Decided to do a flash sale given all the visibility the engine has gotten recently. You can get the Standard License free for the next 24 hours: https://itch.io/s/48411/dragonruby-game-toolkit-hacker-news-...
Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
131–140 of 146 posts
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ehh, I could put together a thing that could display several million dots at 60 fps in unity in a few minutes. (a recent example of some dots I moved) https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1378056437105049603 Not saying DragonRuby isn't the bees knees, I've never used it but appreciate alternatives existing. Despite that, sprites are the wrong facility for drawing that many dots in unity.
Can you associate a PhysicsBody2D with each one of these?
AFAIK there's GPU analogs for everything physicsBody2d's can do, but not directly.
Per particle gravity and forces are batteries included. If you want GPU particles that can collide with other particles there's Fluvio, it's free.
Here's 65k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwzfr9ppvj4
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unity deploys to console. You just need to be licensed to build to different console platforms. And saying Unity is not that great is an ignorant statement. What about it isn’t great? And how is DragonRuby better?
This does a good job of summarizing what's wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23271973
Been using Unity for a long time and that is a hyperbolic comment. It’s not nearly as bad as that person makes it out to be.
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you associate a PhysicsBody2D with each one of these?
AFAIK there's GPU analogs for everything physicsBody2d's can do, but not directly. Per particle gravity and forces are batteries included. If you want GPU particles that can collide with other particles there's Fluvio, it's free. Here's 65k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwzfr9ppvj4
From an apples to apples standpoint. What you're seeing in the video is DragonRuby Entities vs Unity GameObjects (with full functionality).
They look like particles yes, but the intent was to show the creation of fully featured constructs (not a demonstration of "fire and forget" particles).
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#135> This is not the same Ruby you'd use for building web apps with Rails (far from it). > DragonRuby is powered by highly optimized C code written by Ryan C. Gordon. This feels like a liability for the long term. The community is now depending on Ryan to maintain this custom Ruby implementation, if I'm reading correctly.
In general I don't think I'd be comfortable using any type of engine or framework which is solely developed by one person. Let's say he goes crazy tomorrow and decides to camp on the beaches of Jamaica. No matter what you do, particularly with a closed source engine, you're stuck. With unity if one programmer decides to quit, we still have a game engine that gets updated. With Godot if both of the paid maintainers qu…
In the event that Godot becomes insolvent, the engine loses the ability to export to console. You must have a business entity to get access to those parts of the SDK. Losing the ability to go to console is a massive hit to the viability of the engine.
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
This does a good job of summarizing what's wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23271973
Been using Unity for a long time and that is a hyperbolic comment. It’s not nearly as bad as that person makes it out to be.
I’m not sure how to respond frankly. You claimed my statements were ignorant. So in response, I provided a source that I agree with wholeheartedly. And a HN comment thread that provides even more criticisms.
I mean, I can add to what’s already been stated. But I’m not sure it’ll really help further the conversation. Especially when it’s being dismissed as “not nearly as bad”. So... yea.
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is wrong Ruby? Which language would be "cool" choice?
In my opinion Python provides a better syntax in almost all areas. Ruby has been a language in decline for quite some time.
Syntax is extremely subjective. For my part Python's awful syntax is an important reason for why I avoid using it if I at all can (which is almost always).
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
In general I don't think I'd be comfortable using any type of engine or framework which is solely developed by one person. Let's say he goes crazy tomorrow and decides to camp on the beaches of Jamaica. No matter what you do, particularly with a closed source engine, you're stuck. With unity if one programmer decides to quit, we still have a game engine that gets updated. With Godot if both of the paid maintainers qu…
In the event that Godot becomes insolvent, the engine loses the ability to export to console. You must have a business entity to get access to those parts of the SDK. Losing the ability to go to console is a massive hit to the viability of the engine.
Godot doesn't directly offer console support anyway
https://docs.godotengine.org/en/3.0/tutorials/platform/conso...
Realistically this means if porting to console is a priority you should go with one of the dominate engines, Unreal or Unity.
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion Python provides a better syntax in almost all areas. Ruby has been a language in decline for quite some time.
Syntax is extremely subjective. For my part Python's awful syntax is an important reason for why I avoid using it if I at all can (which is almost always).
Thats why I said "in my opinion."
Re: Show HN: DragonRuby Game Toolkit
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion Python provides a better syntax in almost all areas. Ruby has been a language in decline for quite some time.
> Python provides a better syntax in almost all areas Examples?
Things I don't like about Ruby: %w{} et al., symbols, more implicit "magicy" things.