I'm using love2d as a 2d framework to do experimental stuff

I'm using love2d as a 2d framework to do experimental stuff.
Every fucker I know shills Unity.
Redpill me on Unity Sup Forums
Also Unity general
Also fuck those shillers

Unreal Engine is better. It's even Open Source, just like love2d. Don't listen to them, they're all winbabies.

I've heard good things about godot, anyone else who can confirm?

Good for 2D
Not so good for 3D

I'm waiting for the official C# support.

Unity sucks. What else do you need to know? Unity is the game maker studio of 3D games. It's a paid locked down service with many limitations and much better alternatives. It also doesn't support 2D (properly). It uses 3D rendering for "2D" games it builds so nothing is truly 2D there and for that reason it will always perform worse than other engines in 2D. At least this was a fact when I last researched it sometime last year.
Unreal engine 4 is many times better and is free as in beer. Another good free engine with 3D support is Godot, currently one of the best FOSS engines. Game engines are one of the many things free open source software is much better at than paid and closed source. Basically
god tier:
>UE4
>Godot
>Cocos2D X

shit tier:
>Unity
>Game Maker Studio
>Any "You don't need to code to make a game here!" Engine

It's basically like GM Studio except much lighter and not as limited. Also with proper 3D support. The only problem is it's not popular so don't expect there to be that many people dumbing it down to explain all of it's capabilities. But it does have a video series explaining it and resources on the official website.

probably because it's easier and shit is done for you.

TLDR; Don't reinvent the wheel. Using libraries instead of full frameworks for game programming is not worth it. Libraries are a great resource for learning game development concepts, and they are really useful if you're just getting started, but, if your idea is to build a real indie game, your best bet is using something like Unity or UE. Ignoring the war between the two (and also C# vs C++), these frameworks have integrated support for all sort of stuff that you at some point might use in your game. Multiplayer, WYSIWYG editors, particle effects editors, physics, community plugins support, multiplatform, etc. Even if you use the big libraries out there, like LibGDX, Cocos2d or JGLFW they don't have the same community support as Unity/UE. Even though both options not being free, their licenses are real appealing for indie devs. Do your research before choosing which one suits your need (IMO, Unity is great). I'm a Java guy, I don't like either options (C#/C++), but if I would begin a game project today, I would certanly choose practicity over commodity.

>Not so good for 3D
3.0 is gonna fix that though.

Wanna know why unity is "shilled"?
Because before unity managed to rise to the top you had to pay a fuckton of shekels if you wanted a good 3d capable game engine with support, ease of use, documentation and tooling. And then pop unity who give you everything for 1500$ if you make more than 100k a year or free if you use the crippled version.
But today it's another story because we have unreal engine 4 who's open source, free to use and only demand 5% royalties. And if you ask me i think unreal engine is much more user friendly toward no programmer, the blueprint system work really well and versioning explode less than unity, only problem being the high system requirement to run the tools but also the games where unity run on a toaster.

Yeah.
The new renderer should improve the overall exp.

It only demands 5% royalties if you make over 3k every 3 months. And this was per game/app. So if you had 100 games making you 999 bucks a month each (so you get 99.9K/month), you wouldn't have to pay anything.

>Once you've begun collecting money for your product, you'll need to track gross revenue and pay a 5% royalty on that amount after the first $3000 per game per calendar quarter.

Unity is a much better deal for single or small indie developers. It costs $420 if you earn more than $100k, or $1500 if you earn anything more than $200k, per seat. Basically nothing. It is also the easier to use and has the biggest community.

In contrast UE4 gets 5% royalties over your videogame gross income, regardless if you are a single developer, 5 dudes in a basement or a 500 people company. If you make a successful game like Clustertruck or Hearthstone (made with Unity) or a game like Candy Crush you will need to give Epic millions or billions. That's why companies like Blizzard or seasoned programmers like Lucas Pope (the guy who made "Papers, Please", now working on his new game with Unity) use Unity.

UE4 is completely open source and the better engine but is not worth it for indie devs.

>search for help on some specific 3d programming problem (e.g. collision)
>first page of results is basically "how to do X in unity"

You can negotiate with Epic for a custom license.

Unity is good, but the community is shit. Full of pajeet-tier shitters that copy-paste stackoverflow solutions and think they're experts. Plus the application itself is being progressively ruined by nu male cucks who think having to download a downloader to download the installer is a great idea.

It's also popular with "coders" since it lets you write shit in JS

The asset store is full of open source projects that some opportunist whores compiled into unitypackages that are being sold for money

The most expensive one I saw was OpenCV for Unity for 80 dollars

I know GPL permits this, but it's still lazy and, frankly, disgusting.

You know how PHP made it so that anyone could make a webpage?

Unity is PHP for game development. It's incredibly popular because it's popular, because "more support" is a thing and "better support" is not.

I for one would rather be called a faggot by Carmack senpai himself than random retard #1356 on StackOverflow, but that's just me.

I mean, more support? If you write Java like me, 99% of the time, you look up the JavaDocs for anything you need. I don't need the huge amount of idiots trying to farm points on StackOverflow to tell me what an int autoboxing is. I am actually smart enough to read the docs. If you are too, "more users" is not a good argument.

it's "open source"
if you're on Sup Forums, you should know better

Don't listen to this moron

>Unity is the game maker studio of 3D games
In it's simplicity and support, yes.

>It's a paid locked down service with many limitations and much better alternatives
This is a moot point as all the good engines require a percentage of your profits

>It uses 3D rendering for "2D" games it builds so nothing is truly 2D
Holy shit you're fucking stupid. Change the camera perspective to orthographic. You're not losing any performance by the editor being in 3D. The graphics engine is still loading only 2D assets.

