Hey there guys!

I was wondering, what is better? To learn a game engine like Unity or to learn OpenGL/Ogre3D/anything else(API is the technical term I think). With which method can you achieve more? For example, if we took two experts that know everything they need to know about Unity and an API, and let them create their masterpiece, their perfect game, which one would be more vast, have better performance, have better graphics all at the same time. I always assumed(and still do) that the answer is the one that knows an API, because all of the triple A games that blow our minds with what they've achieved are built that way(for instance The Witcher 3 has incredibly short loading times for its complexity, mindblowing graphics, huge open world and many many many more, and it doesn't use any game engine that is publicly available). Can Unity create The Witcher 3? Can Unreal Engine create The Witcher 3? Can you learn both, an API and a game engine(not necessarily at the same time)? Thank you!

WARNING: THIS POST MAY CONTAIN STUPID STUFF, BECAUSE OF MY LACK OF KNOWLEDGE!

For truly cutting-edge technology, I would argue that custom-written engines will perform better than a engines like Unity. I'll just refer to Unity, but this all holds true for other engines as well.

Unity has to offer more flexibility. Custom-written code can make assumptions which Unity can't. These assumptions can allow the code to be more performant.

Unity also has a high focus on making games easy to create. This can lead to sub-optimal solutions compared to the alternative.

Visually, Unity should be able to do anything other stuff does -- it allows for custom shaders (although you might need a paid-for license?).

In terms of world size, again, I would probably say that custom code has the potential advantage. I've heard people having issues with streaming when using Unity. That said, this is also a problem for certain high-end games using their own engine/code.

That said, you seem to be making some invalid assumptions.

Shinier graphics, better performance and larger game worlds do not necessarily mean better games.

Additionally, "what is better" will always vary, depending on the persons involved and the situation/goal.

Finally, "with which method can you achieve more?". This also depends. If you're asking, you are most likely not in the situation in which you can compete with AAA studios. Then it's a question of what you want to do -- do you want to learn the inner workings and work with the more engineering side of things, or do you wish to focus your resources on creating games?

For learning the inner workings, going low-level will present you with more opportunities, while for producing games Unity will have done a lot of things you might not care about (but still vital for a game to be completed).

Learning either will make learning the other easier, but at some point you need to decide what you want to do/what you like doing.

I was wondering, what is better? To learn a game engine like Unity or to learn OpenGL/Ogre3D/anything else(API is the technical term I think). With which method can you achieve more?

How do you measure "more" ?

Game engines aim to make life easier for people writing games, ie you can produce more games in the same amount of time.

Starting from a low-level API while making your game gives you more freedom in choosing how to do things. That means by making smart choices you can do more things than an engine can (since it already made some decisions which are hard or impossible to reverse).

As Lactose! said, in the end you have to make choice what kind of more you want.

I was wondering, what is better?

Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

Or for those of us in games...

Finish your game. See something through to completion. Hear the accolades of others.

Can Unity create The Witcher 3? Can Unreal Engine create The Witcher 3?

Tell you what. Watch this video and start counting:

I see a main development team and two assisting teams, totaling around 150 programmers and about 200 artists and animators, around 50 design folk, around 100 QA folk.

Looks like they spent about 3 years on it, leveraging existing engine technology the group has been building for seven years or so.

A little approximation and multiplication gives around 30 million dollars on the game core, which feels about right based on what is spent on other games I'm more familiar with.

Add in another 20 million for the non-core teams, they appear to have some star power so another 10M for that, then another $50M or so for marketing, and you're headed to a figure that is common for modern AAA games.

With which method can you achieve more?

Are YOU making a blockbuster title like The Witcher 3? Do YOU have a budget that looks like $X00,000,000? Or YOU have a budget that looks like $X00?

If you are operating on a budget on the order of a hundred million dollars you can decide to build and customize your own engine fairly easily.

If you are operating on a budget of your own spare time, you want to take advantage of every shortcut, every existing technology, every benefit you possibly can.

For the vast majority of the members of the site, the budget looks more like the 3 digit variety rather than the 9 digit variety.

If you are learning and asking which to learn:

Learn whichever you prefer. Both are good to know. Neither is bad knowledge. All the knowledge you gain by either route will be helpful to your career if you are following your passions.

I see a main development team and two assisting teams, totaling around 150 programmers and about 200 artists and animators, around 50 design folk, around 100 QA folk.

When I was talking about Unity creating The Witcher 3, I was talking about the engine itself, at its maximum capability. I just wanted to know, which tool is the most powerful. I was asking because I have never really seen a triple A title running on Unity and was wondering why that is.

WARNING: THIS POST MAY CONTAIN STUPID STUFF, BECAUSE OF MY LACK OF KNOWLEDGE!

I warned you about my question seeming stupid, because I'm still relatively new to this environment.

What's a "triple A" title? A title costed tens to hundreds million dollars/euros/pounds/whatever or a game that sold millions copy? Engines do not make games sell themselves. Do not waste time to think how to fly to the Sun, just start code (:

When I was talking about Unity creating The Witcher 3, I was talking about the engine itself, at its maximum capability. I just wanted to know, which tool is the most powerful. I was asking because I have never really seen a triple A title running on Unity and was wondering why that is.

For the engine's maximum capability, it falls under the "If you have to ask, you aren't in the category to need to know" questions. The engine's capacity is far beyond what most of us need.

Many high-profile games have been built with the engine. Their site lists a few titles you might recognize.

Companies big and small, including Square Enix, Blizzard, and EA, use the system. Recognize any of these:

• Temple Run 1 and 2
• Crossy Road
• Hitman Sniper (Square Enix)
• Mevius Final Fantasy (Square Enix)
• Kerbal Space Program
• Oddworld New N Tasty
• Assassin's Creed Identity (Ubisoft)
• Hearthstone (Blizzard)

Some of them lucked into popularity. Others have significant budgets and they choose Unity for their engine.

Unreal does have more major games behind it but that is mostly a difference of how the engines came to be. Unity started as small engine aiming to be generically useful and grew. Unreal started as a single AAA game and became generalized and licensed, ultimately becoming widespread.

Regardless of their status a decade ago, today they are both quite viable for all but the most specialized high-end games.