While Unity isn't yet known as an MMORPG engine, I'd have to say Unity in theory for the simple fact that its allowing Visionary Realms to create an MMO worth playing. I can't think of any better credentials than that. Its also responsible for several other indie MMOs that I might even try if they launch before Pantheon.
Really depends what I was gunning for. Unity or UE4 would be most obvious choices - they're well known, free (for the most part), mature, and there are plenty of devs out there already familiar with them. Unity would be the easiest for me since I'm already a C# developer, but I'd be comfortable with either. Hero Engine is another obvious choice, although I probably wouldn't go with that. For networking, probably Photon or Raknet. I believe Eve's Valkyrie is using UE4, and Pantheon is using Unity, obviously. So I don't think you could go wrong with either.
Comparing Unity to Unreal4 (only two i kind of barely know about) I think Unity is more accesible for more people. Especially for web developers trying to make the leap since everyone and their mom writes at least some Javascript.
I'm a C# MVC guy so i can appreciate either option in Unity. I just don't see the Unreal4 engine being approachable for someone with limited education or experience (looked to be C++ only). That being said i'm sure there is a whole boatload of young self-taught iOS developers who might debunk my theory.
kinidin said: I just don't see the Unreal4 engine being approachable for someone with limited education or experience (looked to be C++ only). That being said i'm sure there is a whole boatload of young self-taught iOS developers who might debunk my theory.
To be fair, someone with limited education or experience shouldn't even be entertaining the idea of developing an MMO. But certainly a .NET developer could do worse than go with Unity, although really it's a wash IMO. UE4 has blueprints, which are pretty easy to pick up, but with that said, you have several options as far as server-side stuff goes. Since you won't be trusting anything your client sends anyway, the real meat and potatoes is going to be on the server, and that theoretically could be any language you choose, assuming there are libraries available for your networking middleware of choice.
itvar said:To be fair, someone with limited education or experience shouldn't even be entertaining the idea of developing an MMO. But certainly a .NET developer could do worse than go with Unity, although really it's a wash IMO. UE4 has blueprints, which are pretty easy to pick up, but with that said, you have several options as far as server-side stuff goes. Since you won't be trusting anything your client sends anyway, the real meat and potatoes is going to be on the server, and that theoretically could be any language you choose, assuming there are libraries available for your networking middleware of choice.
All good points Itvar.
Nice replies!
Unity and Unreal are both very good engines among a wide range that is currently out there, Unity has definitely allowed us to be more versatile and work as a small start-up team to get the game to where it is today and overall it is a pretty awesome engine once you get down under the hood, it is also updating and evolving at a pretty nice rate ;)
I honestly don't know a lot about engines. I know many can do some amazing things. Not sure which engine goes with which game. The graphics I see in teasers of Pantheon looks good.
Not sure what Blizzard uses, but their games are clear and feel Very polished. ( I know, its a different kind of graphics, but it still looks good for such an old game.)
I know an MMORPG is really hard to make. I know a lot of work goes into what the players see, if they stop and appreciate such things, like I do. (Did that a lot in GW2 for the 3 months that I played it, it was beautiful in places.)
I am curious about something. Why, in 2016, can't games that looks as good as the animation used in this commercial:
That (above) is a commercial for an iPhone game. But the graphics used in the animation, not the actual game play, in this video would be amazing looking if things were that sharp and detailed in an MMO.
Yes, I know the iPhone game is all stylized. and Pantheon is not, but I would play a stylized if the graphics were that sharp. I am just using that commercial animation as an example as to hard sharp I want graphics to be.
Or, something as real looking as Destiny.
GW2 looked decent but I would love a game so detailed thta spell effects could be like the black puff of smoke when the rock bursts, or the fireballs from the wizard girl in the commercial.
I know when you have Lots of players all over the place, it is taxing on the CPU and GPU and all that. I am just curious why in 2016 games haven't already reached that level of detail I am talking about.
I would love to see paw prints in the dust of a dungeon floor, a piece of parchment stirring between a couple of books on a dusty shelf behind a mob and know it could be a spell without having to have it Glow or have stars floating off it.
Are graphic cards so bad they couldn't handle it? What is the bottle neck?
I would like to see it as an Ultra settings in a game. Ultra means you need 4.0Ghz i7 and SLI 980's or something to run it smoothly.
CGI is pre-rendered so it doesn't require any processing power to display. Rendering things in realtime is why you don't see graphics like these in-game. Single player games will also always look better than MMOs within the same era because they can build the game from the ground up to look amazing. When designing an MMO, your first thought graphically is how you need to be able to potentially render hundreds of players with unique animations, facial morphs, and equipment simultaneously.
Pantheon will be beautiful but it's not going to be as beautiful as The Witcher 3. It's also not going to be as beautiful as CGI even, say, a decade ago. That's just how it is.
For what it's worth, Blizzard uses their own in-house engine for World of Warcraft. EQ and EQ2 also used in-house engines. This is as opposed to using a third party engine. Vanguard, for instance, used Unreal 2, iirc.
Liav said:CGI is pre-rendered so it doesn't require any processing power to display. Rendering things in realtime is why you don't see graphics like these in-game. Single player games will also always look better than MMOs within the same era because they can build the game from the ground up to look amazing. When designing an MMO, your first thought graphically is how you need to be able to potentially render hundreds of players with unique animations, facial morphs, and equipment simultaneously.
Pantheon will be beautiful but it's not going to be as beautiful as The Witcher 3. It's also not going to be as beautiful as CGI even, say, a decade ago. That's just how it is.
For what it's worth, Blizzard uses their own in-house engine for World of Warcraft. EQ and EQ2 also used in-house engines. This is as opposed to using a third party engine. Vanguard, for instance, used Unreal 2, iirc.
The screen shots, videos, and the pics of the triple screen monitors on VR facebook page look great. I am happy, the graphics do look really nice so far.
I am just wishing for an MMO with Witcher 3 detail. I hope tech and computers will allow me to play such an mmo someday, even if its 10 years from now.