Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Unreal Engine 4 Launching With Full Source Code

Soulskill posted about 7 months ago | from the see-the-man-behind-the-curtain dept.

Games 149

jones_supa writes "Today Epic launched Unreal Engine 4 for game developers. Supported platforms are Windows, OS X, iOS and Android, with desktop Linux coming later. The monetization scheme is unique: anyone can get access to literally everything for a $19/month fee. Epic wants to build a business model that succeeds when UE4 developers succeed. Therefore, part of the deal is that anyone can ship a commercial product with UE4 by paying 5% of their gross revenue resulting from sales to users. This gets them the Unreal Editor in ready-to-run form, and the engine's complete C++ source code hosted on GitHub for collaborative development."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This is very exciting for indie devs (3, Insightful)

glasshole (3569269) | about 7 months ago | (#46526817)

and even medium sized devs who couldn't shill out for the giant license fees before.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46526909)

UDK used to be free to play with. It's exciting until you realize there's a subscription attached and if you build a game with it 5% of the gross. That doesn't sound like much but when you stack it on top of the ~30% gross from your preferred sales channel, plus the fees from whatever other middleware you might want (Scaleform, FMOD, Bink, and Havok come to mind) and then add taxes, you're struggling to break even.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46526981)

If you can make your game 20% better and 20% faster and sell 20% more units! you come out way ahead. The value of the unreal engine is a lot more than that.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527077)

Not if you're making $0 on each unit to begin with. Learn math.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about 7 months ago | (#46527173)

then don't license everything under the sun
or buy your software upfront
or write your own engine. go start an open source game engine project that supports all the new hardware tech before it comes out and see how it works out

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (4, Insightful)

brit74 (831798) | about 7 months ago | (#46527275)

Geez, it's 5%. Stop pretending like this is an onerous burden on developers. Commercial 3d engines used to cost a flat fee in the mid-six-figure range (i.e. $250,000 to $500,000).

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

Assmasher (456699) | about 7 months ago | (#46527351)

5% of gross is a lot. 5% of net is not.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about 7 months ago | (#46527393)

epic is not as dumb as the authors of popular books licensing their works to hollywood

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 7 months ago | (#46528181)

You are bad with percentage calculations?
In terms of percentages gross and net is the same at your bottom line.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

suutar (1860506) | about 7 months ago | (#46528701)

I don't see what you mean. Assuming revenue of 100 and 40% expenses (taxes, sales channel), 5% of gross is 5 bucks, but 5% of net is only 3 bucks. 2 bucks difference on the bottom line may not sound like a lot, but scale it up and it starts to matter more.

Since it seems I'm misinterpreting what you said, could you please clarify?

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 7 months ago | (#46527885)

Its 5% of GROSS not net, so it really ought to be labeled as more than 35% because they are getting their cut before a single one of your costs is figured in.

I know being a little shop owner I don't care what you offered me if it were for a % of the gross? Kindly do piss off. oh and UDK used to be 100% Free to download and play with so its actually worse than it was before as it'll cost you a $20 to even try the thing.

I have a feeling that while they may get some indies (who don't know the difference between gross and net) a LOT of the big studios will either negotiate for a flat rate or just switch to another engine, not like there aren't great engines out there besides Unreal.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528357)

While it isn't overly onerous stop pretending it is cheap. 5% of gross is significant and for any mildly successful game will mean fees many times those mid-six-figure ranges you quoted. Consider also many games struggle to even make a profit at all already and rely heavily on the few successful ones. This pricing is quite intelligently done and is quite good, but CHEAP it aint.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528663)

The pricing is targeted at indy devs; large developers who routinely gross 8 or 9 figures on games will not be paying for it this way, and if Epic thinks they will I suspect they're in for a surprise.

