upvote
Lots of things right too, thankfully
reply
Godot is only the best open source engine because Bevy is not ready for production, Lumberyard/O3DE is hard to set up and everything else is ancient or 2D only. one eyed man among the blind type shit
reply
> Godot is only the best open source engine because Bevy is not ready for production

I would argue that even if Bevy was ready for production it would not really compete with Godot.

Godot's performance is plenty for the vast majority of small to medium games. Plus they're starting to work on features like texture streaming for bigger games. It also has an editor which is a big plus for most teams.

Bevy would be objectively better for expensive CPU simulation stuff but realistically what percentage of games need that? Maybe 1%?

For Bevy to catch up on the indie game scene it needs an editor plus a scripting language and/or something like Unreal Blueprints. If it only wants to target the hardcore Rust dev that does everything by code it will never go mainstream.

reply
Godot is the best open source engine because it is dead simple to use, comes bundled with its own IDE and documentation, the editor runs on any platform that Godot runs (including the web) and the performance benefits for something like Bevy only apply to a handful of games that really need it.

Godot gives GDScript simplicity for the vast majority of use cases which is that iteration boon, provides C# for games that need the additional guardrails. For performance critical game scripts you can just jump to C++, Rust, Swift, etc.

But most game scripts are not performance critical. Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 swept the game awards last year as an Unreal Engine game made using almost entirely visual scripting (blueprints).

reply
Also Unreal C++ has a GC, exactly to have easy interoperability between engine code and C++ components exposed to Blueprints.
reply
I always do not understand why defold is never put into the fold [sic!] of those sentiments/discussions. You can learn a clean & fun language (lua) and its JIT is maybe/probably running laps around something like GDScript, which in itself is proprietary and has no other uses for you than, ehh, Godot?? You can integrate C/C++ extensions natively, neatly exposing them through lua APIs. Its mobile and web target footprint is unbeatably (?) small, desktop at least 10x smaller than Godot or Unity. It is Open Source.

Maybe it's the "ancient" part, because more recent is always better ;)

reply
> I always do not understand why defold

Starting with absolutely nothing but a compiler is always going to be a worse experience (and less likely to result in anything released) than a GUI-driven and aided solution. If Defold developers had produced a fraction of the libraries that Godot has, it might have had a chance. As of now, it's worse than other abandoned engines like Solar2D (was CoronaSDK) for people entering the space. As most people know, the vast majority of games are net-losses, so engines live and die by the ease of adoption by newcomers.

reply
Unfortunately, I'm really not a fan of using Lua for anything beyond simple scripting.
reply
defold is really cool, the only downside is its really weird build system for native extensions
reply
No. If you try Bevy, it feels different from ECS and ordinary OOP. So it's hard to get used to. But Godot, although GDScript has performance issues, if you use GDScript it's easy to port to mobile and web games, and the syntax itself is OOP, so it's easy to adapt to.

A lot of people complain about OOP, but it's a paradigm very well suited for rapid development.

reply
Lots of people complain, yet nothing else has won over in GUI development tooling.
reply
I miss Torque
reply