4 Month of free Unity pro for rift Devs

[zalo]

If I want to get other people involved to do additional coding, would they need a Pro license too?

A project that has transitioned to being developed using Pro, could non Pro users work on it and run the project in edit mode?

To the first one, normally, yes. They would have to have a Pro License too, and if you want some additional teamwork/collaboration features, then a "Team License" is important too.
However, since you can get the "watermarked" version of Unity Pro w/ Team license from Studica, I'd just have all my collaborators using the ~$200 version of Unity Pro w/Team License and Asset Server because THEY won't be the ones doing the final export. You'll be doing that on your legit Unity Pro.

On number two, yes, but all the Pro features will be disabled (unless they have a Pro trial going). So it will be "your game", but without the stereo shaders or shadows or anything.

[mscoder610]

Would be nice if there was an open source app that could bind hydra/rift head tracking/ and everything else to mouse movements/buttons and keyboard keys

FreePIE can probably handle some of this (mapping between input devices - and it's open source). It's scripting driven rather than 'UI configuration' driven though.

More warp shader code floating around wouldn't be bad either (does anyone have an example for Rift style warping in OpenGL already?)

[virror]

as mentioned you can already get stereo cameras in the free version, so I wonder if you can just make your game side by side in unity, integrate the tracking and all that, then use one of those injection/hook drivers to apply the warp shader on the final app? (just for hobbyist community demos and apps of course)

This is exactly what i wrote before, but ppl seems to be to busy bashing Unity instead of searching for solutions, i good start would be to get the Vireio drivers to be compatible with the Unity engine, then strip of everything except for the warp-shader. Then we make a wrapper, put a prefab together with the stereo cameras and a proper neck model and we are good to go. Best would of course be if the Vireio hook could be freestanding and "just work" with a dll or something.

Edit: I already have Unity pro, but i still want this to work with the free version for the sake of VR : )

[Parallaxis]

I am real happy about the Unity support - as Oculus VR promised. Thank you very much for that.

I think it's fantastic that we get 4 months of free PRO version on top of that the Rift supporting Unity. I didn't expect that at all.

I know many of you guys just wan't any and everything for free, you are just spoiled - seriously. Why would Unity offer their product for free for you guys when other developers has to pay for the product?

[thedoktorj]

Personally, I think all you guys balking a putting down $1500 for a life-time of professional commercial game development are a bunch of babies. If you aren't certain you can financially successful with the Pro version, USE THE TRIAL VERSION TO FIND OUT. If it turns out GOOD then GREAT. VR development in Unity is FOR YOU. Buy it because this small investment will be insignificant in the long-run. If it turns out BAD then SORRY. VR development in unity is NOT FOR YOU. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MADE ANY MONEY ANYWAY.

If it turned out good but didn't sell well, that's not Unity's fault. That's your marketing effort's fault, and it would have happened in any engine.


However, that's not the point of my post right now (though it did take a larger chunk than I expected). I'm wondering if the rift's SBS warping shader will break all the other Image Processing effects we have access to. SSAO, Bloom, motion blur, Anti-aliasing... these are all critical for a professional game, and other drivers have been known to break these things in games.

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

[virror]

Stop cry and do something about it instead : p

[German]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

Then GET A REFUND.

[drifter]

Bad new for the VR cause, indeed.

I know many of you guys just wan't any and everything for free, you are just spoiled - seriously. Why would Unity offer their product for free for you guys when other developers has to pay for the product?

Don't be silly, not everyone here wants to make money, and the free version of Unity was the best spot for them to toy with VR ideas...

[Fredrum]

Zalo, thanks a lot for tips I'll look into the Studica thing.

[thedoktorj]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

Then GET A REFUND.

How?

