Hello there, I was wondering what would be the best and easiest game engine to use for a simple 3D game. Something similar to Temple Run. It doesn't have to be C++(though that would be preferred).
I will be deploying the game for both iOS and Android.
You main choices will come down to Unreal Engine 4 and Unity 5 in my opinion. Both have their pros and cons depending how you look at it.
Unreal Engine 4
Pros
- Uses C++ and Blueprints (Visual Scripting). You can use either one or both to create a game.
- Has a large number of built in tools (Level editor, Animator, Particle editor, etc.)
- All the tools in the engine are top notch compared to the other middle ware engines in my opinion.
- Highly active community and developers (Both with getting answer and with pushing new features and bug fixes)
- Just recently made some major improvements to their mobile development.
- No upfront payment and all features out of the box (A royalty of 5% on all quarterly sales over $3,000 per project)
Cons
- Can be a steep learning curve when you are first starting out.
- Lacks good structured learning materials like published books, etc. since it is still quite new.
- Its asset store is still developing (Though it is starting to get a good number of assets in it)
Unity 5
Pros
- Easier learning curve for beginners
- Uses C# (Can be a pro or con depending on the user)
- Large number of learning material available already (Books, tutorials, etc.)
- Large community backing
- Asset store with a large number assets available.
Cons
- Lacking in built in tools compared to UE4 (Though you can use 3rd party tools)
- Not everything comes free out of the box (If you need non free features be ready to pay up either $1,500+ or $75+/month)
- Their bug fix and feature updates have been shady in the past. Many bugs go unfixed for long periods of time. Note this is from past experiences I am not sure if they have cleaned up their act now that there is more competition.
I will admit I am a bit biased towards Unreal Engine 4 since I prefer the engine myself and haven't used Unity 5 for awhile, so these are just my personal pros and cons. Your best bet is to take both engines for a test drive and see which you prefer more and then commit to it. Learning to effectively use an engine will take some time (Months) but it is well worth it. Anyways hopefully this helped a bit.
I'm fairly interested in this too. Didn't know UE4 came with everything out of the box. I've had Unity for a bit of time, but never came up with time to study up on it. Might try UE4 as well.
This would be a con for Unity 5 as well wouldn't it? Unity 5 is even younger than UE4.
While it is true that Unity 5 came out around the same time as UE4, it didn't do any drastic changes to how you develop/script while developing a Unity game. Whereas Unreal Engine 4 is a complete overhaul over the previous version.
So while sure their might not be many published material for Unity 5 specifically all the previous Unity 4 material should work just fine with teaching the basics of the engine. As for Unreal Engine 4 some of the stuff can indeed be learned from previous UDK books since it does follow similar designs for certain things, most of the engine is completely different and the old UDK books wouldn't be as helpful.
TLDR: Epic did a complete overhaul with Unreal Engine 4 so a lot of things changed from the previous engine so the old books won't work as well, whereas Unity didn't change the engine design much with Unity 5.
The biggest change is probably the removal of their scripting language and the introduction of blueprint. Which even without a book i'd say it'd be easier to use that than the previous scripting language with a book. Content creation is probably similar, other than that it really doesn't matter how much an overhaul something like the renderer got. Shaders are created using a similar visual style scripting method as blueprint.
UE4 was released long before Unity 5, it was only around the time Unity 5 was released that it removed the $10/month fee or whatever it was to gain access to the engine.
The biggest change is probably the removal of their scripting language and the introduction of blueprint. Which even without a book i'd say it'd be easier to use that than the previous scripting language with a book. Content creation is probably similar, other than that it really doesn't matter how much an overhaul something like the renderer got. Shaders are created using a similar visual style scripting method as blueprint.
UE4 was released long before Unity 5, it was only around the time Unity 5 was released that it removed the $10/month fee or whatever it was to gain access to the engine.
I think you are understating the amount of change that moving from UnrealScript/Kismit to C++/Blueprints generates. It is hard enough to learn a game engine like UE4 when you have no experience with engines like it, it is even harder to learn it when the book you are using is teaching using a completely different language and tools.
Though not really trying to get into a debate over the changes over UDK to UE4, as I said this is just my own pros and cons. Others might have a completely different list.
You don't have to use a book, just cause there isn't a published book doesn't mean there aren't other resources you can use. It being so accessible pretty much anyone can get the engine without paying a cent, there is a community around it creating these resources. You don't need to use C++, almost everything can be done in blueprint. The problem occurs when you create something that needs to be optimized. There are blogs of indie devs switching to UE4 from unity and they go on to say just how easy blueprint is to use. You underestimate just how easy a visual style scripting language is to use. Let alone with the visualization of how the script is working when debugging. It goes beyond any other visual scripting i've seen/used.
Yes and i'm just stating that i don't agree with it and it might be something someone would want to consider. Pretty much everything else i agree with.
Unreal Engine is like an Swiss army knife with a diamond edge. UE4 is the total decked out package, UE4 has always been one of the best and became even more popular when they made it free to the public (with royalties of course). UE4 has an amazing renderer but a knife is just as good as its holder. UE4 with its great scripting is still a steep learning curve and the requirements to run it might be a problem for those who have a not powerful computer.
Unity however is a light engine with an good looking graphics and rendering. Unity can run on most devices and has (pretty sure) more platform support than UE4, even though you said your building for mobile unity is a good way to go. Most mobile apps are usually made in Unity. Unity is entirely free although it does have assets you can buy from the store. As of Unity 5 every pro feature has been integrated into the community version whereas in previous versions you had to get the pro version for every feature. Nowadays you can live without unity Pro as it is mainly all the big stuff such as analytic and cloud(But that sexy black unity pro skin is amazing) Unity is the better choice for me when it comes to mobile a its light and more open community wise. Their API is easy and creative and they support 3 languages (C#,JS,Boo) in which you can use all 3. Their are many things you can do with Unity, Unity has Mecanim animation which i personally favor but don't entirely like. Unity even comes with SSAO although I wont entirely recommend it for Mobile unless you need it. their are a lot of beautiful games made with Unity such as Monument valley and its easy to make your own plugins
It all comes down to what you need, If your thinking of selling your game as a individual or small team Unity is your choice, (UE4 has royalties in which they take 5% of your earning) Unity can be used as much and freely as you want. You can always use the free version but if your a commercial entity that makes a gross annual income of over 100,000 USD then you will have to buy a pro license.
It's all up to you and what you want
but i do have to say, a small knife can be just as sharp as a big one.