Game Engines and Pricing

slipsius

So, after a VERY exciting couple days, we have been shown Unity 5, Unreal 4, CryEngine, and Snowfall. Now, snowfall isn't available to the public, but the other three are, and they have had some big news.

Unity 5 continues to be free for normal folks, and is trying to very hard to compete with Unreal and CryEngine. As an indie dev, you still need to pay if you want to export and ship your game, but as a hobbyist, you can dabble around for free.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSfakMeW0lw"]Unity 5 Feature Preview - YouTube[/ame]

Unreal 4 is moving from a Free model where you pay redonkulous royalties ( I think it was around 50%?) to a Subscription of $19 / month with a 5% royalty. You can cancel any time and keep using the version of the software you have, but you won't get any updates. So you could cancel, wait till there is an update, then pay another 20 bucks for the update and cancel again.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD5cRnrMqWw"]Unreal Engine 4 Features Trailer -- GDC 2014 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS6q1H23njM"]Unreal Engine 4 -- A Message from Tim Sweeney - YouTube[/ame]

And CryEngine, following suit with Unreal 4, going to $10 / month, with a 0% royalty for the lowest indie tier. Though, they do still have a free SDK, it just won't have any of the updates. So the hobbyist can dabble for free still.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MShEe8twY6g"]CRYENGINE Free SDK Showcase Trailer - GDC 2014 - YouTube[/ame]

So I've seen a lot of hate about these new pricing schemes, and I figured it would be nice to have a centralized location for a discussion about it.

I don't get the hate. Yes, UDK was free, but in case you forgot, the previous versions of unreal came with the game that you bought. You paid more than $20 for the game just to get the engine. And it wasn't even the full engine that the devs were using (I believe?). Now you get the full, beefed up version that the devs use, and can make this unbelievable looking games for less than a couple of beers, which I`m sure a lot of you buy weekly. It's also arguably the best public engine out there. Definitely top 2. If you`re serious about this industry, why would you not want to invest in something that will get you a job, or help you keep current with the industry? I know everyone wants everything to be free, but this is in no way a bad deal for anyone. It's very much affordable for everyone. Including indies. Would you rather go back to the extremely high royalties? Unity, if you want to ship a game, charges you per platform, and its something like $500 up front. Or it use to be. My info may be out of date. But given a 2 year dev cycle, that's still more than unreal 4.

Unity and CryEngine still have a free version. You can still get your stuff in those engines at no cost.

Thoughts?

ZacD

Good thread, we need a feature comparison and pro and con list of each engine to really compare them.

mollick2

I've been working with the Crysis3 FreeSDK for the past 6 months now and I'm really loving the engine. However I'm really hating the documentation, or lack there of. Unless they invest some serious effort into building up the documentation and providing training I really don't see this catching on with Indies.

I want the Cryengine to get some traction, but overall Epic and Unity have the edge when it comes to documentation, support, and of course the community.

Codexus

Some corrections:

Unity doesn't require paying anything to ship a game, small indies can sell games made with the free version of Unity, that version is just limited in terms of available features and has a small watermark. (but companies with over $100k/year turnaround can't license the free version). The free version now also includes mobile platforms with the same feature set. Pro version is $1500 and an additional $1500 per mobile platform to get the full support for that platform (except Blackberry which was just announced is now going to be free)

The royalties for UDK 3 were 25% (not 50%) and the first $50k would not be counted. So I can see why some people (who are in the 0-50k range) might not like the new model. Still I think that with the full source code to the engine AND the editor, that's an incredible deal!

CryEngine, we will need to wait for some more information, I think the devil is going to be hidden in their definition of "indie developer" or some limitation for their indie version.

NegevPro

I think the hate stems from the fact that people always love updating their software (at least I think so, I'm not a part of this crowd.) As a result of wanting to stay on the newest version, people look at the subscriptions and realize that the only way to stay on the latest version is to just pay a subscription fee. For a serious dev/team, this isn't a big deal because it still isn't that much money, but for the guy that likes to play around with a particular game engine for a couple of hours every few weeks, this sucks because they'll have to end up paying a sub fee for the month to update their software.