<edit>Let me add that after a power outage shut down my computer and gave me a few minutes to think without a bunch of VR stuff staring me in the face, I guess this isn't quite as bad as my initial thoughts. I will say that this will cause me to stop using Unity (which I've wasted many hours learning over the past few months), but I'm sure it will be implemented in some of the open source engines, even if that takes a while. It also sounds like an SDK wrapper MAY make use of the Oculus in the free version possible for those of us primarily interested in playing with the technology and not looking to release full games. And to all the people saying "stop whining and do something", is this not a forum for discussing the Occulus? Is that not the entire purpose of this portion of the forum? Heaven forbid people say what they think about the most recent and most damaging announcement in the ~7 months since we all backed the Kickstarter. That being said, still very disappointing news in a stream of disappointing news for something that all of us have been eagerly anticipating for a very long time.</edit>

[CloverFields]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

You DO know there are OTHER free engines out there right? It's not like Unity Free is the ONLY free 3d engine that exist out there.
As far as I can see, pretty much any fullscreen engine with pixel shader capabilities will work without much effort.
In fact I can asure you that UDK will work with the rift for free.
You probably would need a modeling tool too, you could use Blender, but by your logic you should demand a fully paid version of 3ds max because YOU prefer it over blender.
You are being unresonable here.

[GeraldT]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

Then GET A REFUND.

How?

Contact them and tell them you want a refund because you can't play Doom3. I think they mentioned something like that in the Doom3 email.

[thedoktorj]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

You DO know there are OTHER free engines out there right? It's not like Unity Free is the ONLY free 3d engine that exist out there.
As far as I can see, pretty much any fullscreen engine with pixel shader capabilities will work without much effort.
In fact I can asure you that UDK will work with the rift for free.
You probably would need a modeling tool too, you could use Blender, but by your logic you should demand a fully paid version of 3ds max because YOU prefer it over blender.
You are being unresonable here.

Please read my edit, it took me a few minutes to process the information that I was receiving. Many of us have been working with Unity and learning it for months now, primarily because it was implied that we could use the free version with the Rift. It was a shock when it came out that we will have to spend another 1500 bucks. Again, I'm NOT saying Unity should give away their full version for free. I'm not stupid, so I realize that is an impossibility. I have simply wasted a lot of time on something that we were all given the impression would do the job. I don't really want a refund, as long as we can get some sample code and/or full protocol specs for the head tracking that will help us implement the proper shaders and drivers into another engine. So much of this is currently up in the air, that it's hard to pin down, just how much extra work this is going to be, but I'm sure that it will be worth it, in the end.

[Modab]

Please read my edit, it took me a few minutes to process the information that I was receiving. Many of us have been working with Unity and learning it for months now, primarily because it was implied that we could use the free version with the Rift. It was a shock when it came out that we will have to spend another 1500 bucks. Again, I'm NOT saying Unity should give away their full version for free. I'm not stupid, so I realize that is an impossibility. I have simply wasted a lot of time on something that we were all given the impression would do the job. I don't really want a refund, as long as we can get some sample code and/or full protocol specs for the head tracking that will help us implement the proper shaders and drivers into another engine. So much of this is currently up in the air, that it's hard to pin down, just how much extra work this is going to be, but I'm sure that it will be worth it, in the end.

I am not a fan of the Unity PRO limitation either, but I have to say that it was specifically implied that you would *not* be able to use the free version with the Rift. Anytime anyone directly asked people at Oculus about it (I recall a Reddit thread in particular) they said only the pro version of Unity had access to the camera warping features the Rift required. This is why I never invested much time in learning Unity. I'm thinking of focusing on the Ogre3D engine, which is completely open.

[Aabel]

I have simply wasted a lot of time on something that we were all given the impression would do the job. I don't really want a refund, as long as we can get some sample code and/or full protocol specs for the head tracking that will help us implement the proper shaders and drivers into another engine. So much of this is currently up in the air, that it's hard to pin down, just how much extra work this is going to be, but I'm sure that it will be worth it, in the end.

I don't know how you could get that impression. I have been following the Rift since it first stepped into the public with John Carmack's demo at E3, and I am new to Unity and I suspected from the start that the Rift support would be Pro only feature. You only need to look at the features of free vs. pro to realize that. Also do you seriously believe you are going to make VR software without a profiler? Good luck!

If Unity is outside of your budget you still get a SDK so you can implement the Rift into other engines or create your own, nothing is lost, you just have more work to do. In fact it might be a good idea to start getting up to speed with the Source SDK or Id tech 4, both should be more than capable of delivering a quality VR experience, just not as easily as Unity.

[Aabel]

I'm thinking of focusing on the Ogre3D engine, which is completely open.

