SitRep on the UDK situation?

Yes, it would be great to have another update. Nate said it would be a few weeks before we had some more info, and it's been a few weeks.

Even if it is just a short delay, filling us in is important.

Now, I will repeat what I have said countless times on other topics.

Why not just release the Unrealscript and config files necessary to make the Oculus run properly in UDK as a plugin for the regular UDK instead of having to create your own version, where licensing becomes an issue. At the very least, explain why this isn't a possible solution since and what is being done to avoid this issue in the future. It would make more sense to either integrate the Oculus fully in the regular UDK, and just have each version Epic releases contain Oculus support, instead of Oculus releasing their own version when it is compatible.

My feeling based on the Unreal Engine 4 news is that there is a priority to build out Oculus for UE4, which is great, but it leaves current developers - and specifically indie developers, who seem to be the primary Oculus supporters so far - with nothing to do.

We need a fully working UDK solution. I purchased my Oculus with the assumption it was fully working. I'm set to receive my Oculus tomorrow, and would love to enter the VR Jam, but I can't really do that without a working version of the engine I use.

I too would like an update as my development going forward "should" rely upon UDK, but if the priority is UE4 AAA devs and we don't have any meaning in the bigger picture, then I should move over to Unity. That is not my preference, but I can understand that for Epic giving the big players an advantage over indies might be their game plan - sadly.

"BenNadler" wrote:
Why not just release the Unrealscript and config files necessary to make the Oculus run properly in UDK as a plugin for the regular UDK instead of having to create your own version, where licensing becomes an issue. At the very least, explain why this isn't a possible solution since and what is being done to avoid this issue in the future.

It's not possible because the majority of the rendering code that makes the stereo 3d work is deep inside the engine C++ and you can't modify that with unreal script.

So unless Epic merge the Oculus rendering code into normal UDK, we'll be stuck in this same situation.

What would be good is if the Oculus team could link to a dll of the Oculus SDK instead of compiling the code in. That way, when a new Oculus SDK comes out, it doesn't need a full update of UDK to get to us

Ok guys (Oculus), it's been a couple of days since I asked the question and the lack of a reply is bringing about that disconcerting feeling again. We know you have seen the message, and we are not asking you to give us a new Oculus UDK right this moment, but an update on the situation would be polite and respectful considering Nate mentioned it would be a couple of weeks, and a month has gone by.

Thanks a bundle! ;)

Hey HappyHimitsu, as a matter of fact Nate said a few weeks with an emphasis on "Earliest." And just because we've been waiting a couple of days, that doesn't mean these guys are not super busy. We don't know if they are inspecting new screens off in Korea or visiting someone who has a new angle on positional tracking. I think some patience here is in order, but after a week wait we should pull out the virtual pitchforks! ;)

"Teddy0k" wrote:

"BenNadler" wrote:
Why not just release the Unrealscript and config files necessary to make the Oculus run properly in UDK as a plugin for the regular UDK instead of having to create your own version, where licensing becomes an issue. At the very least, explain why this isn't a possible solution since and what is being done to avoid this issue in the future.

It's not possible because the majority of the rendering code that makes the stereo 3d work is deep inside the engine C++ and you can't modify that with unreal script.

So unless Epic merge the Oculus rendering code into normal UDK, we'll be stuck in this same situation.

What would be good is if the Oculus team could link to a dll of the Oculus SDK instead of compiling the code in. That way, when a new Oculus SDK comes out, it doesn't need a full update of UDK to get to us

That's basically the same thing I was trying to propose. A DLL, some UnrealScript, either way - a drag and drop solution as opposed to a custom editor.

"unity2k" wrote:
Hey HappyHimitsu, as a matter of fact Nate said a few weeks with an emphasis on "Earliest." And just because we've been waiting a couple of days, that doesn't mean these guys are not super busy. We don't know if they are inspecting new screens off in Korea or visiting someone who has a new angle on positional tracking. I think some patience here is in order, but after a week wait we should pull out the virtual pitchforks! ;)

Fair enough unity2k, but I don't think I was too rude or overbearing and a wee bit of pressure doesn't hurt. While I appreciate your moderation perhaps you should save it for those on the forum who are really deserving. ;)

I am well aware of what Nate said, and his intent behind it, but it has been my experience on these forums that if you want an answer to something you sometimes have to push a little. Thanks for the help though, and if you happen to catch me doing something really out of line, you have my permission (and my buttocks) presented, and you may be free to give them a nice firm smacking! ;)

(Not trying to be a smart-alecky asshole; I respect what you are saying, but I can't resist having a little bit of fun. :))

Edit: I just wanted to clarify here that I was not asking for Oculus to provide an update to the program, but rather I was hoping they would take a moment out of their busy schedule to just let us know how things are going in that regard.
I have a vested interest in Oculus plan of attack regarding the UDK and as such I thought it would be nice to know how things are going.

:)

Since Andrew's passing Oculus have had to employ a new developer to focus solely on the unreal code. It is my impression from the brief encounters I've had with people from Oculus that they are struggling to get up to speed with the level of affinity Andrew brought to the company through UDK. Rest assured that they are working on a great solution for you guys but it will take some time. Any work being done on UE4 is a collaboration between maybe just one or two Epic developers and one or two Oculus employees. Even less representation is offered towards the UE3/UDK side of development. But, we are getting this development for free and they are paying very talented developers to provide tools for us for which we should be grateful. (but we are in a worse situation than the unity devs)

It is my belief that Oculus had to license out their own separate version of UDK and as a result now has to speak to each and every middle-ware provider in order to negotiate a deal on behalf of Oculus developers to provide complete support.
I for one know that we can not produce high quality current-gen assets running on the Oculus Rift with a comfortable frame-rate without support from software such as Simplygon and other optimization tools. We have made that plainly clear to the guys at Oculus who have made it plainly clear that they are working towards a solution. We don't know when, but I'm happy to wait.

My major concern is whether or not there is a specific reason that UDK users are currently being ignored.
I never asked for anything that is too far out there, but my question has remained unanswered regardless.

Oculus is great for everything except getting updates. We had to fight to get updates on shipping, and until we had half the forums raving about it we were ignored in that area as well.
There are many UDK users out there who are chomping at the bit to get an update, and UDK is still left behind at 0.1.
I understand and respect that the situation isn't optimal at the moment, and I believe that everything is being done to accommodate us, so why should it be so much to ask to be kept in the loop?

People shouldn't be looked at as being rude or arrogant for asking how things are going, even in Lieu of recent events. All we are doing is asking a question, and I believe the only respectful way to deal with such a thing is to give an answer in return...

:(

Yeah, what HappyHimitsu said. I want an update too, my curiosity is getting the best of me. We are approaching the stone age in quality of tools, time to modernize. At least tell us if we are 70% of the way towards an update or if we're still at 2%.