean nothing to epic. But that additional 15% going to the indie developer could mean the difference between ramen and real food for a whole year.

Now if Epic intends to like stop focusing on making all their profit from big name commercial games and focus more on small indie developments. I could understand 25%.

[R10k]

Are you sure...

I've been looking for info on this, and cant seem to find any website that lists the actual percentages.

I was thinking I could be a tad off on the amount of guys offering 30%, but... yes, I'm pretty much sure ;) I've sold through a few portals, and spend a fair amount of time over at the indiegamer forums (http://forums.indiegamer.com) where this kind of thing gets discussed all the time. If you can't find the info you're after there, make a game and sell it- you'll find out soon enough.

About your other post rygoody... you have a lot to learn about indie development. To avoid spending all day arguing points with you, I heartily recommend visiting the forums mentioned above and reading everything by the indie devs there. Once you're done, I suspect you won't make posts like the you've made again.

[fuss]

Geez... Give someone an inch and he will take an ell. AND WILL STILL COMPLAIN HE'S NOT GETTING A MILE! Preferably, FOR FREE!

As far as I know, at least in Germany, if you're an unknown author and want to publish a book, you can be happy if you get to keep more than 15% of the total proceeds. In the music industry the rate will be probably similar. Epic's offer is an absolutely sweat deal. Kudos to them! Rygoody, you wrote so much... thoughtless things in your last post, I'm not even bothering to comment them, except for one:


That 8,750 could mean the difference between an indie developer continuing to be a clerk at a grocery store, or actually being able to take the year to finally focus on there game 100%.


Well, tough luck, then I guess he'll have to work in that grocery store for a while longer! You want something, you work for it. That's life! At some point everybody starts at the bottom and works their way up. You almost sound like Epic are owing the indie developer something!

[eem]

I was thinking I could be a tad off on the amount of guys offering 30%, but... yes, I'm pretty much sure ;) I've sold through a few portals, and spend a fair amount of time over at the indiegamer forums (http://forums.indiegamer.com/) where this kind of thing gets discussed all the time. If you can't find the info you're after there, make a game and sell it- you'll find out soon enough.

About your other post rygoody... you have a lot to learn about indie development. To avoid spending all day arguing points with you, I heartily recommend visiting the forums mentioned above and reading everything by the indie devs there. Once you're done, I suspect you won't make posts like the you've made again.


That much cost for a portal is ridiculous.

And the people on the indie dev forum don't seem to be unanimously declaring 25% a great deal either.

[R10k]

Keep in mind that when you sell on a decent portal, you're essentially paying for advertising (they put eyes onto your game) and the hosting of your files, which isn't a cheap thing in itself. It's a numbers game. Some indies ignore portals altogether, but they usually have a few games on offer to bring the multitudes past their site. If you don't have that, you pay the rates on offer and enjoy what comes your way.

[eem]

Geez... Give someone an inch and he will take an ell. AND WILL STILL COMPLAIN HE'S NOT GETTING A MILE! Preferably, FOR FREE!

As far as I know, at least in Germany, if you're an unknown author and want to publish a book, you can be happy if you get to keep more than 15% of the total proceeds. In the music industry the rate will be probably similar. Epic's offer is an absolutely sweat deal. Kudos to them! Rygoody, you wrote so much... thoughtless things in your last post, I'm not even bothering to comment them, except for one:

Well, tough luck, then I guess he'll have to work in that grocery store for a while longer! You want something, you work for it. That's life! At some point everybody starts at the bottom and works their way up. You almost sound like Epic are owing the indie developer something!

Well aren't you a little henchmen of the big corporations. The music industry is even more ****ed than the game industry, that is a terrible reason to justify this. And an author that only gets 15% of the revenue from his book is an idiot in this day and age.

Or is it 15% of the revenue? I could understand 15% of ALL costs, cause what, it'd cost like 20% to print and distribute the book, 30% to advertise the book, another 10% or something to do whatever. I could see 15% of ALL costs for a book could be fair. But 15% of the revenue? As in, after costs are taken out, the publisher of the book gets 85% of profit for just spending a few months arranging the connections? Then the person who spent what 2 or 4 years of his life writing the book only gets 15% to survive on? Anyone who signs up for that is an idiot. Just because some rich guy does it doesn't mean its right.

And the thing about this, Epic has no costs to cover on releasing UDK. That 25% isn't going to be anymore than a few more gold coins on a huge pile.

I'm all for working hard. But when working harder is done for no reason other than allowing some millionaire to walk around with a .2% increase on some number in their bank account on a computer screen. I'm gonna criticize it.

Everyone owes something to the future progression of humanity. And the artists, the independents, the small guys are some of the prime causal factors for radical progression in such fields. And when your in a position where all you have to do is change two numbers to '1' '0' instead of '2' '5' on a piece of paper in order to help that growth, and you don't do it for a reason that will make so little difference in your life. Thats just not very respectable.

I mean also note, this isn't just directed epic, I hold little respect for most commercial companies.

Yes I know UDK is awesome, thanks for releasing it Epic, it will help some growth in the industry. But the intention behind it is quite clear, Epic wants to profit off of it as much as they want to help it. There not as pure intentioned as something like the Open Source developers or the Unity developers. Who clearly just want to see the art community grow. It's just another business venture from a highly profit driven company. Is that wrong? I dunno, the capitalism thing is a whole debate in itself. Your view on the benefits and defects of high profit capitalism is your thing to decide, I'm just pointing out thats what it is. Epic is not yet on the side of being able to say there in the service to the community, there still on the high profit capitalism side. I bet you if epic thought they could get away with 50/50 they would.

[Kabab]

If you don't like how its done please go write an engine with the capabilities of UDK and release it for free to everyone to help the "future progression of humanity".

[R10k]

You're a Linux user, aren't you rygoody? :)

Just a word of advice. Do your best to drop the bitter attitude against companies. Yes, some have annoyingly greedy people working in them, and some of those people are at the top of large companies (not necessarily Epic, despite your thinking). That's life. If you want to get somewhere in this world, you sometimes have to cut deals with those people. As much as they can hike their prices, you can take advantage of their years of hard work, to save yourself a ton of money, boost your production speed and do things unimaginable outside of hiring a legion of programmers.

Seriously- cutting deals like this isn't about saving the whales, or forwarding humanity (as much as I might not understand how that's possible with a game engine). It's about simple things like asking the question, "Will 10% of X number of book sales through this publisher give me enough cash to support my family while my legion of fans grows?" People who ask questions like those use what's available to them to get ahead. People who complain all day do nothing, while everyone else overtakes them.

[ultramedia]

Wow. I just can't believe some of the things some people are saying in this thread. All I know is that before the price change, building a game with this engine was far beyond anything I could ever have possibly hoped to have been able to afford, and now it is not.

The way some of the posters here are talking reminds me of those people in group projects at uni who don't pull their weight or do their share of the work but then arrogantly claim at the end that they are just as entitled to the same mark as those who did.

And you know what? If you're one of them, you can flame me all you like, I don't care. Because I've learned that when people like that get angry and abusive, all they're really doing is trying to bully other people into giving them a free ride/lunch/whatever.

Oh and Epic? Good work, good gift, good luck :)

[Per-Anders]

You're a Linux user, aren't you rygoody? :)
Wow. I just can't believe some of the things some people are saying in this thread.
Nor me, I mean that's just cold man.

[RFX]

Yes I know UDK is awesome, thanks for releasing it Epic, it will help some growth in the industry. But the intention behind it is quite clear, Epic wants to profit off of it as much as they want to help it. There not as pure intentioned as something like the Open Source developers or the Unity developers. Who clearly just want to see the art community grow. It's just another business venture from a highly profit driven company. Is that wrong? I dunno, the capitalism thing is a whole debate in itself. Your view on the benefits and defects of high profit capitalism is your thing to decide, I'm just pointing out thats what it is. Epic is not yet on the side of being able to say there in the service to the community, there still on the high profit capitalism side. I bet you if epic thought they could get away with 50/50 they would.

