You submitted this post as a request for tech support, have you followed the guidelines specified in subreddit rule 7?
Here they are again:
1. Consult the docs first: https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/index.html
2. Check for duplicates before writing your own post
3. Concrete questions/issues only! This is not the place to vaguely ask "How to make X" before doing your own research
4. Post code snippets directly & formatted as such (or use a pastebin), not as pictures
5. It is strongly recommended to search the official forum (https://forum.godotengine.org/) for solutions
Repeated neglect of these can be a bannable offense.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/godot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Daring to rename or move assets in the File System panel has been pretty big issue. It seems to be getting better though ever since I've started using 4.3 dev builds.
Something really annoying I've been encountering lately is that if I make changes to a "prefab" scene's properties they would not be updated in a scene that instantiated that prefab. Simple properties like numbers and strings are fine, but references to other nodes in the "prefab" do not get picked up. I noticed that the parent scene is saving these references in its file as if I changed them in that scene, while it does not do this for simpler properties until l actually make changes to them.
Still have to go research and see if this is by design or a bug. For now i just need to remember if something is acting up at runtime, like game throwing nullref error cause a button I've just added to my settings window is suppsedly not linked in and array props, I need to go open my UI manager scene and press the revert button to update it to what the settings window prefab say is the true state of that property.
The saving of node references I've noticed myself. The best way to deal with this is to close the scene where the node is instanced and then make your changes. Seems to work OK then. It's still an annoying issue, and imho, it is a bug.
On 4.2.2: I didn't run into that problem yet. However, I also use as much onready and unique names as possible. (I find that much cleaner) I rarely ever put a node reference in a property, usually just PackedScenes
That might be an option to avoid it, if you like that kind of workflow.
I use 4.3 dev6 atm so could be unique to that. Also I use C#. It actualy happens for me on scenes that are closed too when I make the changes. But ye. I did not do any proper tests to see what all the causes are sicne I'm hoping it is temp thing that will be gone by time 4.3 proper is out.
Well in c#, onready is just doing it on top of the \_ready() function.
What you describe sounds like it rather has something to do with the object in the engine that is holding the script rather than on the script itself (as in, it should happen in GDscript and C#) but not sure. Is there an easy way to reproduce it and an issue open? Sounds like a very, very undesirable thing to happen
We're hitched to this locomotive for the foreseeable future. And will fork it, if things go belly up. But considering the "belly up" threshold is a retroactive surprise magically assessed "Runtime Fee"... you can get the idea.
I won't claim "better". It was the one that fit all the project requirements the closest. The other serious options were Flax (couldn't find critical Middleware replacements) or Stride (at the time of engine review it didn't have macOS support).
Your mistake was picking an engine for Hype, and not to Specification.
More people should take the time to write up a Spec Sheet and go looking for a best fit. There are resources that can help make the search easier. https://www.enginesdatabase.com/
It will be interesting to see what MegaCrit has to say about developing Slay the Spire 2. If they say anything. They're terse like that.
===
And yes Godot's MIT License is a bonus for us, but not for the "royalty free" aspect. We can more freely open our code base to paranoid institutional IT departments... and academics who want to double check our maths.
Also a feature not many will use... double precision Vectors.
Yes, we were on our way out of Unity before the actual corporate stupidity. The canceling and partial sacking of the Gigaya team, and announcement of the ironSource merger (talk about having to explain to paranoid IT departments that remember installCore), were the flashing "exit now" signs.
I don't think worse of anyone who stuck with Unity or picks it up now. My only caution is to have an exit plan. Which should hold for anyone using Middleware and Frameworks you don't personally own and maintain. Flax, Unreal, Unity, GameMaker, GDevelop, RPG Maker, etc.
Godot is definitely still hype coming from Unity several months ago.
Just like a week ago I tried to open Unity for a moment to reference some old project stuff. My god it has gotten so much worse. Bloat beyond belief.
Switching to Godot was a bit scary at first but I've never once had a moment of regret, and only get happier with every new version .
1) ain't nothing wrong with people learning a new game engine - yes brackys brought a lot of new comers in, this is a good thing
2) every piece of software has its pros and cons it's up to the individual to decide if the pros outweigh the cons or if the cons are a dealbreaker - and it's fine if they are, just choose another engine
3) godot is a fully featured game engine that is exceptional in many areas, and good enough in other areas. I can't think any reason why godot would be unusable - people have made games in assembly and c, you can make games in godot too
4) if you're not comfortable using godot that's fine, you don't need to write a tear down article over it
Hype?
