UDK?

what is your idea about UDk,A7,UNITY3D?

you cant compare udk with a7 or unity. It's AAA level engine but requires an AAA level team too

yes a7 is more easy to use
udk have to pay 2500$ per game and 25% comission for all the sell
unity3d appear to be the best but for me is to much complicated
the only think will be more better A7 is a webplayer

UDK is actually $99 for a commercial license for a game, and 25% royalties for sales above $5000.

A7 is way more straight-forward, but UDK has stacks of built-in stuff for people who don't like to program some stuff themselves.

I haven't downloaded Unity Free yet.

Jibb

webplayer is interesting for small game and puzzle game but not fitted for an fps or an rpg. So maybe many developers claim doing innovation instead of graphics but for me even if unity has great tool I haven't seen a single game capable of doing what the ue3 showed many time in many game ( gow, batman, bioshcok etc ..; )
I only see iphone dev. I've to say to all iphone fans, ther eis no real point doing game on iphone since there is too much pollustion on apple store to get your game sold.

So don't say unity is best because it has really specific features like webplayer, but don't support shadow for example.

May i correct you? Does only support static shadows in the free version but realtime shadows in the pro version.

Lightmap you mean ? I haven't seen anything like that in the features but it's a quite possible. I know there is a weird system with decal but it didn't make real sense to me. But yeah for the pro version it supports real-time and render to texture. But the problem is most users and new users will use the free version or did use the indie one.

About the lightmap can we bake it in level ? ( It would make a huge difference for me )

Yes sorry i mean lightmaps. It's not a built-in feature yet (afaik) but there are several scripts in the forum and in the wiki to use an ingame lightmapper and someone is currently creating a BSP creating tool with lightmap support:

http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=35498

The decal system you mean uses a texture projector to project blob shadows for example.

And you can always bake your shadows in a model tool too if you know the lightning settings for your scene. Of course it's more work but well, it's the free version of Unity.

Does UDK has import from 3DMAX/MAYA/ZBRUSH?

and

what is output?pc/psp/ps3/xbox?

thanks.

why does one not check the site of UDK and features page but asks about it here?

only pc. imports from max

i checked the site.but there is not any info about it!!

do u have the link?

Google your friend and helper

http://www.udk.com/features.html

udk doese work on any graphic card?

appear only from 3.0 shaders is the minimal requirement

no it don't work with any 3d graphics cards. you can import meshes from max maya blender and xsi. Maya ple has it's own plug in too. You may tru milkshape. I import single mesh collada too.

http://udk.com/

i wouldnt say that, a web player could do alot for you in terms of marketing, why make a demo that people dont wanna download when you could just have it load in a web page, much more viewers, have you seen interstellar marines from unity? theyre doing great stuff using the webplayer...

i personally would only use it to get public attention

UDK is as good as it gets. Most of the top games have been made with it , and we now have this technology available to us at a dirt cheap prize. What more can one ask for ? For Epic to come to our houses and make the games for us ? NOTHING compares to Unreal Engine , Other than something like Cry Engine , but gamestudio , unity , torque , as good as they are , they are NOTHING next to Epic's beautiful masterpiece of an engine.

And it is very easy to use. I am just learning it for a one week and just a few moments of the day ( too busy this days ), and look what I am already able to make:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86uU4OKR3SU

just wondering why you were polluting every forum to show off your work. I mean there is nothing incredible and more over I Still don't see the point of show of random test. It's the third forum you've added this vid. It is just annoying.

Third forum?? Are you crazy? Count 2. But I am not going to explain this to you.
Hum, you don't see the point?! Good for you.
I thought that this topic was about UDK...
Anyway. Have a nice day!!!

I like this video, you achieved a lot in a week.

second that. sued.. go to london or paris

My point is: You can do a lot with this tool very fast. Also, for all that you see on that video, I had to code nothing at all.
So far, I am enjoying to work with Udk. I wish I could have more time to explore it more.

I like the videos aswell, good achievement within a week. Just ignore sued. Sharing is caring, keep it up!

I still don't see the point polluting three forum just for your own experiment or achievements. You don't know how to count that make three forum with those videos.
I hope this won't end up like you engine in xna 2 years ago where you showed up your first achievement on the same forums and then just drop the project. But you can just ignore me, but so far I still don't see anything worth sharing. you are not giving any explanation on your experiment or experience working on the engine except that "you can do a lot very fast" ,but just showing vague skills.


@ Ello don't be such a kid. And yea I own a flat in Paris and I'm living in London, I share my time between those two city and I'm doing pretty fine. What about you? are you back on earth ?

sueds, do you know me from somewhere? Where do you read that I drop my XNA engine?
Getting off this topic, in 2 years I already developed on xna WYSIWYG editor, 2 little engines, and I am working on my 3rd one that can do almost everything an AAA engine can do, except physics ( not my area ).
So, as you can see, you are a little outdated outdated about what I do.
Man, who are you to hope anything from me? And why do I have to give any explanation for you about what I do or not?
Once again, if you still don't see the point, I am not going to tell you.
Don't you have anything else to do?

@Guys, sorry about that.

I think you didn't understand me right but as you said it's off topic. I'm just saying this is not an wip and I didn't to be mean or anything. but don't brag about your wysiwyg editor because I know what you did on quickstart engine. I Don't expect anything from you except maybe stopping to create wip on discussion topic that's all. And when you just do it on three different I'm sorry but that annoying.

See as you don't know nothing about what I do? The editor that I was talking about is not for quickstart engine. After that one that was not finished, I was asked to make a new one for another engine.
Anyway...
Why in the world should I prevent myself to post in foruns that are not from the same company and that are not connected to each other? Man, is that annoys you, just don't read. Simple as that!!!

@Sorry once again guys. i will shut up now.

the POINT of the video was to show that he can do ALOT with the engine without actually having alot of skill, and the video is well in place for anyone who wants to know about how fast it would be working with UDK and nothings wrong with posting in forums, so i dont see the point of why your going against him

and PLEASE DONT REPLY to this, the thread isnt about that, its about udk, so now back on topic, i think its a rather good engine, well duh but am not entirely sure if its best for indie use, am thinking most of the games will look the same and the most we'll see are tonnes of FPS mods coming from it, i cant say much until i play with it..

as for unity, the world editor seems fine but until i locate the scripting interface and see how that handles everything, i cant say much but for me right now it just seems like a world editor, i'll be playing with it though

A7 can do what i want its just that the pipeline is soo annoying and you have to find workarounds for what should be simple tasks and the moment you post a feature request to ease it, you start hearing replies like "you can easily do that by doing this, then that, then this again" its a pain especially for new users, there are some simple things that are holding GS back and even the name is one of them "gamestudio does not sound like something you wanna show a publisher"

it sounds like "gamemaker" or some lame ass hobby engine but who cares about my rant anyways right, maybe because they dont see alot of huge projects from the community so theres no need to add much, all they get is random feature requests by users screaming "we need this!" then when its released, they try it in a test level for 2 days, get bored then move on... tsk

i will be changing engines if i get up to speed with unity, christian already did and am sure alot of the users here would also if they grasped it

@XnaSorcerer @Sueds :
Don't forget , the point is to take lot of pleasure and fun making things, even if it's only little demos.
I think XnaSorcerer had lot of fun playing with UT3, so why not , he can post even little things.
You are both indie game makers and should be friends, you have same interest game making, it would be stupid to be ennemies in this little world of indie or passionnated people

@DarkInferno :
For Unity, try to follow the Third person tutorial, i followed it and was amazed. If you follow it, you will discovered it's programming and lot of basic things already existing like a Ratchet And Clanck camera , fast to create particle effects with editor etc ...

A7 is programmer oriented a lot, each beta is new commands, Who uses all that commands ? Well A7 have not the big team of Unity also that's the other problem !



Back to UT3 engine !
Not lot of documentation, hard to find,when i opened the editor , i dind't find how to create or import something, seems the same interface as UT2 (it's looks like A7 just using same interface from 6-10 years ?)
For me it's somewhat outdated if i compare to Far Cry 1 editor i tested, that was more today interface

Just my opinion, only future will tell if indie people will use it to make other things than FPS mods ??
Perhaps some people here will do something great with it ?

See how everyone gets the point?



dark, but there is nothing stop people from making other kind of games with UDK.
Here is just a simple car racing a BSP track wannabe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVB2pD0DCxE . With a little of work, one can make a racing game.

