I recommend a 16:9 screen ratio of roughly 1280x720 size. This plugin best works in a game with a higher resolution. It puts together all of the reward information gained from battle onto a compact screen to display everything at once before the player goes back to the map scene.
This is a RPG Maker MV plugin that makes the battle system's victory sequence only a single screen. I can imagine Cry Engine was fit for purpose and over the years I doubt NW have dont much in the way of stress testing under the same pressure as UE5/Unity etc have undergone.įinal thoughts are that in the end I do see value in a transitional switch to UE5.1 more from a client perf than anything else, however if i were to be honest and pitch this to an executive on why “we should abandon progress for a year or more and eat our budget lines” you’d find that meeting near impossible to win over from an ROI.Note: This plugin is a part of the OctoPack Battler plugin set. Please keep in mind if you purchase this plugin, it will not deduct the price from the OctoPack Battler Sample Project if you wish to buy it later. UE5 won’t fix that per say but it would make a lot of that head-work easier given you’re starting off with a much more optimised framework to begin with. There is really a lot of unoptimized behaviors in this game and you can notice this mostly in thread management when you die (notice that hitching as the netcode reconciles your death). I look at NW’s memory footprint and I am baffled as to why it consumes so much for what it does. Cry Engine not so much (still has public addresses published on areas of focus).ĬlientSide performance I’d argue would be dramatically more performant than what we have now. You would however open yourself up to lower barrier to entry in terms of hacks to the game client as Unreal SDK is well mapped in the exploit communities. Network Security I’d argue wouldn’t be an exactly game changer moment for the team, as well duping etc is still server-side related issue less a client-side adoption problem. Velocity could be argued as a ROI for switching, asset creation through to coding would be much easier per say - better supported given EPIC would fall over themselves to co-invest here.
#Yep core engine code#
You do have greater access to IP like Nanite/Lumen for 3d production pipelines and lastly your ability to attract staff would be much easier if you were to figure your way through the BP/C++ code merge methodologies (assuming each studio likes to make up their own here). Hard to say, Unreal Engine does start its self out as a network code first principle, meaning all the IP in games like fortnite etc are now baked in natively into the engine. All so when you emerge you’re at minimum parity with where you left off.Īs to difference in engine capabilities such as UE 5.1 vs Cry Engine backports. You’d also have a an immediate net-loss velocity on releases (essentially go quiet for a few months to several years).
Switching to Unreal Engine would be a cooldown moment for a team, specifically re-tooling their devops pipelines, re-forecast hosting costs, adjust network code patterns, pipeline intergration etc would all add up in the millions for a game like this. Well as someone who is currently employed by a game engine maker heres my hot take on this:
0 kommentar(er)
