Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

godotengine.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 187 posts

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#11

Post by lazypenguin »

donmcronald wrote: post #3

Would Godot be a decent engine for kids around 12-14 years old? I don't know a lot about it, but would like to suggest something for a person I know. I'd also be curious what the Godot support is like in terms of maintaining older releases. I think it would be a mistake to tell a young person to use a beta version since they could hit a lot of bugs and get discouraged, but having them use an existing version that doe…

Godot 3 is pretty well supported and maintained for now. It's a great engine for smaller or personal projects IMO. Really reduces the barrier to entry to make a game, especially 2D or basic 3D

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#12

Post by deng »

donmcronald wrote: post #3

Would Godot be a decent engine for kids around 12-14 years old? I don't know a lot about it, but would like to suggest something for a person I know. I'd also be curious what the Godot support is like in terms of maintaining older releases. I think it would be a mistake to tell a young person to use a beta version since they could hit a lot of bugs and get discouraged, but having them use an existing version that doe…

Well, it depends on the kids, of course. For 2D games, I think Gamemaker is more accessible and easier to learn, and you get results more quickly.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#13

Post by seanw444 »

mkl95 wrote: post #2

> After an unsatisfactory attempt at using Bullet, Godot 4.0 returns to its own physics engine which, despite not being a high end physics engine like PhysX, aims to offer a lot more flexibility and “just works” capabilities to users. This is a bit of a red flag if one of their goals is for the engine to be used on AAA games.

I was about to say "they can't, the project is supposed to be fully open-source." Because, you know, Nvidia. But I looked it up just to double-check, and wow, that's like one of the only open-source projects Nvidia has ever published. At least that I've seen.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#14

Post by sho_hn »

seanw444 wrote: post #13
mkl95 wrote: post #2

> After an unsatisfactory attempt at using Bullet, Godot 4.0 returns to its own physics engine which, despite not being a high end physics engine like PhysX, aims to offer a lot more flexibility and “just works” capabilities to users. This is a bit of a red flag if one of their goals is for the engine to be used on AAA games.

I was about to say "they can't, the project is supposed to be fully open-source." Because, you know, Nvidia. But I looked it up just to double-check, and wow, that's like one of the only open-source projects Nvidia has ever published. At least that I've seen.

I believe you misread the quote; they're not using PhysX.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#15

Post by tpxl »

Zealotux wrote: post #7
teawrecks wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

I will assume a high-end, state of the art physics engine is a must have for any AAA game.

Not really. There are whole genres where physics isn't really a thing (RTS, card games, turn based strategies). Even where there are physics, they don't need to be complex, just fast. Most fps games, for example Fortnite, don't really use complex physics stuff like joints, and most don't even have fast moving objects.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#16

Post by seanw444 »

sho_hn wrote: post #14
seanw444 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was about to say "they can't, the project is supposed to be fully open-source." Because, you know, Nvidia. But I looked it up just to double-check, and wow, that's like one of the only open-source projects Nvidia has ever published. At least that I've seen.

I believe you misread the quote; they're not using PhysX.

No, I read it right. I was saying that I was about to explain why, but my explanation turned out to be incorrect, to my surprise.

However, they say:

> That said, Godot 4.0 introduces the ability to bind custom physics engines at runtime (without recompiling Godot) via GDExtension, so it’s perfectly possible for the community to integrate other engines such as PhysX, Jolt, or Box2D if need to be.

I'm liking this work on GDExtension. It'll make Godot a lot more capable just on its own.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#17

Post by rcarmo »

donmcronald wrote: post #3

Would Godot be a decent engine for kids around 12-14 years old? I don't know a lot about it, but would like to suggest something for a person I know. I'd also be curious what the Godot support is like in terms of maintaining older releases. I think it would be a mistake to tell a young person to use a beta version since they could hit a lot of bugs and get discouraged, but having them use an existing version that doe…

My youngest (12K) is writing a 2D platform game in it (3.x). He's had exposure to Pico-8 and various other environments (as well as basic Python) and has spent a while figuring out the mechanics of things like double jumps entirely on his own.

(Oh, and he used Bolt visual scripting in Unity for a while, with decent results until we decided that Godot was much less hassle.)

I'd say that he has come across zero bugs so far.

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#18

Post by whaaswijk »

lazypenguin wrote: post #9

Godot is a nice engine. I did a 3D project in it during the 3.0.x era and it was by far the friendliest and easiest engine I have used to-date. I think it gets a lot of love from people (myself included) because of that. The node system is absolutely wonderful to work with and GDScript is not bad as well. It's the most productive I've been in a game engine and I regularly contemplate going all-in on Godot for the fut…

What’s the “something else” you’re currently using?

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#19

Post by cyber_kinetist »

donmcronald wrote: post #3

Would Godot be a decent engine for kids around 12-14 years old? I don't know a lot about it, but would like to suggest something for a person I know. I'd also be curious what the Godot support is like in terms of maintaining older releases. I think it would be a mistake to tell a young person to use a beta version since they could hit a lot of bugs and get discouraged, but having them use an existing version that doe…

GameMaker is pretty much the best game engine to get introduced to programming. It has a visual scripting tool that lets you write basic logic without any raw textual coding, but also provides a smooth transition path to learn an actual scripting language (GML) when the child becomes more ambitious. I’ve started programming at a young age thanks to this.

(Godot had a visual scripting system but they removed it in 4.0. And it wasn’t really intuitive to learn anyway, compared to how GameMaker does things.)

Re: Godot for AA/AAA game development – What's missing?

#20

Post by mattgreenrocks »

Do you prefer Godot or Unity for 2D games these days? I did a simple game in Unity and it went pretty well. I'd prefer to use C# if possible. Unity is a very nice environment but IIRC it really seems to chug when reloading user scripts from disk after updates.
Post reply on HN