I’m not sure it is; the heart of OOP is encapsulation of data + methods — the object itself. (Or message-passing if you’re being kinky) ECS is almost the oppos

I’m not sure it is; the heart of OOP is encapsulation of data + methods — the object itself. (Or message-passing if you’re being kinky) ECS is almost the opposite; the object in question is barely defined — rather it’s derived from the composition of its parts. Like a DB, there’s roughly no encapsulation at all; just relations defined where, should you put them all together properly, you get the “object” back. That is, in OO a particular object is composed of certain properties and capabilities. In ECS, if certain properties and capabilities exist, we call it a particular object. Implementation-wise, the main difference seems to be the SoA vs AoS argument But there’s also things like unity’s ECS deviating from rust’s ECS definition — I believe in Unity, components (data) and systems (behavior) are coupled, which fits better towards the OO world (components are the object of question). In rust ECS they’re decoupled (which unity is moving to, someday) and you’re really just dealing with structs and functions. And there’s a whole thing about the “true” ECS definition but it doesn’t really matter.