You do realize the engine is a little over 10 years old? That's THOUSANDS of hours of r&d and production use, and they're giving it away for free. So what if they want to make a bit of a profit, it's a business, you make money, so you can produce more thing.

This world is a business, not a charity, don't like it? Tough luck.

[R10k]

Nor me, I mean that's just cold man.

:D

Don't feel bad. Some people use Linux because they like it. Others use it because it's going to save the world from evil.

[CHRiTTeR]

Stop complaining about the 25% already.
If you dont like it use another engine.

Just think what huge amount of money you had to pay before to get this engine and after paying that huge amount you werent even sure if you were going to make any profit from it.

This is unexpected move is a verry smart one from epic and with clever timing.



Now, i wonder if ID software will also take this route with their tech5 :D

[CHRiTTeR]

For those wondering why there isnt a 64bit version, i suspect that is because nvidia hasnt relased the 64bit version of physx yet

[darthviper107]

25% is only a concern for people that would make more than $4million off a project made with it. Which is unlikely.

[switchblade327]

Which I know from a business standpoint, 25/75 sounds REALLY generous. But from an indie standpoint, if your indie developer, you produce a game that manages to make like $40,000 in year. Well thats $8,750 of straight profit for epic for just releasing tech that has already had it's development costs covered.

This is the fatal flaw of your argument. Epic didn't make UE3 hoping to recoup the cost. They made in hopes of making as much money as possible. This is no different then any other piece of software or any other product in a capitalist economy. Business is about making money; not breaking even on initial investment.

Rygoody, you don't seem to know just how hard it is to make a game. If you can throw together a team and make an awesome game that's going to sell alot of a quality that warrants the use of a high end engine like UE3, losing 25% of that to the thing that enabled your success is the LEAST of your problems. What Epic is doing is the equivalent of giving you a student loan and not asking for a dime back until you get a job that pays decently. They are investing in you, hoping for a return.

Valve's take on Steam is like Epic's price on the royalty free engine; it's not 'official' knowledge but people do sometimes talk and it's not hard to guess with articles like this:

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/10/07/randy-pitchford-on-steam-valve-is-taking-a-larger-share-than-i/

Sound like 10% to you? The fact that you completed fabricated a figure doesn't help the validity of your argument.

[JQuigley]

It'll be interesting to see if CryTek does something similar now with their CryEngine 3. I certainly hope so.

While I for one am already playing around with this, and shifting the CE2 mod that i'm doing onto this, (Hey, it can always work as a stand alone product, even if we don't make money out of it) I wouldn't say that its likely to happen with CE3 - compare the engine ages, and the relative costs involved.

CE2, i'd put about odds on something happening there, however...

Personally, I think its a good thing. The 25% out of total revenue, including publishing/sponsorship is a bit meeeeh, but its better than having to get a publisher and pay out the full costs for the engine. The only part that would worry me is the cost involved in distribution, particularly via steam, let alone piracy - Killing Floor had that happen hours within its release, which is quite a sobering thought.

Either way - I see it as a good thing, but its obvious that they're out to make money, and help the community. Is that such a bad thing? I'd say no. :)

[Bullit]

This is no different then any other piece of software or any other product in a capitalist economy. Business is about making money; not breaking even on initial investment.

Market Freedom. That depends what the owners want. I know people that only have a business to have something to do and the bottom line they want is just near that.

I have been thinking about this and i found the 25% a bit step, but with competition i expect to go down.

[BookMansBlues]

even just as a learning platform this is huge, as a development platform you have to weigh the costs, 25% isn't too bad considering that before you'd have to pay a mandatory 300,000 on top of royalties. Removing that initial roadblock it could very well be that some or many indie developers could now find using it much more affordable.

especially since the cost of making a game these days is massive, and the chances of a reward that makes it worth it is slim unless your part of a very small group of AAA developers. Basing the cost of the application simply on %'s is a much smarter way to handle licensing.

