Comment by adastra22 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by adastra22 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

There is a valuable point in what you are saying, but I don't think it is as strong as you are making it. Game engines do have a certain 'style' that is recognizable, especially if you use default settings and cookie cutter stuff from the asset store. The most successful indie games often have their own unique aesthetic, and rolling their own game engine, while not strictly necessary, does make that uniqueness the default outcome rather than something you have to strive hard to achieve.

But most indie games do not roll their own engine. Even this widely shared post aiming to show off games with custom engines, ends up listing a ton of games with notes like "OGRE-based" or "MonoGame-based." I'm sorry, but that's not a custom engine. That's an atypical engine choice (OGRE or MonoGame) with tweaks. Maybe I'm being a pedant, but I think the difference matters.

https://gist.github.com/raysan5/909dc6cf33ed40223eb0dfe625c0...

Unfortunately I don't think there are good numbers on how many truly original / custom / no-engine games are out there, in absolute or market terms. 13% is the ceiling, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was much smaller (e.g. <5%).

> "OGRE-based" or "MonoGame-based."

You compared a full-on 3D renderer to something that's basically the same as SDL or Raylib. Ogre could be considered a game engine but XNA/Monogame definitely isn't (nor is SDL or Raylib).

> But most indie games do not roll their own engine.

Most indie games are slop that are barely more than a template with pre-purchased assets and sell zero copies. There's no point talking about most of something when 99% gets thrown straight into the garbage.

> The most successful indie games often have their own unique aesthetic, and rolling their own game engine, while not strictly necessary, does make that uniqueness the default outcome rather than something you have to strive hard to achieve.

Yup and that's the point. Code is art as much as art is art. Sure, you can get a basic game made in a couple hours with Godot, but what's the value or uniqueness when anyone can do the same?

> most are slop

Is there any chance they meant most "real" indie games? If they did, does the observation about chances of rolling one's own engine change?

How is MonoGame not a game engine? It handles graphics, input, main loop, etc. You can write simple games in a few hundred lines of code, just loading and game logic. Perhaps we're taking past each other.

Game engines typically provide a LOT more than Monogame. For example, an editor, 3D renderer, scenegraph, etc... Monogame and Raylib do a tiny bit more than, say, SDL, but neither does anywhere close to as much as Unity, Unreal, Ogre, Filament, JMonkey, etc...

Seems like the industry is redefining terms since I was last involved in the 00's. Game engine used to mean the runtime that manages game state, the framework that you code your game against that handles common things that aren't specific to a single game. Editors used to be surrounding infrastructure.

> Game engine used to mean the runtime that manages game state,

Yeah Monogame doesn't do that.

Pretty much every definition of framework vs game engine puts Monogame, SDL, Raylib, SFML, libGDX, LÖVE2D, etc... in the framework category. Engines are Unity, Unreal, Godot, Defold, O3DE, etc...

> It handles graphics, input, main loop, etc

It kinda doesn't though

What it provides is the tools to build on top of to make those things yourself

Reply on news.ycombinator.com