6 ms·

No mention of Godot? It seems to be slowly starting to eat their lunch. No mention of the fragmented rendering backends? Oh, but they do talk about basketball.

No mention of Godot? It seems to be slowly starting to eat their lunch. No mention of the fragmented rendering backends? Oh, but they do talk about basketball. Why would a CEO care about the little things… Unity is going to be fine.

OsrsNeedsf2P 10mo ago
As an ex-Unity dev, it's clear Unreal crushes Unity on the "AAA" vibe side, and Godot marches forward on the "indie" vibe side. The writing was on the wall - I personally switched to Godot and couldn't be happier. Tools have new versions before being deprecated, bugs get fixed (and fast!), and there's no looming threat of Unity coming down and squeezing more money out of our products
- lambdaone 10mo ago
  Unity is absolutely being squeezed between the two. I can't really see how it can compete with Godot at the low end; it's hard to compete with free, and most of the goodness in low end games is the gameplay logic, not graphics or animation. And Godot can only get better; look at how Blender ate the CGI tools market. This leaves Unity having to either compete with Unreal at the high end - a very high bar - or somehow finding a new business model. The switcheroo they tried to pull on their customer base can best be viewed in that light.
  - kranke155 10mo ago
    Yep it seems to be end of the line for Unity tbh.
    - 64718283661 10mo ago
      Can you list even a single widely popular Godot game? Meanwhile, like half of the steam top 50, 100, 200, etc is unity.
      - krige 10mo ago
        Cruelty Squad. Also the other assertion seems rather hyperbolic. Steam top50/100 is either unreal or proprietary engines...
        64718283661 10mo ago
        Maybe a bit of an exaggeration. But I think at least 30%. Unreal is popular too. Unity seems to be more popular for indie/coop/single player/certain art styles. There seems to be many more unity games overall, but a lot of them are very small.
      - danbolt 10mo ago
        I don’t know if I could list something that matches say Cuphead or Silksong, but I do think that Godot is currently on a Clayton Christiansen-style worse-is-better ascent right now.
      - SSLy 10mo ago
        Battlefield 6 of all things includes Godot as core of the Portal map-building. Casette Beasts is what Pokemon wishes it was. Upcoming Planetenverteidigungskanonenkommandant looks gorgeous from the previews.
        esyir 10mo ago
        I don't really think Nintendo is particularly concerned about Casette Beasts. And BF6 using it for their map builder is IMO a bit of a stretch. Planetenverteidigungskanonenkommandant looks neat though.
      - jsheard 10mo ago
        It's a bit of a weird edge-case, but the very popular Battlefield 6 is partially a Godot game. It's an odd hybrid of a proprietary in-house engine with Godot grafted onto it, which serves as a public-facing SDK for players to build their own content. I know that's not exactly what you meant but it is an interesting application in a major AAA title. https://gamefromscratch.com/battlefield-6-using-godot-game-engine/ https://gamefromscratch.com/battlefield-6-using-godot-game-e...
  - jsheard 10mo ago
    Godot isn't quite free if you want to release on consoles since those platforms are only supported by commercial forks, but I'm sure going down that route is still a hell of a lot cheaper than licensing Unity.
    - tapoxi 10mo ago
      Yes the pricing for W4 consoles is below paying for Unity Pro. There's also a free, MIT licensed Switch exporter, but it's in the Nintendo developer forums because of the NDAs.
      - ronsor 10mo ago
        You probably violated a Nintendo NDA by even mentioning that the exporter exists on the forums.
  - pjmlp 10mo ago
    A much better C# experience across all devices where people expect to buy games.
- torginus 10mo ago
