I find it quite strange, almost funny how many extremely unpleasant comments I see about Godot. And these seem to come from people who never have made a single game in it. Why are you here guys? Do something that makes you happy instead! Your favorite game engine isn't going to go away or suffer because of Godot, you know? Keep using what you like! Godot has it's niche, I don't claim it's the *best* engine or anything. It works for Liblast, and could be great for small or medium indie games, but it may not be the best pick for you, so don't feel attacked by this video :) - unfa
@@kturnt584 Well, maybe you didn't read the same comments I did. Calling the engine names doesn't seem like a mature way to present criticism in my view. I know Godot's shortcomings quite well myself, I don't read here anything I didn't know or didn't experience myself while working with the engine. It seems people get needlessly emotional about this. It's just a tool. Nice for some things, really unfit for other things :P - unfa
What games have you made? Non meme ones please(pixel art/plataformers/"multiplayer") The problem comes from godot advertising in their site that the engine is 3d ready, when it's not. As someone who is already making a living from gamedev I feel like I can help beginners to stay away from traps like this one.
@@eduardomoura2813 I've made a few small games. A 3D platformer, a bouncy-ball obstacle course game, some other minor stuff. I also made some tools for my livestreams with it (an interactive overlay that detects when something crashes), I have made countless prototypes, but at this point Liblast is probably the most complex one. I don't claim that Godot is perfect or best or whatever. But I think it has it's place, and lots of indie devs are using it already and most of them seem quite happy with it. Though caution is definitely advised, especially with Godot 4. That probably won't be decently stable and polished for a good while. The Godot devs say the same in their blog posts. - unfa
@@eduardomoura2813 God, the beings that I have that read on UA-cam, you have a very inflated ego and surely you have not done anything you say godot a trap? you definitely have not used it or in any case you used it many years ago
@@That_0ne_Dev Yeah why learn driving a car when u can walk everywhere...who would want to learn how to drive a car?... a kickscooter is a way smoother transition from walking.
One word: 2D. I have been working with both Unity and Unreal professionally and Godot as a hobby. I found Godot offers a better 2D games development experience than both of the big two. For Godot, 2D is the first class feature and not some mashed-up mess that was in Unity and Unreal. If you are making 2D games, Godot is the way to go. And having a lightweight editor is a big plus. Try to open Unreal or Unity compare to Godot and you see what I mean; especially Unreal which crashes quite often, restarting the engine every 10 or so minutes has become a huge pain point to me.
@@clockwritesdev7635 Yeah, for moderate 3D games Godot 3.x can perform reasonably well (some 3D games seem to be able to do amazing things with it, like Beat Invaders), Godot 4 has still miles to go before it's reasonably performant (and even bug-free), but hopefully the Vulkan renderer will be able to scale up much better for larger game worlds.
This is the whole reason why I left unreal behind. Why do I have to constantly fight the engine? I remember the last project I was working on. I had to delete the binaries and debug symbols every other compile or it wouldn’t compile anymore. Also, the documentation is just horrible. I guess if you’re a big game studio and epic stands to make a lot of money from you then the support makes it worth using unreal, but as a small indie, not so much.
As someone who uses unity I think it's really strange that unity developers can be so snarky towards godot as if unity wasn't also at one point that niche game engine that apparently couldn't keep up with the competition. Personally I see a lot of advantages to godot that at times even leave me envious such as the UI which is definitely far more intuitive. As a matter of fact I'd have to say the main thing godot has decisively over unity is how intuitive it is, even for me as someone who is atleast at an "intermediate" level of competency in unity godot just looks easier to read. Nothing is more asinine than trying to open the unity animation controller editor or the shadergraph in an entirely different tab and awkwardly fiddling around with what feels like an unfinished API. Fun fact, a lot of things in Unity like the shadergraph editor etc are outsourced to smaller companies which is why they feel so out of place with the rest of the engine. Recently I had to completely reconfigure how I generate terrain in my current main project because of how awful unity's terrain tools are, I eventually just decided to mish mash together a procedural generation script from the internet but still, godot reminds me a lot of the advantages older versions of unity had where the company didn't have to awkwardly sellotape on new features to impress their executives, something godot doesn't have to concern itself with because it's open source. And I'm personally not sold on the "there's a huge wealth of resources available through tutorials" shtick. In my experience if a tutorial is more than 2 years old you may aswell just close the video and save yourself the 20 minutes of watching and half an hour of fiddling with the engine that you can spend looking elsewhere. Unity is still great, but it's simply foolish to scoff at Godot for being new or lacking features when half of unity's "features" it has over Godot are semi functional and when unity was once also that "new" open source engine no one liked.
The more I use Unity professionally and talk to co-workers about it the more I am confident you've nailed the issue here. Unity sure is feature-packed, but it's all over the place (with many features being stuck in "preview" for seemingly forever) and seems like wasn't properly refactored for decades. Many of the internal tools are more and more often replaced with superior 3rd party solutions. And the rolling release model kinda prevents them from taking a step back and refactoring the whole engine, because the versioning inherently creates the expectation that Unity will forever be backwards compatible. On the other hand, Godot with version 4 is completely breaking backwards compatibility, but for all the right reasons - to leave behind the technical debt that has accumulated to that point. 4.0 (stable) isn't perfect - far from it, but the near-complete engine rewrite (!!) has allowed developers to use experience of what worked and didn't work in Godot 3 and make the most of it. Any sufficiently mature software would benefit from such a move, but with Unity or Unreal Engine being so large I don't think either company could afford doing that. Unless UE5 is a near compelte rewrite of UE4, but I doubt that'd be humanly possible. Not to mention that refactoring it's not something that marketing people would appreciate. It's a hard sell. I think Godot's unique development and funding models allow the team to do what is best for the engine and users, because that's who they get paid by and are answering to. It's a project truly driven by the needs of it's users, and not shareholders as you mentioned. However even Godot can suffer from feature creep and messy development if the core team was to not properly filter and analyze the user input. Because especially a lot of inexperienced users might be giving misguided requests, especially if they don't really understand the unique character of Godot and want it to become a replacement for Unity or Unreal Engine. Which I strongly believe is not a reasonable thing to expect of or attempt with Godot. - unfa
I feel more involved when I program with Godot. With other engines, I feel like my intelligence is insulted because they hold my hand and make me code with little blocks. Godot being free and open sourced is also great, but for me it's really just that I prefer using Godot.
Unreal and even Unity for that matter don't hold your hand lol, they may have a lot of functionality built in with the libraries they provide, but you still have to have a very good understanding of the logic, especially in Unreal where you're working with the memory directly with C++, if anything I would say scripting in Unreal and Unity is far more enjoyable since they give you many more options in the form of visual scripting solutions, Unity especially since it has many tools on it's Asset Store for this, "Bolt", "Game Creator", "PlayMaker", "Block Engine", etc... Making it so you can literally program in any format you want, and last I heard Godot was removing it's Visual Scripting...
@@griefy4555 Unity hides its functionality and obfuscates its behaviors, (in fact it will break your code if you do anything slightly exotic) its a blackbox you can't actually entirely trust, Unreal uses Blueprints and C++ which are messy and not well suited for either quick prototyping and independent execution, Unity requires Mono and Unreal requires a C++ compiler just to function, Godot requires neither. Even the extensions and plugins do not require external tools especially with Godot 4, at best if you decide to use C# then you can install dotnet 6 but you don't need that for Godot or anything dependent on it to work. And this is all aside from the fact you can modify the function of the engine directly or examine exactly how it works, most things are well documented anyway, its input and GUI solutions beat Unity and Unreal, and it advises not on forced rulesets but on advised behaviors like call down and signal up. Unity and Unreal force you into rulesets and paradigms without choice. Want ECS instead of child nodes? Godot supports that. Need a true integrated Voxel world support? Godot supports that. Need special engine extensions or exotic modules that have full access to the engine? Godot supports this. (and in Godot 4 no need to even recompile anything from the engine, just compile the module and put it in your project) None of this is supported by Unity or Unreal, Godot can be the engine you want it to be whenever you want or need it to be such. "Unreal and Unity is far more enjoyable since they give you many more options in the form of visual scripting solutions" Unity's visual scripting is trash, almost no one uses it. Unreal's is the best example and its still subpar for a lot of things, any moderate work will eventually benefit more from an IDE then it ever does with visual scripting. Also that's opinion, I've always hated how slow visual scripting makes my work as a developer and have never found an excuse that starting up VSCode doesn't make much superior, and that's definitely not the fastest editor by a mile, vim and emacs are definitely more well tested, I just don't use shortcuts which makes me a bit slower in my workflow. "Unity especially since it has many tools on it's Asset Store" Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot. "Making it so you can literally program in any format you want" Same in Godot, what are you talking about? "last I heard Godot was removing it's Visual Scripting" Because it was literally useless, not only was it buggy, rarely worked right, no one wanted to use it, almost no one even bothered to complain about it because nobody cared about it. All it did was take resources away from other more useful endeavors for the engine. Visual Scripting is a lot less necessary for game development then people like to claim, its extremely overrated, visual scripting doesn't make it easier or more organized, its the pre-built behaviors necessary for visual scripting to be anywhere near decent that do that which doesn't allow visual scripting to be held responsible, its a fallacy to hold the visual scripting as responsible when there is no justification for this belief. And as you build more complex systems, a text editor and IDE become many times more useful. Its especially dumb because there are not well defined outputs for scripting like you get with shaders where visual shaders are more justified specifically because of the pre-defined inputs and outputs, you're not generally expected to need an IDE for a shader and you can see the effects of shaders immediately.
@@Spartan322 You're another prime example of the ignorance and bias when it comes to Godot and the opensource community in general. The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux, on Windows I've never had it break even when having dozens of 3rd party tools installed. C# (JIT Compiled) and especially C++ (Full Compiled) are far better performing than GDScript, which is an interpreted high level language. The visual scripting solutions in both Unity and Unreal are perfect for fast scripting, non programmers, and programmers who want to take a break from syntax or who want to do their implementations from a GUI, these VS solutions have a 1 to 1 reflection with their internal scripting language, which makes them capable of all the same functionality. So your argument makes no sense and you obviously don't have much knowledge on visual scripting... Your other points are also very ignorant. "Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot." This is heavy copium, anyone who has used all 3 of these engines knows Godot will never come anywhere close to having the same amount of tools that Unity with paid assets, and even Unreal out of the box have. Behavior Trees, Destruction & Cloth physics system, IK system, etc... Also if it's so much easier to build tools for Godot then why does it have so few and poor quality ones when compared to one of these proprietary engines? """"Making it so you can literally program in any format you want"""" "Same in Godot, what are you talking about?" No it's not the same at all, Unity's VS solutions allow you to script in any format you want in terms of style, you can program like in the Scratch engine with Block Engine, you can use nodes with Bolt/PlayMaker, you can program right from the inspector with Game Creator (which also has Bolt integration), in Godot you're limited to coding and even then I've heard that the replication for a lot of the other language supports for C#, C++, etc.. have lots of issues and don't receive the same level of functionality and support GDScript does. Visual Scripting is very useful for the reasons stated above, there are also lots of people that use them, if there weren't no one would be making money off these tools and there wouldn't be communities surrounding them lol. Godot's visual scripting looked very bad, but taking that option away from their users looks even worse.
