6 ms·

It's neat, but not better than real open source solutions. Pay is what you want unless your at work and then it's price is under NDA isn't friendly. Godot is

It's neat, but not better than real open source solutions. Pay is what you want unless your at work and then it's price is under NDA isn't friendly. Godot is still probably the best FOSS engine right now. Arguably it's strongly in 3rd place behind Unity/Unreal.

prismatic6 1y ago
The FAQ mentions source https://luxeengine.com/faq/#source-access https://luxeengine.com/faq/#source-access Where do you see an NDA?
- 999900000999 1y ago
  https://luxeengine.com/get/ https://luxeengine.com/get/ >Business - If you need more than 16 seats, or you have access to > $1m USD in the last 365 days, this tier is required, you must contact us to customize pricing. Customized pricing is very scary. It's whatever we feel like charging you under NDA. Why would I pitch this to my boss over using Godot under an MIT license?
  - prismatic6 1y ago
    I read that as cheaper in bulk, but I see what you mean.
    - swsieber 1y ago
      Given that the prices are going up in with each tier, and you can get into that tier just by having a lot of money (x users OR x money), I'm not optimistic it'll be cheaper per user.
- crustaceansoup 1y ago
  It's "source available", not open source. Unreal is "source available" as well. > Where do you see an NDA? The top price tier says > If you need more than 16 seats, or you have access to > $1m USD in the last 365 days, this tier is required, you must contact us to customize pricing. This is really weird, honestly. If you hire a 17th seat your pricing goes from $50/seat/mo to... what? How do I plan around this jump? I would also like to know what happens if my subscription lapses. Can I continue to use a version I previously downloaded? What if luxe goes out of business or, heaven forbid, suddenly increases their pricing to unsustainable levels? With Unreal I can keep using an old version.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
devrandoom 1y ago
I'm surprised they do this. The unity rugpull is still fresh in memory and mystery pricing is scary for newcomers.
- reactordev 1y ago
  They’ll learn when there’s no sales
Uehreka 1y ago
Idk that I’d say it’s in 3rd place. My guess would be that something like Source Engine is 3rd. Having worked with Unreal, Unity and Godot, Godot is extremely rough. It has a terrible scripting language, an abysmal script editing UI, all while lacking the sophistication of Unity and Unreal’s rendering. It gets way too much benefit of the doubt because it’s open source. We desperately need an open source engine that can compete with Unity and Unreal, but we need to stop kidding ourselves that Godot is serious about filling that role. If they were they would’ve grabbed Lua (or JS, or Python, or anything well established) off the shelf, told devs to use the code editor of their choice, and focused on either building the best rendering pipeline they could with their limited resources, or focused on some sort of clever differentiating feature that Unity/Unreal won’t implement. As it is it’s clear Godot’s team is more interested in reinventing wheels for fun than in making a real contender.
- 999900000999 1y ago
  Source isn't really a publicly available engine. Valve doesn't appear to have much interest in licensing it. You're not wrong about Godot, but; 1. You can always fork/modify it. Getting a source code license for Unity is a 6 figure proposition. 2. Being open source is a big deal. No phone home spyware(Unity). Keep 100% of your revenue. 3. C# support is OK. Its very slowly getting better. I'm not a Godot zealot, one if it's biggest weaknesses is a community incapacitated of criticism. But still, your getting something very capable for small scale projects for free. Unity, if Microsoft brought them out and fixed the business side, would easily be my engine of choice. I learned to program in it. But I don't trust Unity the company. Every time you turn around they're laying off more people or doing something else strange. Unreal is very bad for the smaller scales projects I actually build. Lately I've been making weird prototypes using niche engines. I like Raylib, but it's just a rendering system. It's a much harder path to getting a game made. If you know someone building a better Godot let me know. I'll try it this weekend.
  - Uehreka 1y ago
    > If you know someone building a better Godot let me know. I'll try it this weekend. Three.js is better than Godot. Yes, even though it doesn’t have a real editor. Yes, even though it’s exclusive to the web. It is a useful and functional tool for building 3D experiences. It has compatibility with almost every file type under the sun. It supports modern/cutting-edge features like WebXR. It has a talented and disciplined maintainer (mrdoob) who has steered the ship for almost 15 years through many big changes while maintaining the same solid core. It has hundreds of easily browsable examples that are kept working and up-to-date. I wish we were in a better place, but honestly this is where we’re at. If you want to build 3D games/experiences and want an open source stack, use Three.js and stick to the web. There are no good options for native.
runeblaze 1y ago
Yeah like I very much respect their work, and there is some genuine beauty in having this policy such as "have access to > 100k USD in the last 365 days, this tier is for you" or the fact that they seem dedicated to also support small indie creators. However this does differentiate them from true FOSS solutions. Note that small game devs have many types, and I imagine these "boutique" pricing solutions can work for many.

prismatic6 1y ago

The FAQ mentions source https://luxeengine.com/faq/#source-access https://luxeengine.com/faq/#source-access Where do you see an NDA?

