4 ms·

Absolutely, when Unity changed their pricing I expected more people to switch to Raylib. It really makes Game Dev fun again. Also it has tons of bindings (you

by 4pkjai 3y ago

Absolutely, when Unity changed their pricing I expected more people to switch to Raylib. It really makes Game Dev fun again. Also it has tons of bindings (you don’t have to code in C)

superb_dev 3y ago
I love RayLib and I use it a ton, but it’s by no means a replacement for Unity. You would need to implement a lot of stuff yourself that Unity provides before you could switch a project over
- 4pkjai 3y ago
  Yeah I suppose you’re right. Probably makes more sense for new projects to be in Raylib than to move a Unity project over. Another big thing is it doesn’t support iOS at the moment.
pjmlp 3y ago
Makes totally sense, write everything manually in C, versus a full blown middleware engine using C# and C++ with industry wide support.
- 4pkjai 3y ago
  I’m happy for you to code your game however you want. I like doing it this way.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Sure, good luck with it, not everyone needs Unity, Unreal, Godot, Frostbite, CryEngine,...
- flohofwoe 3y ago
  That absolutely works for many 2D games where Unity is currently used just because it is the "industry standard" but is also complete overkill.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Sure, if one wants to write games like in the 16bit glory days.
    - endemic 3y ago
      One of the benefits of doing something as a hobby is that it doesn’t need to scale.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        That isn't the scenario we are talking about regarding RayLib versus Unity, as mentioned by OP.
- rahen 3y ago
  Why so salty? His game will probably have a fraction of the resource requirements of the overkill, overbloated, kitchen-sink engines written in C# and C++. I would command this author for not going the easy way. This takes skills.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Because most folks on social media that suggest replacing engine X with Y, mostly reveal a complete lack of knowledge of what engine X's capabilities, market presence and synergies, or why studios pick it in first place.
    - swingingFlyFish 3y ago
      You'd be surprised to find most studios pick X over Y because it's either familiar to their devs or cheaper. Better doesn't really play into it and a thorough evaluation beforehand isn't usually done.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        As former IGDA member no wouldn't, however most of studios don't pick a raw graphics C library versus proper engine, unless its their first title and don't have any clue about the games industry.
        flohofwoe 3y ago
        Funny enough, during my 30 years (give or take) career I have seen many more game projects fail using Unity than projects using cobbled together inhouse engines. It's always the team that counts, not the technology (the technology just always gets blamed when the team fails to deliver, the actual reason is usually organizational).
  - Uptrenda 3y ago
    [flagged]

by 4pkjai 3y ago

Absolutely, when Unity changed their pricing I expected more people to switch to Raylib. It really makes Game Dev fun again. Also it has tons of bindings (you don’t have to code in C)

superb_dev 3y ago

I love RayLib and I use it a ton, but it’s by no means a replacement for Unity. You would need to implement a lot of stuff yourself that Unity provides before you could switch a project over

4pkjai 3y ago
Yeah I suppose you’re right. Probably makes more sense for new projects to be in Raylib than to move a Unity project over. Another big thing is it doesn’t support iOS at the moment.

pjmlp 3y ago

Makes totally sense, write everything manually in C, versus a full blown middleware engine using C# and C++ with industry wide support.

4pkjai 3y ago
I’m happy for you to code your game however you want. I like doing it this way.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Sure, good luck with it, not everyone needs Unity, Unreal, Godot, Frostbite, CryEngine,...
flohofwoe 3y ago
That absolutely works for many 2D games where Unity is currently used just because it is the "industry standard" but is also complete overkill.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Sure, if one wants to write games like in the 16bit glory days.
  - endemic 3y ago
    One of the benefits of doing something as a hobby is that it doesn’t need to scale.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      That isn't the scenario we are talking about regarding RayLib versus Unity, as mentioned by OP.
rahen 3y ago
Why so salty? His game will probably have a fraction of the resource requirements of the overkill, overbloated, kitchen-sink engines written in C# and C++. I would command this author for not going the easy way. This takes skills.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Because most folks on social media that suggest replacing engine X with Y, mostly reveal a complete lack of knowledge of what engine X's capabilities, market presence and synergies, or why studios pick it in first place.
  - swingingFlyFish 3y ago
    You'd be surprised to find most studios pick X over Y because it's either familiar to their devs or cheaper. Better doesn't really play into it and a thorough evaluation beforehand isn't usually done.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      As former IGDA member no wouldn't, however most of studios don't pick a raw graphics C library versus proper engine, unless its their first title and don't have any clue about the games industry.
      - flohofwoe 3y ago
        Funny enough, during my 30 years (give or take) career I have seen many more game projects fail using Unity than projects using cobbled together inhouse engines. It's always the team that counts, not the technology (the technology just always gets blamed when the team fails to deliver, the actual reason is usually organizational).
- Uptrenda 3y ago
  [flagged]