6 ms·

Is your sentiment not a little unreasonable? You seem to disagree with the godot maintainers on where the effort should be placed, but, this is as open source a

Is your sentiment not a little unreasonable? You seem to disagree with the godot maintainers on where the effort should be placed, but, this is as open source a project as they get. Improving one aspect doesn't belittle all others, nor does it really hinder it. As unsurprising as it might be, they are improving godot in the ways that they can, because they want it to be better. This is unrelated to the existence of UE. I'm sure the godot community wouldn't mind if you shared your experience on game networking, and possibly contributed in that regard. I myself would appreciate it, as with you, I've found it to be limited. The underlying components and language features are there, but how to tie it together with redundancy and prediction, and a bunch of other tricks of the trade, is not trivial.

andrewmcwatters 5y ago
Nope, this team makes 5 figures in donations a month, and they actually spent time writing their own programming language. Total waste of labor. 100%. Let's put it this way, say I gave you $250,000 and said in a year I want a game engine. What would you spend your labor on? It would not be writing a programming language.
- djmips 5y ago
  Why the downvotes. I feel like there is some truth here. The world doesn't need another custom game scripting language.
  - lasagnaphil 5y ago
    This has been repeatedly said throughout Godot’s development history, but there are several crucial reasons as why the team was motivated to create their own scripting language. From the FAQ (https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/about/faq.html#what-were-the-motivations-behind-creating-gdscript https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/about/faq.html#what-w...): In the early days, the engine used the Lua scripting language. Lua is fast, but creating bindings to an object oriented system (by using fallbacks) was complex and slow and took an enormous amount of code. After some experiments with Python, it also proved difficult to embed. The main reasons for creating a custom scripting language for Godot were: - Poor threading support in most script VMs, and Godot uses threads (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Poor class-extending support in most script VMs, and adapting to the way Godot works is highly inefficient (Lua, Python, JavaScript). - Many existing languages have horrible interfaces for binding to C++, resulting in large amount of code, bugs, bottlenecks, and general inefficiency (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, etc.) We wanted to focus on a great engine, not a great amount of integrations. - No native vector types (vector3, matrix4, etc.), resulting in highly reduced performance when using custom types (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Garbage collector results in stalls or unnecessarily large memory usage (Lua, Python, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Difficulty to integrate with the code editor for providing code completion, live editing, etc. (all of them). This is well-supported by GDScript.
    - yc12340 5y ago
      Godot's FAQ makes some very good points, especially about GC, poor interop and inefficiencies language runtimes. But it feels like that reasoning focuses too much on the top interpreted languages (Javascript, Python, Lua etc). Did Godot team considered using a compiled language like D with a bit of custom harness? Wouldn't customizing an existing object-oriented language be easier than designing a completely new one from scratch?
      - PostThisTooFast 5y ago
        Seems like a good question. Shake, for example, was entirely a C/C++ compiler with special extensions for image processing. Therefore you could type C code directly into parameters' textboxes and it would run.
- viraptor 5y ago
  You can look at it the other way too. They spent time writing their language and produced something that still makes them 5 figures in donations. They may not meet your priorities, but there's a few people they do make happy.
- crocodiletears 5y ago
  Iirc, Gdscript preceded the engine's open sourcing, and the team put significant effort into making the engine easy to bind to other languages after the fact.
- okamiueru 5y ago
  Now I'm really confused here. Your objections were that focus for godot 4 was too much on graphics fidelity, and that they had little support for advanced networking features. And, now you are expressing that they have wasted their time with making their own programming language. I don't like your attitude one bit. It's of course OK to criticise decisions, but, you aren't being consistent in your arguments, and it makes it hard to have a discussion. Is your point that the work a group of people made, and then shared to the world, which then gathered attention, support and contributions, should have been done differently? I can only suggest that you look into the history of godot, and the reasons for why it is the way it is. I'm sure the maintainers will have wanted to do certain things differently in hindsight, but that doesn't make it a good criticism. Do you have other annoyances to vent over godot development? Something you would have done different, but yet not made any effort other than to say others have wasted their time on? Or is your point something else entirely, like that godot is not as deserving of praise as grid-sdk?
  - andrewmcwatters 5y ago
    Who cares if you don’t like my attitude? It’s my opinion. Should I genuflect for you?
    - okamiueru 5y ago
      I was being polite. In more earnest phrasing, you are coming across as a bit of an ass, and entitled attitude, which, has little to no effect on anything. I was only trying to see if you had a worth while argument, to which I failed. Whether or not you should care how you are perceived is, I suppose, entirely up to your discretion. You do you.
      - andrewmcwatters 5y ago
        No you weren't. I'm making an opinion statement. There's nothing entitled about it. What am I entitled to? Nothing. It's only how I feel about the labor usage the Godot team utilizes. If I said apples are a terrible purchase because I think oranges do a better job satiating you, does that mean I'm entitled? An ass? Maybe think more carefully about how you speak to people. "I don't like your attitude one bit," is a statement you make to someone when they are subject to your approval; and I'm certainly not subject to yours, nor are you mine.

andrewmcwatters 5y ago

Nope, this team makes 5 figures in donations a month, and they actually spent time writing their own programming language. Total waste of labor. 100%. Let's put it this way, say I gave you $250,000 and said in a year I want a game engine. What would you spend your labor on? It would not be writing a programming language.

djmips 5y ago
Why the downvotes. I feel like there is some truth here. The world doesn't need another custom game scripting language.
- lasagnaphil 5y ago
  This has been repeatedly said throughout Godot’s development history, but there are several crucial reasons as why the team was motivated to create their own scripting language. From the FAQ (https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/about/faq.html#what-were-the-motivations-behind-creating-gdscript https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/about/faq.html#what-w...): In the early days, the engine used the Lua scripting language. Lua is fast, but creating bindings to an object oriented system (by using fallbacks) was complex and slow and took an enormous amount of code. After some experiments with Python, it also proved difficult to embed. The main reasons for creating a custom scripting language for Godot were: - Poor threading support in most script VMs, and Godot uses threads (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Poor class-extending support in most script VMs, and adapting to the way Godot works is highly inefficient (Lua, Python, JavaScript). - Many existing languages have horrible interfaces for binding to C++, resulting in large amount of code, bugs, bottlenecks, and general inefficiency (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, etc.) We wanted to focus on a great engine, not a great amount of integrations. - No native vector types (vector3, matrix4, etc.), resulting in highly reduced performance when using custom types (Lua, Python, Squirrel, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Garbage collector results in stalls or unnecessarily large memory usage (Lua, Python, JavaScript, ActionScript, etc.). - Difficulty to integrate with the code editor for providing code completion, live editing, etc. (all of them). This is well-supported by GDScript.
  - yc12340 5y ago
    Godot's FAQ makes some very good points, especially about GC, poor interop and inefficiencies language runtimes. But it feels like that reasoning focuses too much on the top interpreted languages (Javascript, Python, Lua etc). Did Godot team considered using a compiled language like D with a bit of custom harness? Wouldn't customizing an existing object-oriented language be easier than designing a completely new one from scratch?
    - PostThisTooFast 5y ago
      Seems like a good question. Shake, for example, was entirely a C/C++ compiler with special extensions for image processing. Therefore you could type C code directly into parameters' textboxes and it would run.
viraptor 5y ago
You can look at it the other way too. They spent time writing their language and produced something that still makes them 5 figures in donations. They may not meet your priorities, but there's a few people they do make happy.
crocodiletears 5y ago
Iirc, Gdscript preceded the engine's open sourcing, and the team put significant effort into making the engine easy to bind to other languages after the fact.
okamiueru 5y ago
Now I'm really confused here. Your objections were that focus for godot 4 was too much on graphics fidelity, and that they had little support for advanced networking features. And, now you are expressing that they have wasted their time with making their own programming language. I don't like your attitude one bit. It's of course OK to criticise decisions, but, you aren't being consistent in your arguments, and it makes it hard to have a discussion. Is your point that the work a group of people made, and then shared to the world, which then gathered attention, support and contributions, should have been done differently? I can only suggest that you look into the history of godot, and the reasons for why it is the way it is. I'm sure the maintainers will have wanted to do certain things differently in hindsight, but that doesn't make it a good criticism. Do you have other annoyances to vent over godot development? Something you would have done different, but yet not made any effort other than to say others have wasted their time on? Or is your point something else entirely, like that godot is not as deserving of praise as grid-sdk?
- andrewmcwatters 5y ago
  Who cares if you don’t like my attitude? It’s my opinion. Should I genuflect for you?
  - okamiueru 5y ago
    I was being polite. In more earnest phrasing, you are coming across as a bit of an ass, and entitled attitude, which, has little to no effect on anything. I was only trying to see if you had a worth while argument, to which I failed. Whether or not you should care how you are perceived is, I suppose, entirely up to your discretion. You do you.
    - andrewmcwatters 5y ago
      No you weren't. I'm making an opinion statement. There's nothing entitled about it. What am I entitled to? Nothing. It's only how I feel about the labor usage the Godot team utilizes. If I said apples are a terrible purchase because I think oranges do a better job satiating you, does that mean I'm entitled? An ass? Maybe think more carefully about how you speak to people. "I don't like your attitude one bit," is a statement you make to someone when they are subject to your approval; and I'm certainly not subject to yours, nor are you mine.