Unity Engine to Godot Engine Exporter
github.com
github.com
I expressed the lemon squeeze theory for reddit, where companies kills the lemon to extract its juice instead of keeping the lemon tree alive. It seems like it's such an universal rule in proprietary software.
Godot feels really really good and intuitive. GDScript is not really perfect, but it's pythonic which makes it quite good, and it integrates very well with the engine itself, which is awesome, I really really hope they improve it. They really followed the dual system of "script for high level plumbing, C++ for the rest", and they allow developers to do gdextension and to play with the engine code.
They managed to add a loooooot of features on a tiny budget, for such a light footprint, they support vulkan and next gen API, and since indie gaming has a trend of staying light, godot will be a big success, there is no doubt about it.
And even if 3D isn't good enough with godot, who cares, really? It's not like small studios will attempt to achieve high end 3D graphics, they really should not, and honestly AAA games are starting to gain more and more criticism so they're not really popular.
The gamedev era is entering an age of minimal games, with games that have gameplay, that are played, games SHOULD NOT try to be on the bleeding edge of graphics, it's a big waste of money and developer work.
I like 3D games, I really do, but with the climate, you want games to remove the fat and aim for essential features, and stop with pointless glitter.
Preach it. Games like Battlebit and the resurgence of Boomer-Shooters (originals, remakes and clones) are proving this, and it's the perfect timing too, considering the GPU prices since the pandemic.
I am not against good content, good looking textures, good level design, something that looks pretty, but 3D games cant be pretty without millions of triangle and gigabytes of textures.
Even 144hz sounds pointless to me, since you need a very good eye notice the difference between 30 and 60hz.
It's already quite expensive to make 3D games, it would be nice for game developers to stop the GPU frenzy.
This is false by demonstration. I can tell the difference between 60hz and 144hz. The idea that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 30hz and 60hz is preposterous.
For single player, go with whatever you want!
Back when 240hz monitors were still gaining traction, I visited the Dell booth at ESL One 2018 and they had 2 monitors, side by side, one 144hz and one 240hz. The difference was barely noticeable, if any.
Maybe it was an old model and not as good as today's models, but I really don't think it's worth the premium price tag.
The jump from 60>75 is already very noticeable, from 60 to 144 is a big difference, unfortunately from 144 to 240 doesn't seem to be the case as the former example.
Yeah man, I want "bad graphics" too :)
In fact, he might be the one content creator to convince me to get Nebula, his essays are so good, but are often censored to avoid being demonetised.
Not to mention a big waste on the environment. It's good if we can use old computers to run new games, less waste generated.
I do, as someone wanting to make a 3d game. And I'm not exactly a fan of "just use unreal" as a dismissal. Improving engine performance improves 2d games as well. Why not be able to make a game like Noita if you so fancy
>It's not like small studios will attempt to achieve high end 3D graphics, they really should not,
1. Not with that attitude
2. The last thing I want to do is tell devs what they should or shouldn't do with their creativity. If Godot wants to market itself as a 3d engine it should support, well, 3d stuff. And if an engine can struggle in slightly intensive 2d it doesn't stand a ghost of a chance of any reasonable 3d performance.
Forget "high end 3d graphics", we'd be struggling to make PS2 games running on hardware 100x more powerful. And this community complains enough about Electron as is.
If you're thinking of starting a new project and you're experienced with unity, don't be put off making the switch. It won't put you back as much as you think and it's a lot better in many ways, but more importantly it's momentum is going in the right direction
Neat idea, but impossible to do perfectly. There's potential I'm sure to do imperfect conversions of scenes and assets, but game logic and custom data is going to be pretty much out of reach
At best, this kind of tool could be a jumping-off point for someone who was otherwise planning to do a fully manual port
Its like valves alternatives to the windows eco-system, always ready to bloom, keeping microsoft honest. Same goes for uplay and origin.. they don't have to make money, they just have to be there.
1. Desperately needed;
2. Even if it's completely hands-off and works perfectly, still just step 1 of many, and a huge cost for any studio: retooling, lost expertise/experience, loss of momentum.
In any circumstance any company that can swallow the change of the pricing model, or that wasn't locked into Unity in the first place, will come out way ahead. A project like this gives the rest a fighting chance.
Doesn't support the new 4.0 renderer, this is being worked on too. Webgpu support: https://github.com/godotengine/godot-proposals/issues/6646 .
Main issues right now that I'm aware of.
Their advice seems to be use Godot 3 or wait until it gets fixed in the browsers.
See https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/70691 for details.
That Ruffle project (for playing flash animations) seems to have developed good traction and is going well too.
Might be a good future possibility for Godot web playback. :)