  I don't like Godot that much either - Imo what an engine needs is a clear and easy to use high-level API for grunt work, and good low level access so you can program your features just the way you want to. If you understand how engines and rendering works in general you have an idea on how to implement something - but then you either run into A: a tool that can't quite do what you want but almost, B: an incredibly overengineered API that's somehow way more byzantine than OpenGL C: Some obscure quirk or bug of an existing feature that either works in a strange way, isn't documented, or is buggy. In all these cases, doing the feature yourself is much easier than relying on the engine. Particle systems are a good example for this.
  - OsrsNeedsf2P 10mo ago
    You can bring your own particle system in Godot, you don't have to use the default one
pjmlp 10mo ago
Godot still has a lot to catch up, especially when considering the folks that rather target consoles and VR headsets with C#. Also they aren't still there with being first partner with many industry places, that always release a Unity SDK for their products.
everyone 10mo ago
Currently working on a new game and it was hard for me to decide between unity and Godot.. I ended up going with Unity cus.. * I have 10+ years experience with it. * C# integration in Godot is not great * Cant build to webGL with C# in latest version of Godot * gdscript is not a serious option imo (stupid whitespace language..They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript.. Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example) * With Unity I have access to the asset store, which has a massive amount of content, some very high quality stuff also that's much better then Unity's built in features (eg. Rewired) I feel dirty using Unity vs Godot, but I primarily want to get my game done, and it will be faster with a better result using Unity, its just superior from an engineering point of view right now imo.
- bob1029 10mo ago
  > I feel dirty using Unity vs Godot Unity doesn't make me feel dirty at all. Quite the opposite actually. I am not going to apologize for using tools that don't suck. I feel like I am on the bridge of an imperial star destroyer when I am observing others get caught up with this "X is better than Y" bullshit, especially when X is definitely not better than Y. > its just superior from an engineering point of view right now imo. If you are building a game, this is the only thing that should matter. Imagine deluding yourself into believing that by picking exactly the right OSS hammer from Home Depot that your woodworking project will magically go better. If you have involved other humans in this effort, playing tooling tribalism simulator is a pretty lame thing to do, especially if those other humans are non-technical artists and otherwise trying to simply contribute to some shared creative vision.
- ronsor 10mo ago
  > gdscript is not a serious option imo (stupid whitespace language..They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript.. Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example) I'm going to break this down: > gdscript is not a serious option imo Subjective, but fair enough. If this is a general argument against "scripting languages" versus more "advanced" languages, I should remind you that Lua and JS are still very popular languages in game development. > stupid whitespace language The only other big "whitespace language," Python, is immensely popular and widespread in server, client, AI, etc. applications. This is a question of taste, and has nothing to do with the objective quality of GDScript. > They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript The irony is that JavaScript (real JS, not a JS-like language) is almost certainly very viable in a game engine nowadays. > Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example C# is popular for a variety of reasons (fast, mature ecosystem, etc.); however, "just use C# because others are using it" is by itself not a compelling argument. Syntax and language aren't that big of a deal for professional developers.

