A better game engine ?

[fatihsendur]

I know it's hell a lot of work, but would the team consider getting rid of Unity ? Considering the game has made some significant profit and there are a lot more players on laptops today, I don't think it's a bad investment ( in labour and time ).

[FraggleRock Ampersand]

Originally posted by fatihsendur:

Also, I myself would do it if I were one of the devs. just because this game deserves it.

If you were one of the devs you'd have more sense than to suggest this.

[PakaNoHida]

Originally posted by fatihsendur:

I know it's hell a lot of work, but would the team consider getting rid of Unity ? Considering the game has made some significant profit and there are a lot more players on laptops today, I don't think it's a bad investment ( in labour and time ).

Switching engines is an utter nightmare for any company, especially midstream.

Unless you actually work or did work in the industry you really have no idea what kind of overhaul you are asking them to do.

[Blink4aMoment]

This post is insane, what you're proposing would likely kill this game.

[jonnin]

I don't get the laptop gaming thing? They cost more for the same capability as a desktop, and you can't upgrade them as easily (no space), run hotter, often lack wired internet, and have other issues (reduced life span, often). I can't make the connection between spending more on a worse machine and then complaining about its capability ?!
I just got a new machine, and my old one was a 1070 graphics card from about 6 years ago. It ran this game just fine, with a rotating hard drive (no ssd at all, too high back then), only 32gb ram, old generation cpu chip, etc. I upgraded because it was dying of old age not because there was anything it could not run reasonably well... and again, that is 6 years old which is a decently long lifespan for a gaming desktop. Graphics cards were high when I got the old one, too :(

[Moonshine Fox]

Originally posted by jonnin:

I don't get the laptop gaming thing? They cost more for the same capability as a desktop, and you can't upgrade them as easily (no space), run hotter, often lack wired internet, and have other issues (reduced life span, often). I can't make the connection between spending more on a worse machine and then complaining about its capability ?!
I just got a new machine, and my old one was a 1070 graphics card from about 6 years ago. It ran this game just fine, with a rotating hard drive (no ssd at all, too high back then), only 32gb ram, old generation cpu chip, etc. I upgraded because it was dying of old age not because there was anything it could not run reasonably well... and again, that is 6 years old which is a decently long lifespan for a gaming desktop. Graphics cards were high when I got the old one, too :(

Because not everyone has the space for a dedicated full desktop rig. Others are simply on the go and so don't have the ability to regularly game from a home desk. And others simply like the feel of a laptop better, which is perfectly valid.

[The Time Traveler]

"Hey guys i was just wondering if you could rebuild your entire game to work better with my old outdated used garbage hardware?"

No.

[Indvstrial Black]

Never had a problem with this game running hot. Tried it on 3 of my laptops. MSI GE60 2PE Apache (has only one fan) ASUS G751 (but this runs cool no matter what you do to it cause it has a heatsink that looks like a truck radiator) and my latest ASUS STRIX Scar2.

Other unity games I've had heat issues with but, not Valheim. Seems well optimized, and imo a good pick for a game engine for a small studio. It always sounds nice to build your own engine, and I know it can be done quick but, scope creep, assets and platform support become bloated extra time.

[eh why not]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Unity Engine. It is powerful enough to make any kind of game you want and at the same level as some of the alternatives. Unity only gets a bad rep because it is so easy to use that most people put out absolute trash with it.

There are plenty of games using Unreal that are put out by established studios that run like hot garbage in comparison to this.

[Sabaithal]

We're not here to engage in the "laptop vs desktop" thing AGAIN. Its been done other places on the internet, discuss it there. We're discussing the possibility of changing the engine.

I stand by my opinion that changing the engine would cause far more problems than it solves.

[Ptolemy]

Originally posted by Shaggy:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Unity Engine. It is powerful enough to make any kind of game you want and at the same level as some of the alternatives. Unity only gets a bad rep because it is so easy to use that most people put out absolute trash with it.