Another good example of other type of game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySz-OjA8JVA

Another one:
http://www.kitri.si/slike/AbbysUper_turret/AbbysUper_turret.html

I just found 17 video tutorials and an asset file on Fileshack posted Dec. 2. The topics covered look pretty comprehensive and the videos are high quality. You will need a MP4 player to view them.

Sorry but it make sens for a WIP but not a discussion about an engine. also making few Wip in different forum is kind a weird but let's drop it now.

Anyway Ratchet you made a excellent point, doing a full conversion game is harder than it in Unity for example. People are complaning about the lack of documentation. The community is fairly new and there wasn't so much total conversion mod so it's kind of hard to find valuable data on how to do anything from scratch. UDN tutorial are ok but it's kind a poor compare to other engine. Epic is working on it. they already did a a bunch of new tutorial with 3d buzz. the one DC9 is talking about.

So yea giving a real opinion is really important for people who never tried this engine.

The material editor is really powerful and even if Sorcerer did point out that it didn't explain in what interesting. The node based material editor allows you to create effect and combine different shader so easily I couldn't wonder how I would have done my shader in hlsl. So it's really easy to get you game a next gen look. There is a downside, basically you can't do everything you want in the post process editor. Doing a sobel shader wss a nightmare. I spend 3 days trying to create it. Converting hlsl into node is not that easy. But I did it.

About the car stuff is not that easy if you want to bring your own vehicular in the engine. To add a viper car is just a drag and drop but setting up your own car with physics isn't a trivial task.

You can do a lot with the UDK but you need some extra work to get you game in running. the main point is you aren't limited to the engine.

The shadows are problematic too some issue with large outdoor area. don't expect to do the next crysis or such.

here an example of full conversion.

http://www.moddb.com/mods/airborn/news/first-release-of-airborn

The node based material editor allows you to create effect and combine different shader so easily I couldn't wonder how I would have done my shader in hlsl.

That's one aspect i like a lot, even if you can't create your ones yuo can achieve lot of things.
And you have : Normal map with specular shader working right with all in game lights directly.
Another big point, good lightmapper included in the editor, and lightampping work with next gen level( normal maps, and specular) without anything ot program or to scratch your head !
Unity shaders are also what i like a lot : just choose it in the menu on object properties: too easy and direct result !

For documentation just wait for specialised sites ?
And not sure this engine will be adopted a lot ?
UT2 SDK have not been used a lot , it was free for non commercial use, but none have done a big memorable game with it !

A downside, you won't have rights to access all UDK documentation of the official site (with Unity 3D you can), so you are limited in some way !

Anyway big AAA engine, but who indies can make a complete AAA game ?
For casual or indie or small/medium games, A7, Unity 3D , Torque 3D are they not enought and faster to learn ?

Well just wait some months to see if some indies things show up !

Yeah the mod game Airborn is impressive
But it's just very good 3D art and UT3 engine allowing good lightening/lightmaps and big levels !


On the site , in picture section you can see all 2D design , something very very important : a step that all people here skip unfortunatelly !
concept

funny ! This mod was made with UT3 not udk so the lightning was all made in maya. So it's rather impressive, but I4m not sure this game could have this look in unity. I've never seen such a game on that platform even though. But I4m not well aware of what unity can do or not.

http://forums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=707061&highlight=blue+galaxy

just a game a guy ported from unity to unreal engine 3.

UT3 is more AAA engine , even if unity has some good power and have been choosed for the next Funcom mmo !

It exists a plugin to convert animated blender characters from Blender to UT3 , i'll have to dig it !

But Unity have great things like fully ready to go camera system like "spring follow" and others , that you can tweak if you want on the panel properties.
It's has basic things like also basic physics where you don't have to code anything, just choose the good thing, tweak in property panels , and it just works perfectly !

Yeah , why coding each time camera system, or basic physic collisions (and constraints if you have), and lot of other stuff ?

A7 have old structure.low framerate.i have A7 pro version.but now i am working with unity3d.it is very good.good editor.good tools.good programming(c#).and many things other that A7 can not support.i think conitec must do many changes.

udk is verygood.but needs good and big team.

Yeah, Game Studio relies on old versions.
Thats a fact, and you can't rellay compare A7 en Unity !
or Unity and Dark Basic Pro !

There are lot lot of people using Dark Basic Pro, caus it's not too hard, and they like a lot programming or do small things or games. And some people done some really honorable things.
The most important they enjoy a lot what they do with lot of fun, even without word editors or other tools !