The only people who will get burned by this deal in reality are the very few low-budget indy games that hit enormous success -- think Minecraft, Braid, etc. For the vast, vast majority of indy games, 5% of gross is far less than the one-time fee for licensing a top-notch engine.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

Stickiler (2767941) | about 7 months ago | (#46529651)

Actually, the 'big hit' indie developers will get burnt by this new system a shit load less than the previous UDK system. The previous UDK system was 25% net, with the first $50k free. Assuming 30% fees on top of UE fees, the new system equals the old system at $400k gross revenue, and from that point on is just flat out cheaper than the previous one. Obviously the new system gets worse the higher additional fees you have, but on the flip side, the lower your additional fees, the more attractive the new system is. Plus not to mention you are allowed to contact Epic Games to try and work out a better deal with them.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

stoborrobots (577882) | about 7 months ago | (#46529253)

I really don't know the indie game industry very well so I don't know what constitutes "mildly successful", but based on the numbers given, the break-even point is $5m-$10m (so that 5% is $250k-$500k)... So if your expected gross income from the game is less than $5 million, then this is a good deal, and if not, it's a bad deal.

Even if your expected gross is $10 million over the life of the game, if that's made up of $2 million a year for 5 years, this might be an attractive option given the following choices:

  • Spend $250,000 now, hope and pray that you make some money, gross $2 million in the first year (so that costed you 12.5%!!!!), then recoup the expense over the next few years, or
  • Spend $20 now, gross $2 million each year, then from that income spend $100,000 each year.

You end up spending more in the second situation, but you spend it after you've earned it, with the risk transferred to the vendor. Not always the right option, but often worth considering even if it's not the chosen path.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

alen (225700) | about 7 months ago | (#46527105)

or do what they did in the 90's, code your own engine for every game you make
or pay the thousands of $$$ upfront to Unity for their engine

this is where you have to make a good game and not just a copy of the latest IAP crap in the app store or some FPS. unlike 20 years ago people are willing to license you lots of software for no upfront fee and all you have to do is make an awesome game.

they are taking most of the financial risk of losing lots of money you may have invested in your project and you're still complaining?

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (4, Informative)

Adriax (746043) | about 7 months ago | (#46527243)

https://store.unity3d.com/ [unity3d.com]
$1500 gets you the pro version, or $75 a month. That's not thousands.
Android and iOS are another chunk of cash each but are not required unless you're targeting those pro features.

Of course you can use and release free if you don't need the pro features...

And what financial risk are they taking? If I make a game and it flops badly with no sales they are still ahead by my monthly subscription.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

alen (225700) | about 7 months ago | (#46527271)

$1500 per user
10 guys is $15000
then more money for the other software

you can always start up a company with a few hundreds thousand $$$ of your own money and have it fail and lose it all. Epic is giving you software to make a professional product with very little upfront cost

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

Adriax (746043) | about 7 months ago | (#46527381)

$15000 would get you a 28 person team license with unity pro.
It would also get you an infinite person team license with unity standard and $15000 in change.
Both save you the 5% royalty.

And you have yet to explain what financial risk epic games is bearing for you when you use the unreal engine.

Why are you so intent on making it look like unity is a horribly overpriced alternative?
I'm going to assume you're just an angry fanboy, because a paid shill would have better grammar.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

glasshole (3569269) | about 7 months ago | (#46527543)

You can't develop a commercial game with Unity Standard though. Even if you're a single developer, the watermarking is a but of a put off. Sure you could develop for years and then just license to purchase, but that isn't likely a 28 person teams biggest concern.

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

Adriax (746043) | about 7 months ago | (#46527773)

A watermark? I haven't built anything with unity but all I can find is as long as you make less than $100k/year you can build and release with free with just a required splash screen.

And even if unity suddenly does become an overpriced piece of junk, there's other game engines including a good number of GPL and MIT licensed free ones.
For the hypothetical 10 man team looking to break into the market with no money to spare for a big license, there are alternatives. And if they refuse to do without the extra pretty unreal rendering provides, then they probably lack the ability to compromise on other aspects of their vision and are pretty much doomed to fail.

Unreal's licensing scheme looks like nothing more than a way to squeeze some cash out of students looking to learn the engine before applying to a big company.
That and court small to mid sized studios that have the resources to actually utilize the unreal pretties, and hopefully score a popular enough release to afford a real license and cut down the royalties.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

Guru80 (1579277) | about 7 months ago | (#46528393)

There is no Watermarking in Unity. There are commercial games developed in standard Unity just not high quality games for the most part but there are some of those as well, there are plenty of high quality Unity Pro version of games. Aside from lack of real time shadows and the like the only mark is the powered by Unity splash screen during initial loading of the game that is only up a couple seconds.