Ogre3d is also not a game engine.

[thedoktorj]

I am not a fan of the Unity PRO limitation either, but I have to say that it was specifically implied that you would *not* be able to use the free version with the Rift. Anytime anyone directly asked people at Oculus about it (I recall a Reddit thread in particular) they said only the pro version of Unity had access to the camera warping features the Rift required. This is why I never invested much time in learning Unity. I'm thinking of focusing on the Ogre3D engine, which is completely open.

Good to know, I will look into Ogre3d. I much prefer something open source anyway.

[Aabel]

Let's be clear, a lot of us are not here to MAKE MONEY! We want to play with VR, develop some cool stuff and demos. I am a hobbyist. If at some point I could make some money off it, then great, but 1500 bucks up front or having a 300 dollar device that will be USELESS after 4 months without paying 1500 bucks is unacceptable. I have been very excited, despite all the delays, despite all the big name devs getting their kits before us kickstarter backers, despite everything, but this completely kills my excitement. I DON'T have 1500 bucks to shell out and I would not have shelled out 300 had I known that I could only use my device for 4 months before I had to pay another 1500.

This idea that the Rift is 'useless' without Unity pro is hilariously inaccurate. The Rift Dev kit comes with an SDK which you will be able to use to support other engines or write your own. Far from useless indeed. If you don't have the skills to implement Rift support using a C++ SDK then you probably shouldn't have bought one. All this gnashing of teeth over one engines support is highly irrational.

[German]

I am not a fan of the Unity PRO limitation either, but I have to say that it was specifically implied that you would *not* be able to use the free version with the Rift. Anytime anyone directly asked people at Oculus about it (I recall a Reddit thread in particular) they said only the pro version of Unity had access to the camera warping features the Rift required. This is why I never invested much time in learning Unity. I'm thinking of focusing on the Ogre3D engine, which is completely open.

Yep. It's no secret that perspective warps require an Image Effect which has always been a Unity Pro feature.

It's very frustrating to read these repeated complaints about things that are obvious if you just put a little thought into it to put two and two together and not jump to conclusions. The Oculus Rift Kickstarter is, and always has been, targeted at professional game developers and technical enthusiasts. Many of these misunderstandings and complaints come from the fact that they require a more detailed level of understanding and thought about what goes into this stuff. If you don't have or want to gain this understanding, then please, get a refund and wait for the consumer version. The entire ecosystem will be much better developed and cozy for hobby development.

I'm sorry you put a bunch of time into something you assumed would work the way you wanted it to when it hasn't and doesn't.

[CloverFields]

Please read my edit, it took me a few minutes to process the information that I was receiving. Many of us have been working with Unity and learning it for months now, primarily because it was implied that we could use the free version with the Rift. It was a shock when it came out that we will have to spend another 1500 bucks. Again, I'm NOT saying Unity should give away their full version for free. I'm not stupid, so I realize that is an impossibility. I have simply wasted a lot of time on something that we were all given the impression would do the job. I don't really want a refund, as long as we can get some sample code and/or full protocol specs for the head tracking that will help us implement the proper shaders and drivers into another engine. So much of this is currently up in the air, that it's hard to pin down, just how much extra work this is going to be, but I'm sure that it will be worth it, in the end.

Yeah, I read it. You pretty much went over everything I had said :b
Now, dont get me wrong, I do think that Unity shot themselves in the foot here, but they are on their full right of doing so.
I'm sure once the dev kits are out, the info will be more than enough for adapting engines (our writing your own) without having to reverse engineer the unity plugin. I must insist, the rift image bending is not even remotelly complex as people seem to belive it is.
Ps; Don't ever see time invested in learning how to use tools as a "waste", other engines might be different, (have a different interface, programming language, import file formats, capabilities), but the theory is the same. Even if you never use Unity again, it will sure make your life easier down the line even if you don't realize.

[thedoktorj]

I don't know how you could get that impression. I have been following the Rift since it first stepped into the public with John Carmack's demo at E3, and I am new to Unity and I suspected from the start that the Rift support would be Pro only feature. You only need to look at the features of free vs. pro to realize that. Also do you seriously believe you are going to make VR software without a profiler? Good luck!