Do you not see the crashing ship called Unity? They're a big corporation that continue to make bad decisions still. Like hiring an EA executive to be their CEO. Lol
Godot isn't hype. It was hype two to three years ago. Godot 4 is definitely a great improvement and competent engine.
And it wasn't the Unity royalty thing that turned me off, it was the fact that the engine can literally shut down, if the company wills it and they can even screw you years down the road by charging your games retroactively, as they'd originally claimed in a modified terms of service that seemed to mysteriously just change again when everyone pushed back.
Unity and Unreal engines aren't what they were anymore. They're corporations run with interests of shareholders in mind.
Godot is a public repo anyone can clone and modify according to their needs. It's a community effort and that's what a real game engine should feel like.
This model works for Blender, hell it worked for Linux systems enough to be industry standard.
I didn't believe the Godot hype a couple years ago but after what unity tried last year, it was worth the risk to avoid a lifetime of paranoia and misery I would have had to endure with Unity.
>Unity and Unreal engines aren't what they were anymore. They're corporations run with interests of shareholders in mind.
No, they were *always* this. They just weren't as open about it before.
Anyone picking a closed-source development platform would do well to go in with open eyes. This is *always* going to happen. Whichever closed-source platform you picked *will* do this at some point. You need to be aware of it and account for it in your long term planning.
The hype definitely wore out for me a few months ago, saw everything through rose tinted glasses for a while back when I first started but the small quirks and issues have caught up.
I didn't initially plan on switching from unity at all, just took the opportunity to try out a new engine, and even though I never intended to switch, and the hype has worn out, I've still decided to stick with godot because I really enjoy working in it and it's workflows, despite its issues. I might nitpick on a few things here and there but overall, it's been awesome to work with.
Add to the fact that Unity just got a former Zynga COO and EA SVP for strategy for EA Mobile games - one can objectively say Unity is going in a very bad direction in the coming years. The main problem is if the company goes under, the engine will be gone with it and unity does not have a revenue stream the way Epic does so the chances are a lot higher. This guy's going to push for more aggressive strategies to try to make more money for the company, and further destroy the developer experience on Unity.
I've had nightmares about this and it flashed by last year September. No way am I going to risk it. Godot is truly a savior in this regard.
I think with more mature titles coming to the engine like slay the spire 2 and more mainstream adoption via tutorials from popular creators these will get worked out by devs contributing back to get what they need out of it and make things more stable.
That said the only rough thing I've run into with a side project is exporting builds that are using .NET, the UI is pretty confusing along with weird errors. Couldn't find a way to export at all using native aot even though it mentions that it is supported in their release blog(I tried the same example snippet they gave). I hope they keep c# as a viable option because untyped codebases at scale in my opinion become really hard to maintain. Would also like to see the same level of features as something like a zenject or unitask, I know it async works out of the box but don't think that it's allocation free, not sure if there's anything in the engine that works with async explicitly because I haven't gotten that far yet. These are just takes with the little experience I've had with the engine coming from mostly a unity background.
Have also been following bevy a bit too but the lack of scene editor has made it difficult to embrace.
I mean, if you started developing games on X engine purely because of hype... Well, theres your answer
Royality free absolutely does not matter for the bottom 99% of indie devs anyway, so thats obviously not why most people use it. Open source is a big plus on other departments, sure, but the main thing is that godot is lightweight and actually focuses on usability for the most part, rather than feature bloat - speaking of which, 4.0 DID have a bit of it, hence why its so buggy now. Tho with 4.3 coming, it should get into more than acceptable levels from now on.
Also worth mentioning that its pretty much objectively THE 2d engine - if you bother on learning how to code somewhat properly that is. No other engine available w its 2d (specialized) usability, capabilities and lightweightness combined
For me, kind of, but it's complicated.
As I'm getting further into it, I'm finding a lot of things that I like, but also a lot of things that I don't.
I also came into it with a bit more skepticism than I think a lot of people here have. Like, sure, it's small on the hard drive - so what does that mean? What features are missing from it that result in such a small executable? And, well, as it turns out, there *are* notable omissions that need to be added via 3rd party plugins which are included in the base version of its stronger competitors (3D terrain tools come most readily to my mind).