A bit misleading (1)

downix (84795) | about 7 months ago | (#46528009)

That is per-person involved in development. A 1-2 person team, sure, no big deal. A 300 man AAA, no thank you.

Re:A bit misleading (2)

Adriax (746043) | about 7 months ago | (#46528445)

I really doubt a AAA with a 300 person team is going to purchase a game engine for a multi-million budget AAA title by going to a publicly accessible web store and queuing up 1 pro license + 299 team addon licenses and plunk down a credit card for that $151,000 bill.
Just guessing here, but the same sales team that processes their console licenses will probably give that AAA different licensing prices and terms for a huge order like that.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529573)

UE4 vs Unity though, UE4 wins hands down and I'm not sure if you even get the source code of unity in the pro edition.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 7 months ago | (#46528091)

NO one is forcing you to go through channels that cost 30%

Re: This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529243)

If 5% on top of 30% is too high maybe you should complain about the larger of the two numbers.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529615)

Crytek: $10 USD a month, royalty-free. Much better deal for the developers there.
http://www.cryengine.com/news/crytek-announces-its-cryengine-as-a-service-program

A 'deal' also has to consider 'value' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529669)

Some parts of twitter are lighting up because UE4 workflow and asset management systems seem a lot better than Crytek's... that can be very "valuable" to people where monthly deals are advantageous.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46526931)

I'm sure it certainly is extremely exciting for India developers, but I think even their US counterparts will benefit a lot from this arrangement. It really lowers the upfront financial bar for entering into the market, and a $20 per month fee will allow people to play around and experiment without breaking the bank.

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527107)

It's not exciting.

It's unreal!

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

brit74 (831798) | about 7 months ago | (#46527221)

Unreal has had some good licensing terms for years. Three years ago, I their offer was 25% of sales and your first $50,000 of income is free (i.e. you owed nothing to Epic if your game grossed less than $50,000).

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (1)

SuperDre (982372) | about 7 months ago | (#46527765)

Uhm.. yes it's great until you realize it's $19 or 19 euro per developer per month.. UDK is still supported, but won't get any real new options..

Re:This is very exciting for indie devs (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 7 months ago | (#46528233)

If you can not afford to pay $19 per month for a piece of software, I really don't want to know what you consider to pay your developers per hour.

A release for linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46526825)

A release for linux coming "later"? I remember this from before.... http://games.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]

Re: A release for linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46526907)

From the unreal engine website:

This first release of Unreal Engine 4 is just the beginning. In the C++ code, you can see many new initiatives underway, for example to support Oculus VR, Linux, Valveâ(TM)s Steamworks and Steam Box efforts, and deployment of games to web browsers via HTML5. Itâ(TM)s all right there, in plain view, on day one of many years of exciting and open development ahead!

Re:A release for linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527003)

The link you provided is about Unreal Tournament 3, which is a game. Unreal Engine 3 is available for Linux, so Unreal Engine 4 for Linux does not sound far fetched.

Re:A release for linux? (1)

hydrofix (1253498) | about 7 months ago | (#46527099)

Well, they did eventually port it to Firefox [mozilla.org] . The demo is down right now, but it ran fine at least on Ubuntu.

Re:A release for linux? (1)

spark89 (3569393) | about 7 months ago | (#46527609)

Linux and AAA games, holy cow... I never thought I'd live to see this moment

Re:A release for linux? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527747)

Linux and AAA games, holy cow... I never thought I'd live to see this moment

And you never will.

Re:A release for linux? (1)

spark89 (3569393) | about 7 months ago | (#46527779)

Why? Valve are making good thing for advancing Linux in to GameDev.

Re:A release for linux? (1)

Svartalf (2997) | about 7 months ago | (#46529627)

Really? I couldv'e sworn that Valve's got most of their titles over there...must've been my imagination.

Re:A release for linux? (2)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 7 months ago | (#46527715)

They promise to release it when winter comes to Game of Thrones.

Y'know what would be awesome? (5, Funny)

Voyager529 (1363959) | about 7 months ago | (#46526871)

If Epic demonstrated the capabilities of this engine by also having a first-party game released along with it. They could make it a multiplayer first person shooter, which I know is a well-trodden field, but I really think Epic could do it - especially one that includes LAN play, which seems to be poorly represented in games these days. And then, they could bundle a few of the tools with the game so that some gamers could make their own content for it, and do something really earth-shattering - user-generated DLC, FOR FREE!

If only I could think of a name for this game....

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527001)

The game could be called Engine!

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 7 months ago | (#46527153)

They could call it Quake!

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (3, Funny)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46527233)

That doesn't sound like a real thing.

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 7 months ago | (#46527321)

You know Steamworks exist right?

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527859)

Insert obligatory "Whoosh" here

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527421)

They could call it Piggy Poopballs!

Re:Y'know what would be awesome? (2)

AnontheDestroyer (3500983) | about 7 months ago | (#46527521)

It's truly unreal that they didn't do this.

I'm laughing, but also crying (1)

Phil Urich (841393) | about 7 months ago | (#46528907)

Things have gotten much better in gaming as of late, but also a hell of a lot worse. A few titles have come out lately that actually have full editors and SDKs, but it's still a far cry (hurr hurr) from where it was at one point. I loved the Unreal Engine, but there came a point (with Deus Ex 2 and the post-Raven Shield Rainbox Six games) where UE titles stopped shipping with editors, and I found myself getting very little mileage out of them. And then of course Epic went from having fairly great Linux support to having none. I went from being a rabid fan of nearly anything built with that engine to a person who didn't even bother buying the first-party titles.

If it's such a great development environment... (4, Interesting)

RDW (41497) | about 7 months ago | (#46526887)

...couldn't they use it to build UT4? Please? After 6 years, I'm getting just a little bored of UT3.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46526955)

I'm sorry to say, they've stopped needing UT as a selling point for their engine. They make money off of other people making games these days. They no longer need to make a market for themselves.

Their last generation in major engine improvements was demo'd with gears of war, not unreal tournament. The arena shooter is dead.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (2)

Kremmy (793693) | about 7 months ago | (#46526985)

The arena shooter isn't dead, it just went free to play.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 7 months ago | (#46527033)

Right, and that makes it hard to be profitable for a company like Epic. They want to produce the game, then sell it. It's all these other developers that want a never ending revenue stream and that takes constant attention. Those sheep need sheering.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 7 months ago | (#46527085)

Loadout is the best FTP game I've seen.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527247)

FTP game? Is it played in a terminal session?
 
mget ammo
put bullet

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1, Troll)

Arker (91948) | about 7 months ago | (#46527753)

Took a look at it based on your recommendation. Requires steam is a very long ways from "free."

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

fang0654 (1805224) | about 7 months ago | (#46528035)

Took a look at it based on your recommendation. Requires steam is a very long ways from "free."

How so? It's free as in 'doesn't cost anything until you start shelling out for DLC', which is pretty much the case with all FTP games.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 7 months ago | (#46528103)

That's a cool thing about Loadout. You can pay for costumes and short term double XP periods- but there are no DLC maps or weapons.

The base FTP game is very fun and it doesn't feel like you're missing anything. I tossed them $20 for some goofy outfits as a thank you.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (-1, Flamebait)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 7 months ago | (#46528087)

So you can't afford Steam? Why you dirty nasty filthy bum, what are you doing here?

Oh wait, Steam is free which means you are a FOSSIE...are you running GNUSense, the only OS bless by the holy hippie? If not YOU ARE NOT PURE Of LICENSE and should immediately purge your hard drive (which I'm sure is a dumpster dived 40Gb) by cleansing it with fire and say 50 GPL V3s while flogging yourself with CAT 5 tied to a likeness of his holiness which you have defiled with your vile impurity of license, the great squatter, the most holy of hippies, the pure unwashed friar of freedom RMS.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 7 months ago | (#46528113)

Are they charging to download Steam now?

