13 ms·
Godot 3.5
- birracerveza 4y ago>Internal Server Error Huh... looks like it did stop
- ccbccccbbcccbb 4y agoCame to testify the same, lol)))
- mshockwave 4y agosame here, the hug of death from HN I guess
- KronisLV 4y agoHere's a Wayback Machine link of the article, just in case: https://web.archive.org/web/20220805154013/https://godotengine.org/article/godot-3-5-cant-stop-wont-stop https://web.archive.org/web/20220805154013/https://godotengi...
- bilekas 4y agoI've been hearing so much about Godot recently that I'm going to try it out. I'm not even a game developer. Good marketting I guess!
- BudaDude 4y agoGodot is becoming the game engine of the internet. It checks all the boxes. - Open Source - Cross Platform - Frequent updates - Easy to learn in a weekend - You can use almost any programming language with it - Godot 4.x has beautiful graphics - Godette
- willismichael 4y ago> beautiful graphics Doesn't that depend entirely upon the artwork used in the game?
- krapp 4y agoA lot of it depends on shaders and lighting.
- BudaDude 4y agoThis is only sort of true. If you load any 3D model into Unreal Engine for example, the lighting and shaders will make it look pretty good without much modification. Godot is getting a big upgrade to its lighting and shader engine in 4.x
- naet 4y agoIf you have a nice engine that helps with beautiful lighting / shadows, dynamic range, good animation rigging, or other useful tools related to graphics and visuals, it will be easier for you to make a "beautiful" game with less work than if you have to try and bring some of those things yourself. It is true that people make stunning games even with janky engines by using great art and design. But the easier it is to implement your vision for graphics, the more likely you'll reach that level.
- EarthLaunch 4y agoI think three.js is that. - All of the above except language - Library rather than engine I've had really good luck with it versus Babylon or Unity.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago> I think three.js is that. three.js doesn't produce native multi platform apps for desktop and mobile.
- EarthLaunch 4y agoThe mobile builds are its killer app, in my view as a gamedev. Unity has lost the plot in many ways. Desktop builds are important too, but there's competition there if you consider browser/electron as a desktop platform, plus Unreal. But Godot is the exclusive up-and-coming competition in mobile builds (that I am aware of; granted I am not a mobile dev).
- naet 4y agoThree.js is a 3d graphics library, not a game engine. You can use it to render your game but it doesn't bring the same things as Unity or Babylon. I have often worked directly with an html canvas and some javascript to make 2d web games. It works well for me and I enjoy it, but I wouldn't call it a "game engine" either.
- iFire 4y agoLet's be fair to three.js, the comparison would be to aframe. https://aframe.io/ https://aframe.io/ or similar projects. (Godot Engine Maintainer)
- EarthLaunch 4y agoThank you so much for your work on Godot. You are right, though I think all three can be compared, depending on the type of project. Unity is on the decline and I would be happy for Godot to become the future for those types of games.
- robrtsql 4y ago> Physics interpolation in 3D This is huge. Initially, Godot didn't support any interpolation, which meant you either ignore fps altogether (and your game literally plays slower, and therefore differently, if the game slows down from 60 to 30 fps), or you move physics code to the _physics_process() and suffer from stutter/jitter because the physics code and the rendering code slowly drift out of sync. Amazing! EDIT: I forgot to mention the _third_ possiblity, which is that you write a bunch of custom code in GDScript or C++ which attempts to do the interpolation.
- IshKebab 4y agoWhy couldn't you just run physics at the graphics frame rate (or double it if the graphics becomes too slow)? I don't think many games need fully deterministic physics do they? Like x += v * dt draw(x) Or is that what this does?
- spacehunt 4y agoCollision detection is a major reason. If you only sample positions at the frame rate, you're going to have bullets go through walls without hitting anything. Also, physics is costly to run, so usually it's not run on every frame.
- wongarsu 4y agoAnd you really want your collision detection to be reasonably deterministic. Reasonable frame rates range from 30fps to 240fps, which is nearly an order of magnitude, and you want your bullets to behave the same over that range.
- IshKebab 4y agoYou only need physics to run at a "fast enough" rate. Let me rephrase: Why not just snap physics frames to graphics frames?
- spacehunt 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- anonGone73 4y agoIs it Go Dot or Go Dough? Asking for a friend :)
- upupandup 4y agothe latter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_Godot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_Godot
- Uehreka 4y agoActually neither, it’s “Guh-doe”.
- peoplefromibiza 4y agoActually not, it's /ˈɡɒdoʊ/ GOD-oh pronunciation is where phonetic alphabet shines[1] and English totally sucks [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabe... [2] https://jakubmarian.com/english-words-spelled-the-same-but-pronounced-differently/ https://jakubmarian.com/english-words-spelled-the-same-but-p...
- ehutch79 4y agoEither, but the developers aparently say "go dot"
- PTOB 4y agoTheir logo is a robot. "Go dot" rhymes with "robot". I always assumed that it was a purposeful misdirection using the popularity of "Waiting for Godot" to lead people to mispronounce it as "guh-doh". I know I'm wrong, but I like that story better than the real one.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago/ˈɡɒdoʊ/ (read like GOD-oh) see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32358256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32358256
- georgeecollins 4y agoNow that Godot seems to be getting much hotter, I feel like I am having to update my game engine more and more frequently. It's great to see then update the navigation system, but will it break my game? I worry it could be heading to the same problem I see with Unity where things are constantly getting updated and re engineered. I have seen professional teams working in Unity be many version behind because they dread the work of updating. Plus, I don't know how many more integrations I want to do on 3.x before 4.0. I am hoping that the move to Vulkan will give me better 3d performance on mobile
- dleslie 4y agoUnless Godot has solved the problem of forward compatibility of binary asset bundles with compiled assets, then what's true of Unity is true of Godot: the cost of your engine upgrade is proportional to your reliance on existing assets. It may just be a recompile. It's may be that the upgrade requires more, a whole art pass before recompile. Maybe there's mods you don't have the source for, that you can't upgrade at all.
- Uehreka 4y agoHopefully the incentive schemes help with this: part of the reason for Unity’s feature churn is that they’re more incentivized to create new features (to acquire new customers) than maintain old ones. You’d think this approach would backfire, but with the amount of lock-in engines have they can afford to piss off current customers at least up to a point. Godot, not being beholden to shareholders and quarterly growth targets, can hopefully make more clear-headed decisions around product roadmap.
- dleslie 4y agoUnity needs existing customers to continue their pro subscriptions; and game developers are notorious for throwing everything out and staying afresh on every project. The new features are as much for existing customers as they are for attracting new ones. That said, Unity ads is where the real money is at.
- wongarsu 4y ago
- TheMagicHorsey 4y agoGodot is a fantastic project. But, I really wish it was written in something other than C++. I really can't bring myself to go back to programming C++ again after a decade away using more recent languages like Go and Rust. I even find deciphering the types of variables to be painful when reading C++ code these days.
- demindiro 4y agoIMO the issue is not that Godot uses C++, it's that they refuse to use a standard more recent than C++03. Being able to use `auto` would make the code already a lot less verbose IMO.
- iFire 4y agoGodot uses c++ 17 in master. Autos and lambdas are not allowed from a style guide decision.
- netr0ute 4y agoI can't tell if this is a GPT-3 comment or not.
- TheMagicHorsey 4y agoWell, that comment is definitely GPT-3.
- yodon 4y agoPlease don't cast GPT-3 aspersions on people or posts, they add nothing to the discussion and are rarely if ever correct. This one certainly is not. The commenter is lamenting that they don't feel comfortable contributing to an open source project that they use because of the language choice of the project. It's far easier to simply write the couple of sentences involved than to coax GPT-3 to do it. Your apparent inability to understand the commenter's point doesn't make the commenter an algorithm. The correct response, if you are puzzled by a comment, is to ask a respectful question about the comment. "Assume the best interpretation of a comment" is a core assumption that HN readers are asked to make when reading and commenting on threads, and it's a remarkably good place to start here.
- the_duke 4y agoNot my field of work, but I'm curious. From what I'm hearing Unreal is establishing a big lead over the competition with things like Lumen, face model generation (Metahuman?), asset libraries, ML assisted images/video to model converters, very polished editor tooling ,world builders, ... All things that take a lot of money to make. Is there any chance to compete in the near or medium term for things like Unity or Godot? Outside of small indie studios or hobbyists that is.
- netr0ute 4y ago> All things that take a lot of money to make. Untrue, as shown by numerous FOSS projects run by volunteers.
- _hao 4y agoUnreal is ahead for a couple of reasons (mainly historical + money) and they target industries outside of games as well now - namely film productions. With that said most big AAA companies still use their proprietary game engines and I don't see that changing. General purpose engines like Unreal/Unity/Godot have their place of course, but to use the full set of features of Unreal you need a big team anyways, so comparing it to Unity and Godot doesn't seem right to me at least. Godot is slowly eating Unity's lunch though. Especially given the direction that Unity has taken after their IPO they might be in trouble in the near future. Also there are some crazy people (like me) that just write their own engines for the projects they are doing and here's hoping that in time our number will actually grow. It would be very sad if the game engine world ends up like the OS or browser world for example.
- cptcobalt 4y agoI've been part of shipping one of perhaps the largest used Godot projects in production. It's not a game, and you may not even realize it's Godot. Godot is below average in quality compared to Unreal, and probably about on par with various idiosyncrasies that Unity has. Unreal is winning the technical race because they ship projects and games themselves with their engine. Unity does none of that, at least nothing that counts. Godot is a bit better than Unity because it's open-source so contributors are often contributing to things they use and want to improve, but it's still got weird opinions at a maintainer level and severe performance downfalls from those opinions. We're considering another renderer, but for the time being we're still tepidly okay with Godot.
- jayd16 4y agoHow is Unreal on mobile and VR these days? The new UE5 tech doesn't seem to run on it. I can't really speak from experience but it always felt like mobile dev was a much higher priority for Unity than Unreal. Is that still the case?
- spywaregorilla 4y agoIt works for mobile. Likely not one of the primary use cases though. VR support is there. Again, I think not the engine's priority. Last I checked some of their new core tech behind ue5 (lumen, nanite) didn't work correctly in VR, though that was around launch time. I would probably start a new VR project in Unreal, and Godot for mobile. edit: the RE4 VR remake was in Unreal for example
- naet 4y agoCan I ask what it is you're using godot for if it isn't a game?
- fezfight 4y agoYou can build really fancy UIs in it so you can use it for basically anything.
- Supermancho 4y agoAnything beyond surface level is difficult to extract from the documentation and that hurts a lot. From the new user experience, the Godot IDE still feels buggy. Features (like the inspector) populate with values from code sometimes and sometimes not, because of complicated rules or you get the fun blank file script names or dupes when resources are changed/moved/deleted.
- MrYellowP 4y agoI've looked at 3.4, 3.5 and 4.0a ... and while 4's scripting engine is definitely faster than the others before, it's still way too slow to consider using it.
- zlsa 4y agoI can concur - the stated position is that GDScript should only be used for non-performance-critical tasks, but even with a hundred objects running a simple script every frame, performance absolutely tanks in 3.x. The performance wall is so easy to hit that GDNative is almost a requirement to get good performance in non-trivial projects.
- arran-nz 4y agoStoked! I think I'll continue on my Godot VR Project now that Label3D and Textmesh are implemented - Text within the scene is vital for VR Debugging.
- NewsyJake428 4y agoAnyone else getting server errors?
- iwebdevfromhome 4y agoHow is the support nowadays to export your game to mobile, anyone knows?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sdkgames 4y agoTLDR: The problem with Godot is that it tries to be everything to everyone. They made an engine, an editor (a text editor, resource editor, debugger ...), invented a new language. They "support" export to almost all popular OS platforms. But in my opinion it's lacking in quality. The engine is slow (old style based on OOP), the editor is buggy, the language (GDScript) doesn't have the features of a modern scripting language. But it's certainly good for rapid prototyping and learning.
- chii 4y ago> The engine is slow doesn't really seem that slow for me (but of course, i haven't used it in anger yet). > the editor is buggy, the language (GDScript) doesn't have the features of a modern scripting language. the editor is enough for small scripts, but you can also choose to use your own native editor, or switch to the C# version (and use visual studio or jetbrain rider). I don't find the scripting language any worse or better than any modern script languages. What are the missing features?
- sdkgames 4y ago>I don't find the scripting language any worse or better than any modern script languages. What are the missing features? lambdas, closures, support for error handling, constructor overloading, list comprehension, packing/unpacking (arguments/lists), varargs
- jokoon 4y agoI guess most of these are syntax sugar or quality of life stuff. Gdscript is a lightweight language, it wants to be fast. They explain the goal of the language in their doc and why they didn't use something else.
- markus_zhang 4y agoI'm seriously considering trying it out. Is support on C++ development very good? Because I don't want to learn the scripting language.
- ElCapitanMarkla 4y agoFwiw the scripting language is pretty nice to deal with and quick to pick up. Great for getting things moving quickly
- Tyndale 4y agoIn 3.4 I could not get in-app purchases working for iOS apps. Is it fixed now?