A7 is also very programmer oriented, each beta is new programmer commands thats perhaps you'll never use in your life ! And for beginners , kids A7 is perfect also !
You can learn and do some things that run , you can have lot of fun if you are a programmer !

That's the main points, so compare is useless !

Unity and UT3 SDK have some good bunch of tools and a world editor that are artist oriented with very good tools and workflow for 3D artists !
A7, Ogre3D,Dark Basic Pro and lot of other are programmer oriented , their tools , workflow is not 3D artist oriented !

So don't start a useless flamewar on Engine A Vs Engine B !

You are enought mature to know what engine to use and that's suits your needs, and goal !

Ok let's see if some new UT3 SKD demos comes here in the thread

Does Unreal work with Windows XP ?
Does it produce standalone executables ?
Do the games have the 'Made with Unreal' logo at the start ?


Thanks

works with xp

I'm glad it works with XP.
Does it work with Win 7 ?

thanks

Does it work with Win 7 ?
Yes
Does it produce standalone executables ?
Yes
Do the games have the 'Made with Unreal' logo at the start ?
yes. actually you'd prabably be proud to.

why not go check their page and ask every damn question here?

You can check their demos on every OS you would like to.

Actually it is a very stable technology and fast. The reason is, they are using some proven approaches like pre-rendering light maps from lots of static lights (like WED, Source engine and others). But they also add additional information like some light vectors to illuminate materials very real. This combination of lightmaps, shaders and light direction information makes it fast and good-looking at the same time.

In each indie engine you have to fake it. You can also render a lightmap in second uv-set and overlay it over the tiled textures. But then you have to add shaders and dynamic lights to illuminate shaders. But this approach will look worse and will render slower. You cannot use the same amount of dynamic lights, but you can use tons of static ones for a lightmap. And because of that the lighting direction will be wrong in most cases. Besides that the usage of many dynamic lights in a forward renderer will slow down rendering.

Currently the trend is: If they render every lighting in real-time, then they use deferred rendering. This is not very fast with a single light source, but it is much faster when you use tons of lights and shaders (CryEngine, Torque3D).
The other direction is what UDK and Source are doing: combine static lighting with additional normal mapping and lighting information.

Both solutions make lots of sense.

December update is out with lots of new features, but just take a look at this video:

http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/rsrc/Three/InteractiveFoliageActor/WalkingThroughFields.mp4

Man, what else can I say...

And for those that want to see other types of games with Unreal engine 3...
Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy2rz9Wtl4w

just found this thread and wanted to contribute



well thanks but airborn so far has neither big levels nor lightmaps generated in ut3, so the art will look the same in pretty much every environment as long as it support custom shaders to import our lightmaps that have been generated in maya
Now with the udk version we will start switching from premade lightmaps to the one udk generates with lightmass but this will take some time.

i just thaught i would post my view on UDK.
udk has some great features

Level Editor
Terrain Editor
Unreal Matinee (camera cinimatics)
Speedtree (fast tree modeling program)
Kismet (visual scripting system)

im using it at the moment and think if you wannt to make a good shooter
udk is the quickist and easyest way to do it. im loving the matinee system .it makes cinimatics fast and easy. the editor is solid with a nice gs subtracting.

one thing im not shure about is the scripting.
can you put scripts on to it? whithout kismet?

Thanx xonath

you can script in unrealscript. weird how all people start working with the udk (this includes me ^^).

what do people think about UNITY 3D?

is it as fast to get started on UNITY as it is UDK?

the udk has a really steep learning curve. i don't know about unity but guess it's easier. naturally, unity is not as powerful as the udk.

unity big advantage is the documentation and the java script is not a proprietary language. So if you want your game up and running I wouldn't suggest you to go with udk. There is not official support on scripting.

so yeah most people will find interesting to play with the engine great feature but in the end if you don't have a programming background it can be harsh.

But I used it and since I Don't mind getting my hand dirty it's fine for me. But I would suggest for most of people doing casual game or middle size game to go with unity. I just don't like the lack of shadowing support on the free version.