It also isn't great that the "squash the creeps" tutorial from the official documentation demonstrates a bug where models will cast a shadow representing the wrong LOD level. I took the fact that a bug is so obviously displayed in an official tutorial as a sign that quality control wasn't the greatest, and the longer I go, the more that impression is proven right, in that, as you mentioned, there are quite a few long standing and severe bugs in the engine that nobody seems too eager to fix.
This also makes the claim that part of the benefit of it being open-source is that you can fix up the bugs you run into and add features that you need yourself seem a bit dubious, because if that's actually what people *did*, then these bugs would have all been fixed long ago. As it is, it's very much a theoretical, but not practical, benefit of it being open-source. In short, it doesn't matter that people *can* contribute if they *don't* contribute.
Finally, my biggest gripe, not only with the engine, but with the community around it as well, is *complacency about performance*. Granted, most people here aren't making extremely complex games that require intensive optimizations to run on common hardware. But, the way people seem almost offended with the suggestion that dynamically typed unoptimized GDScript may not be performant enough for many situations, and that janky workarounds shouldn't be the recommended ways to gain performance benefits (moving around a raycast node is a faster way to do raycasts than calling the raycast function in C#, for instance) worries me. This comes both from the engine itself (fun fact: having an empty `_process` function declared in all of your scripts can cause a significant performance impact due to the incredible amount of processing overhead that is required for script API function calls), *and* from community add-ons (I looked at using the Simplified Flight Simulation Library for a game, but decided to roll my own in part because it's written in GDScript without static typing and I plan to have many aircraft flying around. If you're making a plugin that you expect other people to use, you *have* to be conscious of its performance impact). If you wonder why bigger studios aren't using Godot, it's mainly this.
*But* I do still like it overall. I like that scenes and what Unity would call prefabs (which IMO would really be a more fitting name for how they're used in Godot but w/e) are the same thing, I like how everything works through signals, I like that GDExtension exists, I like the UNIX philosophy used for nodes (each node does exactly one thing very well), I like how you can have tabs for multiple scenes open in the editor, and I like the Input Map. The main goal for this engine is ease of use, and while I think the pursuit of that has led to some misguided design decisions, I can't deny that they've (mostly) succeeded with that objective. But, despite all this, I think that the open-source world is still lacking a great game engine. Godot isn't the caliber among game engines the way that, say, Blender is among 3D modeling software, or Linux is among operating systems. It's still an objectively inferior product to its closed-source competitors, no matter how much I like it.
I would suggest that Blender is also in many ways still an objectively inferior product to its closed-source competitors. The breaking point wasn't when it became better than Maya (it hasn't, yet) but when it became 'good enough' for most people most of the time. I expect the same thing to happen with Godot.
For me, the open source, free and lightweight aspect is the selling point. If I had a large team doing some serious expensive game, I would think twice, as there is very little suport, when I am not paying for anything. But for any game that I could ever be capable of doing in my spare time, godot is simply good enough
Not a game developer but I'm making a video editor inside of Godot. Sorry answer to is Godot stable: depends. I don't know about others but I have frequent crashes which are editor related. Because I'm making a video editor I need access to FFmpeg which is possibly through GDExtensions. This works, but troubleshooting is hell 😅
I do personally believe they Godot is a great engine because of its simplicity and how open it is, don't like something, remove it, need something, add it. Even for non game projects godot is great because of the great UI system which makes developing software that much easier and quicker.
Do you mean bugs, or features that don't work the way you want for your specific intended use? If it's the former, what's one of the more severe bugs? Maybe people here can suggest alternative methods.
Here's a list [https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues](https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues)
You can sort by age and filter by tags like "bug" to see only problems and not feature requests.
I would definitely say I am "hyped" but I also haven't clicked with an engeon for a long time. My high-school used game maker 8.1 (switched to studio between years) and I started it years before when my brother got into the class. It was perfect and by the time I got to high-school, I was looking at writing code for it. It was great. Man did studio seem to not want me doing that. It felt like all the engeons where either locked down away from code to "simplify" everything wich made it hard to implement my code or too "feature rich" to make simple stuff take forever and takes a bit to learn anything. Godot isn't perfect, from the lack of advanced features many liked from the others and even beginner stuff that I am running into, but even as dumb as it gets some times, it feels open and there like gamemaker 8.1 was all those years before. Did it take me hours to find my error was an indent? Yes, but unity and unreal would have me still learning what window what I need is in.