@@griefy4555 "The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux" Then you've never used it to do anything creative. Also a lot developers are Linux only folks. "on Windows I've never had it break even when having dozens of 3rd party tools installed." Aside from the fact even on Windows that's happened to me, I've also never been able to use it for more then basic ideas that don't require me messing with the dotnet runtime, especially its mono which is subpar and unsafe to say the least. "C# (JIT Compiled) and especially C++ (Full Compiled) are far better performing than GDScript" The language you use is not a bottleneck in most cases and even if it was, Godot allows you to easily use those languages or any other you want. Want C#? Use it in Godot, its got first party support better then Unity. Want C++? Again, use Godot, it makes more sense then Unreal does. Want Rust, Go, or even Python? Crap out of luck with Unreal and Unity, they can't do this at all. Want to modify the generated binary? You can actually do this only in Godot, not Unity or Unreal. Want a source generator? Again Godot is to support this and Unity still can't. "which is an interpreted high level language." Its bytecode interpreted like C# by the way, the optimizations aren't as sophisticated as C# and it lacks JIT right now, but again this is irrelevant because the language is not the bottleneck of performance in most cases and even if it was, you can just use any other language you want. "The visual scripting solutions in both Unity and Unreal are perfect for fast scripting, non programmers," In Unreal its good, in Unity it is worthless. "and programmers who want to take a break from syntax or who want to do their implementations from a GUI," So kiddies. There is no advantage that a GUI gives you inherently for scripting. It requires extra steps unnecessary for text. "these VS solutions have a 1v1 reflection with their internal scripting language," In Unity yes, and that's what makes it useless. But not in Unreal, the blocks in Unreal are way more high level and sophisticated. That's the reason its actually usable. "which makes them capable of all the same functionality." Note that's been demonstrated useless in Godot, in Godot you had the same functionality in the VS but its specifically because that's all that was provided for why it was useless, it basically duplicated Unity's VS behavior, which nobody uses. "So your argument makes no sense and you obviously don't have much knowledge on visual scripting..." Unsubstantiated claim, also refuted anyway. "Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot." "This is heavy copium, anyone who has used all 3 of these engines knows Godot will never come anywhere close to having the same amount of tools that Unity with paid assets," This is a baseless claim. Its also entirely opinion. "and even Unreal out of the box have. Behavior Trees, Destruction & Cloth physics system, IK system, etc..." Godot supports all this, nothing you said isn't already well supported by plugins and tools you can download from the asset library. "Also if it's so much easier to build tools for Godot then why does it have so few and poor quality ones when compared to one of these proprietary engines?" Source? That claim is literal nonsense, there is no capacity to disprove it because you made it up. And I can think of multiple tools off the top of my head that I use daily and have never had problems with. """"Making it so you can literally program in any format you want"""" "Same in Godot, what are you talking about?" "No it's not the same at all, Unity's VS solutions allow you to script in any format you want in terms of style," No it doesn't. You can't build a language parser out of VS and expect it to ever look decent. Its basic and bare. "you can program like in the Scratch engine with Block Engine," Scratch is for children. That's explicit purpose. Leave it to someone who doesn't understand basic PLT to make baseless claims about them. Tools should be relegated to their intended purpose. "you can use nodes with Bolt/PlayMaker, you can program right from the inspector with Game Creator (which also has Bolt integration)," And that's relevant how? That doesn't prove any point. "in Godot you're limited to coding and even then I've heard that the replication for a lot of the other language supports for C#, C++, etc.. have lots of issues and don't receive the same level of functionality and support GDScript does." Limited how? You don't get to make that claim without justification on how. Also what are you talking about "replication for a lot of other language supports", replication does not apply there. Its not replicating anything, you're literally using the build tools of the language to compile a binary which Godot integrates for you. Could it be better in some cases? Sure, but given you can't do this in Unreal or Unity at all, I don't see how they do it better. C# is already better then Unity's implementation, and in Godot 4 it will support dotnet 6 instead of mono, using C++ is no more a problem then C++ normally is, if you're using C++ you should know how to setup C++ anyway and Godot 4 now makes this even more trivial. As it does for every other language. The lack of any of this support in other engines doesn't compare even if it was subpar since comparing subpar to non-existence isn't a contest. "Visual Scripting is very useful for the reasons stated above," What reasons? You didn't state anything about justifying how they're useful. Wanting to use a "GUI over syntax" is a nonsense claim and doesn't support a point in any regard. Not to mention that as a developer I hate visual scripting systems specifically because they get in my way especially in the debugging process, I already outpace those who use them because I actually can use my debugging tools. If you know how to debug, VS will especially never compare. "there are also lots of people that use them," In Unreal and other languages that implement them decently, yes, not in Unity. "if there weren't no one would be making money off these tools and there wouldn't be communities surrounding them lol." Baseless claim, you can make money regardless of the usefulness of specific aspects so long as there are other aspects that are of value. Unity has plenty of valuable points but its VS is not one of them. Neither is its GUI or Input implementations which are both exceedingly trash. Its value is not measures in accordance to the whole system but those which are actually of value which is why people use said systems. There is no way to separate the value into constituent parts you can recognize unless those were sold separately which nobody does. "Godot's visual scripting looked very bad," It copied Unity. "but taking that option away from their users looks worse." It didn't work and wasted development time. Its called developer foresight, don't waste time on work that won't benefit the project, especially if others could do it better, put time into doing the things you know you can do well. You must've never worked on a serious project as a developer because you have to make there decisions every day as a developer.
@@Spartan322 """"The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux"""" "Then you've never used it to do anything creative. Also a lot developers are Linux only folks." This has got to be one of the most illogical arguments I've heard, you use a game engine to be creative in the first place lol, and it broke on me for the same reason most proprietary software breaks under Linux, garbage compatibility and optimization because it's simply not worth the developers time to develop proper versions for Linux since only .1% of people actually develop/game on it. Also it was Unity's own VS solution that breaks when you drag off a node and then attempt to deselect by clicking somewhere else, which freezes the entire editor and can't even kill the task in system monitor, forcing the user to reset their pc... I'm not gonna waste more of my time responding to each one of your other nonsense biased arguments, just because you personally don't find these VS solutions useful doesn't mean they aren't for a lot of people, they having thriving communities and many games have been built with them. "Scratch is for children" that's why Block Engine is good for Unity to help get kids into it, and everyone knows implementing through code is more performant, you're mostly just stating obvious facts to try and prove you know what you're talking about LOL. It's also funny you talk about Godot having all these advanced tools/features yet I've never heard about them, and definitely haven't seen any games built with them, what's even funnier is if you look at all the games online that have been made in Godot they are either 2d or very simplistic 3d... Unless the Engine has been heavily modified... If Godot and even Linux were nearly as optimized, intuitive, and performant as their proprietary competitors like you opensource fangirls claim they are then a lot more people would be using them, so one can simply tell by inference which is superior.
When you said "But it's not just a meme." I gasped cause I thought you were about to show us you literally making a game in the time you were waiting for Unity or Unreal to load lmfao
Not having to have unity crash and then waiting 20 minutes for my project to load back up is definitely a perk. Even Godot 4RC2 seems to crash less often than the LTS Unity install.
I guess that highly depends on the projects you have. I've seen some really bad breakage in Liblast in Godot Beta builds before (like constants seemingly changing value during an equality check), that was not showing up in other people's work. But well - that's still beta - a stable LTS release creates different expectations. I suspect what is going on is that there are small bugs all around, but sometimes your project/code triggers a series of these together, and they compound into leaving the engine in an undefined state that causes constant random crashes. I've seen both Godot and Unity do this, and I am pretty sure UE4&5 also have their weak spots (especially since I've heard Epic has a "fast and loose" development strategy on the engine).
My dude, now you need only one reason for switching to godot and that is beacause : 1. Is similar to Unity 2.Unity added fees per installs on 12 September 2023 So as a dev that used Unity for 3 years, I will be switching to godot.
I hope Godot will grow more and that more specialized tools, templates etc will be available. Many years ago (when Unreal and Godot weren't that big) the main thing people told me that is good about Unity is the huge marketplace. We need this for Godot.
I find it surprising that over several of these videos, I have not seen anyone present what I consider to be the most important and defining differences. Godot's main advantage is that you own it. It's yours! You can do anything you want with it. Today, and forever; it will never be taken from you. You can predicate your entire business on it, and no one is going to yank it out from under you or milk your future success. The engine is never going to take a change of direction under new ownership. It's never going to be leveraged to force you to consume other commercial products. If you don't understand how it works, you just look at the source code. If you don't like what you see, you change it! There are no secrets, no limits, no traps laid by capitalists and scammers, no onerous licenses, no annual fees, no revenue limit, no seat limit, etc etc etc etc. Unity or Unreal are not yous. You can only borrow them. Maybe. If their owners feel like letting you use it this year and you jump through the right hoops. If you're important enough, they might make the changes to the engine your project needs. If you're not, too bad, you can't do it yourself. Maybe next year Meta, buys Unreal. Maybe Autocad does, and starts charging you a subscription. Maybe in a few years you find out that your games have all been sending telemetry back to some other corporation you never even knew existed because you are not permitted to security audit your own software releases. Maybe if you make money at all this, they let you keep most of it. But maybe that changes tomorrow. A developer using one of the major commercial development packages is a pawn of capital. The software exists to get your money and the money of your customers. All other functions are secondary to that. This philosophy permeates ever aspect of design. And so does the alternative philosophy, where software is written to solve technical problems and empower developers to create games. THAT is Godot's primary purpose, in stark contrast to Unreal and Unity. And I despair that people don't even give a fuck.