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529257)

Aren't you dipshits ever going to get tired of this schtick? Move on with your pathetic lives already!

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46526989)

The arena shooter is dead.

How do you mean, "arena shooter?"

I presume it means something other than "multiplayer FPS game based on maps of finite size," since that would describe every single successful FPS game, er, ever.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527109)

In the old times, FPS was not about multiplayer. I stopped playing them around the time it became like that.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

emj (15659) | about 7 months ago | (#46527255)

In the old times, FPS was not about multiplayer. I stopped playing them around the time it became like that.

That would be around 1996 when Quake was released.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527411)

Quake, while having badass(for the time) multiplayer, was primarily a single player game. AFAIK, Starsiege:Tribes was the first real "arena" FPS although arguably it's team-only based gameplay disqualifies it. Then UT and then Q3A a year later. Of course, it does say something rather sad when the first UT game is still by far the best.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (5, Informative)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46527197)

No, arena shooters are ones where you spawn in random locations, run to grab guns and gear, move relatively quickly, and tend to have little incentive to not shoot(such as long reload times, precision weapons, stealth). With a tendency towards more explosive weaponry and "arena" styled battlefieds. It's a subgenre thing.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46527375)

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying.

Personally I agree - UT was fun when it came out, but the concept gets pretty boring after a tick. Then again, I've noticed a number of newer games, mostly "freemium," that seem to follow at least a modified version of the arena shooter model - Dust 514 and HAWKEN immediately spring to mind (although, to be fair, I haven't actually played HAWKEN, so I could be dead wrong about that one).

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

phorm (591458) | about 7 months ago | (#46527851)

"I haven't actually played HAWKEN, so I could be dead wrong about that on"

You're not. It's pretty much an arena shooter with some of the addition option of some more modern FPS modes (capture the silo, etc), and exp-gathering to build upgrades (with the option to pay for them instead, of course).

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about 7 months ago | (#46527519)

Games akin to Quake 3 Arena, presumably.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

future assassin (639396) | about 7 months ago | (#46527011)

Just go to Xonotic, download it http://www.xonotic.org/ [xonotic.org]

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (2)

Nimey (114278) | about 7 months ago | (#46527193)

Meh, why not fire up UT2004? IMO that's the best of the series.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527465)

agree. I love Battlefield 4 (and 2, and other games), but when I really think about it I don't think it really gets much better than UT2004.

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (2)

jrronimo (978486) | about 7 months ago | (#46527473)

Totally agreed. My friends and I still play UT2k4 on a weekly basis. With the Heaven of Relics mutator and some of the great Community Bonus Pack maps, it's still fun, ten years on. As it came out March 16, 2004, happy Tenth Anniversary UT2k4!

Re:If it's such a great development environment... (1)

Saffaya (702234) | about 7 months ago | (#46527401)

Speaking of which, I usually end up playing the original UT while waiting for my online games to update.
With Oculus Rift.

And it still is great fun after all these years.

Release for Firefox? (1)

hydrofix (1253498) | about 7 months ago | (#46527071)

Really exicited to see if they port this to Firefox. They have already ported [mozilla.org] the version 3 of the Unreal Engine to Firefox, using OpenGL for graphics and Asm.js for code. The speed difference compared to the native version should be very small to non-existent, since Asm.js is statically compiled.

Licensing if my game cost $0 ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527119)

So if I make a game from this and release it for free, 5% of my $0 revenue is $0? Or are there licensing stipulations that prevent this.

Just the developers of the game would pay a monthly fee. The non-engine part of the game could be open source. It wouldn't be desirable for those who want to build something truly open(GPL free), but would be a nice hybrid for those who would like to leverage a commercial engine.

Re: Licensing if my game cost $0 ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527175)

That's correct, there's no royalty charge for free games.

Re:Licensing if my game cost $0 ? (4, Funny)

Rhacman (1528815) | about 7 months ago | (#46527331)

So if I make a game from this and pay people to play it, will Epic cut me a check for 5% of what I'm paying the players?

pretty sure min (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527789)

pretty sure it's 5% of _positive_ income. Btw if you pay them $100 and they pay you $5 you still are losing $95.
not a good business model.

