3 ms·

He dismisses C# without even knowing what options he has. The latest stuff Unity has been doing is heavily biased towards data driven design where almost everyt

He dismisses C# without even knowing what options he has. The latest stuff Unity has been doing is heavily biased towards data driven design where almost everything is a struct. There are very few classes to be found that use any kind of polymorphism, and it is actively discouraged. You could easily treat Unity as a cross platform rendering engine and asset loading system, and then build your own engine on top of it. I see very little reason to drop down to C or C++ at this point, especially if your goal is to ship your game to as many people as possible.

elabajaba 7y ago
Blackbird Interactive did that for Homeworld Deserts of Kharak so they could have a deterministic simulation for multiplayer RTS and used Unity for the rendering. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwLW6CjswxM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwLW6CjswxM
jayd16 7y ago
As a Unity dev this is really generous to Unity. After all it's extremely complex in a way the author would hate. That said, I'd love to see a pure C# engine on .NET core 3 that has access to Span<T>. C# is set up as a great high level language with low level features as long as you're willing to do the work you would have done in C or C++.
- hesdeadjim 7y ago
  Any game engine evolves towards serious complexity as time goes on. The question is, do you want to waste time building systems that a million man hours have gone into to make them resilient across a thousand different permutations of hardware? Or do you want to ship your game? I've built a non-trivial engine active from around 2010 to 2015 that targeted all iOS and Android devices. Our test fleet of devices was enormous because we'd run into silly issues that were always device specific. My favorite, one particular phone with one particular driver version for the GPU did not correctly implement the ES 2.0 standard for constant defined variables. It caused our games to crash, and because of the scale of mobile this affected hundreds of thousands of users. At this point you could not pay me to build an engine, because for anything that isn't a toy you end up having to solve these problems yourself. Treating Unity as a rendering engine and asset loading system is not immediately "easy", but it's a very far cry from "hard". Dismissing it or other options simply because of unfamiliarity or a shallow distaste for OOP is ignorant at best and actively misleading otherwise.

elabajaba 7y ago

Blackbird Interactive did that for Homeworld Deserts of Kharak so they could have a deterministic simulation for multiplayer RTS and used Unity for the rendering. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwLW6CjswxM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwLW6CjswxM

jayd16 7y ago

As a Unity dev this is really generous to Unity. After all it's extremely complex in a way the author would hate. That said, I'd love to see a pure C# engine on .NET core 3 that has access to Span<T>. C# is set up as a great high level language with low level features as long as you're willing to do the work you would have done in C or C++.

hesdeadjim 7y ago
Any game engine evolves towards serious complexity as time goes on. The question is, do you want to waste time building systems that a million man hours have gone into to make them resilient across a thousand different permutations of hardware? Or do you want to ship your game? I've built a non-trivial engine active from around 2010 to 2015 that targeted all iOS and Android devices. Our test fleet of devices was enormous because we'd run into silly issues that were always device specific. My favorite, one particular phone with one particular driver version for the GPU did not correctly implement the ES 2.0 standard for constant defined variables. It caused our games to crash, and because of the scale of mobile this affected hundreds of thousands of users. At this point you could not pay me to build an engine, because for anything that isn't a toy you end up having to solve these problems yourself. Treating Unity as a rendering engine and asset loading system is not immediately "easy", but it's a very far cry from "hard". Dismissing it or other options simply because of unfamiliarity or a shallow distaste for OOP is ignorant at best and actively misleading otherwise.