Oh, but that is what Godot being open-source and community-driven means :) I found the point you mention being discussed already, so I wanted to add some different reasons. For some people this is the cardinal reason to use Godot over anything else (for me it's a requirement), but many people don't understand that or don't care (yet) - I wanted to present some aspects that are solely rooted in how a regular user interacts with the engine and it's editor, not how a company or a corporation would (but obviously Godot has even bigger benefits for those use cases). - unfa
A lot of your points are illogical and make no sense, Unity and Unreal would never completely switch to a subscription model again as they would lose a lot of their users and not to mention their asset store sales would drop significantly...Also if there were backdoors and malware in the engine's code that sold you and your users data someone would have discovered it by now and these companies would be exposed. All your arguments are pure conjecture and are therefore irrelevant, Unity and Unreal have professional development teams that are dedicated to constantly improving them, which is actually a huge benefit over Godot where you have to rely on a single small community of hobbyists... Not to mention the fact Godot sucks as a professional engine, especially for large scale, mechanically complex, and high fidelity 3d games.
@@DartVonGrell What are you even talking about? You can always download legacy versions of the proprietary engines to modify your games, or go through the arduous process of converting them to the latest build, who said you don't have the right to access them? I swear you opensource obsessed clowns will come up with any excuse to say opensource is superior when it clearly isn't, opensource software like Blender, Gimp, Librespite, and Krita are good and competitive opensource software, whereas software like Godot and Linux are complete garbage when compared to the competition. Stop trying to demonize proprietary software just because they're far superior and go grow up a bit.
I think the last Godot I worked with, was 3.3 or something. I actually liked Godot and it was easy to get into. But as easy as it was to get into, it was just as easy to come to a halt. Designing a level in it was very cumbersome. Had to manually add (in Blender) collisions for the ground and roads. And got strange collisions/physics at certain spots for no reason. Also, although initial car setup was straightforward and with a bit of tinkering, got the car to behave like I wanted, I "hit a brick wall" when it came to more advanced controls for it (like being able to drift). And biggest problem was, you couldn't really find much help in those regards. In contrast, in Unreal I am able to create ground and roads, which automatically have collisions and I can easily edit on the fly. Even Materials adjust accordingly. The Chaos Vehicle is also easy to setup (although here also again, things like drifting is hard to find a solution to) and camera setup is even easier. And since I'm a visual learner, Blueprints are welcome addition. Also since I'm more a designer than a coder. I don't know how much and how Godot has improved in the mean-time. I do miss it in some way, because indeed, the lack of options actually made it easier to focus. But Godot still seems more for programmers than for designers. And I don't think my coding-skills in webdesign and databases is enough to make any meaningfull progress, as game development, solo, is already a daunting task. Who knows, I'll probably one day revisit Godot.
Welp, 9 months after this video was made, Unity is imploding due to a new "runtime fee" - an announced staggering and straight out abusive pricing model that would "somehow" monitor number of installs of games and make developers or publishers pay up to $0.20 per game or app install. And it seems like a lot of people suddenly realized how dangerous building your business on a corporation (and a publicly traded one at that) is. So the first point I mentioned has become a real highlight. The entire game dev community is fleeing after Unity has incinerated any trust it's userbase had. And many of these fleeing game developers and studios are looking at Godot and seeing as it could never do something like this to them. I am greatly saddened to see Unity Technologies set itself on fire, but that's the unfortunate capitalistic reality. After an IPO, a company's job is not to make it's customers happy - it's only job now is to make it's shareholders happy. And that might not align very well, if at all... Unity is a very important engine and has played a huge role in the global culture of games. Sadly - after this, the only way people could every trust it again would probably be to release the engine as open-source software and establish a new company working on it's development in the open, guaranteeing that nothing like this could ever happen again - otherwise, the industry will desert it as it is already doing. Take care, Unity game devs. Professionally I'm on this boat with you, and I hope we can all make it out alive. - unfa
Hello there I was about to practice using/testing both Unity and Godot for my upcoming 2D indie/AA games to find out which is better, that is until the controversy regarding Unity, so I finally chose Godot 2D besides, UE 5.3 has a lot of potential (even all 3D art directions became better within this engine if used Nanite correctly) that's why I choose this for 3D alongside Godot for 2D
Why not explain an engine like a musical instrument?! People like to listen to music (play games) so other people who can play an instrument (able to use the given engine) make music (the game they are developing). So in this case, some people play piano and some like the guitar. Some like to listen to classical music and others hate it and listen to metal and rock. The same goes for game engines as I mentioned. Someone may want to make a multiplayer FPS or an RPG with ultra-realistic graphics and someone else wants a farm sim with large story elements and in a pixel art style like Stardew Valley. If unity is great for your fits, then use it! If you are stunned by UE 5's graphics and capabilities like Nanite and you have dreams and ideas you want to make real with those tools? Then just use it! And if you want to use Godot (or actually any other game engine) 'cause it fits your workflow and doesn't cut you off, then just continue using it! There is no reason and no logic behind saying: "You just can't use engine X, because it can't handle topic X well. It is terrible!" As long as it feels good to use and serve your creativity and fantasy of making a game, it is good enough. Also saying "It is a bad tool/engine/whatever" isn't right. A good artist can make a masterpiece out of one simple pen. So, please, just use the engine you like! :)
Late to the party, but the reasons I love Godot are it's open source nature and lack of bloat. The engine is tiny loads quickly and makes small executables. It feels extremely efficient compared to the other engines out there. It's amazing really that almost everything you could need is included in that tiny download. Then there is the node and scene system, which the more you use it the more it makes sense, it's simply the best way of doing things unless you want to go into pure ECS programming. Another plus for me is that the devs of Godot don't seem afraid to take apart the engine and rewrite parts of it that need it, removing and replacing where necessary. While that sucks for backwards compatibility it's so much better for the engine's overall health in the long run and truly, I believe why it's still so lightweight even in its 4th version. If you look at Unity and especially Unreal, while they have more features they also have a metric ton of bloat that comes with it. I mean a UE5 install takes over 100GB for the engine alone wtf! Tell me how Godot can have 80-90% of that functionality in less than 200kb. Should I also mention, the speed Godot gets updates. It's catching up with the big boys fast in terms of features.
I don't mind GDScript, i just wish the sytax was a bit more similar to C instead of Python. There are a fair number of land mines in the more esoteric syntax that GDScript uses that trade off being able to code things up fast initially at the cost of spending unnecessary amounts of time tracking down a bug that, with a more conventional syntax, would have refused to compile in the first place.
it's pratically not totally a community driven project. The core engine part(rendering, physics etc) is written by 3-5 people at most. 95% of people doesn't understand the code at all let alone they contribute it. It's great for Indies but not for us who're working for game companies, I'm not indie, just a salaried developer. But it's a great engine for 2d games for sure.
I wouldn't recommend Godot for anyone above small indie teams right now. I work in a medium-sized indie studio and I would not see Godot being a good tool for the job we do here at this point. But for single-developers or small teams - I think it's worth evaluating. So far 3D performance is still really poor, but once they manage to get it into the ballpark of Unity and Unreal Engine - I think it'd be a decent option not just for 2D games. Right now it's great for tinkerers, but I wouldn't use it as a foundation for a business project. Too much uncertainty there still. BTW, if Godot is not a community-driven project than I don't know what is :D The full-time development is paid from community donations and the development is done using user input all the time. Also tons of work is contributed from outside of the core team. The Godot GDC 2023 talk has some numbers on this, I don't remember them, but it's a lot. - unfa
@@liblast On year has pass since this comment. Are you still thinking the same? I'm a professional Unreal Engine developer, and I was wondering about learning Godot.
Godot being lightweight is indeed an important thing, at least for me. I work on a laptop packed with reaper and sample libraries. And Godot just runs neatly. My app will be small and smart. But it won't be a game and let's see whether I can sell a few copies once it's finished... No need for features that I'll never use.
A game engine is just a tool. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. Stick with what you know best or prefer. Even better, if you're able to switch between multiple engines for different problems. For me, Godot for 2D, and Unity for 3D, since it's more mature in that field.
I've used Unity since 2006 on the Mac and Unreal since 2000 on the PC. GODOT is basically the start of EveryEngineInc. It's NOT something we DIDN'T have before, it's part of the cycle of going back to what we had before with Unity (and to some extent Unreal).
I agree with you. For basic prototyping in 2d android games, godot is a lot more beginner friendly. It is much faster and easier to install godot, configurate it, program and ship the game for your phone. It is a huge advantage compared to Unity and Unreal.
I love Godot, but I don't really understand why they chose to roll their own language and certainly don't see it as a pro for them. Not only do they have to waste huge resources maintaining, bug-fixing, evolving and create tooling for GD Script, but it kind of sucks for devs too because we have to learn a new language that becomes useless when we stop using Godot. Also it's indentation based 🤮
1. Godot supports .fbx import through a third party tool that you need to install separately and point Godot towards (the tool actually converts FBX to GLTF2 which is what Godot supports natively). 2. I am not sure if you can break up a single class into multiple files, but you can create subclasses in separate files that are then used in the parent class. In Liblast there's a lot of static classes for objects that are used for controlling player input, character controls, weapons, damage etc. Though I am not experienced with C++ so I might be misunderstanding your question. - unfa
I have many years experience on Unity. I can do pretty much anything I think of with it. Currently learning Godot because I can’t stand Unity slow recompile.
@@liblast I am now tinkering with Godot, I just need to learn C++ then I can read the source code. And that can help for problems that there is no solution to on internet or if you just want to see what happens behind the engine.
Funny how You called godot editor a game. It is not a game, it's the editor of the engine. But it feels good to use. For us indie developers godot simplifies some things that are really useful, and it is OPEN SOURCE
Well, that's not going to be possible, because Unity's Asset Store has assets made specifically for Unity :) However Godot has something similar called Asset Library - obviously there's way less things in there (Godot's user base is still very small compared to Unity's). - unfa
Not sure if you can. I have not tried. But I guess if you buy something from the Unity Asset store, import it into Unity, the files are stored on your disk and you could copy them to Godot. I tried to find a way to download Unity Assets without installing Unity but that is not possible :(
Tbh, Godot is more of a beginner friendly as while Unity is more of an intermediate to enterprise level. Not saying Godoy can’t be similar to Unity but it can’t be like Unity
The main thing I don't like about Godot is its script language because it is limited to just this game engine; If its main language was C# or C++ I would have been using it; I know you can integrate C# and probably C++ but the associate documentation and videos are more limited; however Unity and Unreal use C# and C++ which can be used in other application and are not restricted to just unity or unreal.
@@GorgeousPuree I learned C, C#, C++ assembly, javascript, gamemaker script, monkey, visual basic, Dephi, HTML, CCS ...I could go on but you probably get the point. so learning a new coding language as simple as GDscript is not really my problem; I don't want to use a code that is only used in one place (like when I learned in monkey and gamemaker studio script and decided to finally switch Unreal. ) at least GameMaker script was similar to C, C#, and C++.