There are plenty of games using Unreal that are put out by established studios that run like hot garbage in comparison to this.

I like Unity, but it does have some inherent performance issues due to the way it operates. (Has to rely on e.g. .NET framework for some functions where other engines can perform them directly.)

Edit: I'm in no way agreeing that it would be a good idea for the team to completely rebuild Valheim in another engine, though.

[gerzald]

Can you make a randomized map[ look as good with the unreal engine? Can you make a randomized map at all?
Sorry you are a gamer with a laptop. Who does such a thing?

[eh why not]

Originally posted by Ptolemy:

Originally posted by Shaggy:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Unity Engine. It is powerful enough to make any kind of game you want and at the same level as some of the alternatives. Unity only gets a bad rep because it is so easy to use that most people put out absolute trash with it.

There are plenty of games using Unreal that are put out by established studios that run like hot garbage in comparison to this.

I like Unity, but it does have some inherent performance issues due to the way it operates. (Has to rely on e.g. .NET framework for some functions where other engines can perform them directly.)

Edit: I'm in no way agreeing that it would be a good idea for the team to completely rebuild Valheim in another engine, though.

You can go around that with un-managed code and using C++, but even w/o workarounds Unity is plenty fast enough for any type of game you could wish to create. Sure using C# and managed code does run slightly slower, but with today's processors and using Jobs you won't even notice any real performance loss.

Unreal has it's own set of drawbacks: short of the devs creating their own proprietary engine (add 2-5 years for a dev team this size) Unity is as good of an option as any.

Not trying to argue just pointing out Unity is a very capable engine.

[Ptolemy]

Originally posted by Shaggy:

Originally posted by Ptolemy:

I like Unity, but it does have some inherent performance issues due to the way it operates. (Has to rely on e.g. .NET framework for some functions where other engines can perform them directly.)

Edit: I'm in no way agreeing that it would be a good idea for the team to completely rebuild Valheim in another engine, though.

You can go around that with un-managed code and using C++, but even w/o workarounds Unity is plenty fast enough for any type of game you could wish to create. Sure using C# and managed code does run slightly slower, but with today's processors and using Jobs you won't even notice any real performance loss.

Unreal has it's own set of drawbacks: short of the devs creating their own proprietary engine (add 2-5 years for a dev team this size) Unity is as good of an option as any.

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing.

[Ketamarine]

100% agree Unity holds back so many great games from achieving their true potential. Battletech was so close to being a masterpiece, but can't run properly on any machine due to limits of unity engine.

Valheim has all the same problems. The bigger you build and more you modify the world, the more janky it gets. Even 2 players in coop in tiny bases can get massive frame drops, rubber banding and lag spikes.

Moving to something like unreal that was built for multiplayer gaming would be a great investment of the tens of millions of dollars this game has brought in. Otherwise they are just going to keep having to spend all their time bug squashing and band aiding over the trash netcode this game is built on forever... never to get any meaningful content out the door.
If they drop like 3 recipes and a handful of bricks for their first update this game will be dead for good.

[eh why not]

Originally posted by Ketamarine:

100% agree Unity holds back so many great games from achieving their true potential. Battletech was so close to being a masterpiece, but can't run properly on any machine due to limits of unity engine.

Valheim has all the same problems. The bigger you build and more you modify the world, the more janky it gets. Even 2 players in coop in tiny bases can get massive frame drops, rubber banding and lag spikes.

Moving to something like unreal that was built for multiplayer gaming would be a great investment of the tens of millions of dollars this game has brought in. Otherwise they are just going to keep having to spend all their time bug squashing and band aiding over the trash netcode this game is built on forever... never to get any meaningful content out the door.
If they drop like 3 recipes and a handful of bricks for their first update this game will be dead for good.

That is not a problem with the Unity Engine, but a problem with the way the devs have handled the networking / server and the terrible way they did their editable heightmap. Altogether, item per item just building I get about the same performance hit I get with any survival game that allows building.