pouët.net

https://www.unrealengine.com/blog/ue4-is-free

Even the C++ source is free. I wonder if anyone will use Unreal 4 for their demos now, or if that even matters.

Game engines don't tend to tend to be very compatible with the amount of optimization that goes into 4k and some 64k demos. I'm not sure how UE4 handles things, but though the source code might be interesting I don't know if the engine and editor itself will see much use.

Pershaps compos should exclude the use of engines like Unreal

I got the idea it was only free as long until you put something out there with it. Then they took part of your profit. Of course a prod released for free has zero profits, but I have a feeling the blog post probably says what it does to avoid getting bogged down in the lawyerly details of their license you have to agree to in order to use it that such a release might run afoul of.

However hypothetically supposing that it is possible to release it with a free production, I don't see why it should be excluded. Like DirectX and OpenGL everyone who wants it can get access to it easily enough. I don't think there's any particularly unfair advantage there. Besides having a powerful engine at your disposal doesn't mean you know how to use it to generate good stuff.

You're looking at 100+ MB demos with unreal 4 easily. Unless someone gets really bored and only strips out the parts he wants. Still the rendering quality is excellent :)

Can it recognize the SB Pro?

UE4 is ~3 million lines of code , who's the superman who can actually benefit from this ocean of code !!

It took me less than 20 seconds to find the directory with the shaders...
And there's definitely some interesting stuff.

yay :)

making it "free" (unless you make a big title) isnt really the big news - it was already so cheap to almost be free. this just brings it inline with unity etc.

providing the full source, though.. that's bold.



.. yea. that.
how many democoders are ripping those as we speak? :D

About ripping the code apart, it's nothing new really. UE4 became open source months ago.

Sceners won't like using other people's engines, they prefer to build their own. But the code might be interesting to look at.

Also, new Unreal Tournament!

smash: I don't know the current license model regarding the code - but half a year ago it was kind of prohibitive.

I'm not a fan of ripping stuff. Looking into some code for educational purposes isn't a bad thing.
And I don't think that ripping "all the shaders" is so easy ;).

Nevertheless - I don't really care - if other coders can learn from that source code how stuff works, it's a good thing.

magic: why would you want to exclude engines in scene prods? The last two good demos I watched were both done in Unity.

Because magic is talking out of his ass, as always.

It's not like looking at the shaders in Unreal Tournament 3 was impossible ;)

For your info: This prod for example got number 1 at Payback 2015 and it is made with Unity. It is possible to make all those effects w/o writing a single line of code. PAYBACK by JUGZ

In my opinion this has nothing to do with demomaking anymore and there should be rules.

THERE SHOULD BE RULES!!!

says a dude who made a demo with fucking Macromedia Flash.. fuck off ;)

Isn't that similar to non-coders using demotools to create demos? From an art perspective, that's perfectly fine IMHO. I'd still rate a comparable demo for which sceners have custom-coded the engine higher, but I wouldn't want to miss prods like Payback or *shudder* Paardicle.

(Hm, I'm sure this must have been discussed to death in earlier times already, or not?)

"custom-coded the engine"
you mean someone who spaghetti coded an opensource object loader, an opensource audio player, gnurocket api, and some basic routines from the ogl or dx api together? yes, that is impressive work!

For your info: Jugi/Komplex made those excellent Unity demos since 2009 or so. And "all those effects" certainly did require some scripting/code to get them working. Not to mention the art assets, compositing, audio, timing and whatever else. It's not like you can clap your hands and magically a demo appears.

good. I know Unity very well since it is my daily job and I said "it is possible". You can use graphs and timelines and tons of assets/effects/scripts available on the store and put them together like lego. I certainly do respect the work they put in style and art but thats a different compo to me.

It's not like it's that much different from programming. Both programming graphics and using software like Unity (or werkkzeug or tooll or whatever) are mostly about controlling data flows and describing what you want to have on the screen. Different language, but same thing in the end.

Demos can be any piece of art, that's what the "Wild" category stands for. There is some frontier somewhere, but hard to tell where:
Meet Bob. Bob generated a demo-like video using After Effects, it's been hard work, and Bob created great assets for this video. If he goes to a party, he will compete in the "wild" category. Though he worked hard and got lots of talent, Bob cannot say it's a demo: it's a video.
Now, Bob learned a bit to code, and created an executable that plays the video, and maybe adds a scrolltext. Would you say it's now a demo? I would say no, because Bob did not code the FX in the demo. This is only my opinion, but a demo should feature some code from the authors in its FX. The next question is then "which percentage of code should come from the demo authors in a demo?". 0% is wrong, 100% is wrong too.
The least you can do when building your project on top of someone else's technology is to say it loud in the greets. This would be a start. Talking about Jugi's prod, I would definitely not complain, there is way enough work behind it!