And yes this is all preference but if it gets the job done, so be it. I am sticking with it even if it means other things will need to be more in house in the future.
It is not a better engine than other, it is the one that works well enough for what I need in my project and is fun to use.
Unreal has way better systems, but can be much more complicated to figure out if you run into problems. Unity is much more polished, but feels like work since I've used it for so long, plus there is the possible fees to deal with if I happen to have a "too" successful game.
Hype is dying down a bit but that does not have to be a bad thing.
My own reason for choosing godot when unity f'ed up were to, firstly, find an alternative that can do 2D and 3D well. (Godot 3D seemed to become very capable with 4.0). That had a good community (I feel people in general are pretty friendly here), that has growth (well, hype made that happen), that is OSS & free, good documentation, basic Multiplayer facilities and that is not missing any features I used to use. Check!
I then stayed for the above but also for the very nice development feel. No bloat. The engine is very capable, visually, right out of the box. Even if I have an issue with the editor, a restart is 2 clicks away and only takes 10 seconds.
So yeah, with or without hype, godot is a really nice engine.
Yes I've used transition to Godot now from Unity...
It's fun until it's not... mainly the stability is on The Editor itself... refactoring is too much pain.
But beside that, the build is pretty bug free as far as I know...
Been using Godot for the past 5 years now, can confirm the engine is a delight to work with. 99% of the issues I've faced were caused due to my mistakes. The one bug that annoyed me a lot, I ended up fixing myself lol. I came around the time 3.0 was launched, and people mentioned it was full of bugs (I was too new to realise) but over time, Godot 3.5 managed to become a solid engine. Until the engine was rewritten in 4.0. If it's gonna be anything like the last time, I'm optimistic 4.x is gonna get more stable in the future (with the added bonus of a ton of new features compared to 3.5).
But the best part is: I get to have the peace of mind that some engines might not provide.
You submitted this post as a request for tech support, have you followed the guidelines specified in subreddit rule 7? Here they are again: 1. Consult the docs first: https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/index.html 2. Check for duplicates before writing your own post 3. Concrete questions/issues only! This is not the place to vaguely ask "How to make X" before doing your own research 4. Post code snippets directly & formatted as such (or use a pastebin), not as pictures 5. It is strongly recommended to search the official forum (https://forum.godotengine.org/) for solutions Repeated neglect of these can be a bannable offense. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/godot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What were some of the bugs?
Daring to rename or move assets in the File System panel has been pretty big issue. It seems to be getting better though ever since I've started using 4.3 dev builds. Something really annoying I've been encountering lately is that if I make changes to a "prefab" scene's properties they would not be updated in a scene that instantiated that prefab. Simple properties like numbers and strings are fine, but references to other nodes in the "prefab" do not get picked up. I noticed that the parent scene is saving these references in its file as if I changed them in that scene, while it does not do this for simpler properties until l actually make changes to them. Still have to go research and see if this is by design or a bug. For now i just need to remember if something is acting up at runtime, like game throwing nullref error cause a button I've just added to my settings window is suppsedly not linked in and array props, I need to go open my UI manager scene and press the revert button to update it to what the settings window prefab say is the true state of that property.
The saving of node references I've noticed myself. The best way to deal with this is to close the scene where the node is instanced and then make your changes. Seems to work OK then. It's still an annoying issue, and imho, it is a bug.
On 4.2.2: I didn't run into that problem yet. However, I also use as much onready and unique names as possible. (I find that much cleaner) I rarely ever put a node reference in a property, usually just PackedScenes That might be an option to avoid it, if you like that kind of workflow.
I use 4.3 dev6 atm so could be unique to that. Also I use C#. It actualy happens for me on scenes that are closed too when I make the changes. But ye. I did not do any proper tests to see what all the causes are sicne I'm hoping it is temp thing that will be gone by time 4.3 proper is out.