Re:pretty sure min (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528101)

Not if you resell me the copy I sold you for -$100. Integer underflows are fun!

So, basically the cost is $19 (1)

edxwelch (600979) | about 7 months ago | (#46527135)

So, basically you can just pay $19 for one month and then cancel your subscription

Re: So, basically the cost is $19 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527301)

We're going to provide well over $20 in value to subscribers every month with updates and other stuff. You don't have to take our word for it, you can cancel any time.

Re: So, basically the cost is $19 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528669)

What's stopping someone from subscribing one month a year just for the updates?

Re: So, basically the cost is $19 (2)

ynp7 (1786468) | about 7 months ago | (#46529311)

Nothing?

According to the UE4 EULA: "However, cancellation of your Subscription will not affect your rights under the License with respect to any Licensed Technology you have already downloaded under the License."

https://www.unrealengine.com/e... [unrealengine.com]

Unity eating Unreal's lunch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527191)

I'm guessing this is to counter the huge chunk of the indie market that Unity has eaten?

C# is still much better to code in for game logic. I'm guessing this engine is still pure C++?

Re:Unity eating Unreal's lunch? (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46527253)

I'm not sure what you mean. If you're developing a fast-and-easy game in unreal, you use unrealscript. If you're a hardcore game developer doing fancy things anyways... you're going to use C/C++.

C#'s role in unity is very much like unrealscript's role in unreal. And as a c# developer, I won't hesitate to say that unrealscript actually has features oriented towards game development.

Re: Unity eating Unreal's lunch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527365)

Oh yeah forgot about unrealscript

My impression from messing with some unreal mods is that unrealscript was only for some logic and most of the logic was hidden away, presumably in the C code. Maybe I'm mistaken?

Re: Unity eating Unreal's lunch? (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46527481)

Nope, that's pretty much it.

Re:Unity eating Unreal's lunch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528461)

>And as a c# developer, I won't hesitate to say that unrealscript actually has features oriented towards game development.

Yeah but it's YASL (yet another scripting language) to learn. In theory, we're all 31337 software engineers who lean new languages for fun over the weekend but, in practice, that kind of crap gets kinda old after a while.

Maybe that's why only young people work in the games industry?

Seems a reasonable approach (1)

Borgmeister (810840) | about 7 months ago | (#46527839)

From a laypersons perspective (by that, I mean not a programmer) this strikes me as reasonable.They are creating a sophisticated tool (is anyone going to dispute that it is, in fact, somewhat sophisticated?) for what appears to me an eminently reasonable figure, and a small haircut at the end of the process. You don't really want an EA hegemony forever surely?

Re:Seems a reasonable approach (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528139)

5% of gross turns out to be 30-50% of net gain for most developers (unless you're Blizzard or EA). That's what's causing the controversy.

A smart move for Epic (2)

downix (84795) | about 7 months ago | (#46528067)

Epic's terms for 4 are quite affordable, that's why we made the move to 4 from three for City of Titans after our Kickstarter last year. These terms are very positive for those seeking to deal with a top end game engine which is, simply, a joy to work with.

Unreal Tournament 4? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528317)

Will this herald a new Unreal Tournament 4 game? I hope they go back to what made UT 1999 so cool. The game physics and the speed of gameplay needs to be kept as well as tweaks to the map editor to make it even more playable.

Re:Unreal Tournament 4? (1)

Fancia (710007) | about 7 months ago | (#46529637)

The only (IIRC) UE4 game publicly known to be in development from Epic is Fortnite [wikipedia.org] , a survival sandbox game that sounds kinda like Sourceforts.

Meanwhile (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529165)

Sudden shortage of underpants around Unity's HQ

I'll wait until Linux support is out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529607)

I'll be more excited when they come up with the Linux support. Seriously. It's great- so long as an Indie can push to Desura and Steam...and can target anything including SteamOS with this stuff.

Until then, it's nifty- but useless to me.

Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46529811)

with desktop Linux coming later

Oh good, "coming later"! Just like UT3 for Linux is "coming later". I suppose I should go and start paying now, like when I preordered UT3 to play it on Linux, right?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?