Compare Unity and C4 engine : C4 part of the test. Using the editor, and check rendering speed.

This is the second part of the compare/test of Unity 3D and C4. There is a huge difference in terms of Speed and usability. The models are the same (or close), in this C4 test I've not been able to use all the shaders I wanted, and get a perfectly translated spaceship (as you can see the bugs on the surface). I hardly get more than 10 FPS.
Check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6YpZmqhbCA for the other part of this test with Unity this time.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• unity
• c4
• 3d
• engine
• compare
• test
• review

[BaronDewy]

Some of you are either blind or complete idiots. If anyone believes nikkoid, I can guarantee you don't work in the games industry -- just some try hard kid. It is easy to see that the C4 test is using real time shadows and motion blur while Unity is not de facto the test is bull shit and not fair. I bet he tried to test it at first in a fair way but C4 won; however nikkoid either can't program in C++ therefore can't use C4 or just likes Unity better. Either way it still isn't a fair test

[northrend99]

Nikkoid is just making c4 engine look bad. Check out some of the games that other people have made.

[d4m42]

Nothing for or against C4, but for what it's worth, Voxelform (the Unity package) will be providing virtually unlimited multi-material support in the upcoming version... theoretical maximum being roughly 65K materials per palette.

[jarrod1937]

@RareVDO And i probably should give the disclaimer that i do use the C4 engine, though i am not really a fanboy, so don't think that clouds my judgement. I looked at unity and was actually pretty tempted to use it, but i found C4's overall offerings to be better suited for my project. Though i'll probably still mess with the free version of unity for fun.

[jarrod1937]

@RareVDO Along with this, you made the rather noobish mistake of comparing various game graphics between engines and judging the capabilities from there. That is obviously a very flawed method, since artwork has no correlation to technology. In fact, you could probably take a pretty old school engine and produce something very cool looking. Artwork is terrible thing to use for judging engine tech.

[jarrod1937]

@RareVDO I'm sorry,but after reading your other replies, i've come to the conclusions that you either don't know what you're talking about or you do but you're a troll. Deferred rendering systems are not the future, in fact they've been around for a very long time (late 80's/early 90's). A lot of games now are simply using it because cross-platform development has become more prevalent, and the rendering pipeline is streamlined, but it is used only for performance, not for it's capabilities.

[JesseRMeyer]

@RareVDO That's cool! It doesn't appear to have a working LOD system (which is the hard part about voxels), or advanced material shaders, so if you're comparing - C4's is better.

[JesseRMeyer]

@RareVDO Performance problems come when you want to branch out beyond your typical diffuse, spec, and normal shader - or when you want more than 8 light points to be shadow casters. If that doesn't matter to you, then cool, deferred rendering it is.

[JesseRMeyer]

@RareVDO Deferred rendering what designed to counter-act the slow processing speeds of console GPUs. It severely limits artistic shader creation (since you have limited buffers) so you're pretty much stuck with diffuse, spec, normal, glow. That's cool if you only want to use those, but eventually that won't work. I'm not saying it's crap - it certainly as its benefits. It's just not the future.

[RareVDO]

@JesseRMeyer

Since you showcase Voxel, I will up you one with a working VOXEL implementation in UNITY! (add h t t p :/ / and get rid of spaces between letters)

Realtime Voxel Demo (require Unity web plugin) c y c l o p s f r a m e w o r k . o r g / v o x e l f o r m

If you have problem with above demo use this c y c l o p s f r a m e w o r k . o r g / v o x e l f o r m / l i t e