Additionally, this leads to the fact that you no longer feel like you actually "own" your software. From reading youtube/forum/etc. comments, a lot of people seem to have previously believed that they owned the game engine when they downloaded it and these people now feel like they are just renting something.

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of any kind of subscription fees whether it is for an amazing piece of software, a game, a service, etc. I'm not really upset over any of the engine subscription fees though, both UE4 and CryEngine have INCREDIBLY generous prices. I'm a broke college student that works to pay off tuition while occasionally spending money on licenses for a free non-profit game I've been developing for the last two years, and even I have money to spend on an UE4 subscription (for 1 month at least lol) so I think the people upset over it are just not aware of the pricing options. It's important to remember, you don't always have to be on the latest version of a piece of software, in fact, sometimes it's better to not be on the latest version.

Also, it's important to realize how often major updates will be released. I'm sure we won't be seeing large, major changes released every single month for the next decade.

Gestalt

Unity Pro also has a subscription. Sure you could use the free version but for most purposes (and I'm assuming for many of the cool Unity 5 features) you'd want to use the pro version and that is currently a $75/month subscription or $1500 on the spot, $1500 for iOS and Android each and $500 for team features (or +$20/month).

commander_keen

Are you sure about UE4 allowing you to cancel subscription at any time and continue using the engine? Seems like people will take advantage of that and only subscribe for 1 month when theres a major update. I guess if they are releasing the full source theres nothing they can really do to prevent people from using it beyond a license lifespan. That opens the door for DRM free piracy too. Its very interesting that they decided to do that.

I generally dont like the idea of any kind of software using a subscription model, but really if the software is going to require upgrade fees its pretty much the same thing. Unity should probably drop their subscription price because right now you end up paying a lot more when using the subscription than if you just get a pro license, then update for $600 every 2ish years when a major update happens. Subscription should cost less than a license because you dont actually own anything with a subscription.

JustinSlick

commander_keen wrote: »

Are you sure about UE4 allowing you to cancel subscription at any time and continue using the engine?

Positive... has been confirmed numerous times by Epic on the UE4 forums. They also confirmed that you can cancel your sub, develop your game, and re-subscribe right before you publish if that's the route you want to take. Obviously you miss support and updates, but once you pay a month the engine is useable forever.

Codexus

commander_keen, you bring an interesting point. Software updates are already very much like a subscription in some ways. Well you can skip upgrades (though some companies make you pay for that with an increased price for the next upgrade) but if you want to stay current, you're already on a "subscription" and the price is not clear because you don't know exactly when the next major upgrade is coming.

Now looking at things from this perspective the current Unity Pro upgrade is $600 and it seems those upgrades happen every 2 years. So staying up to date in Unity Pro costs $300 / year. UE4 is $19 (or €19) / month so $228 / year. Unity doesn't seem so expensive anymore.

Granted you also have to buy your first version at $1500 and UE4 comes with iOS and Android included in the cost while those are very expensive for Unity Pro. Still it's something to think about, and if you're making real money the 5% royalty is going to make a huge difference.

NegevPro

I'm more curious to see where this is going to put Unity in terms of used game engines. Unity is very easy to work with which is one of the biggest reasons to pick Unity for a project, but UE4 is supposedly incredibly easy to learn and use also. From the looks of the "Marketplace" tab on the UE4 downloader thing, there might be an Asset Store for UE4 some time in the near future.

I have to hand it to Epic, it seems like they really played their cards right. Oh, and Tappy Chicken, this alone makes UE4 worth the purchase lol.

ZacD

Yeah the market place really looks like an asset store, the future looks good for artists setting their assets on market places.