If Unity is outside of your budget you still get a SDK so you can implement the Rift into other engines or create your own, nothing is lost, you just have more work to do. In fact it might be a good idea to start getting up to speed with the Source SDK or Id tech 4, both should be more than capable of delivering a quality VR experience, just not as easily as Unity.

I suggest that you go back and read Project Update 13 for the Kickstarter backers... Here is a quote:
"The Unity integration is getting underway with the latest Oculus SDK codebase. We’ll post another update in the near future with footage of Oculus VR inside Unity.

We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines and will keep the community posted on the progress."

[German]

Now, dont get me wrong, I do think that Unity shot themselves in the foot here, but they are on their full right of doing so.

This would only be true if the Rift was ubiquitous today, it's not. Trying to capture a percent of the developers out of the 10,000+ people who purchased devkits makes good business sense.

We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines and will keep the community posted on the progress.

Again, you are making multiple assumptions. That statement is not a promise of support in the free version. Oculus VR has not said, definitively, that they have stopped pursuing support for the free version. Unity 3D has not said they're never offering support either. Adding support to Unity Pro and giving away free trials is a quick and easy way to add Rift support immediately.

[thedoktorj]

We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines and will keep the community posted on the progress.

Again, you are making multiple assumptions. That statement is not a promise of support in the free version. Oculus VR has not said, definitively, that they have stopped pursuing support for the free version. Unity 3D has not said they're never offering support either. Adding support to Unity Pro and giving away free trials is a quick and easy way to add Rift support immediately.

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never said it was definitely stated, I said that it was implied. I was responding to someone who couldn't begin to understand how I ever go that impression. If that statement doesn't at the very least imply that there would be support in the free version, then I don't know what does. That being said, it's all a moot point, as far as I'm concerned. I will be looking into other options. My first ranty post was clearly a, "woke up to bad news and responded without thinking too much", kind of situation. If nobody here has ever posted one of those before, then you are all VAST exceptions to the normal populace.

[CloverFields]

I suggest that you go back and read Project Update 13 for the Kickstarter backers... Here is a quote:
"The Unity integration is getting underway with the latest Oculus SDK codebase. We’ll post another update in the near future with footage of Oculus VR inside Unity.

We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines and will keep the community posted on the progress."

Yup, I read that too at the time and I still saw it coming, they said they were "working" with those companies on integrating, which didn't mean it was a certainty, and it didn't look likelly to me that they could strike a deal for an "exception" Unity free feature.
They should have been open about it when negotiations fell through, thought.

[virror]

Also, we have no idea what parts will be pro only, it its only the shader or the rest of the stuff as well.
If its only the shader it will be an easy fix.

[Fluke]

Again, you are making multiple assumptions. That statement is not a promise of support in the free version. Oculus VR has not said, definitively, that they have stopped pursuing support for the free version. Unity 3D has not said they're never offering support either. Adding support to Unity Pro and giving away free trials is a quick and easy way to add Rift support immediately.

You're right, it isn't a promise. However, given two outcomes (either there will be support for the free version, or you will need the Pro version), realistically, which outcome does "We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines" suggest? I can't see how you'd read that as "you will need the pro version".

I'd guess that what's annoying people more than anything is the above quote is from is from last November. With no other updates to the contrary in the last four months, you can't blame people for being a bit miffed that the new information has only just come to light a week before the kits start shipping.

For me, it would have been nice to continue to play about with Unity. However, I've now got the UDK installed and I'll have to go with that. It's just a hobby for me, so I've not got time constraints with learning something new, but it's a shame that there isn't a non-commercial license for Unity Pro (so you could develop/release free software, but not charge for anything) at a reduced price and aimed at the hobbyist.

It would be cool if they do continue pursuing an option for integrating it in to the free version, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. I'm guessing it's something the Unity guys won't want though as they'd rather have you buy a license after your free 4 months expires, and that's perfectly understandable (even if it's gutting to us hobbyists) as they're a business after all.

[German]

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never said it was definitely stated, I said that it was implied. I was responding to someone who couldn't begin to understand how I ever go that impression. If that statement doesn't at the very least imply that there would be support in the free version, then I don't know what does.

