Search Unity

サンプルベースの素晴らしい機能を持つ AI ノードと連携して動く、パワフルなプロシージャルツールを使って、2021 年のスタートを切りましょう。

2021 年初となる ArtEngine リリースについてお知らせします。サンプルベースのワークフローについてはこれまでもご紹介してきました。昨年はサンプルベースのツールキットの強化を図りつつ、強力なプロシージャルなノードの開発も推進して、サンプルベース、プロシージャルの両方の分野で最高のツールをお届けするために取り組んできました。この記事では、新機能の主要なハイライトと、今後追加する予定の機能についてお伝えします。

プロシージャルの力

新しく Pattern Array ノードを組み込んだプロシージャルなツールキットが公開されました。このノードを利用することで、巨大なキャンバスの上に、ビットマップやマテリアルを使って構成された複雑でシームレスなパターンを素早く効率的に作成することができます。また、このノードを Scatter ノードとして使用すれば、ビットマップやマテリアルを自然な形で分散させることもできます。

Pattern Array ノードを構成に使う、すなわち Scatter ノードとして採用したところ。ここでは、砂のマテリアルの上に木の葉を自然に散らすためにノードが適用されている。

こちらの動画をご覧いただき、皆さんも自分だけのパターンを作ってみてください。

新規導入されたノード、改良されたノード

新しくプロシージャルなノードを追加するとともに、既存のサンプルベースノードにいくつかの大きな改良と機能追加を行いました。

  • 新しい Noise ノード:ガウシアン、セルラー、クリスタル、雲など、さまざまなノイズのプロファイルを生成することで、ランダム化による表現にもう一工夫加えることができます。
  • 新しい Basic Shapes ノード:自分だけの基本形状を作成し、Pattern Array ノードに入力して、他の画像のマスクとして使うことができます。
  • よりリアルになった環境光の近似:Ambient Occulusion ノードの新しいアルゴリズムにより、より物理的に正確な描画結果を得られるようになりました。
  • 法線マップ生成の改良:Radial Compensation スライダーを備えた Multi-Angle to Texture ノードを利用して、より品質の高い法線マップを生成できます。
  • バッチ処理:バッチングワークフローを活用して、数千個のファイルをクリック 1 つでまとめて処理することができます(ArtEngine Studio でのみお使いいただけます)。
basic shapes and pattern array nodes

Basic Shape ノードと Pattern Array ノードを組み合わせて使うことで、無数のバリエーションを作り出そう。

 

ArtEngine の Seam Removal ノードと Mutation ノードはこれまでと同じくパワフル。

今後の予定:楽しい機能への取り組み

2020 年はすべてツールの整備に費やしました。これは ArtEngine が正式に Unity ファミリーに参加したことによります。安定性の問題の解決に大きな時間を注ぎ込むことが要求されましたし、Unity のライセンシングシステムに移行するための時間も必要でした。そして、ようやく楽しい機能に取り掛かる準備が整いました。これが、今回満を持して 2021 年の製品ロードマップを皆さんにシェアしようとしている理由です。

リリースの回数は減るかもしれませんが、その代わり毎回のリリースごとでご提供する機能の数は多くする予定です。ここでは、今年後半にご提供する予定のワクワクするような機能の情報を先取りしてお届けします。

ご紹介する機能は Style Transfer です。これは、1 枚の画像のスタイルを抽出して、それをもう 1 枚の画像に適用するノードです。80 年代のレトロゲームのあの感じを再現したい、あるいは Unity シーンをゴッホ風に仕立て上げたいなど、想像力を自由に働かせ、AI の力でその想像を形にして、楽しんでください。

2 枚の絵から、1 枚の新しい絵が生まれる。

私たちのユーザーは速いペースで増え続けており、皆さんが作成した素晴らしいアートも同じペースで増え続けています。フィードバックを頂ける方や、ご自分の作品を紹介したい方は、artengine-info@unity3d.com へのメール、Unity のDiscord チャンネル、または Unity フォーラムのいずれかでご連絡ください。

 

無料で ArtEngine を試す

 