Hm, shadow seems to work. Ambient Occlusion, Blobshadow, all there. I was at least able to create a lightmap for the terrain. But even when not, there would be Giles as an alternative lightmapper

That walking through foliage is awesome but at a second thought I'd prefer a certain degree of DIY in an engine. So this is the difference between authoring and engine. On the other hand I wouldn't go make a game in pure C++. But I like A7 approach overall except for some flags settings which are cumbersome to match. I'm a beginner both in programming and 3D gaming and I'm currently looking for the right tool to make my own projects. Too bad there are ups and downs for each engine. So it's difficult to pick. But I'd like you to tell me from the speed (performance) point of view -- which one is the fastest from the above mentioned engines?
I've seen that the Unity default example (the one with nature, water and seagulls can't remember the name) looks very rich and it doesn't go below 60 FPS on my PC. Maybe it's because the trees and foliage (very dense) are not objects. Plus Unity has a great thing which A7 hasn't IMO: replacing 3D models with billboards at a distance. What I find unpleasant is the message system: create message, send it to a certain instance then go there and receive it. Haven't played with it much but I think it's a system for... handling events?
As for A7, the endless terrain with 9 views and thousands of visible instances outputting 30 FPS is a performance too. Not Unity's 60 FPS but so many simultaneous instances and views...
There is Torque 3D but in the default FPS example on a completely blank terrain only with the player it output like 60-70 FPS. So disappointing...
Now more to the topic: never tried UDK but I'm very interested in the FPS(frames per second)yield. It would've been perfect if someone could compare _the same_ game on all 3 engines -- same models, billboards, shaders etc. You might say that speed isn't everything. But I'd say that for me it is. And besides that if one engine is easy to work with but it's slow compared to an exactly opposite engine, I'd call they're of the same value.

Maybe it is limited to your monitor frequency (mostly 60 Hz). So it will not go higher than 60. This way you cannot compare 60 to 60 in different engines. You have to remove this limit or use a more dense test scene rendering with less than 60.



Yes, I am also interested in this. And I will do that in the near future with a more complex sci-fi interior set. But in this case the indoor scene-management will be the most important part to do a good culling job and to create as few as possible render jobs for the graphic card.

It also depends on the size of textures. I realized that I can render and optimize a lot in C4, but when textures get bigger (couple of 2048px textures) then it slows down, but UDK can still run fast with big textures. It is probably the smart virtual texture system they use.
Unity is currently not very fast with big interiors. But the upcoming version 3 will have a professional culling system (Umbra). This will change the situation a lot.

For outdoors this changes again. Unity has some optimized nature shaders and a good lod system. UDK got some new foliage features, but I found the april demo not very convincing.

In the end we really need a stress test, but this is not too easy. In C4 I have to create zones and portals manually to get good performance. I can even place some occlusion portals for big columns. I can setup lights not render shadow volumes each frame and so on.
When there is Umbra in Unity then we also have to setup some occlusion areas, dont know how to do at the moment.

And when we compare terrains then it is the same. We have to understand how the engines handle lod, materials, transparency, how to make a terrain with the engine tools, how to create water (with or without reflections) and so on.

It will be not possible to create absolute identical situations for each engine, but it might be possible to come to an at least similar scenery.

You mean vertical sync? When I look up to the sky the FPS goes from 30 to 40 in some cases and stays there, and from 60 to 72 in others. So there's no cap.
As for the comparison I'm suspecting they don't want to make some facts public -- imagine the impact. For the moment, one is easier, the other has an extra feature, bla bla blaaa... you know, it's arguable, one likes the features, other prefer workflow... can't say one it's better than the other so a comparison can't be made as there's no solid criterion. But when it comes about speed you can tell not only if one particular engine trades speed for workflow (like say, scripting replacing C++) but more important -- you can tell very much about the architecture, if it's well done, even if the engine uses scripting. Conversely, even if an engine is C++ oriented but has an improvement of only a few FPS then you can tell that it's not worth it. That's why we need a common denominator.
You had to learn their performance issues by practice, I suppose. and it's clear that you know what you're talking about.
About the large texture in C4, you made a point. Actually, it was (one of) my favorite. But I saw this video with a large, actually humongous spaceship on YouTube in Unity compared to C4 and the results were propostruous. I liked C4 for the voxel terrain. Again there's the default example with the graveyard and it only yielded 30 FPS with not many instances or substantial geometry. But you say you have to do the BSP tree manually?
I have some second thoughts about Unity because of the message thing and the web and iPhone things. I might be talking nonsense but man I want a PC robust game engine, plain and simple with straight forward output, something opposed to complicated, clogged and why not -- opposed to complex.
Sorry if I deviated from the topic. Anyway, I look forward to seeing if the same demo, any demo, is made in several engines.