>closed source
I doubt you even understand UE4's source code, let alone need it.


And now the truth about Unity:
>easy to learn
>quick to prototype
>single codebase deployment to all major platforms
>large community support (assets, libraries, help docs, etc.)


And UE4:
>higher resource requirement
>tried and tested for AAA games
>superior graphics engine (lod, lighting, shadows, etc.)
>blueprint (visual coding thing) makes it simple to build cool stuff
>also pretty good community support


At the end of the day, pick the engine that is easiest to use. You can waste your time worrying about shit that doesn't matter or actually pick an engine and make a game to sell. Both engines have produced successful games. But learning either engine locks you into that environment. You won't be exactly be learning things you can take to another engine and if you are ok with that then go ahead.

Personally I use Unity, I would like to use UE4 but it runs like shit on my macbook so until I can figure that out or build a rig I'm putting it off.

From what you've just described UE4 is MUCH more profitable than Unity for indie devs. All of it's functions are free so it's excellent to start with it.
These are true.

Don't listen to this moron.
>simplicity and support
Unreal Engine has hundreds of videos and documents on how to use it and it's just as easy to use, if not easier.
>graphics engine still loading only 2D assets
And other engines are still better at 2D and more lightweight for the end user. Even free ones which you obviously dislike for whatever autistic reason.
>so what if it's closed source
Open source gives much more power to a large group of developers and companies. It's a big bonus no matter how hard you want to deny it.

>Unity is easy to learn
So is UE. Their environments aren't really different.
>deploys to all major platforms
If you pay extra per platform. UE does this for free.
>UE has high resource requirement
On the developer it kinda does, but so does Unity. If you're making games on a shitty PC then this is perfect. An end user wouldn't notice a difference, especially since in UE you can disable a ton of crap which can improve performance significantly.

>I for one would rather be called a faggot by Carmack senpai himself than random retard #1356 on StackOverflow, but that's just me.

why woudl carmack call you a faggot

Because I wanted to cuddle.

>Redpill me on Unity Sup Forums
Only engine so hilariously broken that I need to LD_PRELOAD hacks to fix their OpenGL api usage

If you're using Love2D then stick to fucking Love2D. Why even bother making this thread talking about Unity if you aren't using it.

>Unity
>Runs on anything
>Minimal size: 20MB though
>Massive as fuck, cannot into dropping unneeded engine code when compiling
>Takes fucking ages to load on mobile for some reason

Back when I was a kid we just used C and Assembly to make games that fit on a single floppy disk, and probably learned more in the process than you would with Unity.

For the lulz

>Change the camera perspective to orthographic
Not that moron, but I always wondered how rendering in orthographic changes things.
You can still throw in a sprite and rotate it around, so it's still somewhat 3d.

This.
After making shit in unity I wanna go remake it in C for the consoles, manually.
Is muh dream.

Well, It's not the 90's anymore and no sane indie dev is going to use C or Assembly to develop games routinely.

I'm glad you found a way to brag about your sick assembly skills user, I'm really impressed

>Minimal size: 20MB though
The game I've been working on for 3 years is still around 10MB. The only thing that should be taking up large amounts of space are assets.

For actual production, you're definitely right.
If it's for the learning experience, going without an engine might be the better path.

This is partly why Terry made TempleOS too

I find it more satisfying to render my first cube with raw OpenGL or Vulkan than telling an engine to load a 3D model and "just display" it.

That's right, the most importanting is having fun while you are doing it.

Their scripting engine is a prehistoric version of Mono on which they hacked .net 4.0-ish features.. badly.

It works as long as you either suck up to the bugs or do stuff that's so simple you don't trigger them at all. Do anything serious and it will blow up on you big time.

I had all sorts of issues myself, pic related being one of them (playing with virtual functions and co-routines).
When people tell you that they never encountered a bug in Unity, it's most surely because they have never written code more complex than an if-else chain.

The documentation is shit and incorrect a lot of the time (I had a NOT fun week fixing a bug because the docs were blatantly lying about how RPC actually worked in the old networking stack).

Ironically, the one bug that made me go "fuck this, I'm tired of this shit" was probably one of the least bad ones: I was testing some devices that mapped to DirectInput gamepads in my game but since they were using DirectInput instead of XInput, Unity decided to discard the entire negative range of the analog sticks, not recognizing anything from center to left (or center to top).

>i'd rather reinvent the wheel every step and write a wrapper function to tell my own snowflake engine to "just display it" instead

>>Any "You don't need to code to make a game here!" Engine
>implying you don't need to code in Unity or Game Maker
What?

You forgot the part where all unity games stutter because lol writing a 3D engine in a garbage collected language

(and then using mono, which has a notoriously bad garbage collector)

>shit tier:
>>Unity
>Any "You don't need to code to make a game here!" Engine
This guy hasn't a clue as to what he's talking about. Unity may get shilled a bit, but the people shitting on it seem to be even more retarded.

Pretty sure he meant
1. unity
2. gamemaker
3. Any "You don't need to code to make a game here!" Engine

are all shit, not that unity is 3

Nobody said unity doesn't need code. What are you two talking about?

Excuse their braindamage. They have been using Unity.

>are all shit
Then he's still retarded.
Probably one of those people that used it for 3 days, ran into some obscure bug like then rage quit. Then again, this is just a bait thread.

>im using love2d but im gonna make a thread about a completely unrelated engine
>for lulz
>this is the same person giving engine 'advice'
>most likely underage

I'm talking about once it's compiled by unity. What sizes do you get?

>3 years
>10MB
>Unity
B8