本記事で使用した作品の権利は Victor Kam 氏に帰属します。

以下の資料は情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、契約に組み込まれることはありません。以下の資料に基づいて購入の意思決定を行うべきではありません。Unity は、いかなる機能およびコードの提供を約束するものではありません。すべての製品および機能の開発、提供時期の決定、およびリリースは、Unity の独自の裁量により行われ、変更されることがあります。

15 replies on “ArtEngine 2021.1 の新しい 1 年、新しいノード”

This seems out of my price range, but hopefully it finds an audience. There may be people out there making enough on their Unity creations that $100 a month is worth it, and if it is, then it helps to fund the creation of the Unity engine. I will say, the only negative, is that it may feel some of the indies like us feel left out, because we’re missing out on some of the cool new goodies. But, I guess we’ll see how it works.

Its not really just about indies. I run a company and work on large scale enterprise projects, pay for unity licenses etc. I pay for adobe, I pay for substance, I pay for everything – money is not an issue if there is value. But at this price point, its just doesnt make financial sense to go for it when you can get a better more mature and just as integrated offering from a competitor for a fraction of the price. There is just no value here.

This pricing is prohibitive for everyone, enteprise and indie alike.

Yet another product that has “will be abandoned soon” written all over it

Unity, as a company, seems to be absolutely obsessed with making all the worst possible decisions and driving down the value of the company as much as they can. I hope shareholders see just how negatively people feel about Unity’s future, and do everything they can to do a complete 180.

Here is the winning strategy to make users happy, it’s very simple:
– Focus on making sure the core engine is extremely stable & robust before thinking about any bells & whistles
– Every feature must be accessible to everyone. Paywalled features give off the impression that they’ll not be supported properly because not enough people will be willing to use them, and there will be no community knowledge/resources about them
– Communicate clearly what your future goals are with things like DOTS and SRPs. It’s hard to get answers at the moment
– Stop spreading your dev resources on a million different things. FOCUS your resources on high-quality production-ready features
– TEST your engine. And no engine can reasonably claim to have been tested if its makers haven’t shipped an actual game with it

In agreement, I feel like after all the billions from going public, they should put aside a couple million at least and make a small game with a small team that has a mandate to turn a profit, without access to all the internal help the spotlight team gets etc.

Instead of giving us the “our developers make games” response which is what we get – not what we are asking is it. Making games in your spare time, or before you joined unity etc etc does not count the same as using the engine to make a commercial high quality production and then using results as a feedback loop to improve the engine.

There is just no way that consulting existing companies using your engine, is getting all the quality data you need for this, you need to dog food your engine.

This has been brought up for pretty much the last decade, and the need isnt going anywhere, if anything its becoming more apparent.

Nobody is asking you to make a AAA game like fortnite and pivot your focus, just make a small 4-8 person funded team and try and make a game that actually makes a profit with your engine. The insights from that alone you will gain will improve your insight into what really matters, which is something unity as a company clearly lacks.

Good ideas.

I think this would help to change the company culture just a little bit. Unity is an amazing company, but everyone’s culture can use a prod in the right direction. And here’s what the small issue in their culture is right now, the developers they have all want to be making the cool new stuff. They want to be on the teams that are making beta software, beta features, beta upgrades. Experimental things. They look highly on abandoning old software that’s long in the tooth. They’re seen as forward thinking. As the young guns. It’s considered brave to cut off support for widely used features that haven’t been talked about in a while.

What they should be doing, is fostering ease of use. Making better quality of life. Increasing the quality of current features. Promoting those team mates who take care of the every day features. Who make sure nothing is broken.

I completely agree with you.
Your last point is huge IMO.
If Unity were to develop *big* games themselves, I think so many issues in the engine would simply disappear.
They would face real, immediate, continuous large-scale production problems (the problems their users face). By tackling those problems in order to simply facilitate their game’s production, they would be naturally be fixing the issues which are most relevant and valuable to users. For once, the developers and users would be aligned in their goals and motivations.
Nothing is as fast and effective for the design of creative software/tools than those tools being used for large-scale productions by the tool developers themselves, or in tandem with them.
Unity developers can’t understand their engines’ problems (and thus cannot solve them) if they are not making game projects *at least* as large and complex than their users, all the time, like their users.
This should be obvious, but it seems to me that Unity devs think secondhand information from users is sufficient, which it isn’t. It’s not even possible to express the depths of what is missed.