It is not exactly a BSP. It has the same goal to create good culling but it works differently. The difference compared to the Gamestudio BSP system is: You have to create zones and portals manually. You can control it in a very professional way. It takes more time to setup but it does not need compiling time and can render faster in the end.

I am also very curious about the stress test results. I plan to test this scene in Unity, C4 and Torque3D, with different texture sizes and different polygon numbers.
It could also be done in Gamestudio, Neoaxis, Leadwerks, Shiva and Esenthel. But my time is limited. Though I might ask for help then in the respective forums.

I've bookmarked this thread

Just as an addition:

The upcoming A8 allows to do some more manual optimizing using regions:
http://www.conitec.net/beta/region_create.htm

I've been playing around with UDK lately , and it's BEAUTIFUL. The workflow seems pretty straight forward , level editor is very nice and easy to use , it's technology is top of the line. Fantastic , it's as good as it gets. And on top of all of that , you can use all of the included code for commercial applications as well. What more can one ask for ?

Btw , here is a page where you can download a bunch of UDK training videos that show you how to use everything from the editor to physics , the videos are very good and if your familiar with a game engine like GameStudio you will pick up UDK almost instantly after watching them.

http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/VideoTutorials.html

When you load the page just scroll down to where it says 3D Buzz Video Tutorials.

I thought quite much about how to express the issue in as few words as possible and at the same time to say the essence:

Which of the engines -- and I'm specially aiming at UDK -- offers in the best way, the possibility of making the simplest game with a corresponding low FPS?

This question I think reveals the best engine, besides the performance. Very tricky as some engines are not versatile and can't work with graphics below a threshold. I'm not implying anything about a certain engine; I just want to know more. Let's say we want to make a 2D game with no shaders, no nothing. Like a pacman or snake. Which of the engines is capable of making it and of those which can, which one yields the lowest FPS?

"Let's say we want to make a 2D game with no shaders, no nothing. Like a pacman or snake"
Then use Flash , it's the best option for that type of game.

For a 3d game with no shaders and older type graphics or technology , then use GameStudio or Unity(though they do support shaders as well, but they're easier to use and less demanding of end user PCs).

If you want to make the next block buster game with top of line graphics and want to use the best and most powerful engine you can get your hands on , then use UDK.

UDK is powered by Unreal 3 Engine , UE3 was use to make Unreal Tournament 3, Gears of War , Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe , Tom Clancy games , ect...
It's a powerful engine that used to cost three quarter of a million dollars to license , now at our hands. But if your looking to make corny pac man clones , then stick to something like flash , cause even GameStudio is way too powerful for that.

Excuse me but you got it wrong. It's not I want to make a pacman but it's the degree of freedom the engine allows. It's about granting access to the low levels of making a game. It's pretty easy to make a good looking, complex game but it comes with a cost. My music professor used to say: "Professionalism doesn't reside in singing correctly; it begins from using nuances". Well, maybe because I had some colleagues singing like soccer supporters... but anyway, think about making a game as building:

Different construction sites come with different size prefabs. Now it depends on what you want to build -- a hut or a skyscraper. I want to build a mansion. So I'd be glad to also have other prefabs than whole floors. But maybe not bricks.

I'm not against UDK, I haven't tried it yet but I planned to this week. It may be the only engine I'll use but I like having the control that you have in A7 (aside from frame rate). If UDK offers the same control degree (which I currently don't have a clue), believe me, I won't think twice.

I download and installed UDK last night..impressive, really impressive!

There are some very easy to follow video tutorials at their website. After you saw these, you will find it even more impressive.

Some tools are not very easy to get from the first glance, but after following a tutorial it makes lot of sense and reveals lots of power.

But I also found out that Unity is close behind them in terms of these tools.

Has anyone here tried anything serious with Unreal Kismet? I'm interested in this mainly because I am not a coder.

I tried using UDK on my current laptop, why too demanding for this hardware. Once I get my new desktop I'll start messing with the UDK. I plan on just messing around and making some simple shooters like I did with the A5 temps, only these templates will be much, much better (no offense to Doug)