51–60 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not directly relevant, but the use of the phrase “democratization” to describe a process that has nothing whatsoever to do with democracy (“anarchization”?) has become a pet peeve of mine.
I think democratization is often used where decentralization fits better as a term.
Let me tell you that the future of game development is in developing games, and any particular language has nothing to do with it. Does anyone care what language were any particular games that keep being replayed or remembered fondly? No. Never.
It is important: I have very good memories of flash games. But those are now unplayable. (Well, I guess you can still run flash. But it doesn’t work out of the box.) The technology in which a game is made does matter a bit.
Rust has one of the best Lang->WASM stories out there. The thing that made Flash games so popular was the "You just load up the page in your browser". I see rust fitting very well into that role in the future.
Further, because WASM is a part of the web standard, I don't see it going away anytime soon. Those WASM games will work for a long time into the future.
The future of Game Development is about democratization of tools. With tools like Unity, GameMaker, and RPG maker it has become easier and easier for anyone to make a game. While Rust might be a good foundation for some performance critical code, I'd hardly say it's the "Future of Game Development". Already, games use tools like Blueprints in Unreal to make games with limited to no coding experience, and I expect tho…
Not directly relevant, but the use of the phrase “democratization” to describe a process that has nothing whatsoever to do with democracy (“anarchization”?) has become a pet peeve of mine.
The action of making something accessible to everyone.
‘the democratization of information through technology’
‘Kirk has contributed greatly to the democratisation of electronic music and helped it becoming a genre to reckon with.’
>Ownership based memory Is this not just ARC?
Let me tell you that the future of game development is in developing games, and any particular language has nothing to do with it. Does anyone care what language were any particular games that keep being replayed or remembered fondly? No. Never.
Minecraft is a good example where people talk about the programming language. The portability of Java was a benefit for both Server and Client. But it was also critized because of the inefficiency of Java. I dont know if all this would have been better in Rust or other languages.
The C++ one didn't have all the same features as the Java one for a while, but it ran fine on weaker hardware than the Java version needed.
The future of Game Development is about democratization of tools. With tools like Unity, GameMaker, and RPG maker it has become easier and easier for anyone to make a game. While Rust might be a good foundation for some performance critical code, I'd hardly say it's the "Future of Game Development". Already, games use tools like Blueprints in Unreal to make games with limited to no coding experience, and I expect tho…
It is important to understand the difference between parts of a game that are expected to be performant and parts of a game that are expected to be easily changed or modded.
The future of Game Development is about democratization of tools. With tools like Unity, GameMaker, and RPG maker it has become easier and easier for anyone to make a game. While Rust might be a good foundation for some performance critical code, I'd hardly say it's the "Future of Game Development". Already, games use tools like Blueprints in Unreal to make games with limited to no coding experience, and I expect tho…
Not directly relevant, but the use of the phrase “democratization” to describe a process that has nothing whatsoever to do with democracy (“anarchization”?) has become a pet peeve of mine.
Two weeks ago Rust was the future of embedded systems (it is not) and now it is the future of Game Development (it is not). I'm starting to think that people's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously unless they have like at least 20 years of experience in a particular field.
Let me tell you that the future of game development is in developing games, and any particular language has nothing to do with it. Does anyone care what language were any particular games that keep being replayed or remembered fondly? No. Never.
> No. Never.
I certainly remember games more that still have an active modding community, which is (somewhat) enabled by the choice of programming language.
I doubt Rimworld or Minecraft would have the thousands of mods they do if modders had to write OCaml instead of Java or C#.
A lot of what makes games fun are the exceptions to the rules. An extra game mechanic in a special circumstance that allows you to do something that the basic rules don't. Or just a mechanic that stops something un-fun from happening (getting stuck, or it being too easy to trick an enemy).
But clean code always follows the rules, and makes it harder to introduce special cases.
I'm not saying software engineering has no place in a game, nor that rust would be bad it it. Just that it's less clear how software engineering will help a game, or if the game will be nudged toward a different style by the language somehow.