I have been able to run some big engines on Linux in the past, but it is always somewhat hacky and unsupported. The only game I was able to finish and launch was written in Java using the great libGDX (and I had to rent a mac in the cloud to compile for IOS (when Robovm was officially supported, don't know about how it's done now)). I am now considering Godot for my next game because it is free and runs on Linux.
Godot has always been first and foremost a 2D focused engine, with 3D available if you want it. It's also far smaller and completely free (MIT) so you can make any changes you want at any level.
I don't use Unity, because throwing around vertex buffers isn't particularly difficult, but this is a pretty silly comment. Quads in an orthographic projection is what's done by literally every modern engine that's designed for any level of performance. "Fake" 2D is normal 2D in 2017.
And, uh. It's what Godot uses too.
What is hard to do in Unity because its 2D isn't "real"?
If Unity ever finishes their experimental support for Tilemaps and other features, I'll try it again.
Unity3D's design is not very good. It is a popular system, you can find a lot of hacks online for getting common things done, but overall the thing is a garbage heap of unorganized and poorly documented features.
The ability to work with source control is a joke. I'm sorry, you can't do professional grade software development without source control. You really shouldn't be doing hobby grade development without it either. But Unity makes you jump through several hoops to get source control working correctly and reliably.
They have an asset store that almost looks like a package manager, but isn't, leaving you to have to check all of your plugins into your repository rather than redeploy out of the central store.
Patch-point releases frequently introduce breaking changes. And their project format is locked to prevent you from opening a project that had just been opened in a newer version than the one you have. Yes, opening a project in Unity writes changes to disk. Wouldn't be so bad of a problem if your project could easily and trivially be added to source control and you could just reset the changes, but see above.
It makes doing basic physics very easy to do, but the quality of the physics is not very good. Even their heavy number crunching "continuous dynamic" mode suffers from terrible warp-through problems.
It's still, after all this time, not available for working on Linux. You can build games that run on Linux, but you can't do the work on Linux.
The export to WebGL feature is another joke. An empty project ends up dumping around 50MB of code out. That's before you even get to any game code or assets. They compile your C# code to CIL with Mono, then that gets converted to C++ with IL2CPP, then that gets converted to ASM.js with Emscripten. It's an absurd Rube Goldberg machine of a process that it's no wonder people thing WebGL sucks, if all they have to go by is Unity projects.
It bombs you out to Visual Studio for editing code, but it's still not compatible with any version of .NET post 2.0. You can't import DLLs without hacking the *.csproj file by hand.
I'm sure I could come up with some more gripes if I thought about it for a while, but I don't want to be here all day.
Are you sure they don't have linux support?
And that does suck, speaking as a developer, I MUCH prefer working in linux. The exception would be .net/C#, you just can't beat visual studio in that environment.
Even then though... I still use the git bash console/tools for everything. love me some grep.
Although it is buggy, I use the Linux editor regularly. :)
> And their project format is locked to prevent you from opening a project that had just been opened in a newer version than the one you have
Related pet peeve: The Linux editor appends "Linux" to the project version, forcing a complete reimport of all the assets when moving between the Linux and Windows editors even if they're actually at the same version.
https://forum.unity3d.com/threads/unity-on-linux-release-not...
Why they do this in a forum thread instead of having a link on the normal download page, I cannot imagine. It's no wonder you couldn't find it! :)
I know the Unity guys feel they're being reasonable and that it's a mainstream thing to require an account for a product, but I will never -ever- voluntarily lock my own personal projects inside someone elses system like that, and I think it's pretty galling of them to think they deserve that much control over my work.
Personally I'm using it for prototyping, my main engine is UE4 though. I'm thinking that maybe it's time to create a small but full game with it.