4:04 I disagree that no other languages were suited. Lua has been integrated into game engines and used to make games for decades. Maybe Godot team could have focused on delivering more valuable features instead of inventing a scripting language that no one wants to learn.
Or maybe - Godot developers decided that the convenience of using an already developed language is not worth the frictions and hard edges that it will inevitably cause. It might also be that Godot is just not for you, because a lot of people don't have a problem with learning GDScript if that's what it takes to use this engine. And it's really not hard to get started. - unfa
@@liblast Neither. 1.C# is an officially supported language for development of games with Godot. Extending the engine would need C++ or C. 2.I've thought of at someday making my own engine but thats far in the future ;)
I see your points and now can really understand why some people like godot so much. But to be honest, for me (who never used godot) it seems, the only reason to use godot, is that it's easier to learn. Fair enough but to be honest, unity isn't that hard to learn either
There's one thing I will never be able to do with Unity or Unreal Engine that is something that Godot allows me to do easily. With Godot I can talk directly to the developers about problems I have and what I think could be a good solution and more often than not see these problems resolved within weeks or months (depending on how complex the issue is). Or heck - I can even fix the problem myself if nobody wants to do it! Because I have the source code and I am allowed to modify and use it however I please! With Unity there's crippling issues that will probably never be fixed that I can't do anything about. For example - a problem I'm facing at work right now: Editing a complex ShaderGraph is going to be faster to do in a text editor than Unity, because it takes between 20 and 70 minutes to process a single connection change in there (a single click&drag), because it's not possible to disable automatic shader re-compilation. And I need to do say 20 of these mouse click&drags to do a "simple thing". When Godot has something this bad, I report it, show my project to the developers and it doesn't take long before there is a fix for it. Even if the core team doesn't have time to do it because it's niche, *anybody* can submit a PR and fix that. With Godot I as a user have a say in the matter and I can actually improve things for myself and others. With Unity I'm now literally taking apart the JSON format of ShaderGraph files to do my flippin' job! I can think of better things to do with my time! - unfa
@@liblast why dont you just write the shader then? really what kind of reason is this? it seemsyou are creating problems for yourself then anything. you can literally just write the shader...
@@zendraw3468 ShaderGraph is a tool I use because it allows me to do very complex shaders while retaining artistic control. I am a tech artist, not a graphics programmer. Unity's Shader graph generally is an awesome tool (I wish Godot's Visual Shaders will one day will at least get close to what it can do) but I found a use case where it fails miserably, costing me a lot and nobody can help me with that. "Just write a shader" is unfortunately not a solution to my problem here. - unfa
me as Android experience is so easy i mean very easy learn Godot why because if u watch short u ar now pro Godot engine and others engine cry in corner
That's perfectly fine :D I feel like some people think that I am trying to say that Godot is *better* than Unreal or Unity. It's not. It is different. More suitable for some use cases, but unsuitable in others. For example it's a great option for simpler mobile games, because it's so lightweight. It can be a great replacement for Flash fro the Web. It' definitely not a good fit for an AAA or even AA production. At some point I think it will become feasible for the latter, but I don't think will ever try to compete in the AAA space. This is why I think it's best for indie developers like myself, not necessarily for large studios. At least not yet. When Godot 4 becomes truly stable, feature-full and will gather a large library of add-ons, assets and extensions - then I think it'll be a good time to re-evaluate it for more complex productions. I think that'll be around version 4.2 or 4.3. 4.0 will be a "bare bones" release to just get the engine's boots on the ground and get it widely tested in production, and will be followed quickly by releases addressing the most pressing issues that weren't apparent before the first stable release. For example I find Godot fantastic for my own projects like Liblast, but I wouldn't want try to convince my boss to develop our next game on it. It would not be a good experience for our teams at this stage with the scope of what we do. Cheers! - unfa
@@liblast you say its suitible for some cases and not for others, which is correct, but then you run a mile and write the typical fly vs elephant contrasting reasons which is just enforcing your bias. godot is in no way better suited then unity for example, to make any game, be it small or big. the mobile market is dominated by unity games btw, games made in a week or so, but only becouse testing, not becouse it takes time to put things together, becouse i know your going to make that argument... the ONLY single good thing about godot is, portability, NOTHING game dev related. unity and unreal are the only 2 pioneers in game development. the more you try to do with godot, the more you have to fix its problems and instead of your mind being in the development process, you think about bs. this doesnt happen atall with unity nor unreal, with them you can just sit down, and dev. no bs.
@@zendraw3468 Well, I am currently loosing my marbles because of BS I have to deal with developing in Unity at work. So I am not so sure I'd agree on that front. - unfa
@@ArsentyevYaroslav 3.5 or 4, both look horrible, I dont think sgdi will be ready on the next year as people are saying. But bugs are the major problem, I just now found a bug with 3d ik, that was solved on github since 2020, but it's not and the same bug is present on 4... and is not just that, every thing i try to do i hit a bug, that was susposed to have been solved in the 2018 ~ 2020 range, but is still there. I will say, 99% of godot userbase wont go past a pixel art plataformer, so they won't make bugs report on anything more complex than that. it's a shame since gdscript and the node system is so good.
I mean the 3D side isn't as developed/optimised as the 2D sure; but saying it's more hardware hungry than unreal is a big stretch. It's more likely that whatever experience you're basing that on was actually from something like driver issues.
@@blaze595 And it is, just by droping some 3d models on the viewport I can see my fps dropping and is not a lot of poligons, i have 10~20x times more on other engines with way higher fps, driver is ok.
@@eduardomoura2813 Well, Liblast (the game this channel is all about) is a project that (among other things) aims to help with that. I've reported and helped fix many issues already that didn't creep up in smaller projects. It gets better when we make complex games and help devs make that work well. Godot is a community-driven engine unlike Unity or Unreal, where an average user has virtually zero impact on it's development. We are who can make Godot work fantastically for huge, beautiful 3D games , and I am working towards that :) - unfa
Godot is written in C++ so it's too late for that engine, it will always be inherently unstable and obsolete. I've moved on from C++ to Rust. Going back to an old C++ engine is going backwards.
tbh, I hate Godot's node system, it's attempt to push a custom coding language into your face and the naming convention is especially exhausting to look at. Like who the fuck uses underscores like that? The code is so ugly to look at with the formatting and naming. Can't work with that. And yes, I know there is a .Net version but that one is probably just as ugly to work with as with the rest. So I don't see any reason to use godot. I'd rather prefer a lightweight component based engine using a proper programming language as primary scripting API such as C# and C++. But the only options out there are bloated as hell.
not an angry comment but if you want a lightweight engine that badly why not make one yourself? and that way you can have complete control over your work
@@griefy4555 Because there's no one out there and, as he said, if OP needs it badly, there's no choice but to create one himself. GDScript is heavily influenced by Python. It borrowed a lot of Python's coding style. The underscore has been used since the C era so I don't really know what his problem is. And arguing about the naming convention is kinda pointless since you won't find one that suits you until you make one yourself. For example, I hate Unreal's naming convention with a passion. What with A, U, F, E, etc. prefixes? It's freaking confusing when you start using Unreal for the first time because the compiler will complain if you DON'T name it according to the predefined convention. Talking about shoving coding language into a user's throat, Unreal is the worst of all. And why everything starts with uppercase? Variables, functions, classes. They are all uppercase. That makes it hard to see at the first glance which is which. In the end, I just learn to accept it and just use whatever gets my job done because you can keep searching the whole internet but you will find at least one thing you don't like about the tools you are using. So, I decided to not waste my time on that anymore.
@@griefy4555 building your own engine is not a out competing with some other big engine. It's about tailoring it to specifically what u need it to do. Who cares if it doesn't have something a big name does if u don't need it or need something simpler.
I find it quite strange, almost funny how many extremely unpleasant comments I see about Godot. And these seem to come from people who never have made a single game in it.
Why are you here guys? Do something that makes you happy instead! Your favorite game engine isn't going to go away or suffer because of Godot, you know? Keep using what you like!
Godot has it's niche, I don't claim it's the *best* engine or anything. It works for Liblast, and could be great for small or medium indie games, but it may not be the best pick for you, so don't feel attacked by this video :)
- unfa
To be honest seems more like you can't stand critic about godot. People just wanted to see what your opinion is and say what they think.
@@kturnt584 Well, maybe you didn't read the same comments I did. Calling the engine names doesn't seem like a mature way to present criticism in my view.
I know Godot's shortcomings quite well myself, I don't read here anything I didn't know or didn't experience myself while working with the engine.
It seems people get needlessly emotional about this. It's just a tool. Nice for some things, really unfit for other things :P
- unfa
What games have you made? Non meme ones please(pixel art/plataformers/"multiplayer")
The problem comes from godot advertising in their site that the engine is 3d ready, when it's not. As someone who is already making a living from gamedev I feel like I can help beginners to stay away from traps like this one.
@@eduardomoura2813 I've made a few small games. A 3D platformer, a bouncy-ball obstacle course game, some other minor stuff. I also made some tools for my livestreams with it (an interactive overlay that detects when something crashes), I have made countless prototypes, but at this point Liblast is probably the most complex one. I don't claim that Godot is perfect or best or whatever. But I think it has it's place, and lots of indie devs are using it already and most of them seem quite happy with it.
Though caution is definitely advised, especially with Godot 4. That probably won't be decently stable and polished for a good while. The Godot devs say the same in their blog posts.
- unfa
@@eduardomoura2813 God, the beings that I have that read on UA-cam, you have a very inflated ego and surely you have not done anything you say
godot a trap? you definitely have not used it or in any case you used it many years ago
Hello everyone here after the Unity apocalypse
Why would you ever want to use Godot over unity?
Because Godot doesn't charge per install
Unity doesn't charge anymore per install!
Why would you ever want to use Godot over Unreal 5?
@@dacsus because Godot doesn't require you learn C++ to use and is a somewhat smooth transition from Unity
@@That_0ne_Dev Yeah why learn driving a car when u can walk everywhere...who would want to learn how to drive a car?... a kickscooter is a way smoother transition from walking.
If you make $1m in the last 12 months then you start paying. I'm sure you're not making that much so don't worry about that.
One word: 2D.
I have been working with both Unity and Unreal professionally and Godot as a hobby. I found Godot offers a better 2D games development experience than both of the big two. For Godot, 2D is the first class feature and not some mashed-up mess that was in Unity and Unreal. If you are making 2D games, Godot is the way to go.
And having a lightweight editor is a big plus. Try to open Unreal or Unity compare to Godot and you see what I mean; especially Unreal which crashes quite often, restarting the engine every 10 or so minutes has become a huge pain point to me.