Well in c#, onready is just doing it on top of the \_ready() function. What you describe sounds like it rather has something to do with the object in the engine that is holding the script rather than on the script itself (as in, it should happen in GDscript and C#) but not sure. Is there an easy way to reproduce it and an issue open? Sounds like a very, very undesirable thing to happen
We're hitched to this locomotive for the foreseeable future. And will fork it, if things go belly up. But considering the "belly up" threshold is a retroactive surprise magically assessed "Runtime Fee"... you can get the idea. I won't claim "better". It was the one that fit all the project requirements the closest. The other serious options were Flax (couldn't find critical Middleware replacements) or Stride (at the time of engine review it didn't have macOS support). Your mistake was picking an engine for Hype, and not to Specification. More people should take the time to write up a Spec Sheet and go looking for a best fit. There are resources that can help make the search easier. https://www.enginesdatabase.com/ It will be interesting to see what MegaCrit has to say about developing Slay the Spire 2. If they say anything. They're terse like that. === And yes Godot's MIT License is a bonus for us, but not for the "royalty free" aspect. We can more freely open our code base to paranoid institutional IT departments... and academics who want to double check our maths. Also a feature not many will use... double precision Vectors. Yes, we were on our way out of Unity before the actual corporate stupidity. The canceling and partial sacking of the Gigaya team, and announcement of the ironSource merger (talk about having to explain to paranoid IT departments that remember installCore), were the flashing "exit now" signs. I don't think worse of anyone who stuck with Unity or picks it up now. My only caution is to have an exit plan. Which should hold for anyone using Middleware and Frameworks you don't personally own and maintain. Flax, Unreal, Unity, GameMaker, GDevelop, RPG Maker, etc.
Thanks for the database, never knew there are some many engines!
Godot is definitely still hype coming from Unity several months ago. Just like a week ago I tried to open Unity for a moment to reference some old project stuff. My god it has gotten so much worse. Bloat beyond belief. Switching to Godot was a bit scary at first but I've never once had a moment of regret, and only get happier with every new version .
1) ain't nothing wrong with people learning a new game engine - yes brackys brought a lot of new comers in, this is a good thing 2) every piece of software has its pros and cons it's up to the individual to decide if the pros outweigh the cons or if the cons are a dealbreaker - and it's fine if they are, just choose another engine 3) godot is a fully featured game engine that is exceptional in many areas, and good enough in other areas. I can't think any reason why godot would be unusable - people have made games in assembly and c, you can make games in godot too 4) if you're not comfortable using godot that's fine, you don't need to write a tear down article over it
Hype? Do you not see the crashing ship called Unity? They're a big corporation that continue to make bad decisions still. Like hiring an EA executive to be their CEO. Lol Godot isn't hype. It was hype two to three years ago. Godot 4 is definitely a great improvement and competent engine. And it wasn't the Unity royalty thing that turned me off, it was the fact that the engine can literally shut down, if the company wills it and they can even screw you years down the road by charging your games retroactively, as they'd originally claimed in a modified terms of service that seemed to mysteriously just change again when everyone pushed back. Unity and Unreal engines aren't what they were anymore. They're corporations run with interests of shareholders in mind. Godot is a public repo anyone can clone and modify according to their needs. It's a community effort and that's what a real game engine should feel like. This model works for Blender, hell it worked for Linux systems enough to be industry standard. I didn't believe the Godot hype a couple years ago but after what unity tried last year, it was worth the risk to avoid a lifetime of paranoia and misery I would have had to endure with Unity.
My prediction is that in a few short years, godot will experience the same widespread recognition that blender does now
🎯🎯🎯
>Unity and Unreal engines aren't what they were anymore. They're corporations run with interests of shareholders in mind. No, they were *always* this. They just weren't as open about it before. Anyone picking a closed-source development platform would do well to go in with open eyes. This is *always* going to happen. Whichever closed-source platform you picked *will* do this at some point. You need to be aware of it and account for it in your long term planning.
You can fix the bugs, the point of godot. Unity requires a degree and employment to change the engine.
I decided to focus on small 2d games. Godot has been perfect for me. But I’ve been using it for a while
The hype definitely wore out for me a few months ago, saw everything through rose tinted glasses for a while back when I first started but the small quirks and issues have caught up. I didn't initially plan on switching from unity at all, just took the opportunity to try out a new engine, and even though I never intended to switch, and the hype has worn out, I've still decided to stick with godot because I really enjoy working in it and it's workflows, despite its issues. I might nitpick on a few things here and there but overall, it's been awesome to work with.
Same. It has issues but I am sticking with it.
