- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Unity May Never Win Back the Developers It Lost in Its Fee Debacle::Even though the company behind the wildly popular game engine walked back its controversial new fee policy, the damage is done.
I hope to see a lot of the features added to Godot that Unity refugees have been requesting and working on (because, yknow, open-source) and would expect to see at least 25% Godot 25% Unity 50% Unreal in the job market. Although honestly it is more likely that Unreal takes up a larger share of the market going forward, whereas in the past it has been like 60% Unity positions and 40% Unreal positions (due to Unity use on smaller projects, indie games, and use in the VR training industry).
2D projects also used Unity at a very high rate. Unreal has never really been considered suitable for 2D work. I’m not sure if Godot is.
Godot has been used mainly for 2D as it didn’t support 3D until fairly recently.
Godot actually has supported 3D since at least 2.1 when I started using it in 2016.
But really sucked for a long time. It’s pretty good now.
For general 2d development, Godot is much better than unity already. It doesn’t have everything that unity does but what it has is much more efficient and easy to understand.
Though the opposite is true for 3d.
In short: Unity is a 3d tool where you can pretend one of the dimensions doesn’t exist to make 2d games (but it’s still running a 3d environment behind the curtains, you’re just not seeing one of them), while godot is a 2d tool that gives you an optional third dimension for some stuff.
Wrong.
Godot has fully independent 2D and 3D engines. Each one has it’s own backend, that is specialized for that purpose.
Waiting for the ability to target mobile in c# and for embedding to work… should see that in the next year I think with the renewed focus on it… we don’t use many unity features but those two are kinda showstoppers right now.