OsrsNeedsf2P 10mo ago

As an ex-Unity dev, it's clear Unreal crushes Unity on the "AAA" vibe side, and Godot marches forward on the "indie" vibe side. The writing was on the wall - I personally switched to Godot and couldn't be happier. Tools have new versions before being deprecated, bugs get fixed (and fast!), and there's no looming threat of Unity coming down and squeezing more money out of our products

lambdaone 10mo ago
Unity is absolutely being squeezed between the two. I can't really see how it can compete with Godot at the low end; it's hard to compete with free, and most of the goodness in low end games is the gameplay logic, not graphics or animation. And Godot can only get better; look at how Blender ate the CGI tools market. This leaves Unity having to either compete with Unreal at the high end - a very high bar - or somehow finding a new business model. The switcheroo they tried to pull on their customer base can best be viewed in that light.
- kranke155 10mo ago
  Yep it seems to be end of the line for Unity tbh.
  - 64718283661 10mo ago
    Can you list even a single widely popular Godot game? Meanwhile, like half of the steam top 50, 100, 200, etc is unity.
    - krige 10mo ago
      Cruelty Squad. Also the other assertion seems rather hyperbolic. Steam top50/100 is either unreal or proprietary engines...
      - 64718283661 10mo ago
        Maybe a bit of an exaggeration. But I think at least 30%. Unreal is popular too. Unity seems to be more popular for indie/coop/single player/certain art styles. There seems to be many more unity games overall, but a lot of them are very small.
    - danbolt 10mo ago
      I don’t know if I could list something that matches say Cuphead or Silksong, but I do think that Godot is currently on a Clayton Christiansen-style worse-is-better ascent right now.
    - SSLy 10mo ago
      Battlefield 6 of all things includes Godot as core of the Portal map-building. Casette Beasts is what Pokemon wishes it was. Upcoming Planetenverteidigungskanonenkommandant looks gorgeous from the previews.
      - esyir 10mo ago
        I don't really think Nintendo is particularly concerned about Casette Beasts. And BF6 using it for their map builder is IMO a bit of a stretch. Planetenverteidigungskanonenkommandant looks neat though.
    - jsheard 10mo ago
      It's a bit of a weird edge-case, but the very popular Battlefield 6 is partially a Godot game. It's an odd hybrid of a proprietary in-house engine with Godot grafted onto it, which serves as a public-facing SDK for players to build their own content. I know that's not exactly what you meant but it is an interesting application in a major AAA title. https://gamefromscratch.com/battlefield-6-using-godot-game-engine/ https://gamefromscratch.com/battlefield-6-using-godot-game-e...
- jsheard 10mo ago
  Godot isn't quite free if you want to release on consoles since those platforms are only supported by commercial forks, but I'm sure going down that route is still a hell of a lot cheaper than licensing Unity.
  - tapoxi 10mo ago
    Yes the pricing for W4 consoles is below paying for Unity Pro. There's also a free, MIT licensed Switch exporter, but it's in the Nintendo developer forums because of the NDAs.
    - ronsor 10mo ago
      You probably violated a Nintendo NDA by even mentioning that the exporter exists on the forums.
- pjmlp 10mo ago
  A much better C# experience across all devices where people expect to buy games.
torginus 10mo ago
I don't like Godot that much either - Imo what an engine needs is a clear and easy to use high-level API for grunt work, and good low level access so you can program your features just the way you want to. If you understand how engines and rendering works in general you have an idea on how to implement something - but then you either run into A: a tool that can't quite do what you want but almost, B: an incredibly overengineered API that's somehow way more byzantine than OpenGL C: Some obscure quirk or bug of an existing feature that either works in a strange way, isn't documented, or is buggy. In all these cases, doing the feature yourself is much easier than relying on the engine. Particle systems are a good example for this.
- OsrsNeedsf2P 10mo ago
  You can bring your own particle system in Godot, you don't have to use the default one

pjmlp 10mo ago

Godot still has a lot to catch up, especially when considering the folks that rather target consoles and VR headsets with C#. Also they aren't still there with being first partner with many industry places, that always release a Unity SDK for their products.

everyone 10mo ago

Currently working on a new game and it was hard for me to decide between unity and Godot.. I ended up going with Unity cus.. * I have 10+ years experience with it. * C# integration in Godot is not great * Cant build to webGL with C# in latest version of Godot * gdscript is not a serious option imo (stupid whitespace language..They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript.. Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example) * With Unity I have access to the asset store, which has a massive amount of content, some very high quality stuff also that's much better then Unity's built in features (eg. Rewired) I feel dirty using Unity vs Godot, but I primarily want to get my game done, and it will be faster with a better result using Unity, its just superior from an engineering point of view right now imo.

bob1029 10mo ago
> I feel dirty using Unity vs Godot Unity doesn't make me feel dirty at all. Quite the opposite actually. I am not going to apologize for using tools that don't suck. I feel like I am on the bridge of an imperial star destroyer when I am observing others get caught up with this "X is better than Y" bullshit, especially when X is definitely not better than Y. > its just superior from an engineering point of view right now imo. If you are building a game, this is the only thing that should matter. Imagine deluding yourself into believing that by picking exactly the right OSS hammer from Home Depot that your woodworking project will magically go better. If you have involved other humans in this effort, playing tooling tribalism simulator is a pretty lame thing to do, especially if those other humans are non-technical artists and otherwise trying to simply contribute to some shared creative vision.
ronsor 10mo ago
> gdscript is not a serious option imo (stupid whitespace language..They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript.. Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example) I'm going to break this down: > gdscript is not a serious option imo Subjective, but fair enough. If this is a general argument against "scripting languages" versus more "advanced" languages, I should remind you that Lua and JS are still very popular languages in game development. > stupid whitespace language The only other big "whitespace language," Python, is immensely popular and widespread in server, client, AI, etc. applications. This is a question of taste, and has nothing to do with the objective quality of GDScript. > They need to drop it and focus on C# like Unity did years back with UnityScript The irony is that JavaScript (real JS, not a JS-like language) is almost certainly very viable in a game engine nowadays. > Seriously XNA and then Unity have cemented C# as the other language of game devs alongside C++. Even KSA's custom new engine is C# for example C# is popular for a variety of reasons (fast, mature ecosystem, etc.); however, "just use C# because others are using it" is by itself not a compelling argument. Syntax and language aren't that big of a deal for professional developers.