3 ms·

I would hope people just go back to writing engines from scratch. It's really not that hard and unlocks being able to do unique non cookie cutter things which i

by naillo 3y ago

I would hope people just go back to writing engines from scratch. It's really not that hard and unlocks being able to do unique non cookie cutter things which in the end games are supposed to contain.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>It's really not that hard Famous last words of a software developer. If you're making a small 2D game and are willing to make some tools for artists, then sure. You can get away with slapping together a few frameworks. But we are far past the days where you can make some decent 3D game at scale from scratch, unless you yourself are some unicorn of a "full stack" graphics engineer.
- naillo 3y ago
  If you're willing to go for graphics as good as minecraft (best selling game of all time mind you, even in 2023) it's just as feasible as in 2011, in fact it's a lot easier (and hardware a lot more forgiving). People care much less about graphics and much more about gameplay, and building things from scratch makes making unique experiences much more feasible.
HideousKojima 3y ago
Writing your own engine requires a far stronger knowledge of math, rendering, audio, and networking (just to start with) than the median dev has, probably by a few orders of magnitude.
- naillo 3y ago
  Sure but learning a framework like unity or godot is it's own massive investment (which can be taken away from you ala this article), and doing game dev isn't a part time job you do so if you're gonna spend your life on it better just learn that stuff anyway.
- JoeyJoJoJr 3y ago
  If you want to build the next Call of Duty, sure. Engines like Unity and Unreal promise to aspiring gamedevs that they can build the next COD. The reality is that most aspiring gamedevs won’t ship a game, partly because the tooling is orders of magnitude more complex than a simple rendering library, and because their aspirations to create the next COD is orders of magnitude more complex than building the next Celeste. Rendering libraries like Monogame hit a sweet spot of shielding the developer from most of the complex rendering maths, while being general enough to allow you structure your code how you like. Simple rendering libraries are a much harder sell though because a capabilities video demonstrating rotating sprites and blend modes doesn’t seem as enticing as Quixel scanned environments or Dynamically globally illuminated assets.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    > The reality is that most aspiring gamedevs won’t ship a game, partly because the tooling is orders of magnitude more complex than a simple rendering library, and because their aspirations to create the next COD is orders of magnitude more complex than building the next Celeste. If I wanted to build the next celeste, sure. But Even if I did I don't have the brand recognition to sell as well as celeste. I want to make a 3D game anyway, so that's big enough reason to let an engine do the heavy work.

by naillo 3y ago

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>It's really not that hard Famous last words of a software developer. If you're making a small 2D game and are willing to make some tools for artists, then sure. You can get away with slapping together a few frameworks. But we are far past the days where you can make some decent 3D game at scale from scratch, unless you yourself are some unicorn of a "full stack" graphics engineer.

naillo 3y ago
If you're willing to go for graphics as good as minecraft (best selling game of all time mind you, even in 2023) it's just as feasible as in 2011, in fact it's a lot easier (and hardware a lot more forgiving). People care much less about graphics and much more about gameplay, and building things from scratch makes making unique experiences much more feasible.

HideousKojima 3y ago

Writing your own engine requires a far stronger knowledge of math, rendering, audio, and networking (just to start with) than the median dev has, probably by a few orders of magnitude.

naillo 3y ago
Sure but learning a framework like unity or godot is it's own massive investment (which can be taken away from you ala this article), and doing game dev isn't a part time job you do so if you're gonna spend your life on it better just learn that stuff anyway.
JoeyJoJoJr 3y ago
If you want to build the next Call of Duty, sure. Engines like Unity and Unreal promise to aspiring gamedevs that they can build the next COD. The reality is that most aspiring gamedevs won’t ship a game, partly because the tooling is orders of magnitude more complex than a simple rendering library, and because their aspirations to create the next COD is orders of magnitude more complex than building the next Celeste. Rendering libraries like Monogame hit a sweet spot of shielding the developer from most of the complex rendering maths, while being general enough to allow you structure your code how you like. Simple rendering libraries are a much harder sell though because a capabilities video demonstrating rotating sprites and blend modes doesn’t seem as enticing as Quixel scanned environments or Dynamically globally illuminated assets.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  > The reality is that most aspiring gamedevs won’t ship a game, partly because the tooling is orders of magnitude more complex than a simple rendering library, and because their aspirations to create the next COD is orders of magnitude more complex than building the next Celeste. If I wanted to build the next celeste, sure. But Even if I did I don't have the brand recognition to sell as well as celeste. I want to make a 3D game anyway, so that's big enough reason to let an engine do the heavy work.