It implies there may be support. It does not imply that there will be support out of the box. Your previous reactions were as if there was never going to be support. You just assumed there wouldn't and overreacted.

You're right, it isn't a promise. However, given two outcomes (either there will be support for the free version, or you will need the Pro version), realistically, which outcome does "We’re working closely with Epic and Unity on integrating support for the Oculus Rift in the free versions of their engines" suggest? I can't see how you'd read that as "you will need the pro version".

It's very easy to see that "you will need the pro version" if you look at it as: "What is the absolute, most simplest way for Unity 3D to add support to Unity as fast as possible?" The answer is Image Effects and Image Effects are Pro only. You can add support for a DIY Rift to Unity Pro right now by yourself with an Image Effect, if you have a license. The Rift isn't different in that respect. That Image Effect would get you about 95% there with the release devkit. It's only a quirk in the difference between the 5.6" and 7" panels that a stereoscopic camera setup in the free version wouldn't work as well in Unity free. What is a more complicated solution? Updating the free version of Unity in such a way to include native Rift support but not allow it to be exploited in other ways that aren't intended for display on the Rift. Unity 3D has their own internal development schedule that may no longer match the Rift's release, what with the delay and all.

Just because there is not out of the box support for the things Oculus VR has talked about does not mean there will not be support or that it's suddenly a big problem.

[CloverFields]

Now, dont get me wrong, I do think that Unity shot themselves in the foot here, but they are on their full right of doing so.

This would only be true if the Rift was ubiquitous today, it's not. Trying to capture a percent of the developers out of the 10,000+ people who purchased devkits makes good business sense.

I said they shot themselves, but it is yet to know to wich degree (we are talking about what anyways? 6k developers at best? developers that most likelly already know about it/have it/have tried it anyways?) :b

It makes sense, yeah:
1) Get Unity Pro for 4 months.
2) Gosh! This engine is great I could make a game with it!
3) Buys Unity pro.

But what I think would happen is:
1) Get Unity for 4 moths.
2) Gosh! After 4 months it locks itself and I have to pay 1500 bucks? Why bother? What other option do I have?
3) Uses UDK.
Case point these guys.

Being a better choice in my opinion:
1) Get Unity Free.
2) Gosh! This engine is great I could make a game with it!
3) Buys Unity pro.

But thats just the way I see it, it could very well go the other way around, I'm not a bussines man. :b
Don't get me wrong Unity looks like a GREAT engine and I plan on getting it eventually if the free version convinces me when I get a computer that runs it properly (but it won't be because of the rift, mainly for mobile development :b)

[Aabel]

The Unity fanboyism on display in this thread is astounding.

As is the irrationality of people who can't seem to grasp that professional grade tools for developing content on a brand new platform might cost a modest amount of money. You think Unity is expensive? go look at any of the Autodesk software used for 3d animation and only 3d animation, it's not even a game engine!

Don't be fooled by this "generous offer" - this announcement is the death knell of indie VR development in Unity.

Don't you think you are being just a little overly dramatic? death knell of indie VR development? really? I don't think so, it's just beginning and it's going to be amazing. Having the power of Unity at my disposal for developing in VR is going to save me and my wife so much time it's hard to put a real value on it. And yes, a demo that lasts 4x as long as normal is extremely generous, it will allow you to fully explore if Unity will work for your project.

Don't misunderstand me, I was actually super-impressed with what I was able to accomplish in Unity in a single day's time, it's a very capable and approachable engine. But consider these various facts:

So being impressed by Unity's workflow which enabled you to work on your ideas so quickly wasn't enough of a selling point for it's virtues? I don't get the gnashing over the pro trial either, that is pretty standard fare for trial licenses of software. That they even allow you to save your project while you try it is a step over many trial licenses I have used in the past.

If "Surely someone will put something up on the Asset Store!" is your counter-argument, please direct me to the place where I can download a package to enable Unity Indie support of something as commonplace as the humble Wiimote. UniWii? I said in Unity Indie. OSCuMote - Wiimote support for the free version? It's Mac only, but nice try. Hack a way around all this in some ridiculous fashion like sending commands through a Flash object and back into Unity or something? Pu-leeze. "Just use GlovePIE"? Haha, you're cute, you should give up game development for a career in stand-up comedy.

