Hacker News Reader

Comment by LoganDark | Hacker News Reader

Is there a way to access this engine without having to install the epic or coregames launcher? (and without having to build from source)

View on HN

Epic games store is pretty lightweight, doesn't track you around the internet, or announce what game you are playing to the world.

Why are there so many people who are hating on installing this particular client?

> Why are there so many people who are hating on installing this particular client?

Because I don't want to click through Fortnite ads every time I want to launch UE5.

The Epic Games Launcher:

- remembers which pane you were on last time you closed, so you'll never see the store unless you go there on purpose.

- allows you to disable every notification.

You're never going to see a Fortnite ad, please make up a new imaginary problem.

It doesn't have a linux version, so unless you're a gamer it's not worth the effort to get it running unless something has changed... Last time I found it easier to just download the UE5 source to mess around with it. Afterwards, it seems like I needed the Epic client for other reasons. I'm guessing there could be legitimate barriers although it's been a long time for me. Currently I'm downloading the new UE5 source again and take another stab at getting the Epic client running.

> please make up a new imaginary problem.

what.

It is anything but lightweight. It's a full Chrome browser that struggles to show even the most basic "text with images" pages and hides useful functionality in corners while pestering you with multiple CTAs

It's not a full Chrome browser.

It's actually an Unreal Engine 4 application, that only displays an Unreal Motion Graphics UI, that only contains a single Web Browser widget, that may or may not be chromium. Also its PresentInterval is locked to 2, so it'll never go over 30 FPS. Fun times!

You don't have to have it open during development, only to download the Unreal Engine, which happens very infrequently.

Right now I have open:

- 2 Rider backends with 8 and 7 GB of RAM consumption, plus rider64.exe with almost 4 GB of RAM usage.

- UnrealEditor.exe with almost 1 GB of RAM usage (6 GB committed).

- Firefox with 500-ish MB of RAM usage.

- Epic Launcher with 500-ish MB of RAM usage.

- Steam with 200-ish MB of RAM usage.

The launcher seems to be the least of one's problems when working with UE, resource-wise.

If often amazes me how unresponsive the EGS application is.

Though my experiences modding various games with their unreal 4 dev kits were much worse. Especially coming from modding games with engines where you could edit scripts with the text editor of your choice.

Lightweight? Are we talking about the same piece of software?

That hasn't been my experience at all, it's the most sluggish launcher I've ever dealt with.

I suppose it comes from their rocky launch when it was ... less than optimal. However, I can confirm that the Epic Games Launcher isn't causing any problems and it seems to be a good way to get UE.

As a side note, I would also recommend JetBrains Rider if you plan to do a lot of C++, it's miles ahead of Visual Studio when it comes to UE code completion.

Thanks, I hate VS and already have a JetBrains all-apps package so that's very helpful

You still have to install VS, or at least the msbuild toolchain though. (VS is a lot easier to get running.)

One more thing: I switched my editor setting in Unreal to "Rider (uproject)" so I could get rid of the SLN files.

I already have VS and the Windows SDK that includes MSVC and Clang. I just generally don't like to use it as an IDE (with few exceptions). I use it to build VS projects and that's about it.

You mean JetBrains CLion? Rider is C#, which is great for Unity development and has support for that builtin.

No, I mean Rider. CLion seems to be built to work with CMake primarily which UE does not use. Rider specifically has an Unreal Engine plugin and does support C++ fairly well. It is the only IDE we could get UE code completion to work properly. Why this is the case I don't know, but if I had to guess I'd say something something msbuild.

"CLion seems to be built to work with CMake primarily" - you mean only? I mean, they recently implemented basic syntax highlighting for non-CMake projects, but you still can't use any of the actual analysis, refactoring, or debugging features without a CMakeLists.txt file.

With compile_commands.json it's been possible for quite a while now.

Ugh, I wish these features were more discoverable. I use CLion all the time and I've never heard of this.

Rider also does C++ and Jetbrains targets Unreal Engine support. They’re trying to position it as a game developers IDE

AFAIK there is none. You have to accept their terms, it is not open source.

I don't care if it's open source. I want to download DRM-free binaries, and screw the "terms". Is that so much to ask?

I don't think UE has DRM in the editor. The launcher is AFAIK only needed to download the thing, which probably has a lot more to do with optimizing downloads than DRM. If you don't like it, just build it from source, it's not exactly complicated.

> If you don't like it, just build it from source

Sorry, but my problem statement explicitly addressed this.

It is source available to everyone though!

Everyone who accepts their agreement. https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.3/en-US/downloading-unreal-e...

If the source code is publicly available, it's Open Source, however much we may dislike the actual license.

Source Available is not necessarily Open Source.

https://opensource.org/osd/

That's one definition. There are many.

It is not publicly available. If you click on this link you get a 404 page: https://github.com/EpicGames/UnrealEngine You actually have to go and subscribe, agree to their terms, and then you get to view the source code. It happens to be free, but it is by no means "public". (I also don't have a problem with their license. Their business model is more than fair.)

That's an incomplete, if not useless, definition.

I sell a source code license to my software. It does not allow redistribution. Any member of the public can pay me for a copy under that license.

That fits your definition but no one meaningfully calls my software Open Source.

Using that term your way in general conversation is only going to confuse things.

We already have terms like "source available" which fit your needs and which are far less ambiguous or contentious. The arguments over what "open source" means, in a software license context, was generally resolved many years ago.

Yes of course, there are at least 2 ways. You can install from source or you can download the engine directly and install it without the launcher, this is what I did in my linux computer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com