Count Vertsalot

I'd rather pay Unity $75 a month than pay Epic $19 plus give them the potential to eat some of my profits that would already be getting devoured by Steam and/or iTunes. I don't have to pay Unity anymore when I'm done developing, but Epic could be getting checks from me for years.

sawik

slipsius wrote: »

Would you rather go back to the extremely high royalties?

Risk.
What do you prefer, risk time or money and time?
With UDK free, the only thing you risk is your own time whereas, with subscription fees, you have to pay the fee either you make profit or not.
With high royalties, you didn't lose your money, you simply made less. The money was never yours in the first place, so you couldn't lose it. You could argue that the game was yours, so the profit is yours too however, the engine was (is) theirs, so you are actually lucky they make you pay only if you succeed. Whereas now, if you succeed, you get more money, but this money is only coming back to you. You've put it out of your own pocket for subscription.
So unless we talk about franchise which would beat Ubisoft's Assassins Creed, at the end of a day, you most likely gained the same money as if you used UDK Free... and Unreal made more money, because not everyone will finish the project, yet, they all have to pay for subscription. Let's face it, if they would believe they are going to make less money due to the new pricing, they wouldn't use it.

slipsius wrote: »

If you`re serious about this industry, why would you not want to invest in something that will get you a job, or help you keep current with the industry?

Quite simple, having a lifetime license is always better than "renting" your license.

Putting Unity as an example here:
20 months in using Unity I just spend enough money to buy PRO version. If I am some minor indie developer and in general I don't see new features as necessary and the games I make, or plan to make, wouldn't suffer this much from having it done different, maybe more time consuming or slightly more "pricey" optimization wise, way. From now on, I am losing money.
Of course, if I would've access to those features, I would most likely use them because, why not?

Upgrades, are giving you an OPTION to make your project more advanced, better looking, or whatever. If you decide you don't necessary need them or won't use them, you don't upgrade. If you decide you actually need them Unity offers discounts for people who upgrade.

Codexus wrote: »

commander_keen, you bring an interesting point. Granted you also have to buy your first version at $1500 and UE4 comes with iOS and Android included in the cost while those are very expensive for Unity Pro. Still it's something to think about, and if you're making real money the 5% royalty is going to make a huge difference.

Yes, you have to pay $2500 for Unity Pro with iOS and Andorid devices, yet again, this is a lifetime license and NO royalties, however they charge some royalties IF you use their help to publish the game (Unity Games, originally Union). As someone mentioned, with UE4 you might get subscription, cancel it and then renew it just before the release, still, the 5% eats you and you had no support from the developers, they support only subscribers. At least, subscribers are more important.

Codexus wrote: »

if you're making real money the 5% royalty is going to make a huge difference.

IF is the key here.
Big AAA companies, will either go with per title license, or they can simply afford it.

Baron Flame

Interesting discussion. Subscribed.

RyanB

Another option with Unity is the free version plus plugins.

I'm using NGui, Playmaker, MasterAudio, and SimpleSQL with the free version of Unity. Playmaker is the brains and the other plugins are designed to work with Playmaker. This costs a bit of money, but the time savings are huge.

Down the road, if I make a publishable game, I know there are monetization plugins waiting for me.

UE4 is a great engine, but I don't feel it has the same kind of solutions that Unity offers. I need tools suited to independent development, not AAA studios.

iniside

Oh quit whining. You pay 19$ cancel sub and continue to work.

Then when some interesting update come in you pay again 19$ and cancel sub again.
You probably spend more on beer per month ;/

If know cheaper solution of UE4 quality, then by all means, spread the word!

And if you worried than 5% royalties might be to much then.. Why do you even get indie version. You obviously foresee profits, that will easily be big enough to justify buying full license.

NegevPro

I don't really see why the $20 a month thing is such a big deal to actual developers though, I mean, AAA games cost $60. I was going to pre-order Daylight and purchase Deus Ex:The Fall, for a total of $20, but instead I got to get my hands on a kickass game engine that I can use for the next 10 years if I wanted to. You really only lose out on the updates, but again, do you really need to have every update?