If you really want to use the Wiimote with free Unity I suggest looking into to the Managed Library for Nintendo's Wiimote I am finding C# is the way to go for everything in Unity.

As a perpetually broke hacker I've always hated Unity's "our engine is free no it isn't" approach to licensing, and upon seeing this news I was extremely glad I've been watching UDK tutorials instead of Unity tutorials. Epic hasn't made any formal announcements, but consider the relative selling points of UDK (and please note I'm not anyone's employee, the only vested interest I have here is in the commercial success of VR overall):

Great let me know how glad you are when you try making something and find out that a significant portion of the tutorials you watched were all hoplessly out of date and irrellevant. This is easily the worst thing about UDK, the REAL documentation and REAL support is reserved for UE3 licensees. Trust me it's a world of difference, and even then it's pretty sparse compared to Unity.

From a technical standpoint, UDK is one of the best game engines at any price, and "better" than Unity in several very significant ways (though the points about being unhappily tied to UnrealScript and the usability/workflow hurdles that come with all this power are well taken - for something like Ludum Dare, Unity Indie is indeed a godsend, just don't try to make a VR game with it ).

It's true that technically UDK is a great engine with great technology, but all the technology in the world doesn't mean jack if it's poorly documented (you will see what I mean about the documentation once you start to use it and realize how dated so much of it is) and extremely difficult to use. UDK's heritage is UE3 and there is no getting away from that, it is both a great strength and a great weakness. If you don't have a team of AAA developer quality dev's with the appropriate division of labor and pipeline support chances are you will never overcome the weakness of UDk's workflow to tap into it's strengths. UDK is a child of UE3 and UE3 was designed for large budget AAA teams and it shows in many respects.

UDK's documentation puts Unity to shame (God help me, I coded my little Unity demo in Boo, "The Forgotten Language") - just check out these official tutorial videos. Nearly all assets packaged with UDK are 100% free even for commercial use (it gets complicated, but the sole exceptions are apparently skeletal meshes and Jazz Jackrabbit).

This part put me out of my chair with laughter, You haven't actually used UDK to do any development yet have you? let alone anything VR related? Your opinion on UDK's documentation will change, I guarantee it.

The $99 thing is unfortunate, I'd agree, but only needs to be paid once you have a working product you're ready to sell; anyone drawing comparisons to the $1500 ransom Unity Pro demands just to get started? You're not allowed to call yourself "indie" ever again, sorry.

Wait, $1500 is a ransom but somehow 25% royalty isn't? Wow ok, also in no way could $50,000 in sales be considered serious money. Seriously paying royalties is not something I want to ever get into, it's a nasty mess and it's easily worth finding a way to scrape $1500 to be able to avoid that kind of headache and not have to worry about paying an additional 25% tax on game sales for how ever long your game is on the market.

Now, of course, Epic hasn't said for certain what's going to be involved in Rift support for UDK, but they give everything else away for nothing at all - do you really think this small bit of support that's been largely cooked up by Oculus is going to be the one thing with a price tag hanging off of it? Why Unity wants to settle for a steady revenue stream when Epic is about to eat their lunch giving an arguably superior engine away for nothing is their business, but I'm still going to call it bad business.

I doubt it's bad business, they continue to grow and improve and their support of the Rift will likely only contribute to that growth. While UDK is freely availalable few people who get it do anything with it. It's just a beast to do work with. While you don't find Unity Pro to be a good value, many Pro game developers do. In fact I don't know anyone, myself included who works in the games industry that actually dislikes Unity. Can find plenty that dislike UDK though, inspite of it's technology it's a real beast to work with and when you are just trying to get things done workflow quickly becomes the most important feature.

Pointing fingers at Oculus is beyond childish, I'm very sure they did all they could to convince Unity but Unity's knuckleheaded business model got in the way. And for the people who understand UDK's revenue cutoff system yet are still saying "OMG 25% royalty how outrageous", hopefully there will be some open-source options available

Unity's business model is not knuckleheaded, they have a level of success that is admirable and I am sure Occulus is thrilled to have their support. And, yes I agree hopefully there will be some opensource solutions.

and/or maybe you should have your $50,000+/year game empire cook up an engine of your very own? If you don't charge $1500, I might even use it!

