> "Unity has a ton of features that even Godot lacks. (Unreal also has a ton of features they all lack)."
Hard to interpret w/out more detailed comparison but stack-ranking their featurefulness, is it Unreal, Unity, Godot?
Hard to interpret w/out more detailed comparison but stack-ranking their featurefulness, is it Unreal, Unity, Godot?
(Though imo unity is the better engine. Unreal has so many bugs and so much jank that to make a real game with it you basically need a large enough team that you can have a dedicated unreal-bug-fixer employee.)
*Technically Unity has a visual scripting language too but IIUC it's tacked on and I've never heard of anyone actually using it.
The collision was clearly working, just some n% of the time you'd end up on the wrong side of the clean flat rectangle you were walking into.
I lost interest pretty soon after that.
Game development is full of domain knowledge like this because games need to make compromises ensure completing simulation updates at no lower than 30Hz.
The tutorial probably should have instructed you create box colliders for walls (giving a greater area for the physics engine to catch collisions) rather than a simple plane/quad which would lead to the exact issues you had, or at least explained why a box works better than a plane.
I guess you have to balance the necessary information with overload in your tutorial or at least have an aside or additional reading that really helps understand many of these internalized understandings.
For performance/practicality, it's Unity > Godot > Unreal. Building something in Unreal that simply runs with ultra low frame latency is possible, but the way the ecosystem is structured you will be permanently burdened by things like temporal anti-aliasing way before you find your bearings. Unreal and Unity are at odds on MSAA support (Unity has it, Unreal doesn't). MSAA can be king if you have an art team with game dev knowledge from 10+ years ago. Unreal is basically TAA or bust.