Godot is a very impressive project.
Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
21–30 of 44 posts
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#22Godot approach to game development with nodes is superior to other solutions IMO. I think the biggest blocker for wider adoption is 3D performance and Inverse Kinematics now. Without it, nobody will ever produce high profile game on Godot.
Yup, most gamedev will talk about performance as a reason to prefer Unity, when asked about Unity vs Godot.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#23I was thinking "why not use bgfx?", thankfully it's already been discussed: https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/19602
However, the arguments against bgfx seem to amount to "I want to do it myself", a classic "not invented here" issue.
EDIT: found this too https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-renderer-design-expl...
> Added to that fact, Vulkan still has years to go until it's properly supported in most desktop and mobile platforms, which makes it unattractive to implement for us (as it means considerably more effort to write, debug and maintain).
And then they're talking about the Vulkan PI in TFA which probably won't be ready for some time too...
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#24Godot approach to game development with nodes is superior to other solutions IMO. I think the biggest blocker for wider adoption is 3D performance and Inverse Kinematics now. Without it, nobody will ever produce high profile game on Godot.
Isn’t there IK now? I’ve used it on 2D skeletons in Godot.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#25Godot is my game engine of choice. As a patron, I am now in very good company.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#26I was thinking "why not use bgfx?", thankfully it's already been discussed: https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/19602 However, the arguments against bgfx seem to amount to "I want to do it myself", a classic "not invented here" issue. EDIT: found this too https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-renderer-design-expl... > Added to that fact, Vulkan still has years to go until it's properly supported in most des…
So much of a game engine is how it's rendering works. It interacts with everything else. I don't think it's an unreasonable thing for a game engine to want to implement themselves.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#27I was thinking "why not use bgfx?", thankfully it's already been discussed: https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/19602 However, the arguments against bgfx seem to amount to "I want to do it myself", a classic "not invented here" issue. EDIT: found this too https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-renderer-design-expl... > Added to that fact, Vulkan still has years to go until it's properly supported in most des…
It maybe reasonable at first glance, but when you start using a library you will hit a roadblock eventually especially if you are working on the lower-level things.
If you need something from the library that it doesn't have you will either implement it yourself, create a PR, wait for it to be merged or work around it (which defeats the purpose of using a library).
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#28I was thinking "why not use bgfx?", thankfully it's already been discussed: https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/19602 However, the arguments against bgfx seem to amount to "I want to do it myself", a classic "not invented here" issue. EDIT: found this too https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-renderer-design-expl... > Added to that fact, Vulkan still has years to go until it's properly supported in most des…
> However, the arguments against bgfx seem to amount to "I want to do it myself", a classic "not invented here" issue.
I disagree. It has been 9 months since that post. bgfx still does not list support for Vulkan. They already implemented DX12 and Metal. They still claim support for Windows XP and Vista. Godot says it will get Vulkan support in 3.2 which comes out in a few months. Otherwise they would have to wait and work on bgfx to get it working. DX9, XP, Vista, feels like a lot of baggage for what Godot is right now. A very quick and easy to use game editor that easily deploys on both Win and Linux.
Also, your edit links to a pretty outdated article (2017).
See Godot's about face on Vulkan here:
https://godotengine.org/article/abandoning-gles3-vulkan-and-...
> Vulkan was always a tempting alternative to solve them and to ensure we are much safer from driver bugs (after all, this is what the API was intended for). Still, the lack of support on macOS made it unappealing. Having to write a Metal backend to support this OS is a lot of effort for a platform not used very much.
> in a completely unexpected turn of events, it seems Valve has found an arrangement with the developers of MoltenVK (the commercial and proprietary Vulkan over Metal wrapper), ported Dota 2 to it, and got it open sourced.
> It seems to be a mostly complete Vulkan implementation that runs on macOS and iOS. This pretty much lifts the only barrier we had for moving Godot to it.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the tip. Did you have a chance to compare with gamemaker?
Godot doesn't enforce any structure like game maker does. Additionally Godots default language (Gdscript) is awesome and intuitive, whereas gml doesn't really feel like a real language (argument0-15. Come on)
>Additionally Godots default language (Gdscript) is awesome and intuitive, whereas gml doesn't really feel like a real language (argument0-15. Come on)
I agree with the comparison to GML, but whether one finds Gdscript intuitive depends on one's existing background. I personally found it frustrating because I was used to C/C++, but with time I can see getting used to it. It's not a bad language by any means.
Also, both Game Maker and Godot share the problem of their scripting language being essentially a form of lock-in, since no one is going to use Gdscript anywhere else, and any code you write it in is no longer portable. Also, they use their own shader script rather than GLSL, which means your shaders aren't portable either.
Godot can support different languages (unlike Unity or Game Maker), but IIRC that requires recompiling the engine and may break the editor.
Re: Godot Engine Awarded $50k by Mozilla Open Source Support Program
#30> The WP also includes work to make the editor work on mobile browsers, such as touch screen gestures, responsive UI, etc. This should also make it possible for us to port the editor to Android and iOS natively to tweak your projects on the go.
That sounds very ambitious, UI and UX wise. Wonder how that will turn out in practice