[/quote]

Uh that isn't nearly enough revenue to develop a game engine on the level of Unity or UE3. Not even close. I hope this was a joke.

Well Tencent now owns a significant stake of Epic, so it will be interesting to see if the king of Chinese microtransaction pay to win skinner boxes dressed as games will have any impact over the pricing scheme of UDK

[Aabel]

But what I think would happen is:
1) Get Unity for 4 months.
2) Gosh! After 4 months it locks itself and I have to pay 1500 bucks? Why bother? What other option do I have?
3) Uses UDK.
Case point these guys.

It would go more like this:

1) Get Unity for 4 months.
2) Gosh! After 4 months it locks itself and I have to pay 1500 bucks? Why bother? What other option do I have?
3) Uses UDK, gets far less work done than they did in Unity, comes to the realization they need more people or need to get a support contract from Epic/Tencent to continue development in UDK.
4) Realizes that $1500 is a pittance in the world of game development and goes back to being productive with the existing team in Unity.

[virror]

Lol, this must be the worst thread in a long while, thought you guys were more grown up than this : /

[Paladia]

I very much dislike how Oculus are trying to push this as some good news. When in reality, this is really, really poor news that kills the hopes and dreams of many aspiring developers.

I'm fine with bad news, that's bound to happen. But trying to dress up the news of Unity requiring a pro license in order to develop for the Rift as something good, that's just awfully done, in my opinion.

[CloverFields]

But what I think would happen is:
1) Get Unity for 4 months.
2) Gosh! After 4 months it locks itself and I have to pay 1500 bucks? Why bother? What other option do I have?
3) Uses UDK.
Case point these guys.

It would go more like this:

1) Get Unity for 4 months.
2) Gosh! After 4 months it locks itself and I have to pay 1500 bucks? Why bother? What other option do I have?
3) Uses UDK, gets far less work done than they did in Unity, comes to the realization they need more people or need to get a support contract from Epic/Tencent to continue development in UDK.
4) Realizes that $1500 is a pittance in the world of game development and goes back to being productive with the existing team in Unity.

Also a possibility, as I said, not a bussines man :b
I just think honey instead of vinnegar would be best in this situation to atract newbies (who would flock to the cheapest then to the easiest), since I belive those who buy Unity for the Rift because they specificaly WANT to use Unity for the rift were already going to buy it anyways.
Dunno if I'm making sense here

[spire8989]

Great let me know how glad you are when you try making something and find out that a significant portion of the tutorials you watched were all hoplessly out of date and irrellevant. This is easily the worst thing about UDK, the REAL documentation and REAL support is reserved for UE3 licensees. Trust me it's a world of difference, and even then it's pretty sparse compared to Unity.

It's true that technically UDK is a great engine with great technology, but all the technology in the world doesn't mean jack if it's poorly documented (you will see what I mean about the documentation once you start to use it and realize how dated so much of it is) and extremely difficult to use. UDK's heritage is UE3 and there is no getting away from that, it is both a great strength and a great weakness. If you don't have a team of AAA developer quality dev's with the appropriate division of labor and pipeline support chances are you will never overcome the weakness of UDk's workflow to tap into it's strengths. UDK is a child of UE3 and UE3 was designed for large budget AAA teams and it shows in many respects.

This part put me out of my chair with laughter, You haven't actually used UDK to do any development yet have you? let alone anything VR related? Your opinion on UDK's documentation will change, I guarantee it.

Woah woah woah. I use both Unity and UDK. Unity professionally and UDK on a AAA game, and this is just false and misleading. The documentation for UDK is great, especially if you use the documentation part of the forum. There are tutorials posted every day by knowledgeable users. Unity has plenty of good documentation too, but you're misleading new users here.

[Aabel]

I very much dislike how Oculus are trying to push this as some good news. When in reality, this is really, really poor news that kills the hopes and dreams of many aspiring developers.

I'm fine with bad news, that's bound to happen. But trying to dress up the news of Unity requiring a pro license in order to develop for the Rift as something good, that's just awfully done, in my opinion.

No, announcing there would be NO SDK would be the real bad news, but they didn't do that did they? There is still a SDK and support already in the leading engines commercially available for Independent developers. People are way over reacting to this.