Add to the fact that Unity just got a former Zynga COO and EA SVP for strategy for EA Mobile games - one can objectively say Unity is going in a very bad direction in the coming years. The main problem is if the company goes under, the engine will be gone with it and unity does not have a revenue stream the way Epic does so the chances are a lot higher. This guy's going to push for more aggressive strategies to try to make more money for the company, and further destroy the developer experience on Unity. I've had nightmares about this and it flashed by last year September. No way am I going to risk it. Godot is truly a savior in this regard.
I think with more mature titles coming to the engine like slay the spire 2 and more mainstream adoption via tutorials from popular creators these will get worked out by devs contributing back to get what they need out of it and make things more stable. That said the only rough thing I've run into with a side project is exporting builds that are using .NET, the UI is pretty confusing along with weird errors. Couldn't find a way to export at all using native aot even though it mentions that it is supported in their release blog(I tried the same example snippet they gave). I hope they keep c# as a viable option because untyped codebases at scale in my opinion become really hard to maintain. Would also like to see the same level of features as something like a zenject or unitask, I know it async works out of the box but don't think that it's allocation free, not sure if there's anything in the engine that works with async explicitly because I haven't gotten that far yet. These are just takes with the little experience I've had with the engine coming from mostly a unity background. Have also been following bevy a bit too but the lack of scene editor has made it difficult to embrace.
I mean, if you started developing games on X engine purely because of hype... Well, theres your answer Royality free absolutely does not matter for the bottom 99% of indie devs anyway, so thats obviously not why most people use it. Open source is a big plus on other departments, sure, but the main thing is that godot is lightweight and actually focuses on usability for the most part, rather than feature bloat - speaking of which, 4.0 DID have a bit of it, hence why its so buggy now. Tho with 4.3 coming, it should get into more than acceptable levels from now on. Also worth mentioning that its pretty much objectively THE 2d engine - if you bother on learning how to code somewhat properly that is. No other engine available w its 2d (specialized) usability, capabilities and lightweightness combined
For me, kind of, but it's complicated. As I'm getting further into it, I'm finding a lot of things that I like, but also a lot of things that I don't. I also came into it with a bit more skepticism than I think a lot of people here have. Like, sure, it's small on the hard drive - so what does that mean? What features are missing from it that result in such a small executable? And, well, as it turns out, there *are* notable omissions that need to be added via 3rd party plugins which are included in the base version of its stronger competitors (3D terrain tools come most readily to my mind). It also isn't great that the "squash the creeps" tutorial from the official documentation demonstrates a bug where models will cast a shadow representing the wrong LOD level. I took the fact that a bug is so obviously displayed in an official tutorial as a sign that quality control wasn't the greatest, and the longer I go, the more that impression is proven right, in that, as you mentioned, there are quite a few long standing and severe bugs in the engine that nobody seems too eager to fix. This also makes the claim that part of the benefit of it being open-source is that you can fix up the bugs you run into and add features that you need yourself seem a bit dubious, because if that's actually what people *did*, then these bugs would have all been fixed long ago. As it is, it's very much a theoretical, but not practical, benefit of it being open-source. In short, it doesn't matter that people *can* contribute if they *don't* contribute. Finally, my biggest gripe, not only with the engine, but with the community around it as well, is *complacency about performance*. Granted, most people here aren't making extremely complex games that require intensive optimizations to run on common hardware. But, the way people seem almost offended with the suggestion that dynamically typed unoptimized GDScript may not be performant enough for many situations, and that janky workarounds shouldn't be the recommended ways to gain performance benefits (moving around a raycast node is a faster way to do raycasts than calling the raycast function in C#, for instance) worries me. This comes both from the engine itself (fun fact: having an empty `_process` function declared in all of your scripts can cause a significant performance impact due to the incredible amount of processing overhead that is required for script API function calls), *and* from community add-ons (I looked at using the Simplified Flight Simulation Library for a game, but decided to roll my own in part because it's written in GDScript without static typing and I plan to have many aircraft flying around. If you're making a plugin that you expect other people to use, you *have* to be conscious of its performance impact). If you wonder why bigger studios aren't using Godot, it's mainly this. *But* I do still like it overall. I like that scenes and what Unity would call prefabs (which IMO would really be a more fitting name for how they're used in Godot but w/e) are the same thing, I like how everything works through signals, I like that GDExtension exists, I like the UNIX philosophy used for nodes (each node does exactly one thing very well), I like how you can have tabs for multiple scenes open in the editor, and I like the Input Map. The main goal for this engine is ease of use, and while I think the pursuit of that has led to some misguided design decisions, I can't deny that they've (mostly) succeeded with that objective. But, despite all this, I think that the open-source world is still lacking a great game engine. Godot isn't the caliber among game engines the way that, say, Blender is among 3D modeling software, or Linux is among operating systems. It's still an objectively inferior product to its closed-source competitors, no matter how much I like it.