After using it for the last couple of hours, I have noticed that the performance seems to be kind of shitty. I don't know if it's just my PC, but I was getting 40 - 55 FPS on the blank default first person map. I've got a radeon 6950, 32GB ram, and an i7 2700k so I would imagine that I should at least get a stable framerate on a map with just a few cubes.

iniside

That Radeon is on bare minimum to comrotably work. Slate (new UI framework, in which the editor is UI is created), is very resource heavy on GPU and CPU.

ZacD

I noticed a few places where my FPS drop a bit, the reflection scene in content examples and the shooter game. In the shooter game on high at 1080p was averaging 42 FPS on a core2quad and a 760 GTX.

ZeroNight

sawik wrote: »

Upgrades, are giving you an OPTION to make your project more advanced, better looking, or whatever. If you decide you don't necessary need them or won't use them, you don't upgrade. If you decide you actually need them Unity offers discounts for people who upgrade.

And upgrades are basically what the UE4 licensing model is. You pay $20 once, you get the full engine and every feature it has at the present time, and if you want to upgrade to a newer version of the engine, then you pay $20 again for the latest build. There is no reason whatsoever why you need to stay subscribed every month of the year if you don't need to upgrade, it's entirely viable to pay $40 total, $20 when you first start, and $20 more to release the game.

Lamont

I never heard of anyone OWNING Unreal engine... you licensed it per title. As far as Unity, you own a LICENSE of Unity, not the engine... and get updates through that X.X cycle, then pay to upgrade if your choose.

Unity ---

I like Unity because I do not need so much help/ramp up to get something going. So many tools available for independent development. Helps a ton. Unity is $75 per month plus $75 PER add-on... so if you are pushing to iOS/Android and need a team lic it will be $245 a month if you need to go that route. (and no source code). So will plopping down the cost for Unity and keeping up to date keep you slightly ahead of the subscription costs? Maybe neck and neck? Someone needs to do the math. So far 3.0x to 4.0 was almost 2 years, 4.0 to 5.0 was 13 months? And these dev/release cycles are getting closer and closer to full point releases. Maybe Unity needs to re-visit the costs of the subscription model...

UDK ---

I like UDK because it is like bringing a shotgun to a knife fight. If you can code, you can get awesome stuff, but takes effort. Lots of it. I like how Epic is giving source code with this, so it seems like it can foster some kind of community like Unity where people make tools to speed up/add to the workflow.

UDK`s workflow is super solid and I have always liked it (maybe Stockholm Syndrome?).

I would like to wait and see how this turns out for them. And I will for sure download in the next couple of weeks.

Cry ---

CryEngine? I.. uh.. don`t know much about it. Looks pretty though.

Subscriptions in General ---

I like them, it gives me an option when it comes to doing work, I can charge to a client the time it takes to rent the software, then go back to older versions when done.

Shrike

Come on guys, 5% royalities is extremely generous. I could not believe it at first.
The subscription model is a little turning off for individual persons, but for actually making a game together its a lot better now. You had to lay off 20% royalities or more before, and that seemed reasonable back then, because it was. Youre sitting on the shoulders of giants.

Staying with unity for now thanks to shader forge and NGUI and the store in general, but UE4 and CE are really inviting with their superior tech , making me rethink everything now : /

NegevPro

I figured it was just my card, looks like it's time to upgrade again .

Anybody have any suggestions on a good card, preferably in the $200-$300 range?

Anchang-Style

How about the CE3? If you cancel your subscription is it still useable? Don't know about UDK but the SDK of CE always had this log in thingy, so they could use that to block unsubscripted usage.
Would go with a 760 GTX 4GB Edition...will probably get 2 of those in coming months.

Decoyz

But isnt CryEngine notorious for being not indie friendly even though they claim that they are? Seems Pretty risky for indies because of their reputation for misleading. A quick google search shows people that have complained about making a game in cryengine but then no matter what they do, they are unable to publish.