[philnolan3d]

Something other than price is ease of use. I'm no game maker for sure, but I have done same game quality models and a little while ago a friend at a game studio suggested I get them into a game engine for my reel. So I was toying around with the idea and trying to figure out what my best option was. I tried UT3 because I had played with Unreal Ed in the past and found it very difficult to get my models into the editor and confusing to get the textures applied once they were in there. Then Unity became free and I gave that a shot. It's really amazing how easy it is to get the models in. Just about every 3D Software is supported for import and once it was in there the textures were a breeze to apply. Even my bone rigging and animation comes in without a second thought, all in the same FBX file.

So UDK looks amazing there's no doubt about that, it also offer's a few more features than Unity. But it seems to me that if you are a small indie team and want to jump in and make something Unity is definitely the fastest way to get started.

[switchblade327]

I tried UT3 because I had played with Unreal Ed in the past and found it very difficult to get my models into the editor and confusing to get the textures applied once they were in there. Then Unity became free and I gave that a shot. It's really amazing how easy it is to get the models in. Just about every 3D Software is supported for import and once it was in there the textures were a breeze to apply. Even my bone rigging and animation comes in without a second thought, all in the same FBX file.

Unity's import-based pipeline is fantastically simple to use and there are strong arguments for import-based engines replacing exporting from specific software. But in defense of UE3, getting models and animation into game with it makes a lot of sense once you know what you're doing and have your head around the whole concept of "packages". There are tutorials on UDN that walk you through the whole thing. It's easier, more sensical and artist friendly then other engines I've used, (especially some in-house tech which is still very common in game studios) without sacrificing flexibility and power.

If the point is to show that you can handle the complexities of getting a model into the engine and looking nice, dragging and dropping an .fbx file into Unity doesn't prove much to anyone who knows how monkey-simple it is.

[philnolan3d]

Well I haven't yet looked into these packages you mentioned, but it looked like you had to be using max to get your models in. Like for a static mesh I only see .ASE supported, which is a max format, so is that to say once you learn these packages max is no longer required?

[R10k]

Speaking of Unity- its weakness is it's asset management. I think they've made a few adjustments to the current version, but the previous one was borderline terrible.

Just as a side point, there's something to be said for learning how to figure out a solid pipeline between programs. People say Unity is amazing because things load in the first time, but when something goes wrong (and it will, sooner or later) or their other programs don't play nicely together (which is quite common to many indies), they're lost and confused, wondering how people without a smoothly working import option get things done.

I can't count the amount of people I've run into on middleware forums crying like babies because their model doesn't import with the click of a button. It really nails home the importance of learning how to troubleshoot your way past pipeline issues.

[philnolan3d]

Well to be fair, I did have to figure a couple of things out with Unity, so it wasn't just a click exactly, but the problems were solved within a few hours by browsing their forum. In UDK I can't even load my model at all without having to switch to another 3D package first (as I understand it anyway).

[Sil3]

Well I haven't yet looked into these packages you mentioned, but it looked like you had to be using max to get your models in. Like for a static mesh I only see .ASE supported, which is a max format, so is that to say once you learn these packages max is no longer required?

UEditor natively imports .lwo (i believe you are a LW user right?)files since UT2003 that came out in 2002 :D

There was a tutorial by Digital Extremes on Newtek site on how to Export a Door from LW with the Uvs and textures into UEditor but seems its long gone by now.

EDIT:

Managed to find online a .pdf of that Tutorial:

http://home.graffiti.net/jospicy:graffiti.net/UT2003models.pdf

[philnolan3d]

Yes I mostly use LightWave and 3D-Coat. Unreal used to use .LWO natively for static meshes but that stopped when the 3.0 version came out (2007 I believe?).

[Sil3]

Moved from LW ages ago so didnt knew that, sorry :S


Well you can use XSI MOD tool with Actor X (free), i know another program in the mix... but

Also there are a few tools on this page that let you use Blender to export ASE files to UT3:

http://www.katsbits.com/htm/tools_utilities.htm

[ThomasMahler]

People that are complaining are complainers.

Word.