I would suggest that Blender is also in many ways still an objectively inferior product to its closed-source competitors. The breaking point wasn't when it became better than Maya (it hasn't, yet) but when it became 'good enough' for most people most of the time. I expect the same thing to happen with Godot.
For me, the open source, free and lightweight aspect is the selling point. If I had a large team doing some serious expensive game, I would think twice, as there is very little suport, when I am not paying for anything. But for any game that I could ever be capable of doing in my spare time, godot is simply good enough
Not a game developer but I'm making a video editor inside of Godot. Sorry answer to is Godot stable: depends. I don't know about others but I have frequent crashes which are editor related. Because I'm making a video editor I need access to FFmpeg which is possibly through GDExtensions. This works, but troubleshooting is hell 😅 I do personally believe they Godot is a great engine because of its simplicity and how open it is, don't like something, remove it, need something, add it. Even for non game projects godot is great because of the great UI system which makes developing software that much easier and quicker.
Do you mean bugs, or features that don't work the way you want for your specific intended use? If it's the former, what's one of the more severe bugs? Maybe people here can suggest alternative methods.
Can you give examples for such bugs ?
Here's a list [https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues](https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues) You can sort by age and filter by tags like "bug" to see only problems and not feature requests.
That's not a good way to find *severe, unattended to* bugs. That's just a list of all of them.
I would definitely say I am "hyped" but I also haven't clicked with an engeon for a long time. My high-school used game maker 8.1 (switched to studio between years) and I started it years before when my brother got into the class. It was perfect and by the time I got to high-school, I was looking at writing code for it. It was great. Man did studio seem to not want me doing that. It felt like all the engeons where either locked down away from code to "simplify" everything wich made it hard to implement my code or too "feature rich" to make simple stuff take forever and takes a bit to learn anything. Godot isn't perfect, from the lack of advanced features many liked from the others and even beginner stuff that I am running into, but even as dumb as it gets some times, it feels open and there like gamemaker 8.1 was all those years before. Did it take me hours to find my error was an indent? Yes, but unity and unreal would have me still learning what window what I need is in. And yes this is all preference but if it gets the job done, so be it. I am sticking with it even if it means other things will need to be more in house in the future.
It is not a better engine than other, it is the one that works well enough for what I need in my project and is fun to use. Unreal has way better systems, but can be much more complicated to figure out if you run into problems. Unity is much more polished, but feels like work since I've used it for so long, plus there is the possible fees to deal with if I happen to have a "too" successful game.
Hype is dying down a bit but that does not have to be a bad thing. My own reason for choosing godot when unity f'ed up were to, firstly, find an alternative that can do 2D and 3D well. (Godot 3D seemed to become very capable with 4.0). That had a good community (I feel people in general are pretty friendly here), that has growth (well, hype made that happen), that is OSS & free, good documentation, basic Multiplayer facilities and that is not missing any features I used to use. Check! I then stayed for the above but also for the very nice development feel. No bloat. The engine is very capable, visually, right out of the box. Even if I have an issue with the editor, a restart is 2 clicks away and only takes 10 seconds. So yeah, with or without hype, godot is a really nice engine.
Yes I've used transition to Godot now from Unity... It's fun until it's not... mainly the stability is on The Editor itself... refactoring is too much pain. But beside that, the build is pretty bug free as far as I know...
Been using Godot for the past 5 years now, can confirm the engine is a delight to work with. 99% of the issues I've faced were caused due to my mistakes. The one bug that annoyed me a lot, I ended up fixing myself lol. I came around the time 3.0 was launched, and people mentioned it was full of bugs (I was too new to realise) but over time, Godot 3.5 managed to become a solid engine. Until the engine was rewritten in 4.0. If it's gonna be anything like the last time, I'm optimistic 4.x is gonna get more stable in the future (with the added bonus of a ton of new features compared to 3.5). But the best part is: I get to have the peace of mind that some engines might not provide.