999900000999 1y ago
https://luxeengine.com/get/ https://luxeengine.com/get/ >Business - If you need more than 16 seats, or you have access to > $1m USD in the last 365 days, this tier is required, you must contact us to customize pricing. Customized pricing is very scary. It's whatever we feel like charging you under NDA. Why would I pitch this to my boss over using Godot under an MIT license?
- prismatic6 1y ago
  I read that as cheaper in bulk, but I see what you mean.
  - swsieber 1y ago
    Given that the prices are going up in with each tier, and you can get into that tier just by having a lot of money (x users OR x money), I'm not optimistic it'll be cheaper per user.
crustaceansoup 1y ago
It's "source available", not open source. Unreal is "source available" as well. > Where do you see an NDA? The top price tier says > If you need more than 16 seats, or you have access to > $1m USD in the last 365 days, this tier is required, you must contact us to customize pricing. This is really weird, honestly. If you hire a 17th seat your pricing goes from $50/seat/mo to... what? How do I plan around this jump? I would also like to know what happens if my subscription lapses. Can I continue to use a version I previously downloaded? What if luxe goes out of business or, heaven forbid, suddenly increases their pricing to unsustainable levels? With Unreal I can keep using an old version.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

devrandoom 1y ago

I'm surprised they do this. The unity rugpull is still fresh in memory and mystery pricing is scary for newcomers.

reactordev 1y ago
They’ll learn when there’s no sales

Uehreka 1y ago

Idk that I’d say it’s in 3rd place. My guess would be that something like Source Engine is 3rd. Having worked with Unreal, Unity and Godot, Godot is extremely rough. It has a terrible scripting language, an abysmal script editing UI, all while lacking the sophistication of Unity and Unreal’s rendering. It gets way too much benefit of the doubt because it’s open source. We desperately need an open source engine that can compete with Unity and Unreal, but we need to stop kidding ourselves that Godot is serious about filling that role. If they were they would’ve grabbed Lua (or JS, or Python, or anything well established) off the shelf, told devs to use the code editor of their choice, and focused on either building the best rendering pipeline they could with their limited resources, or focused on some sort of clever differentiating feature that Unity/Unreal won’t implement. As it is it’s clear Godot’s team is more interested in reinventing wheels for fun than in making a real contender.

999900000999 1y ago
Source isn't really a publicly available engine. Valve doesn't appear to have much interest in licensing it. You're not wrong about Godot, but; 1. You can always fork/modify it. Getting a source code license for Unity is a 6 figure proposition. 2. Being open source is a big deal. No phone home spyware(Unity). Keep 100% of your revenue. 3. C# support is OK. Its very slowly getting better. I'm not a Godot zealot, one if it's biggest weaknesses is a community incapacitated of criticism. But still, your getting something very capable for small scale projects for free. Unity, if Microsoft brought them out and fixed the business side, would easily be my engine of choice. I learned to program in it. But I don't trust Unity the company. Every time you turn around they're laying off more people or doing something else strange. Unreal is very bad for the smaller scales projects I actually build. Lately I've been making weird prototypes using niche engines. I like Raylib, but it's just a rendering system. It's a much harder path to getting a game made. If you know someone building a better Godot let me know. I'll try it this weekend.
- Uehreka 1y ago
  > If you know someone building a better Godot let me know. I'll try it this weekend. Three.js is better than Godot. Yes, even though it doesn’t have a real editor. Yes, even though it’s exclusive to the web. It is a useful and functional tool for building 3D experiences. It has compatibility with almost every file type under the sun. It supports modern/cutting-edge features like WebXR. It has a talented and disciplined maintainer (mrdoob) who has steered the ship for almost 15 years through many big changes while maintaining the same solid core. It has hundreds of easily browsable examples that are kept working and up-to-date. I wish we were in a better place, but honestly this is where we’re at. If you want to build 3D games/experiences and want an open source stack, use Three.js and stick to the web. There are no good options for native.

runeblaze 1y ago

Yeah like I very much respect their work, and there is some genuine beauty in having this policy such as "have access to > 100k USD in the last 365 days, this tier is for you" or the fact that they seem dedicated to also support small indie creators. However this does differentiate them from true FOSS solutions. Note that small game devs have many types, and I imagine these "boutique" pricing solutions can work for many.