Udk or cryengine
polycounter lvl 11
Just was wondering I have been using udk past few weeks studying it and everything. Is scripting easier in cryengine then udk. Is it worth learning cryengine? I love the games made with both engine which do you prefer to work in?
I would also like to know how cry engine is as far as set up for a scene things like that thanks in advance
think about making a game eventually
I would also like to know how cry engine is as far as set up for a scene things like that thanks in advance
think about making a game eventually
Replies
I haven't used CryEngine at all, other than installing it and poking around a bit. Scripting in CryEngine is done with Lua which from what I understand is a bit different from other "C family" programming languages. In my opinion the big advantage of CryEngine is not having to deal with baking light maps for art assets.
UDK on the other hand has a visual scripting system called Kismet which is very approachable for a beginner. It also has code based scripting which is done with UnrealScript which is similar to Java/C# in syntax, but I guess you know this already. Some things I didn't like about UDK were dealing with mirrored normal maps (forget about synched normal maps...) and making good efficient lightmap UVs for everything. Building lighting can be a time sink too. The art asset pipeline is fairly solid though, Max, Maya, even Modo, and I think Blender can get assets to UDK.
If you're serious about making your own game especially if it's not a FPS I would highly suggest looking into Unity. You'll spend much less time "fighting the engine" and much more time actually making your gameplay better. The asset pipeline is very smooth. Scripting in Unity can be done with C#, UnityScript (very similar to JavaScript), and Boo (similar to Python). There are also numerous visual scripting plugins, though they might not be free. The only drawback is if you want any of the Pro features then you'll need to buy a license for $1500.
Eat3D also has a huge list of DVDs you can buy Here that includes stuff like Cryengine (which is a massive introduction series to the editor plus a huge introduction to the material setups), ZBrush and even the scripting in UDK.
Good places to start if you want to get the quality training for a cheap price.
That is the only way you can start comparing them anyway.
Most important things to compare in my opinion are: scripting, asset importing/setup and exporting.
I would recommend Unity too. It doesn't have the pretty graphics out-of-the-box, but in my opinion it wins on being easy as hell to learn. There arent millions of buttons around the UI and i learned scripting gameplay mechanics to it in couple of months. They have awesome script reference site.
Im not biased at all, but id take Cryengine on a date. Id let it have the lobster too.
UDK is easier to learn and has much more documentation, but what I like mostly from CryEngine, it is the fact that it is all real-time, so I can focus more on creating assets than waiting for baking and having technical issues. I've been using Unity for my final university projet and I personally didn't like to use it.
The only difference is that CE3 is more 'easier' to get it started right off the bat, while UDK requires more grease work but has more 'behind' the scenes control right off the bat.
But both suffer the same issues, which is both are geared towards a FPS crowd, so if you're looking to get a different type of games started, I wish you the best for CE3, while for UDK, I recommend you looking in the U forums for 'kit' which some kind soul uploaded for your needs.
If you're looking for an engine which is more flexible, but doesn't have the UBER graphical powress of this programs, then I suggest C4Engine, Unity, etc.
1. With UDK you code gamplay code with UnrealScript. It's powerfull tool, yet limited in some cases. CE3 you code gamplay in C++ (*see how everyone running away). You can do pretty much everything. Use custom libraries, custom servers, and integrate everything that do not need direct modification of engine code. Also there is CryMono for CE3 (yet unstable version), that is somewhat wrapper around GameDLL (gamplay code DLL). Which allows you for realtime scripting and coding without restarting, recompling anything.
2. As for starting. In UDK you have some starting kits. Which may prove easier. And if you don't need them, you just don't use classes with UT* which are FPS specific.
In CE3 it's much bigger PITA. GameDLL code is simply mess. No comments, meangless methods and variables names. And most of it's base is based around FPS. If you really want something new you need to throw it out of window and write your own code from scratch. Which would be cool, if we have at least basic explanation what is needed to run basic game.
Other than that I prefer CE3. It's so much faster to work with with this annoying "Lighting needs to be rebuild", "AI needs to be rebuild", "other things need to be rebuild" things.
If project Skyline was released tommorow with a node for UDK ready to go with HIK nodal toolset and a treasure chest of python commands to wrangle unreal from Maya or Max I would say the choice was now impossibly UDK favored.
It is just so frustrating to witness Unreal uglify my favorite games and not want to run to the Cryengine camp. But I will reserve final judgement till unrealengine 4 is gold.
Gamebryo had incredible documentation! A programmer with very little C++ experience could easily setup visual studio and understand and implement the inner workings of Gamebryo confidently! ( don't test me cause it's been years ).
Plus the community was private so there was a lot less silly noise in it's threads and loads of experienced help. Never tried LightSpeed but I am willing to bet if Gamebryo would only have had the vision to see the value in a free version it would not die the slow death it is currently in the throes of?
although no games seem to leverage as much... gamebryo easily supported multiple dynamic lights as well as vsm and pcf shadows that were far superior to what unreal had in the editors default configuration at the time. I could usually count on an Alpha sorting solution even if that did take some trial and error depending on conditions:
Unlike Unreal at the time...
sure was nice to control texture compression output along with multiple AA options.
I spat my tea out. good one man! :poly142:
I am familiar with classes learning a little jquery helped with that. I have never even looked much into c++. I am just wondering because I never did it. Is it hard to code a game for a company like a full game like assassins creed or something along that line.
What about CE3? Thinking of picking one of the engines but I'm using Maya so it would be nice to hear some opinions!
Compared to what UDN any Crytek offer? Gamebryo 3.4 docs in addition to PULSE were comprehensive!
As much as I crave unreal to dissapear inside project skyline to the point where unreal is essentially a runtime plug in. I do not see an editor less pipeline as a bad thing. ( Lightspeed looked like it accomplished alot that project Skyline is now attempting ) Instead of re-inventing a DX panel for every project I would rather have a huge Autodesk standardised python library and nodal front end in Maya any day of the week.
If skyline is ever realised it appears that Maya is getting all the attention through the efforts of Steven Roselle .
At that time, I couldn't even say what CryTek were offering, but the UE2 docs on the UDN were pretty comprehensive. The searcheable docs GameBryo now has weren't available (FYI this is pre-Lightspeed where everything is still called NetImmerse), and the source code wasn't even completely open - some parts of the engine were just headers to compile against.
Things can change in 6 years, but my experience with GameBryo was really unpleasant.
People tend to think that Unreal's FBX support is the golden grail for compatibility with either DCC, but tbh I don't trust FBX one bit anymore.
No matter if you go Unreal or CE3, use the propertary fileformats (ActorX for unreal IIRC and CGF/CHR/CAF for CE3).
Unity (as far as I know) only supports FBX which I think is a massive PITA as we had so many conversion errors with Left-Handed and Right-Handed systems, scale issues and so on.
I know most game-artist don't seem to care that much, but having a proper metric setup is the best thing a game engine can have imho and CE3 takes the cake there.
That's a completely arbitrary thing which can vary by game. It doesn't matter at all.
Most of the work in making a scene is the modeling and texturing. Once you've got that done it shouldn't be too hard to port from one engine to another.