Looks like a nice tool, but the price model… this is what I feared would happen with Unity after going public. Itemizing off each new feature in expensive payment plans. I worry the Unity’s future will look like this across the board, and eventually the goal will be to get every Unity user to fork over money on monthly basis if they want to use the new versions of the engine. Sooner or later, it will reflect Adobe CC but at enterprise price levels. I will jump ship if it gets to that point.

I would use a new tool like this if it were not going to cost me over $1000/year. Sell it as an asset on the asset store for a reasonable price. I don’t know. I’m not feeling optimistic about the future of Unity. Sorry.

The future wont look like this, because everyone will leave by then. Most of us working on enterprise projects are already evaluating unreal or further. In a year or 2 I am not sure I will be using unity at all, given all the turmoil in the last 5 years and now the fact that while the engine and workflow turmoil is not over yet, they are already trying to squeeze money out of things in silly ways like this.

As said, this will likely die out because of the silly pricing, I just cant understand how anyone making the decisions on pricing chose this price point. Did they literally not even look at the competition first to get a benchmark?

Even if this becomes free for free tier, it wont matter because once you need to pay you would swap to substance (substantially cheaper and lightyears ahead in tech) or quixel mixer (free entirely)

The only good thing here is the generic buzzword “AI Assisted” but substance suite comes with alchemist….so where is the value here? There just isnt any.

I could understand if it was super difficult to get materials from substance or quixel into unity….but it is not and they provide support themselves for this. So this is dead in the water most likely, but is anyone surprised? What unity service has come out in the last 5 years that really has been decent and widely used? The best thing they offer is multiplay, and that was already existing before they bought it, the hard work was already done.

Interesting product but the prohibitive cost is very disappointing.
Why would someone pay more for this when they can get the Substance suite?
The AI stuff seems very useful in a vacuum, but in comparison to what’s available, most of it doesn’t seem *that* much better than the kinds of parameterized solutions you can easily achieve in other node-based texture software.
It seems like more of an incremental improvement on a very small set of artist tools rather than a monumental leap over everything that’s currently available, which is what Substance Designer/Painter was able to provide.

In addition, why make this blog post and pretend like Art Engine is something any Unity user might use when in fact it’s ridiculously expensive, and for that reason not suitable for independent developers? (or frankly any developers, again considering the competition)

Unity has so many good opportunities to give their game engine a *huge* leg up over the competition but they seem to frequently miss them.
Given its inaccessibility and lack of features/production value compared to the competition, I would not be surprised if this was another slowly forgotten and abandoned project…

I think ArtEngine is awesome at what it does, but on marketing/business front it needs some serious new plans. Considering their direct competitors are either totally free (quixel+ue4) or cheaper(substance suite), I don’t see the benefit of being conservative with ArtEngine. It is simply hurting the product. Free tier for Unity developers is a must.

And in the meantime, the competition keeps throwing free stuff at their developer community…

This ArtEngine thing is never going to take off unless it comes included with the engine or as a free package. The extent of how Unity’s management DOESN’T understand its community/users keeps baffling all of us. Great example of how the corporate decision-making process consistently fails at solving even the most basic problems

It can be paid, that’s not the problem, but a base price of $95 per seat is INSANE.

What are you doing Unity? From ‘democratizing game development’ to ‘enterprise only’?
This software costs more than the ENTIRE Adobe CC collection.

Sort of looks like a much worse substance designer, kind of interested in why anyone would pick this over substance designer given the price?

It costs 4x the amount a license costs to get the ENTIRE substance suite. This just seems like a massive rip off, offering a service that is much weaker than the competition (quixel still exists too) but at a much higher price point.

If this had been rolled into the engine you would have had your first “look at us, we have the good features now” feature to brag about instead of UE always getting the juicy stuff for their users, but instead its at a really high cost with a much much slimmer set of features.

Its a shame, this could have been something amazing with the right mindset.

Comments are closed.