4 ms·

Godot is also behind the curve on content pipeline tools. I love it to death, but I would never be able to convince anyone outside hobbyists to use it because i

Godot is also behind the curve on content pipeline tools. I love it to death, but I would never be able to convince anyone outside hobbyists to use it because it has no goddamn FBX support, or an easy ECS framework.

wishinghand 8y ago
Hopefully some of the Unity exodus helps Godot along with more contributors.
- cwyers 8y ago
  The issue, of course, is most of the people using Unity are using it because they don't have the ability (or time) to write the functionality Unity provides themselves.
  - wishinghand 8y ago
    There will be higher skilled devs who are using Unity that are appalled by this business practice and will want to move to a more open platform.
    - thrillgore 8y ago
      Unless there's an incentive for them to share their contributions back to Godot (like a paid plugin store, of which at least one is in development) they won't stay. And no, I am not talking about the Asset Library.
      - wishinghand 8y ago
        If that was true, then no open source software would ever get released.
ignaloidas 8y ago
Native FBX support is not compatible by license, you are free to make a module that lets Godot use FBX, just with a FBX compatible license. Traditional ECS doesn't fit with Godot's philosophy, but you can make behaviors into nodes and just add these nodes as a child for ECS-like behavior. Honestly, I find Godot's way more natural and extendable.
- wishinghand 8y ago
  Is there a blog post that goes into this ECS vs nodes paradigm?
  - ignaloidas 8y ago
    There is this [0] overview that looks into OOP as a whole and puts Godot and other game engines into it [0] https://willnationsdev.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/godots-node-system-a-paradigm-overview/ https://willnationsdev.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/godots-node-...
- Arwill 8y ago
  Without a stable and widely used model format making a game is impossible. You can drag&drop FBX into Unity and Unreal, and its mostly ready for use. Having a broken FBX importer is just a waste of time. You start with a model format, something works, you build a workflow, a system for producing content en masse, and then at some point you must consider throwing away the model format, the workflow and/or the whole engine, because the importer is unreliable. Or you try to rewrite it yourself, further wasting time. Some things must be rock-solid, open-source or not.
  - ignaloidas 8y ago
    Godot doesn't have any broken importers, yet alone FBX which it doesn't have completely for legal reasons. Looking at Collada(.dae) Blender has a super broken exporter, so broken that Godot folks wrote a better one from the frustration. GLTF2 doesn't have enough support, even though it's a good format. The problem is that everyone is just sitting and using proprietary FBX format and don't work towards new open standards like Collada or GLTF2.

wishinghand 8y ago

Hopefully some of the Unity exodus helps Godot along with more contributors.

cwyers 8y ago
The issue, of course, is most of the people using Unity are using it because they don't have the ability (or time) to write the functionality Unity provides themselves.
- wishinghand 8y ago
  There will be higher skilled devs who are using Unity that are appalled by this business practice and will want to move to a more open platform.
  - thrillgore 8y ago
    Unless there's an incentive for them to share their contributions back to Godot (like a paid plugin store, of which at least one is in development) they won't stay. And no, I am not talking about the Asset Library.
    - wishinghand 8y ago
      If that was true, then no open source software would ever get released.

ignaloidas 8y ago

Native FBX support is not compatible by license, you are free to make a module that lets Godot use FBX, just with a FBX compatible license. Traditional ECS doesn't fit with Godot's philosophy, but you can make behaviors into nodes and just add these nodes as a child for ECS-like behavior. Honestly, I find Godot's way more natural and extendable.

wishinghand 8y ago
Is there a blog post that goes into this ECS vs nodes paradigm?
- ignaloidas 8y ago
  There is this [0] overview that looks into OOP as a whole and puts Godot and other game engines into it [0] https://willnationsdev.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/godots-node-system-a-paradigm-overview/ https://willnationsdev.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/godots-node-...
Arwill 8y ago
Without a stable and widely used model format making a game is impossible. You can drag&drop FBX into Unity and Unreal, and its mostly ready for use. Having a broken FBX importer is just a waste of time. You start with a model format, something works, you build a workflow, a system for producing content en masse, and then at some point you must consider throwing away the model format, the workflow and/or the whole engine, because the importer is unreliable. Or you try to rewrite it yourself, further wasting time. Some things must be rock-solid, open-source or not.
- ignaloidas 8y ago
  Godot doesn't have any broken importers, yet alone FBX which it doesn't have completely for legal reasons. Looking at Collada(.dae) Blender has a super broken exporter, so broken that Godot folks wrote a better one from the frustration. GLTF2 doesn't have enough support, even though it's a good format. The problem is that everyone is just sitting and using proprietary FBX format and don't work towards new open standards like Collada or GLTF2.