What about RedEngine?
Why not Godot?
He didn't say open source.
In the article he says it's about building a game engine that is built with AI in mind. I guess that's one thing. Godot has one of the clunkiest editors I have ever used with a lot of basic features missing. Absolutely no AI anywhere. And I kinda love it for that.
"AI in mind" - so it's a grift. Good that they label themselves beforehand, so people don't get confused.
Godot is not European and not proprietary ;)
Which is good, right? (Not proprietary part).
Yes, but for some reason a lot of buy european is concentrating on proprietary offerings
It's hard to buy free
Hard to sell.
Companies sell support for FOSS all over the world. SLAs and consultants for days
Of course, and larhe organizations (such as EU) don't just adopt software but rather buy service contract from a corporation so they don't have to figure it out themselves.
And so they can blame someone when stuff goes wrong.
And even better for people that don't live in us or Europe, right? Right?
have you tried using godot with c#? Enjoy your variants!
have you tried using godot with c#?
Nope!
Enjoy your variants!
Thanks, you too!
Personally I would really like it if they just exposed an API/bindings style and let people write in pretty much any language they want. Gdscript is okish, but not more than that. Forcing a new language with all it quirks is not the way to go.
Now I know it would be a lot of work to do so, but I hope they will at some point.
First of all, GDScript is pretty dope, and I think having a tool that's familiar but fit to purpose can be better than trying to cram everything into one generic language.
But despite that Godot does have an API called GDExtension that allows you to write in any language, for example Rust!
No, it really isn't dope. It is okish, there are far worse but also far better. But the whole idea of forcing people to learn a new language is bad, and needs to stop. We do not need more languages, we need better languages.
class vs class_name which means completly different things. The latter should have been something other than class with a name suffix.All in all, it is not bad. But certain aspects of it are not that good. The main point is that forcing people to learn a new language raises the bar of entry a lot. I think that is one of the things Unity got right, for the most part they used microsoft java (aka C#), with all its warts.
Speaking of which, if there are native bindings. Why does the .net version even exist as a separate download? And why aren't there bindings for other languages? At least I haven't seen any, everyone just says "use gdscript. C# version is older and not well maintained"
If there are first class bindings, then great.
Edit: I would be very happy if there was a way to write in typescript, lua, perl, c# (without .net), etc.. even if I had to drop in a plugin to support it.
In the end a lot of this is taste but:
Indent based flow control is a massive fail right from the start.
By some metrics, Python is the most popular programming language in the world and has been for a long time. So the thing that's a massive fail right off the bat to you, is actually the lowest a barrier of entry gets. Simple GDScript starts out as basically a Python variant.
I've been a professional programmer for 20 years (not in Python) but I've never used C# and all the bits of it I've seen seem awful, like Java which I have used and hated every time. If Godot had been a C# system it would have been harder for me to get into it and enjoy it. Personally. I think the only reason they offer it at all is to try and appeal to Unity migrants.
GDScript was meant to be a gentle introduction. You've got a thing on the screen, and you want to just quickly move it when the cursor moves and it takes a few lines of code, every one of which is just about that intent. The way it has built-in syntax for addressing the hierarchy of nodes specifically encourages their use and incentivizes their design philosophy. I love functional programming typically, but I don't think I've ever missed having a lambda in GDScript, because I'm making a videogame, not transforming a data pipeline.
Things like class and class_name are a smidge confusing, sure, but both are essentially advanced features. The normal way to make a class is to make a file, and the normal way to refer to it is to include it in your node hierarchy, or by filename in a weird case.
So the GDScript is meant to be "progressive", like a scripting language, where it's a few lines to add a bit of interaction to something, where every line is there for a reason rather than boilerplate, and there are more advanced features if you need them, but they're not front and centre most of the time. I think most of the problems you've mentioned are just baggage you've brought from your other languages, but aren't needed here.
So anyway, it's taste. But fundamentally, I think the thing we disagree on most is "we don't need more languages, we need better languages". I get that, but disagree. I love a domain specific language, I love a purpose-built feature, and would much rather see a garden of variety rather than have everything be Java and C#.
Awww you two. This is why i love lemmy. Two randoms arguing over some super specific personal preferences :)
Me too! 😛🫡
It's just euro washing greed like 99% of the buy European of the past couple of years. Better off to support anything open source than the next Tim Epic
A community for PC Master Race.
Rules: