3 ms·

Any engine is fine; the hard part is getting familiar enough with the framework to execute you vision on it. And developing the ancillary skills (broadly artist

Any engine is fine; the hard part is getting familiar enough with the framework to execute you vision on it. And developing the ancillary skills (broadly artistic talent/vision, and familiarity with art tooling) to do so. Or having someone else to outsource that to. Unity has a much larger community and will have much more in the way of intro tutorials, so I started there. But regardless of the engine you choose, you'll probably spend the better part of a year building tiny games (like tic-tac-toe -> pong -> breakout -> Tetris -> etc) before you can execute on anything more complicated (like a 3d RTS).

vvanders 4y ago
Any engine can work, there are advantages with choosing engines that people build similar games with. I spent ~6mo "adding" core engine features(LoD streaming, etc) to a UE3 open-world title because most of the games on UE3 at the time were very on-rails shooters. That said I agree 100% with building tiny games in an iterative fashion to understand the engine you're using, or taking a very narrow "vertical slice" to help flush out where the technical or game mechanic issues will be. There's a wealth of good engines out there today where you're building on in some cases literally decades worth of development that can accelerate a lot of the work involved in building a game(and there is a lot of work there).