[Aabel]

Woah woah woah. I use both Unity and UDK. Unity professionally and UDK on a AAA game, and this is just false and misleading. The documentation for UDK is great, especially if you use the documentation part of the forum. There are tutorials posted every day by knowledgeable users. Unity has plenty of good documentation too, but you're misleading new users here.

UDK or UE3? If you are a UE3 licensee it's a world of difference between what you experience and what the UDK user who has never been on a licencsed UE3 production experiences.

[langmyersknow]

Wow. Talk about people having no idea what they are talking. Any serious indie developer will shell out the money for unity pro. Come on guys it's only 1500. If you were able to spend 300 on a rift the. You sure as well can get the pro version. Unless you guys are not real developer and are just super early adopters ? Even then you can put it on your credit card if you're serious about this.

And I'm pretty sure that if there is a demand unity will offer a student or educational license with all the pro features except you can't sell your game until you pay them the licence.

Anyways for all you whiners. Chill the k chef out.

[spire8989]

UDK or UE3? If you are a UE3 licensee it's a world of difference between what you experience and what the UDK user who has never been on a licencsed UE3 production experiences.

I use the UDK and I've never been on a licensed UE3 production.

I started with a book called "Unreal Development Kit Game Programming with UnrealScript: Beginner's Guide" from 2011 or so. Everything has fit together perfectly since then. Good book for programmers new to the UDK.

[ChrisJD]

This is exactly what i wrote before, but ppl seems to be to busy bashing Unity instead of searching for solutions, i good start would be to get the Vireio drivers to be compatible with the Unity engine, then strip of everything except for the warp-shader. Then we make a wrapper, put a prefab together with the stereo cameras and a proper neck model and we are good to go. Best would of course be if the Vireio hook could be freestanding and "just work" with a dll or something.

Edit: I already have Unity pro, but i still want this to work with the free version for the sake of VR : )

I also indicated how this would probably work in one of the other threads. The "no c++ plugins in free" is easily worked around by wrapping whatever c++ SDK you want to use with a C# lib. Someone wrote a guide for how to do it with the Hydra/Sixense lib earlier in this very thread.

The only other issue is the warp and their are already 3 (?) drivers that are aiming to add stereo and warp to a running game. The stereo part isn't needed for a Unity game if you setup the cameras properly yourself. So the problem is even simpler.

For the hobbiest just trying to create cool things to play with this should be a workable solution. If they suddenly create something amazing they think will sell then they can invest the $1500. As previously indicated this is a tiny amount for a full featured 3d game engine.

[Modab]

It's clear that there are several types of people who ordered the Rift; they don't break down into 2 groups, developer and "enthusiast". I see this in all the negative threads and it's wrong wrong wrong. If you don't like some aspect of the Rift, and you are willing to post on the forum about it, it does not mean you are just a consumer pretending to be a developer.

Anyway, specifically about the issue with Unity Pro:
We are developers from all walks of life. People who have never developed before but because of the possibilities of VR would like to be a developer. People who have only developed a few projects, maybe just for themselves. People who develop software, but would like to write an Oculus experience as a hobby (that's me). People who are already in the indie game crowd. People who are part of a large studio.

All of us see tremendous potential in the Rift, but we all have different capabilities. Some of us may end up just beta-ing games others develop. A lot of us will fiddle, probably unsuccessfully, at putting together fun code. Some of us already have an awesome project and a team just waiting to receive the actual kit. We all have a different amount of money. $1500 is a lot of money to a developer team of 1, who has never sold a game before, and to be honest, even if they actually make the game, will probably not sell very many copies of it.

Look at a legitimately awesome group, like CloudHead Games. They have a large team, artists, programmers, etc. Their Kickstarter project is only at 17k as I post this. $1500 (* the number of developers) is a large chunk of that money. And I am not at even close to their level of course. As just one guy, unless I make Rift development my full-time job, sign on with a studio, I have no hope of making $1500 back (let alone enough to pay the rent). My 'indie development' budget hovers right around 0.

Anyway, sorry to ramble, and maybe some of you don't think I deserve to develop software for the Rift because I am not hard-core enough to spend a measly $1500; you are entitled to your opinion