I see 2D mentioned a lot, and that's certainly true. Though I am personally not interested in developing 2D games at all :)
- unfa
@@liblast dude not only 2d, for a lightweight 3d engine it do a good job, like my game is looking good even for my low end laptop.
@@clockwritesdev7635 Yeah, for moderate 3D games Godot 3.x can perform reasonably well (some 3D games seem to be able to do amazing things with it, like Beat Invaders), Godot 4 has still miles to go before it's reasonably performant (and even bug-free), but hopefully the Vulkan renderer will be able to scale up much better for larger game worlds.
@@clockwritesdev7635 where can we see it?
This is the whole reason why I left unreal behind. Why do I have to constantly fight the engine? I remember the last project I was working on. I had to delete the binaries and debug symbols every other compile or it wouldn’t compile anymore. Also, the documentation is just horrible. I guess if you’re a big game studio and epic stands to make a lot of money from you then the support makes it worth using unreal, but as a small indie, not so much.
As someone who uses unity I think it's really strange that unity developers can be so snarky towards godot as if unity wasn't also at one point that niche game engine that apparently couldn't keep up with the competition. Personally I see a lot of advantages to godot that at times even leave me envious such as the UI which is definitely far more intuitive. As a matter of fact I'd have to say the main thing godot has decisively over unity is how intuitive it is, even for me as someone who is atleast at an "intermediate" level of competency in unity godot just looks easier to read.
Nothing is more asinine than trying to open the unity animation controller editor or the shadergraph in an entirely different tab and awkwardly fiddling around with what feels like an unfinished API. Fun fact, a lot of things in Unity like the shadergraph editor etc are outsourced to smaller companies which is why they feel so out of place with the rest of the engine. Recently I had to completely reconfigure how I generate terrain in my current main project because of how awful unity's terrain tools are, I eventually just decided to mish mash together a procedural generation script from the internet but still, godot reminds me a lot of the advantages older versions of unity had where the company didn't have to awkwardly sellotape on new features to impress their executives, something godot doesn't have to concern itself with because it's open source.
And I'm personally not sold on the "there's a huge wealth of resources available through tutorials" shtick. In my experience if a tutorial is more than 2 years old you may aswell just close the video and save yourself the 20 minutes of watching and half an hour of fiddling with the engine that you can spend looking elsewhere.
Unity is still great, but it's simply foolish to scoff at Godot for being new or lacking features when half of unity's "features" it has over Godot are semi functional and when unity was once also that "new" open source engine no one liked.
The more I use Unity professionally and talk to co-workers about it the more I am confident you've nailed the issue here.
Unity sure is feature-packed, but it's all over the place (with many features being stuck in "preview" for seemingly forever) and seems like wasn't properly refactored for decades. Many of the internal tools are more and more often replaced with superior 3rd party solutions.
And the rolling release model kinda prevents them from taking a step back and refactoring the whole engine, because the versioning inherently creates the expectation that Unity will forever be backwards compatible.
On the other hand, Godot with version 4 is completely breaking backwards compatibility, but for all the right reasons - to leave behind the technical debt that has accumulated to that point. 4.0 (stable) isn't perfect - far from it, but the near-complete engine rewrite (!!) has allowed developers to use experience of what worked and didn't work in Godot 3 and make the most of it.
Any sufficiently mature software would benefit from such a move, but with Unity or Unreal Engine being so large I don't think either company could afford doing that. Unless UE5 is a near compelte rewrite of UE4, but I doubt that'd be humanly possible.
Not to mention that refactoring it's not something that marketing people would appreciate. It's a hard sell.
I think Godot's unique development and funding models allow the team to do what is best for the engine and users, because that's who they get paid by and are answering to. It's a project truly driven by the needs of it's users, and not shareholders as you mentioned. However even Godot can suffer from feature creep and messy development if the core team was to not properly filter and analyze the user input.
Because especially a lot of inexperienced users might be giving misguided requests, especially if they don't really understand the unique character of Godot and want it to become a replacement for Unity or Unreal Engine. Which I strongly believe is not a reasonable thing to expect of or attempt with Godot.
- unfa
Well you were totally right. Unity engine wont suffer because of Godot. They are perfectly capable of killing their game engine by themselves :))
I feel more involved when I program with Godot. With other engines, I feel like my intelligence is insulted because they hold my hand and make me code with little blocks. Godot being free and open sourced is also great, but for me it's really just that I prefer using Godot.
Unreal and even Unity for that matter don't hold your hand lol, they may have a lot of functionality built in with the libraries they provide, but you still have to have a very good understanding of the logic, especially in Unreal where you're working with the memory directly with C++, if anything I would say scripting in Unreal and Unity is far more enjoyable since they give you many more options in the form of visual scripting solutions, Unity especially since it has many tools on it's Asset Store for this, "Bolt", "Game Creator", "PlayMaker", "Block Engine", etc... Making it so you can literally program in any format you want, and last I heard Godot was removing it's Visual Scripting...
@@griefy4555 Unity hides its functionality and obfuscates its behaviors, (in fact it will break your code if you do anything slightly exotic) its a blackbox you can't actually entirely trust, Unreal uses Blueprints and C++ which are messy and not well suited for either quick prototyping and independent execution, Unity requires Mono and Unreal requires a C++ compiler just to function, Godot requires neither. Even the extensions and plugins do not require external tools especially with Godot 4, at best if you decide to use C# then you can install dotnet 6 but you don't need that for Godot or anything dependent on it to work. And this is all aside from the fact you can modify the function of the engine directly or examine exactly how it works, most things are well documented anyway, its input and GUI solutions beat Unity and Unreal, and it advises not on forced rulesets but on advised behaviors like call down and signal up. Unity and Unreal force you into rulesets and paradigms without choice. Want ECS instead of child nodes? Godot supports that. Need a true integrated Voxel world support? Godot supports that. Need special engine extensions or exotic modules that have full access to the engine? Godot supports this. (and in Godot 4 no need to even recompile anything from the engine, just compile the module and put it in your project) None of this is supported by Unity or Unreal, Godot can be the engine you want it to be whenever you want or need it to be such.
"Unreal and Unity is far more enjoyable since they give you many more options in the form of visual scripting solutions"
Unity's visual scripting is trash, almost no one uses it. Unreal's is the best example and its still subpar for a lot of things, any moderate work will eventually benefit more from an IDE then it ever does with visual scripting. Also that's opinion, I've always hated how slow visual scripting makes my work as a developer and have never found an excuse that starting up VSCode doesn't make much superior, and that's definitely not the fastest editor by a mile, vim and emacs are definitely more well tested, I just don't use shortcuts which makes me a bit slower in my workflow.
"Unity especially since it has many tools on it's Asset Store"
Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot.
"Making it so you can literally program in any format you want"
Same in Godot, what are you talking about?
"last I heard Godot was removing it's Visual Scripting"
Because it was literally useless, not only was it buggy, rarely worked right, no one wanted to use it, almost no one even bothered to complain about it because nobody cared about it. All it did was take resources away from other more useful endeavors for the engine. Visual Scripting is a lot less necessary for game development then people like to claim, its extremely overrated, visual scripting doesn't make it easier or more organized, its the pre-built behaviors necessary for visual scripting to be anywhere near decent that do that which doesn't allow visual scripting to be held responsible, its a fallacy to hold the visual scripting as responsible when there is no justification for this belief. And as you build more complex systems, a text editor and IDE become many times more useful. Its especially dumb because there are not well defined outputs for scripting like you get with shaders where visual shaders are more justified specifically because of the pre-defined inputs and outputs, you're not generally expected to need an IDE for a shader and you can see the effects of shaders immediately.
@@Spartan322 You're another prime example of the ignorance and bias when it comes to Godot and the opensource community in general.
The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux, on Windows I've never had it break even when having dozens of 3rd party tools installed. C# (JIT Compiled) and especially C++ (Full Compiled) are far better performing than GDScript, which is an interpreted high level language. The visual scripting solutions in both Unity and Unreal are perfect for fast scripting, non programmers, and programmers who want to take a break from syntax or who want to do their implementations from a GUI, these VS solutions have a 1 to 1 reflection with their internal scripting language, which makes them capable of all the same functionality. So your argument makes no sense and you obviously don't have much knowledge on visual scripting...
Your other points are also very ignorant.
"Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot."
This is heavy copium, anyone who has used all 3 of these engines knows Godot will never come anywhere close to having the same amount of tools that Unity with paid assets, and even Unreal out of the box have. Behavior Trees, Destruction & Cloth physics system, IK system, etc...
Also if it's so much easier to build tools for Godot then why does it have so few and poor quality ones when compared to one of these proprietary engines?
""""Making it so you can literally program in any format you want""""
"Same in Godot, what are you talking about?"
No it's not the same at all, Unity's VS solutions allow you to script in any format you want in terms of style, you can program like in the Scratch engine with Block Engine, you can use nodes with Bolt/PlayMaker, you can program right from the inspector with Game Creator (which also has Bolt integration), in Godot you're limited to coding and even then I've heard that the replication for a lot of the other language supports for C#, C++, etc.. have lots of issues and don't receive the same level of functionality and support GDScript does.
Visual Scripting is very useful for the reasons stated above, there are also lots of people that use them, if there weren't no one would be making money off these tools and there wouldn't be communities surrounding them lol. Godot's visual scripting looked very bad, but taking that option away from their users looks even worse.
@@griefy4555
"The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux"
Then you've never used it to do anything creative. Also a lot developers are Linux only folks.
"on Windows I've never had it break even when having dozens of 3rd party tools installed."
Aside from the fact even on Windows that's happened to me, I've also never been able to use it for more then basic ideas that don't require me messing with the dotnet runtime, especially its mono which is subpar and unsafe to say the least.
"C# (JIT Compiled) and especially C++ (Full Compiled) are far better performing than GDScript"
The language you use is not a bottleneck in most cases and even if it was, Godot allows you to easily use those languages or any other you want. Want C#? Use it in Godot, its got first party support better then Unity. Want C++? Again, use Godot, it makes more sense then Unreal does. Want Rust, Go, or even Python? Crap out of luck with Unreal and Unity, they can't do this at all. Want to modify the generated binary? You can actually do this only in Godot, not Unity or Unreal. Want a source generator? Again Godot is to support this and Unity still can't.
"which is an interpreted high level language."
Its bytecode interpreted like C# by the way, the optimizations aren't as sophisticated as C# and it lacks JIT right now, but again this is irrelevant because the language is not the bottleneck of performance in most cases and even if it was, you can just use any other language you want.