Rick Stirling

What authoring platforms do they support?

Windows
CryEngine, Unreal, Unity

OSX
Unreal, Unity 4/5

Linux
Unity 4 only? I'd have thought Unity 5 would have been available on Linux, perhaps that is coming (or I missed it on the site).

Ark

Cryengine is coming to Linux.

slipsius

well cryengine does say that the 0% is for the lowest tier. That could mean a game up to $5000 in sales. or it could mean up to 50k. Who knows. Either way, it sounds like cloud cover for the higher prices. Unreal seems to be just 5% for any game?

Anchang-Style

On the topic of engines...what the hell happened to Unigine?

ambershee

It's terrible. That's what happened to it.

iniside

Anchang-Style wrote: »

On the topic of engines...what the hell happened to Unigine?

It had some nice ideas (I really liked their terrain system), but they had no idea what to do with their tech.

Ben Apuna

Polycode seems like a nice engine to watch out for. It's MIT licensed (in other words free), got an integrated scene editor for 3D/2D, code your games in C++ or Lua, compile to Win/Mac/Linux, and much more.

It's not officially released yet (maybe soon), work on it has been ongoing, but you can build from source if you're impatient.

As an aside, Ivan Safrin (Polycodes' creator) was looking for some models to demo Polycode with. So if anyone has any portfolio work lying around that he could use, I'm sure he'd appreciate it.

PixelMasher

I dig the new models. the old free versions are out there still so there isnt much to complain about. its not like they are taking anything away.

Also the idea that having the latest new updates and toys is going to somehow make the average artists personal work better aside from new things like PBR is pretty funny. I always see the updates changelist adding things for actual production and people being like "damn i need to get my hands on that new character rigging and animation blending system to play around with" when they are an environment artist. 99% of the updates besides performance based stuff in UDK I have never touched and while it seems exciting and cool to have all these new features, its in no way preventing you from creating awesome art.

I think people get so wrapped up in alll the new goodies and toys they forget that putting in the time making actual art is what really counts. From an indie studio perspective of people who actually make games and finish stuff this should be amazing. such a low entry to AAA level packages and toolsets. look back 3-4 years, and how expensive it was to get liscences to decent engines to even begin an indie project. this is sweeeeeeeeet.

almighty_gir

for all the things you get with UE4, the price is absolutely worth it. hell, a photoshop subscription costs about the same. in my opinion the maya animation tools alone are worth subbing for UE4 lol.

Richard Kain

At this point, I would say that Unity is still the best option for small/hobbyist teams. (in the range of 1-10 developers) The free version of Unity is very capable, and it's lack of cost up to $100,000 in revenue makes it one of the cheapest possible options. While Unity's performance and feature set might be lacking in some areas, it's scale is appropriate to smaller teams. It's prototyping capabilities are also very desirable for small-scale development.

With UE4's new licensing model, Epic is making its engine much more appealing to mid-size developers. It was already popular with large-scale developers, and those large-scale developers will likely be even more enticed. (this pricing model works out well for large-scale as well as mid-scale) I'm personally hoping that this move will expand the mid-size development presence in the industry. A hard swing between small-scale indies and large-scale mega development isn't good for anyone. A larger number of mid-scale developers and games would be a real boon.

The good things I've been hearing about UE4's new Blueprint system could also really push the engine's popularity. It sounds like the Blueprint system is going to be a good way to cook up and experiment with game mechanics. UE4's rendering capabilities were never in question, and the architecture of the new console's are doing it a favor as far as porting is concerned. Blueprint is going to be the area that helps bolster UE4's appeal the most.

CryEngine is a bit of a question mark in my mind. It's new pricing model places it between Unity and UE4. But I'm not sure about the effective application of the engine. Unity was already an incredibly flexible system by design. It sounds like UE4 is focused on becoming more flexible than it was. But CryEngine is pretty specific in its strengths. I can't help but feel that it will be best applied to certain kinds of games, and ignored for most others.

ambershee

Richard Kain wrote: »

UE4's new Blueprint system could also really push the engine's popularity. It sounds like the Blueprint system is going to be a good way to cook up and experiment with game mechanics.

I find it invaluable. Iteration time is much quicker than other engines and non-programmers don't have trouble adapting things.

Richard Kain wrote: »

UE4's rendering capabilities were never in question, and the architecture of the new console's are doing it a favor as far as porting is concerned. Blueprint is going to be the area that helps bolster UE4's appeal the most.

I find it sorely lacking. Things like not being able to overlap more than a handful of lights, no specular on translucent surfaces, 'dynamic' lighting being performance intensive when it shouldn't be, inflexible shader pipeline etc

TrampledUnderFoot

Decoyz wrote: »

But isnt CryEngine notorious for being not indie friendly even though they claim that they are? Seems Pretty risky for indies because of their reputation for misleading. A quick google search shows people that have complained about making a game in cryengine but then no matter what they do, they are unable to publish.

Yes it is. Look at how many projects there are (some quite good and with a healthy following) that never see the light of day. Yes there are other factors in play there, but in my personal experience with Cry on an indie team...it just not good.


You don't get source code with the Cry sub right? Basically the free SDK wih a royalty program?

adam

Really liking this discussion happening. Engines as a service is something our industry should have adopted years ago, and I am happy to see its finally happening. $19 or $10/month is nothing for the technology you'll have (legal) access to.

I just wanted to share the links to our various forums for Unreal, CryEngine, and Unity. Some people may be more interested in them now as the new engines and tools get release.

Unreal Tech Talk: http://www.polycount.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=63
CryEngine Tech Talk: http://www.polycount.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=64
Unity Tech Talk: http://www.polycount.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=69

And our brand new Unity Store forum: http://www.polycount.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=79

Amatobahn

I skipped a lot of reading other comments so this may be repeated —On my personal accord. I don't plan on making a full-fledged game on my own for the time being. However, by the fact that as an individual I'd like to keep moving forward in my skill, learning what is new (pbr workflow, etc) and not being limited due to licensing or waiting for a free version with tools that are locked by pro/licencees is now an option since the tools are available to learn on for such a low price point.

Needless to say, having the engine as a service is a huge win for us as a whole dev community. We will see things pop up now that were previously hindered before and I am incredibly excited for that.

Ragsza

I am really liking UE4 so far and the goodies they have included with it. The materials look amazing. I am just a hobbyist and the $19 for me is not a big deal. Hell if you compare it to adobe and autodesk, you really get some amazing tools for very little.

CordellC

Interested to see how much the workflow has improved in UE4. Prior this news Unity was the absolute fastest on game iteration time hands down (UDK required you to shut down the program before compiling scripts.. whoever designed that shouldn't work on tools ever again).

I hope UE4 gets some better world constructing tools, though. Compared to Source's Hammer or ProBuilder for Unity it's slow as shit to greybox levels.

merc-ai

Having worked with UE4 before, I was (and still am) completely won over by its features and workflow.
I also welcome the new subscription-based model and licensing terms, which feel much friendlier toward small/medium indies.

One detail I've yet to find out is whether you need to stay subscribed to make use of their asset store (sell/buy). $19/month isn't a deal-breaker, but for those who plan to make cash on asset store, this might be interesting to know.

All in all, this is a great time for artists and indies

Jacky

merc-ai wrote: »

Having worked with UE4 before, I was (and still am) completely won over by its features and workflow.
I also welcome the new subscription-based model and licensing terms, which feel much friendlier toward small/medium indies.

One detail I've yet to find out is whether you need to stay subscribed to make use of their asset store (sell/buy). $19/month isn't a deal-breaker, but for those who plan to make cash on asset store, this might be interesting to know.

All in all, this is a great time for artists and indies

From what i've heard so far yes, you need to be subscribed in order to sell&buy assets from the store in the future.

Equanim

One possible issue with CryEngine is its reliance on plugins to import content. (Unless this is changing.) If an indie studio decided to use the cheapest paid software (Maya LT, which can't use plugins) CryEngine isn't an option whereas the other two engines still are.

Assuming the time spent developing an indie title is two years, which is generous, even an upgrade from LT to Modo would cannibalize any savings gained by developing in CryEngine. (Through the time of development.)

The only way to make CryEngine the cheapest option would be to either use Blender, stay in CryTek's 0% royalty tier, or hope that your game sells long enough to recuperate the extra cost of your software licenses and/or offset the additional costs of the other engines.

If the new CryEngine has a standalone converter or can import standard asset formats however, the above wouldn't be an issue.

kylehorne3d

They made the Entire source code Available for free, Unity is now a big competitor, this way they get guaranteed money, and can support their business, 1 sale or multiple sales, its like micro transactions just for the engine, and also the asset store. Blueprint being more art friendly I'm hoping, is another big plus. We will see A LOT of improvement across the board because Devs will have a base to make their own engines with.

tkfxity

I just spent a good couple hours looking at the UE4 tutorial videos on youtube from Unreal Engine, and wow Blueprint looks like it is a powerful tool. I really love the PBR of the new materials and the way the UI is handled. $20 a month even for a individual is NOTHING for what is being offered here! I can't wait to start using this and learning!

Arixsus

Hello! Long time lurker first time poster here.

I just thought I would chime in and throw in my two cents about Unreal Engines new subscription based model.

So basically you pay 20 bucks once to get the engine and you can cancel it from there on out and resubscribe when you want to release. Right? With a 5% royalty taken off the top on any sales.

To release on UDK you had to pay $99 dollars IIRC and you were then charged a 25% royalty on 50K+ income earned.

So going into some quick math here from the different of UDK to UE4 and its payment model.

UDK
Lets say you release your game at 10 bucks a pop and you sell 10k copies. Well you've hit your 50k mark and then some. So after 50k you have to play royalties and you've just made 100k.

$0 upfront
$99 to release
Total cost -$99

10 * 10000 = 100000 - 50000 *.25 = 12487.50 paid in royalties

UE4
Lets say the same scenario for UE4.

$20 upfront
$20 to release
Total cost -$40

10 * 10000 = 100000 *.05 = 5000 paid in royalties.

Keep in mind I am horrible at math, and I am posting this from work xD.

I think it works out pretty well IMO and I cannot wait to get my hands on the tech. I've used UDK for a while and then switched to unity because I could do a little more with it at the time. I have tried CE3 FreeSDK but I was not willing to put work into something that had an iffy license model. But those are just my 2 cents and I cant wait to invest more time into UE4

Ehsan Gamer

I just watched This video on youtube.

I'm a Unity user for about 3 years now and I have worked with both UDK and Cryengine sdk for a while now. What I found very interesting on the UE4 editor was they have change it to be like Unity editor ! I mean the window forms, asset browser, etc .

I think that is very good. They have also added a asset store !

Right now I haven't decided between UE4 and Unity 5. I love Cryengine for presentation but for making a full game in our team, That sound scary to me

Decoyz

TrampledUnderFoot wrote: »

Yes it is. Look at how many projects there are (some quite good and with a healthy following) that never see the light of day. Yes there are other factors in play there, but in my personal experience with Cry on an indie team...it just not good.

Any word of any of those projects going to finally see the light of day, now that Cry has this new business model? Or are they just misleading again? Till then, it seems like a bad investment to learn this.

Dataday

Will have to add Source 2 to the list once its out as well.

cptSwing

I wonder where this leaves lesser known and/or opensource engines such as OGRE. Obviously the argument of "free vs gazillions in fees" has nearly vanished.