[BookMansBlues]

Yes I mostly use LightWave and 3D-Coat. Unreal used to use .LWO natively for static meshes but that stopped when the 3.0 version came out (2007 I believe?).

But both support Collada

[ozioz]

I have some problems with UDK. Even though I have searched the whole internet, I have been able to find nothing so far. Then I decided to ask you guys in CGSociety.

I downloaded the latest version of UDK. ( two days ago ). I could install it and make it work in the office. When I got the home, I tried to install it on my PC which has the same configiration with the one I use in the office. Guess what, It did not work.

I tried re- downloding it three times. Nothing changed.

If you have a solution for this particilur issue , please fill me in about that.

A little windows appears after double clicking the . exe file sayin " UnSetup has stopped working ". I can not see the installation progress.

I realy need this revolutionary tool, engine, masterpiece whatever you name it.

I'll be waiting for your replies. Heer are the specs of my PC;

Pentium 4 3.2

8 gb ram.

more than 40 gb free HD space

ATI 4850 video card.

windows Vista 64 bit

Best Regards;

Ozan

[R10k]

What about the UDK forums? Did you ask there?

[DuttyFoot]

i have been having the same problem since it came out. I am running vista 64 and it will not work at all. i downloaded it on my laptop which runs xp sp2 and it works fine.

[phexitol]

I'm running Vista 64bit and UDK installed and works perfectly here. And just to confirm, I also downloaded it 2 days ago, so I'm fairly certain that I've got the same version as ozioz. Main differences being that I have less RAM, a slower CPU, and an older (nVidia, if that makes a difference) GPU.

@ozioz: (repeating R10k's question, with a link) have you tried asking here (http://forums.epicgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=372)?

[ozioz]

OK guys I want to thank you so much. Do not tell me about UDK forums, I have been living in it since the UDK tool kit was relased.

There is no effective answer. In other words, I hace tried every single thing that the people in UDK forums offered me. But nothing has been able to helpfull so far.

I think It is about ATI cards.

Most of the UDK forum members having the same issue have Nvidia video cards. What do you say about that?

I will be keep on searching for the solution till I get one on the internet. As soos as I find something , I will share it with you guys. ( I hope you find an answer before me )

Best Regards;

Ozan

[ozioz]

It is so sad for me because I have not been able to solve the situaition yet.

I do not know what to say. I just wait for the correct solution.

[R10k]

I think It is about ATI cards.

Most of the UDK forum members having the same issue have Nvidia video cards.

It sounds to me like you have no idea at all about what's going on. Look, stick to the UDK forums and try to get the attention of one of the Epic staff. Ask for one of them to respond, or ask for a contact at Epic to help them sort the issue out. Chances are they're already looking into the issue, but if not, that's the best course of action- not trawling the entire internet, guessing at what the cause might be.

The only time you do that is when support for a program has stopped. Epic are there to support UDK- take advantage of that.

[ozioz]

you must be genius! How could you guess that I had no idea about the problem?

Please reply If you have a solution. I have to ask and look for a solution for my problem. That is exactly what this forum is for. Am I wrong?

But If you say that there is allready a forum which is totally dedicated to this particular case ( UDK ), I do not think that It makes sense. If so, Moderators should close down the whole Autodesk sub-forums in CG Society. Because Autodesk has its own perfect forum sites, doesn't it?

Please do not tell me the UDK forum stuff again. It is always opened in my explorer.

Best Regards;

Ozan

[R10k]

you must be genius! How could you guess that I had no idea about the problem?

Why are you trying to make me sound stupid for saying something? You're the one who said what you thought the issue was (including asking openly "What do you say about that?") and now you're saying you don't know. Make your mind up. I simply said I thought you sounded confused- one moment the issue is ATI related, and then it's Nvidia.

If so, Moderators should close down the whole Autodesk sub-forums in CG Society. Because Autodesk has its own perfect forum sites, doesn't it?

Autodesk guys drop by here. As far as I'm aware, Epic don't.

Please do not tell me the UDK forum stuff again. It is always opened in my explorer.

Whatever you wish, your highness.

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.