"The visual scripting solutions in both Unity and Unreal are perfect for fast scripting, non programmers,"
In Unreal its good, in Unity it is worthless.
"and programmers who want to take a break from syntax or who want to do their implementations from a GUI,"
So kiddies. There is no advantage that a GUI gives you inherently for scripting. It requires extra steps unnecessary for text.
"these VS solutions have a 1v1 reflection with their internal scripting language,"
In Unity yes, and that's what makes it useless. But not in Unreal, the blocks in Unreal are way more high level and sophisticated. That's the reason its actually usable.
"which makes them capable of all the same functionality."
Note that's been demonstrated useless in Godot, in Godot you had the same functionality in the VS but its specifically because that's all that was provided for why it was useless, it basically duplicated Unity's VS behavior, which nobody uses.
"So your argument makes no sense and you obviously don't have much knowledge on visual scripting..."
Unsubstantiated claim, also refuted anyway.
"Godot already has this and a lot of popular Unity tools have a Godot analogue, not to mention its much easier to build tools, templates, and projects in Godot."
"This is heavy copium, anyone who has used all 3 of these engines knows Godot will never come anywhere close to having the same amount of tools that Unity with paid assets,"
This is a baseless claim. Its also entirely opinion.
"and even Unreal out of the box have. Behavior Trees, Destruction & Cloth physics system, IK system, etc..."
Godot supports all this, nothing you said isn't already well supported by plugins and tools you can download from the asset library.
"Also if it's so much easier to build tools for Godot then why does it have so few and poor quality ones when compared to one of these proprietary engines?"
Source? That claim is literal nonsense, there is no capacity to disprove it because you made it up. And I can think of multiple tools off the top of my head that I use daily and have never had problems with.
""""Making it so you can literally program in any format you want""""
"Same in Godot, what are you talking about?"
"No it's not the same at all, Unity's VS solutions allow you to script in any format you want in terms of style,"
No it doesn't. You can't build a language parser out of VS and expect it to ever look decent. Its basic and bare.
"you can program like in the Scratch engine with Block Engine,"
Scratch is for children. That's explicit purpose. Leave it to someone who doesn't understand basic PLT to make baseless claims about them. Tools should be relegated to their intended purpose.
"you can use nodes with Bolt/PlayMaker, you can program right from the inspector with Game Creator (which also has Bolt integration),"
And that's relevant how? That doesn't prove any point.
"in Godot you're limited to coding and even then I've heard that the replication for a lot of the other language supports for C#, C++, etc.. have lots of issues and don't receive the same level of functionality and support GDScript does."
Limited how? You don't get to make that claim without justification on how.
Also what are you talking about "replication for a lot of other language supports", replication does not apply there. Its not replicating anything, you're literally using the build tools of the language to compile a binary which Godot integrates for you. Could it be better in some cases? Sure, but given you can't do this in Unreal or Unity at all, I don't see how they do it better. C# is already better then Unity's implementation, and in Godot 4 it will support dotnet 6 instead of mono, using C++ is no more a problem then C++ normally is, if you're using C++ you should know how to setup C++ anyway and Godot 4 now makes this even more trivial. As it does for every other language. The lack of any of this support in other engines doesn't compare even if it was subpar since comparing subpar to non-existence isn't a contest.
"Visual Scripting is very useful for the reasons stated above,"
What reasons? You didn't state anything about justifying how they're useful. Wanting to use a "GUI over syntax" is a nonsense claim and doesn't support a point in any regard. Not to mention that as a developer I hate visual scripting systems specifically because they get in my way especially in the debugging process, I already outpace those who use them because I actually can use my debugging tools. If you know how to debug, VS will especially never compare.
"there are also lots of people that use them,"
In Unreal and other languages that implement them decently, yes, not in Unity.
"if there weren't no one would be making money off these tools and there wouldn't be communities surrounding them lol."
Baseless claim, you can make money regardless of the usefulness of specific aspects so long as there are other aspects that are of value. Unity has plenty of valuable points but its VS is not one of them. Neither is its GUI or Input implementations which are both exceedingly trash. Its value is not measures in accordance to the whole system but those which are actually of value which is why people use said systems. There is no way to separate the value into constituent parts you can recognize unless those were sold separately which nobody does.
"Godot's visual scripting looked very bad,"
It copied Unity.
"but taking that option away from their users looks worse."
It didn't work and wasted development time. Its called developer foresight, don't waste time on work that won't benefit the project, especially if others could do it better, put time into doing the things you know you can do well. You must've never worked on a serious project as a developer because you have to make there decisions every day as a developer.
@@Spartan322
""""The only time Unity broke on me is when I tried to use it on Linux""""
"Then you've never used it to do anything creative. Also a lot developers are Linux only folks."
This has got to be one of the most illogical arguments I've heard, you use a game engine to be creative in the first place lol, and it broke on me for the same reason most proprietary software breaks under Linux, garbage compatibility and optimization because it's simply not worth the developers time to develop proper versions for Linux since only .1% of people actually develop/game on it.
Also it was Unity's own VS solution that breaks when you drag off a node and then attempt to deselect by clicking somewhere else, which freezes the entire editor and can't even kill the task in system monitor, forcing the user to reset their pc...
I'm not gonna waste more of my time responding to each one of your other nonsense biased arguments, just because you personally don't find these VS solutions useful doesn't mean they aren't for a lot of people, they having thriving communities and many games have been built with them. "Scratch is for children" that's why Block Engine is good for Unity to help get kids into it, and everyone knows implementing through code is more performant, you're mostly just stating obvious facts to try and prove you know what you're talking about LOL.
It's also funny you talk about Godot having all these advanced tools/features yet I've never heard about them, and definitely haven't seen any games built with them, what's even funnier is if you look at all the games online that have been made in Godot they are either 2d or very simplistic 3d...
Unless the Engine has been heavily modified...
If Godot and even Linux were nearly as optimized, intuitive, and performant as their proprietary competitors like you opensource fangirls claim they are then a lot more people would be using them, so one can simply tell by inference which is superior.
When you said "But it's not just a meme." I gasped cause I thought you were about to show us you literally making a game in the time you were waiting for Unity or Unreal to load lmfao
Not having to have unity crash and then waiting 20 minutes for my project to load back up is definitely a perk. Even Godot 4RC2 seems to crash less often than the LTS Unity install.
I guess that highly depends on the projects you have.
I've seen some really bad breakage in Liblast in Godot Beta builds before (like constants seemingly changing value during an equality check), that was not showing up in other people's work. But well - that's still beta - a stable LTS release creates different expectations.
I suspect what is going on is that there are small bugs all around, but sometimes your project/code triggers a series of these together, and they compound into leaving the engine in an undefined state that causes constant random crashes. I've seen both Godot and Unity do this, and I am pretty sure UE4&5 also have their weak spots (especially since I've heard Epic has a "fast and loose" development strategy on the engine).
Solid, no bs video. Thanks for the work man
Thanks!
It's such a light, easy, quick IDE... I build tools in Godot, not just games, and it's so quick and neat in comparison with those other tools.
thanks to unity, this video needs no explanation as to why godot is better than unity. lol
My dude, now you need only one reason for switching to godot and that is beacause :
1. Is similar to Unity
2.Unity added fees per installs on 12 September 2023
So as a dev that used Unity for 3 years, I will be switching to godot.
I hope Godot will grow more and that more specialized tools, templates etc will be available. Many years ago (when Unreal and Godot weren't that big) the main thing people told me that is good about Unity is the huge marketplace. We need this for Godot.
I find it surprising that over several of these videos, I have not seen anyone present what I consider to be the most important and defining differences.
Godot's main advantage is that you own it. It's yours! You can do anything you want with it. Today, and forever; it will never be taken from you. You can predicate your entire business on it, and no one is going to yank it out from under you or milk your future success. The engine is never going to take a change of direction under new ownership. It's never going to be leveraged to force you to consume other commercial products. If you don't understand how it works, you just look at the source code. If you don't like what you see, you change it! There are no secrets, no limits, no traps laid by capitalists and scammers, no onerous licenses, no annual fees, no revenue limit, no seat limit, etc etc etc etc.
Unity or Unreal are not yous. You can only borrow them. Maybe. If their owners feel like letting you use it this year and you jump through the right hoops. If you're important enough, they might make the changes to the engine your project needs. If you're not, too bad, you can't do it yourself. Maybe next year Meta, buys Unreal. Maybe Autocad does, and starts charging you a subscription. Maybe in a few years you find out that your games have all been sending telemetry back to some other corporation you never even knew existed because you are not permitted to security audit your own software releases. Maybe if you make money at all this, they let you keep most of it. But maybe that changes tomorrow.
A developer using one of the major commercial development packages is a pawn of capital. The software exists to get your money and the money of your customers. All other functions are secondary to that. This philosophy permeates ever aspect of design. And so does the alternative philosophy, where software is written to solve technical problems and empower developers to create games. THAT is Godot's primary purpose, in stark contrast to Unreal and Unity. And I despair that people don't even give a fuck.
Oh, but that is what Godot being open-source and community-driven means :) I found the point you mention being discussed already, so I wanted to add some different reasons.
For some people this is the cardinal reason to use Godot over anything else (for me it's a requirement), but many people don't understand that or don't care (yet) - I wanted to present some aspects that are solely rooted in how a regular user interacts with the engine and it's editor, not how a company or a corporation would (but obviously Godot has even bigger benefits for those use cases).
- unfa
A lot of your points are illogical and make no sense, Unity and Unreal would never completely switch to a subscription model again as they would lose a lot of their users and not to mention their asset store sales would drop significantly...Also if there were backdoors and malware in the engine's code that sold you and your users data someone would have discovered it by now and these companies would be exposed.
All your arguments are pure conjecture and are therefore irrelevant, Unity and Unreal have professional development teams that are dedicated to constantly improving them, which is actually a huge benefit over Godot where you have to rely on a single small community of hobbyists...
Not to mention the fact Godot sucks as a professional engine, especially for large scale, mechanically complex, and high fidelity 3d games.
@@griefy4555 ha ha, lurk more, man. it's not a hypothetical. "first shave" energy there, bud.
@@Barnaclebeard Wow amazing retort! Just invalidates your arguments further and proves my point that Godot is a trash engine lmao
@@DartVonGrell What are you even talking about? You can always download legacy versions of the proprietary engines to modify your games, or go through the arduous process of converting them to the latest build, who said you don't have the right to access them?
I swear you opensource obsessed clowns will come up with any excuse to say opensource is superior when it clearly isn't, opensource software like Blender, Gimp, Librespite, and Krita are good and competitive opensource software, whereas software like Godot and Linux are complete garbage when compared to the competition. Stop trying to demonize proprietary software just because they're far superior and go grow up a bit.
me: starting to get bored
video : screams with reverberation
me: ok, I'm here
I think the last Godot I worked with, was 3.3 or something. I actually liked Godot and it was easy to get into. But as easy as it was to get into, it was just as easy to come to a halt. Designing a level in it was very cumbersome. Had to manually add (in Blender) collisions for the ground and roads. And got strange collisions/physics at certain spots for no reason.
Also, although initial car setup was straightforward and with a bit of tinkering, got the car to behave like I wanted, I "hit a brick wall" when it came to more advanced controls for it (like being able to drift). And biggest problem was, you couldn't really find much help in those regards.
In contrast, in Unreal I am able to create ground and roads, which automatically have collisions and I can easily edit on the fly. Even Materials adjust accordingly. The Chaos Vehicle is also easy to setup (although here also again, things like drifting is hard to find a solution to) and camera setup is even easier. And since I'm a visual learner, Blueprints are welcome addition. Also since I'm more a designer than a coder.
I don't know how much and how Godot has improved in the mean-time. I do miss it in some way, because indeed, the lack of options actually made it easier to focus. But Godot still seems more for programmers than for designers. And I don't think my coding-skills in webdesign and databases is enough to make any meaningfull progress, as game development, solo, is already a daunting task.
Who knows, I'll probably one day revisit Godot.
Welp, 9 months after this video was made, Unity is imploding due to a new "runtime fee" - an announced staggering and straight out abusive pricing model that would "somehow" monitor number of installs of games and make developers or publishers pay up to $0.20 per game or app install.
And it seems like a lot of people suddenly realized how dangerous building your business on a corporation (and a publicly traded one at that) is.
So the first point I mentioned has become a real highlight. The entire game dev community is fleeing after Unity has incinerated any trust it's userbase had.
And many of these fleeing game developers and studios are looking at Godot and seeing as it could never do something like this to them.
I am greatly saddened to see Unity Technologies set itself on fire, but that's the unfortunate capitalistic reality. After an IPO, a company's job is not to make it's customers happy - it's only job now is to make it's shareholders happy. And that might not align very well, if at all...
Unity is a very important engine and has played a huge role in the global culture of games.
Sadly - after this, the only way people could every trust it again would probably be to release the engine as open-source software and establish a new company working on it's development in the open, guaranteeing that nothing like this could ever happen again - otherwise, the industry will desert it as it is already doing.
Take care, Unity game devs.
Professionally I'm on this boat with you, and I hope we can all make it out alive.
- unfa
Hello there
I was about to practice using/testing both Unity and Godot for my upcoming 2D indie/AA games to find out which is better, that is until the controversy regarding Unity, so I finally chose Godot
2D besides, UE 5.3 has a lot of potential (even all 3D art directions became better within this engine if used Nanite correctly) that's why I choose this for 3D alongside Godot for 2D
Why not explain an engine like a musical instrument?! People like to listen to music (play games) so other people who can play an instrument (able to use the given engine) make music (the game they are developing). So in this case, some people play piano and some like the guitar. Some like to listen to classical music and others hate it and listen to metal and rock.
The same goes for game engines as I mentioned. Someone may want to make a multiplayer FPS or an RPG with ultra-realistic graphics and someone else wants a farm sim with large story elements and in a pixel art style like Stardew Valley.
If unity is great for your fits, then use it! If you are stunned by UE 5's graphics and capabilities like Nanite and you have dreams and ideas you want to make real with those tools? Then just use it!
And if you want to use Godot (or actually any other game engine) 'cause it fits your workflow and doesn't cut you off, then just continue using it! There is no reason and no logic behind saying: "You just can't use engine X, because it can't handle topic X well. It is terrible!" As long as it feels good to use and serve your creativity and fantasy of making a game, it is good enough. Also saying "It is a bad tool/engine/whatever" isn't right. A good artist can make a masterpiece out of one simple pen.
So, please, just use the engine you like! :)
Well said!
- unfa
Well said
when you said FINAL THOUGHTS i expected a guitar riff
This aged like fine wine.
Late to the party, but the reasons I love Godot are it's open source nature and lack of bloat. The engine is tiny loads quickly and makes small executables. It feels extremely efficient compared to the other engines out there. It's amazing really that almost everything you could need is included in that tiny download. Then there is the node and scene system, which the more you use it the more it makes sense, it's simply the best way of doing things unless you want to go into pure ECS programming.
Another plus for me is that the devs of Godot don't seem afraid to take apart the engine and rewrite parts of it that need it, removing and replacing where necessary. While that sucks for backwards compatibility it's so much better for the engine's overall health in the long run and truly, I believe why it's still so lightweight even in its 4th version.
If you look at Unity and especially Unreal, while they have more features they also have a metric ton of bloat that comes with it. I mean a UE5 install takes over 100GB for the engine alone wtf! Tell me how Godot can have 80-90% of that functionality in less than 200kb.
Should I also mention, the speed Godot gets updates. It's catching up with the big boys fast in terms of features.
I don't mind GDScript, i just wish the sytax was a bit more similar to C instead of Python. There are a fair number of land mines in the more esoteric syntax that GDScript uses that trade off being able to code things up fast initially at the cost of spending unnecessary amounts of time tracking down a bug that, with a more conventional syntax, would have refused to compile in the first place.
You can use static typing with GDScript and bugs that coming from variables "suddenly" changing type no longer exist. Project wont even run.
Yeah i think ill use godot with c#, i would like to dive deep into the engine and since its open source, ill be able to do that!
it's pratically not totally a community driven project. The core engine part(rendering, physics etc) is written by 3-5 people at most. 95% of people doesn't understand the code at all let alone they contribute it.
It's great for Indies but not for us who're working for game companies, I'm not indie, just a salaried developer.
But it's a great engine for 2d games for sure.
I wouldn't recommend Godot for anyone above small indie teams right now. I work in a medium-sized indie studio and I would not see Godot being a good tool for the job we do here at this point. But for single-developers or small teams - I think it's worth evaluating. So far 3D performance is still really poor, but once they manage to get it into the ballpark of Unity and Unreal Engine - I think it'd be a decent option not just for 2D games. Right now it's great for tinkerers, but I wouldn't use it as a foundation for a business project. Too much uncertainty there still.
BTW, if Godot is not a community-driven project than I don't know what is :D The full-time development is paid from community donations and the development is done using user input all the time. Also tons of work is contributed from outside of the core team.
The Godot GDC 2023 talk has some numbers on this, I don't remember them, but it's a lot.
- unfa
@@liblast On year has pass since this comment. Are you still thinking the same?
I'm a professional Unreal Engine developer, and I was wondering about learning Godot.
A UT99 inspired game you say? HELL YEA
Godot being lightweight is indeed an important thing, at least for me. I work on a laptop packed with reaper and sample libraries. And Godot just runs neatly.
My app will be small and smart. But it won't be a game and let's see whether I can sell a few copies once it's finished...
No need for features that I'll never use.
The game that's featured in this video looks like it's going to be a great game.
Thanks! It has changed a lot since the video was made :) Check out the newest videos on this channel if you're interested.
- unfa
Great video. I really like the points you make and how you describe them.
Thanks!
- unfa
Awesome video! Some great points covered.
Thanks!
- unfa
Bro's like "sorry for my voice, I'm sick" I wish I had your voice
if I make a 2d game for android on Unity vs Godot vs Unreal, which platform will give me smallest apk size according to you ?
As it happens I've just been playing Liblast this afternoon, not the worst thing I ever played.
That checks out - it's pre-alpha :)
- unfa
A game engine is just a tool. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. Stick with what you know best or prefer. Even better, if you're able to switch between multiple engines for different problems. For me, Godot for 2D, and Unity for 3D, since it's more mature in that field.
I've used Unity since 2006 on the Mac and Unreal since 2000 on the PC. GODOT is basically the start of EveryEngineInc. It's NOT something we DIDN'T have before, it's part of the cycle of going back to what we had before with Unity (and to some extent Unreal).
I agree with you. For basic prototyping in 2d android games, godot is a lot more beginner friendly. It is much faster and easier to install godot, configurate it, program and ship the game for your phone. It is a huge advantage compared to Unity and Unreal.
I love Godot, but I don't really understand why they chose to roll their own language and certainly don't see it as a pro for them. Not only do they have to waste huge resources maintaining, bug-fixing, evolving and create tooling for GD Script, but it kind of sucks for devs too because we have to learn a new language that becomes useless when we stop using Godot. Also it's indentation based 🤮
All solid points
solid for a noob like you
Does Godot support .fbx? Can you put code of one class into separate files (like in C++)?
1. Godot supports .fbx import through a third party tool that you need to install separately and point Godot towards (the tool actually converts FBX to GLTF2 which is what Godot supports natively).
2. I am not sure if you can break up a single class into multiple files, but you can create subclasses in separate files that are then used in the parent class. In Liblast there's a lot of static classes for objects that are used for controlling player input, character controls, weapons, damage etc. Though I am not experienced with C++ so I might be misunderstanding your question.
- unfa
Use defold for 2d games It's really amazing It supports Nintendo switch and consoles and PC and mac and mobiles etc .
You can put games on Switch with Godot as well :)
@@liblast really then I will use godot
@@blasterxt9so defold becoming de/fol so Godot is a sukuna ryuse senkai maveluvant shrine Godot is top 1 because very easy to use and learn
@@messengercreator im using godot 4
Your voice is epic.
Thanks! But it's not normally this deep, unless I just woke up on a Sunday morning :D
- unfa
I have many years experience on Unity. I can do pretty much anything I think of with it. Currently learning Godot because I can’t stand Unity slow recompile.
I work with Unity in my day job, and I feel you :D
- unfa
@@liblast Lol I work on Roblox game engine in my day job. But yea I don't like the that I can't see the source code.
@@liblast I am now tinkering with Godot, I just need to learn C++ then I can read the source code. And that can help for problems that there is no solution to on internet or if you just want to see what happens behind the engine.
@@liblast Also I like how fast you can test your game in Godot.
Funny how You called godot editor a game. It is not a game, it's the editor of the engine. But it feels good to use. For us indie developers godot simplifies some things that are really useful, and it is OPEN SOURCE
I tried Godot and there is no way in hell I would give up Unreal 5 for that Engine.
Nice video. Thanks.
Making extensions is ASM? How? :D Link against the C++?
haha this video's fonna blow up now
The asset Store of Unity is crazy, if their is a way to import it to Godot would be amazing
Well, that's not going to be possible, because Unity's Asset Store has assets made specifically for Unity :)
However Godot has something similar called Asset Library - obviously there's way less things in there (Godot's user base is still very small compared to Unity's).
- unfa
Not sure if you can. I have not tried. But I guess if you buy something from the Unity Asset store, import it into Unity, the files are stored on your disk and you could copy them to Godot. I tried to find a way to download Unity Assets without installing Unity but that is not possible :(
Good explanation of differences.
Thank you!
- unfa
Thank you, that was needed
Upd: subscribed
Tbh, Godot is more of a beginner friendly as while Unity is more of an intermediate to enterprise level. Not saying Godoy can’t be similar to Unity but it can’t be like Unity
Having to use Unity at work I am very happy Godot is different :D
- unfa
@@liblast yes, in the end they’re both unique and good game engines good for different game
The main thing I don't like about Godot is its script language because it is limited to just this game engine; If its main language was C# or C++ I would have been using it; I know you can integrate C# and probably C++ but the associate documentation and videos are more limited; however Unity and Unreal use C# and C++ which can be used in other application and are not restricted to just unity or unreal.
GDscript is easy.
After a week you'll feel comfortable using it.
@@GorgeousPuree I learned C, C#, C++ assembly, javascript, gamemaker script, monkey, visual basic, Dephi, HTML, CCS ...I could go on but you probably get the point. so learning a new coding language as simple as GDscript is not really my problem; I don't want to use a code that is only used in one place (like when I learned in monkey and gamemaker studio script and decided to finally switch Unreal. ) at least GameMaker script was similar to C, C#, and C++.
Dude really awesome, how I can run Godot in iPad/ 😊
Hey, I don't have one to test and I have no idea :D
- unfa
@@liblast I see, I hope you get one so you can test it 😊
4.4 coming soon
FINALTHOUGHTS!!!!!!
Good job.
4:04 I disagree that no other languages were suited. Lua has been integrated into game engines and used to make games for decades. Maybe Godot team could have focused on delivering more valuable features instead of inventing a scripting language that no one wants to learn.
Or maybe - Godot developers decided that the convenience of using an already developed language is not worth the frictions and hard edges that it will inevitably cause.
It might also be that Godot is just not for you, because a lot of people don't have a problem with learning GDScript if that's what it takes to use this engine. And it's really not hard to get started.
- unfa
Meanwhile im here trynna start using C# instead of GDScript, hope i wont regret it.
Are you extending Godot or just making your own engine from scratch? :)
- unfa
@@liblast Neither.
1.C# is an officially supported language for development of games with Godot.
Extending the engine would need C++ or C.
2.I've thought of at someday making my own engine but thats far in the future ;)
4:40 that hit me like a brick
My apologies.
- unfa
I see your points and now can really understand why some people like godot so much. But to be honest, for me (who never used godot) it seems, the only reason to use godot, is that it's easier to learn. Fair enough but to be honest, unity isn't that hard to learn either
There's one thing I will never be able to do with Unity or Unreal Engine that is something that Godot allows me to do easily.
With Godot I can talk directly to the developers about problems I have and what I think could be a good solution and more often than not see these problems resolved within weeks or months (depending on how complex the issue is).
Or heck - I can even fix the problem myself if nobody wants to do it! Because I have the source code and I am allowed to modify and use it however I please!
With Unity there's crippling issues that will probably never be fixed that I can't do anything about.
For example - a problem I'm facing at work right now:
Editing a complex ShaderGraph is going to be faster to do in a text editor than Unity, because it takes between 20 and 70 minutes to process a single connection change in there (a single click&drag), because it's not possible to disable automatic shader re-compilation. And I need to do say 20 of these mouse click&drags to do a "simple thing".
When Godot has something this bad, I report it, show my project to the developers and it doesn't take long before there is a fix for it. Even if the core team doesn't have time to do it because it's niche, *anybody* can submit a PR and fix that.
With Godot I as a user have a say in the matter and I can actually improve things for myself and others.
With Unity I'm now literally taking apart the JSON format of ShaderGraph files to do my flippin' job!
I can think of better things to do with my time!
- unfa
@@liblast why dont you just write the shader then? really what kind of reason is this? it seemsyou are creating problems for yourself then anything. you can literally just write the shader...
@@zendraw3468 I guess it's my fault for using tools Unity provides and expecting them to work. Case closed.
@@liblast if your talking about shader graph i alredy told you, lol.
@@zendraw3468 ShaderGraph is a tool I use because it allows me to do very complex shaders while retaining artistic control. I am a tech artist, not a graphics programmer. Unity's Shader graph generally is an awesome tool (I wish Godot's Visual Shaders will one day will at least get close to what it can do) but I found a use case where it fails miserably, costing me a lot and nobody can help me with that. "Just write a shader" is unfortunately not a solution to my problem here.
- unfa
#TeamGodot
nice video...😊
Thanks :)
- unfa
Tone down the sound effects, man.
Free
me as Android experience is so easy i mean very easy learn Godot why because if u watch short u ar now pro Godot engine and others engine cry in corner
After seeing this video i'm still more happier using ue5
That's perfectly fine :D
I feel like some people think that I am trying to say that Godot is *better* than Unreal or Unity. It's not. It is different. More suitable for some use cases, but unsuitable in others.
For example it's a great option for simpler mobile games, because it's so lightweight. It can be a great replacement for Flash fro the Web. It' definitely not a good fit for an AAA or even AA production.
At some point I think it will become feasible for the latter, but I don't think will ever try to compete in the AAA space. This is why I think it's best for indie developers like myself, not necessarily for large studios. At least not yet.
When Godot 4 becomes truly stable, feature-full and will gather a large library of add-ons, assets and extensions - then I think it'll be a good time to re-evaluate it for more complex productions. I think that'll be around version 4.2 or 4.3.
4.0 will be a "bare bones" release to just get the engine's boots on the ground and get it widely tested in production, and will be followed quickly by releases addressing the most pressing issues that weren't apparent before the first stable release.
For example I find Godot fantastic for my own projects like Liblast, but I wouldn't want try to convince my boss to develop our next game on it. It would not be a good experience for our teams at this stage with the scope of what we do.
Cheers!
- unfa
@@liblast you say its suitible for some cases and not for others, which is correct, but then you run a mile and write the typical fly vs elephant contrasting reasons which is just enforcing your bias.
godot is in no way better suited then unity for example, to make any game, be it small or big. the mobile market is dominated by unity games btw, games made in a week or so, but only becouse testing, not becouse it takes time to put things together, becouse i know your going to make that argument...
the ONLY single good thing about godot is, portability, NOTHING game dev related. unity and unreal are the only 2 pioneers in game development.
the more you try to do with godot, the more you have to fix its problems and instead of your mind being in the development process, you think about bs. this doesnt happen atall with unity nor unreal, with them you can just sit down, and dev. no bs.
@@zendraw3468 Well, I am currently loosing my marbles because of BS I have to deal with developing in Unity at work. So I am not so sure I'd agree on that front.
- unfa
It's a wierd engine, 3d looks worse than unity but at same time is more hardware hungry than unreal.
You mean in godot 3? Godot 4 is(will be) ok
@@ArsentyevYaroslav 3.5 or 4, both look horrible, I dont think sgdi will be ready on the next year as people are saying.
But bugs are the major problem, I just now found a bug with 3d ik, that was solved on github since 2020, but it's not and the same bug is present on 4... and is not just that, every thing i try to do i hit a bug, that was susposed to have been solved in the 2018 ~ 2020 range, but is still there.
I will say, 99% of godot userbase wont go past a pixel art plataformer, so they won't make bugs report on anything more complex than that.
it's a shame since gdscript and the node system is so good.
I mean the 3D side isn't as developed/optimised as the 2D sure; but saying it's more hardware hungry than unreal is a big stretch. It's more likely that whatever experience you're basing that on was actually from something like driver issues.
@@blaze595 And it is, just by droping some 3d models on the viewport I can see my fps dropping and is not a lot of poligons, i have 10~20x times more on other engines with way higher fps, driver is ok.
@@eduardomoura2813 Well, Liblast (the game this channel is all about) is a project that (among other things) aims to help with that. I've reported and helped fix many issues already that didn't creep up in smaller projects.
It gets better when we make complex games and help devs make that work well.
Godot is a community-driven engine unlike Unity or Unreal, where an average user has virtually zero impact on it's development.
We are who can make Godot work fantastically for huge, beautiful 3D games , and I am working towards that :)
- unfa
Godot is written in C++ so it's too late for that engine, it will always be inherently unstable and obsolete. I've moved on from C++ to Rust. Going back to an old C++ engine is going backwards.
💀
c++ sister its over 😭
That isn't THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER READ, but good effort.
I am pretty sure that makes all existing game engines obsolete, no? :D
- unfa
Nah, rust is a failure, you should use Google carbon, using rust is going backwards.
tbh, I hate Godot's node system, it's attempt to push a custom coding language into your face and the naming convention is especially exhausting to look at. Like who the fuck uses underscores like that? The code is so ugly to look at with the formatting and naming. Can't work with that. And yes, I know there is a .Net version but that one is probably just as ugly to work with as with the rest.
So I don't see any reason to use godot. I'd rather prefer a lightweight component based engine using a proper programming language as primary scripting API such as C# and C++. But the only options out there are bloated as hell.
@SomeoneOnlyWeKnow compared to unity it's horrible tbh, but I love godot
not an angry comment but if you want a lightweight engine that badly why not make one yourself? and that way you can have complete control over your work
@@scarm_rune Yeah, because everyone has years to dedicate to building a subpar engine that can never compete against what's already out there...
@@griefy4555 Because there's no one out there and, as he said, if OP needs it badly, there's no choice but to create one himself.
GDScript is heavily influenced by Python. It borrowed a lot of Python's coding style. The underscore has been used since the C era so I don't really know what his problem is. And arguing about the naming convention is kinda pointless since you won't find one that suits you until you make one yourself.
For example, I hate Unreal's naming convention with a passion. What with A, U, F, E, etc. prefixes? It's freaking confusing when you start using Unreal for the first time because the compiler will complain if you DON'T name it according to the predefined convention. Talking about shoving coding language into a user's throat, Unreal is the worst of all. And why everything starts with uppercase? Variables, functions, classes. They are all uppercase. That makes it hard to see at the first glance which is which.
In the end, I just learn to accept it and just use whatever gets my job done because you can keep searching the whole internet but you will find at least one thing you don't like about the tools you are using. So, I decided to not waste my time on that anymore.
@@griefy4555 building your own engine is not a out competing with some other big engine. It's about tailoring it to specifically what u need it to do. Who cares if it doesn't have something a big name does if u don't need it or need something simpler.