RightHandOfIkaros comments on Developer makes the same game twice in Unity and Godot after struggling to choose an engine, delivering detailed comparison of the pros and cons

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I can't help but feel like this article is biased in favor of Godot. Looking at the screenshots, its pretty clear that the Godot build appears to have post-processing effects applied to it while the Unity one appears to not have the same effects applied to it, or they are not tuned to the same values.

A person who is good at using a game engine can make a game look graphically almost identical when made in any other engine.

permalink

fedilink

source

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago (1 child)

Grové concluded that both engines were fully capable of creating the kind of game he wanted to make. When comparing framerates, he noted that although his target was 60fps, both engines achieved framerates several times higher than that. Even accounting for future graphical improvements, he believes both still have plenty of performance headroom.

It's not like he was knocking the performance or graphics, and the points on which Godot won were objective measurements

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

I am simply pointing out that those screenshots skew the appearance of the article and make it appear to be biased in favor of Godot. I would imagine that people should want a fair and equal comparison for all elements of the two engines for comparison.

Because there is a difference, the argument could be made: if there is such an intentional difference in the screenshots with post-processing graphics, is there an intentional difference elsewhere as well to skew the data?

Its possible that there isn't, but just how trustworthy is that? That's all.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent