Godot's devs are deceiving you - Uncheatable shooter devlog 2

False advertising? Fraud? Lying by omission?
Godot's leadership got tens of millions of dollars yet they don't bother fixing things.
Previous devlog: • Cheating crisis - Unch...
Twitter: / enhex
sources:
gamefromscratch.com/godot-pow...
/ 1412471226841378817
global illumination
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
Godot physics
/ 1746928253460234439
/ 1751190657270514175
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
occlusion culling
github.com/godotengine/godot/...
/ 1751834565419708612
/ 1751874520527294668
/ 1752090322572632069
/ 1751910288683655307

[@Wiiownyou]

Godot gots "tens of millions" for an open source, free engine being developed pretty much in the open without a massive core team. Unreal has billions of Epic Games money behind it, all the fortnite bux and far more. Unity also has billions of investment behind it. Even if we just assumed both Unreal/Unity engines had $1 billion (an EXTREMELY low figure) put into them, this dwarfs the highest estimates for godot by tens of times on its own AND they also have very experienced developers working around the clock on a wage in a corporate environment with shitloads of supports from GPU, CPU and more companies layered on top. Godot isn't the devil dude, its completely free to use and edit and you have to understand that this kind of software is just not going to always work as well as the industries leading giants with decades of hardcore well funded in house development, since the PS3/360 days Unreal Engine has been the industry standard and taught in colleges/universities for a reason. The fact that Godot is still around and actually a feasible option for development against those titans is extremely impressive in itself, and I hope to see less hit pieces trying to call a literally free engine some kind of false advertisment cash grab because of a few random miscellaneous bugs in the future.

[@GodotNoContext]

The author of this video only scratched the tip of the iceberg here.

[@douknow57]

Bro....LOOL You gotta stop riding Godot's strap-on. What's free about Godot other than you can download and use it? If it didn't get "millions" in donations I guarantee the development would almost halt completely. They talk about it every time they beg for money. That's not to FREE my friend. Bro is just saying he is tired of them hyping up all these things in Godot for them to be garbage in the end. I'm just saying there is some truth in this video. You have to look at it from eyes that aren't biased towards Godot. For the millions of dollars Godot has got, it should have more to show for itself than a bunch of hacks and messed up systems. I don't know man, Just saying. A lemon will always be a lemon! Also, this is far from a hit piece.

[@rgabriel5043]

@@douknow57 yeah brooo. They should be ashamed that they made money voluntarily by being smart? Why are they not starving for the cause??? Please reconsider your life damn... I'm disgusted by ya'll nerd larpers in here that think you are all tech highs but they do nothing with C (except maybe a stupid apps or shitty implementation of an algorithm), you do nothing in programming and except that everything will be put on a plate for you. That's why it's open source. That's why you have plugins. It's perfectly normal to be proud of something that you've done. Even if it doesn't work as expected, especially if that thing can be provely obtained just by using software made by billion dollars corporations. You're disgusting

[@juho1882]

​@@douknow57broo, it is open source and free. how i would be more free? brooooo

[@douknow57]

@@juho1882 nothing in life is free bro. It's free if you know how to be a software engineer. It's not free to have the main devs work on it. If they didn't get paid it would be like most open source projects and either die or move at a turtles pace

[@dathedix3951]

So in one video you've eliminated, Godot, Unreal, and Unity - given how many great games have been made with those engines it seems like the limiting factor here isn't the tech.

[@GodotNoContext]

Well, all of them are bad to some degree, but in contrast Godot is the worst of them all. Frankly, I wouldn't even compare Godot to engines like Unity or Unreal to begin with, as it creates false expectations. Godot is in its own "unique" league, if you know what I mean.

[@Yipper64]

@@GodotNoContext Yeah. Luckily I havnt seen any issues with the 2D side of Godot, so that's safe. But in general the engine is just *rough around the edges* I hope they get to the same level of Unity soon but if this video is anything to go by, I probably shouldnt hold my breath.

[@peezieforestem5078]

One can use this argument to justify any old tech. "You criticize the old tech? Look at how many great programs have been written in it. Looks like the limiting factor here is not the tech." It's a bad argument, because you're not contending with any of the points.

[@enhex]

Don't forget Flax and Wicked ;) I used Urho3D before, which worked well, but it's a dead project since the main dev left. the situation with game engines is really sad.

[@russianotter]

Right? Like, I'm not a game dev, I can't even code in the slightest - the extent of my knowledge is in making avatars for VRchat, which is just barely scratching the surface of Unity. But, I feel like I can safely say these types of things exist everywhere. Every piece of software has bugs and limitations, and nothing ever has ALL the things you want, exactly how you want them. Each program, whether you're making models in Blender, textures in Substance Painter, games in Unity, software in VSCode - every single one of those have given me issues that hours of fruitless googling simply ends at "it just be that way, deal with it." And that kind of sucks, but, what else can you do? People work with or around the bugs, or in the case of OSS, they can fix the issues themselves. I'm not going to pretend I know how big of an undertaking the issues in this video would be - I don't know if it'd be as simple as doing a git pull and swapping one config file and recompiling, or if it's stuff that requires a significant redo of the whole codebase. But this guy is clearly capable of it, he's finding and providing solutions for the bugs, even if they aren't being implemented officially, couldn't he fork it and have a community led effort on that front? And none of this is to say that there aren't any real issues with these programs, there's absolutely. Like Godot siding with a bully or Unity's scummy money grubbing attempt. But... at the end of the day, people make games with these programs. The problems can be worked with, and have been by many devs. There are solutions to most of the problems. To completely throw out engine after engine for one reason or another... after a certain point, it just sounds like complaining.

[@Octahedran]

So you implied it was fraud with the pretentious quote at the start. Then you complained about something you could just not use, then discounting pretty much every modern engine for 1/4 of the video. While complaining about the millions of dollars they got only a few months ago; you are a dev, you should understand that money does not equal immediate results. And that is not even mentioning the claims of fraud. I generally agree on the physics and the tweets by a dev. but that is only the 1/3 of the video and those complaints are not even close to what the rest of the video or title portrays. This is awful clickbait at best and straight up view begging at worst

[@GodotNoContext]

Numerous former users, contributors, and maintainers of Godot say something similar to what the author of this video talks about.

[@Shoobybuhdooby]

@@GodotNoContextshut up

[@rookbrood]

I agree mostly with you. I understand these frustrations with problems that are left unfixed and bad decisions made by the devs of Godot. I'm also of the opinion calling this "Fraud" when it's not real fraud devalues the point you are trying to make. I agree things should be better in this project, they should be upfront with limitations and dev to dev behaviors should be professional!

[@GodotNoContext]

@@rookbrood Are you familiar with how scams operate? Typically, those who fall victim to scams are reluctant to acknowledge that they've been deceived. Instead, they will find numerous excuses and rationalizations to justify their investment, be it money (donations), time, work (as a contributor), etc, when the better course of action would be to abandon the product (see sunk cost fallacy). Many people have been waiting for that moment when Godot would finally arrive, but ironically, waiting for Godot is futile by definition (see "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett). The very name behind Godot suggests that it's a dishonest scheme, especially in the context of Godot's for-profit companies that only a few are aware of (see W4 Games, Ramatak, Lone Wolf Technology).

[@GodotNoContext]

@@rookbrood Are you familiar with how scams work? Victims often refuse to admit they've been deceived, rationalizing their investment in terms of money, time, or work. However, it's wiser to recognize the sunk cost fallacy and disengage. Waiting for Godot, as depicted in Samuel Beckett's play, illustrates this futility. Have you heard of W4 Games, Ramatak, and Lone Wolf Technology?

[@drinkwwwaterrr]

Pretty sure the thing with Flax's lighting was just the shadow render distance, not a bug. Edit: This is probably the same thing that's happening in Godot

[@enhex]

I'm not sure either, also its distance is better than Godot. I'm still worried about having to constantly working around it when making indoor levels.

[@mert6230]

My guy you are using a game engine not gui they have their way of handling the game you do not need to add third party libs that is why we use engines instead of frameworks. You can use a frame work instead of empty slandering game engines.

[@kurvaosobne3897]

Ngl this is just a skill issue. Comparing any newer product that isn’t owned by a huge company to a product funded and made by a huge company that has been in development for years is almost always going to result in the latter winning. All engines have their own problems as you mentioned but I really don’t understand the point you are trying to make here. Every engine is good at something and bad at something else and all engines will always have their own issues and bugs

[@anthonyewell3470]

1. The physics issues are solved problems and there's open source solutions they can use. 2. Jolt 3. The graphics issues are mostly solved problems beyond the GI thing which he says he's going to fix lightmapping himself 4. They chose to make a 3D solution themselves rather than use an existing solution. 5. They're not properly supporting it or fixing any issues with it. When software is broken, the company making it isn't supposed to just laugh at you and go about their merry way, but fix it and apologize. 6. When you make the choice to build it yourself and there's entire free and open codebases pre-existing for you, any problems with the software you create that the pre-existing solutions don't have are completely your fault are due to negligence and ignorance.

[@kurvaosobne3897]

@@anthonyewell3470I do agree that reinventing the wheel and not improving it isn’t good. Sadly Godot isn’t the only engine suffering from this. Not saying it’s ok for Godot to do that if others are doing similar mistakes though, because it really isn’t.

[@enhex]

Godot got a lot of money, they can hire someone to fix the things they get wrong. also I've used engines before with less developers and 0 budgets that did get things right, so indeed it is a skill issue on Godot's team part.

[@Alex-vq7fz]

​@@enhexor you could contribute by fixing issues yourself

[@GodotNoContext]

@@Alex-vq7fz And get stuck contributing to Godot or fixing issues that were not supposed to be broken in the first place, like 4:42? No thanks.

[@nopenopenopex100]

time to make your own game engine lol. nah. what about cryenegine have you tried that? i'm curious what that is like

[@nopenopenopex100]

also what about source 2? i forget if that is available to the public

[@enhex]

haven't looked at it yet. at this point with Godot I only need the lightmapper to be fixed, as I'm doing the rest of the stuff on my own. so switching engine should take longer than fixing the lightmapper.

[@abhijitleihaorambam3763]

cryengine doesn't even support linux

[@computernerd8157]

You can also learn a graphic framework , code from scratch or download Godot source code and fork it. I think it would be cool if Godot got the distro treatment like Linux.

[@enhex]

i might fork it at some point.

[@sukhmandersingh4306]

We don't want a gazillion distros, fragmentation would pretty much kill the engine at this point. What we need is better leadership, that is not as toxic and dogmatic.

[@computernerd8157]

@@sukhmandersingh4306 Well its up to the dev if they want to give code back because its under MIT license. I would personally give cods back if I modified it but that just me. Open Source has no true leaders that just the nature of it.

[@Cleefbag71]

@@sukhmandersingh4306 So which other game engine has a development team that just goes with whatever their users demand?

[@saulsantos4132]

0:56 uh you can increase cascades for longer distances… and also change max distance 1:40 that the auto uv 2 generation fault, try baking them in blender. 4:24 should the floor mesh one big cube mesh? Like this is normal when you try to overlap the cubes, z fighting happens. I am not being a fanboy , just mentioning points that while it part engine fault, the user can also have the fault if he doesn’t set it up well, like having lots of cubes that overlap with each other is not a good idea, neither using the built in auto uv 2 generator.

[@saulsantos4132]

Also 5:16, eeeh they actually want to add jolt as built in on 4.4 or 4.5 now that is almost at feature parity with godot physics. While i agree removing bullet and work on godot physics was not a good idea, time changed and we now have jolt which is easy to add and it way better at everythig compared to bullet or godot physics. 5:54, understand your point, but man there are engines with worst occlusion, like unity( except in unity 6 which hopefully brings a way better method), and the issue is the algorithm itself (embree).

[@saulsantos4132]

Also “ Raycasting can be beneficial for more accurate occlusion culling, especially in scenarios where the scene is highly complex and traditional rasterization-based techniques might produce inaccurate results“ compared to using raster.

[@enhex]

increasing cascade distance reduces resolution, so it isn't always applicable. it wasn't the UV2 generator, as I said it was disabling "editable children" not reverting them to default, keeping a "make unique" mesh. my test level is tile based, the cubes in the video are minimal reproducible sample. it isn't z-fighting, there's no overlap. you can check out my github issue (link in description).

[@enhex]

can you link an example for Unity's broken occlusion? someone told me that before but I couldn't find anything that wasn't user misuse.@@saulsantos4132

[@enhex]

raycasting can't be more accurate than rasterization, in fact it isn't accurate while rasterization is. trying to use points with 0 area to occlude something is stupid.@@saulsantos4132

[@guitarbuddha74]

I've definitely noticed everything you mentioned after spending quite a bit of time on godot. I also spent a bunch of time on a bug where if my screen hz is anything but 60 I get stuttering when using physics in 2D. There is a bug in godot and they are working on it. Maybe I just hit a lot of edge cases but I go tired of it and switched over to defold for 2d and I'll use Unreal with blueprints for 3D. I try to use Linux for most everything too so it does make it hard finding something decent to work with that I don't have to spend hours trying to fix an engine bug or find out that is advertised as a feature but doesn't work or only half works.

[@enhex]

regarding the stuttering you may need to interpolate the rendering position between physics update.

[@guitarbuddha74]

@@enhex you can fix it by adjusting the physics time step but it’s not great. I tried quite a few other things like lerp and smoothing too

[@JSiuDev]

I am seeing this in games. The most noticeable one lately is BG3. During character conversation scene, there is light leak from the back of character head. The result is it feels like there is some led inside character throat and light up their teeth🤦‍♂️

[@readyforlol]

That’s just a general issue with dynamic objects. Self-shadowing is tricky.

[@RuiRei]

What a joke 🤣 Let me get this straight... you're accusing Godot's contributors of deceiving you because you don't know how to use the engine to achieve your goal? Doesn't seem like a good approach to ask for help. I think someone has some growing up to do... 😒

[@GodotNoContext]

Godot contributors are ignorant for the most part. The author talks about Godot's leadership instead, as evident from the thumbnail of this video.

[@Cleefbag71]

That's pretty much the level most of Godot's critics operate at. I saw one clown complaining that Godot must be trash because it kept giving him error messages. Didn't occur to him to maybe try reading them and fixing them, oh no, it's gotta be the engine's fault 🙄

[@unfa00]

Unfortunately, the video is way more correct than you think. The issues mentioned are deeply rooted problems. Sure, some of it is just poor understanding of how to use it, but getting phantom collisions on your character controller is not fault of the user. Same with light leaks. And Occlusion Culling that culls objects that are still visible... That's just basic featres not working correctly.

[@AGTTP]

@@unfa00 Not to mention pixel instability, where pixels shake or jitter from just basic movement and collision seems to be affected by this as well. Through code i had to work around that. Also the physics example where those pins were freaking out for no reason. You should not have to use a 3rd party plugin to get accurate and working physics. I don't get how people think that's a user issue, it's literally a problem with how the engine handles physics. It's the exact same scene but when they use jolt it works as expected. There is a difference between fine tuning and just straight up broken systems. I really like godot and i'm developing a game in it and it's sad to see that this is how the devs are.

[@skaruts]

Juan has stated intentions of integrating Jolt into Godot. They removed Bullet because it had many issues, and because they improved the physics integration, so different physics engines can be integrated more easily by third parties. The Jolt plugin doesn't guarantee determinism, btw (they state it in the repo). I do agree, though, that Godot seems to move forward too hastily, leaving too many things broken or unpolished along the way.

[@enhex]

they could keep Bullet around until there's a better alternative. Jolt itself is deterministic: jrouwe.github.io/JoltPhysics/index.html#deterministic-simulation

[@skaruts]

@@enhex the original jolt is deterministic, but the port doesn't guarantee that. It's stated in the repo. Or at least it was last time I checked (last year).

[@unfa00]

Yes, Jolt Physics is officially planned to replace Godot Physics. There's a few problems however. Godot Jolt doesn't and can't fix everything. It helps a lot, but it still can only work with what Godot Core gives it... just like Bullet (that is BTW used in games with success). The only person that works on Godot Jolt is mihe - he is not part of the Godot team. So he is an unpaid volunteer. Working alone on a key feature of the engine that is advertised by the Godot team. Godot gets like $50K/mo donations. Mihe gets $0/mo I think Godot's physics are fixable still, but most likely not by unpaid hobbyists I am afraid. I won't even get into the GI situation... Still - Godot is the best thing we have in the general-purpose user-friendly FOSS 3D game engine space at this moment. Bevy goes way slower, but it at least doges the bullet on it's physics core... pun intended. Don't@me.

[@FR3NKD]

This video inspired me to make a post on Twitter about limitations in Godot and game development. My most viral post with 178.000 views, Thank you 😂

[@enhex]

it isn't "limited", it's inexcusably broken. but hey at least you got views from it :)

[@FR3NKD]

@@enhex I really think you should switch engine and use Unity 💪🏻

[@zuulmanra]

@FR3NKD you are a certified clown

[@zuulmanra]

@@FR3NKD you are a certified 🤡

[@MrXlee1967]

Can you do a video on stride and let us know what you think about it. Could be the real alternative. I know zero code so can't help 😢

[@enhex]

looking at its website it doesn't seem to suit my needs, so i won't be giving it a try (can't afford the time).

[@MrXlee1967]

@@enhex that's a shame, you could mention what you think is missing. Perhaps they might listen to you, as you do make some valid points. Personally I don't believe godot is ready for 3d or it's safe to use to protect your source code.

[@charlieking7600]

Stride engine lacks occlusion culling and editor is Windows-only, so it's limited alternative.

[@diligencehumility6971]

I haven't used Godot for 3D, but for 2D it's been quite solid so far

[@enhex]

I haven't used 2D, i assume it's fine for 2D.

[@Obscurite1221]

This is kinda disingenuous. Godot started literally like two decades ago as a personal project between two people. It only really started taking off in like 2018, and that was with Godot 3.0. 4.0 will eventually be a strict upgrade to 3.0, and both are very much still in development to the point that you are expected to modify the engine on your own if you need a fix, and publicly submit it if it's not a niche problem. They're not gonna throw every single penny toward hiring as many devs as possible. Not only are quality devs extremely expensive compared to most positions, but they're also likely hired on for multiple years, and not on a per project basis. Additionally, Godot isn't for profit. It's open source. It's literally free to use for anyone, including for commercial purposes. You couldn't pay for it if you wanted to, as they only accept donations to the Godot Project.

[@SnakeEngine]

Well, you just described why you should prefer Unity for a polished commercial 3D game.

[@harrylane4]

@@SnakeEngine I mean... there's a pretty massive reason you shouldn't prefer unity for any reason. Genuinely you should pick, like, literally any engine over unity.

[@Obscurite1221]

@@SnakeEngine Nobody will tell you Godot is better than Unity or Unreal in most metrics, but the fact that they're even comparable speaks volumes for how far Godot has come, and how close it actually is to replacing them.

[@Yipper64]

So can I expect Godot 4 to have a good physics engine any time soon? That's really my main qualm with it at the moment for 3D stuff.

[@anthonyewell3470]

just realize, that for everything that he complained about there's probably a library out there that has a working version of it. Generic game physics is a solved problem. 3D rendering is a solved problem. They could have taken in Jolt and used a pre-existing 3D solution, but chose to waste time and choose to actively not fix any problems their choices made. They'd hire less devs. They'd spend less time and resources debugging themselves as they could easily direct everyone to the libraries repositories for any issue that came up. They chose the burden and then choose to hold us accountable.

[@vladimir_maks7518]

dude, there is CSG stuff in godot for level geometry building. Separate meshinstances making your render slower and they are for objects (separete parts or environment like barrels or other stuff)

[@unfa00]

I've heard that CSG is intentionally not fully featured. You can't use lightmaps with it, because the engine can't UV- unwrap it, can't change physics material, poor performance due to no option to make it static (if you move the CSG objects at runtime, Godot will recalculate the geometry's there but it's only good for prototyping... by choice). I guess for CSG workflow with decent results one would need Qodot and TrenchBroom or something...

[@real2rek]

Well, they are not offering any service you can buy. So. Where fraud?

[@mateuscaetano380]

In less than seven minutes you discarted Godot, Unity, Flax Engine, Wicked Engine and fucking Unreal 5, you literally discarted Flax Engine because of the GI's draw distance! What game are you making? The next Crysis? At this point you should just make your own engine cuz nothing else will satisfy you.

[@somedude5951]

Excellent points. I hope the Godot coders find this video, and take the feedback to heart. ty

[@Yipper64]

Its funny I have actually some into a similar situation, though I still like Godot. See, I want to make VR Games, I have a llittle idea for one that seems very fun. I made a demo in unreal but unreal just isnt my cup of tea. Unity would be the next best option but we all know why Unity should be avoided. So that leaves Godot. And they do have the ability to make VR games... *but* its just not great. I barely set up a project where you can pick up a block and I noticed *several* bugs i'd need to find some way to fix. When I place the block on the ground it starts freaking out because of some kind of collision issue, when I pick it up it teleports to a random point five feet away for a frame, and when I walk on top of it, it launches me off the map. I would imagine 4:40 is one of the reasons why and I guess the best I can do is use unity for now and wait till Godot gets its crap together when it comes to all that. Still going to be my goto for 2D games from here on though.

[@enhex]

indeed it seems you encountered the broken physics. there's a community made Jolt plugin for Godot called "Godot Jolt", maybe it can help.

[@Yipper64]

@@enhex So that made the block collide with the ground properly but now the hands are all jittery. And didnt fix the issue where when I grab the block it blinks into the distance for a frame. Thank you for your help and ill keep that in mind for whenever I make a non-VR game but it seems that the VR plugin for godot was not made with jolt physics in mind, and I wouldnt know how to fix that.

[@gnatinator]

Until Verse becomes a thing, Blueprints is the only way to keep your solo sanity using Unreal. That said, GDScript is probably the lowest friction overall.

[@Chailotl]

"shadows disappear at a distance!" bro have you never heard of baked lightmaps

[@TheYoxiz]

baked lightmaps? every game engine should have real time traytraced GI or something equivalent working by the push of a button! /s

[@ohiasdxfcghbljokasdjhnfvaw4ehr]

yes it's not perfect, but you being melodramatic. plenty of features in every engine aren't perfect. and it's not like you had to pay for it... if it's that important to you, you should have done some test renders before creating your entire game in it... its still a perfectly usable engine.

[@GodotNoContext]

Frankly, people who appear melodramatic while criticizing Godot accumulate frustration with the engine over the years. The issue is that criticism of Godot is discouraged, causing people to generally avoid expressing anything negative about it. However, when problems become too apparent, users of Godot can no longer ignore these issues and must speak up about them. There are other issues that the author of this video is not mentioning here... When you say "a perfectly usable engine", then you probably haven't used Godot for anything serious or long-term.

[@zuulmanra]

@@GodotNoContext Guys like this is the reason why people dont criticize godot. You say one thing and they call you "melodramatic" lol Criticism in this video is completely valid and done in a really good way we should embrace it instead of dismissing it.

[@FR3NKD]

New Dynamic GI is coming 💪🏻

[@enhex]

sadly it also got problems with light/shadow leaking

[@FR3NKD]

@@enhex If so, consider that it is not yet fully developed, we will see how the final version behaves.

[@FR3NKD]

I want to add that they are incredibly underfunded and have just made a big leap to 4.0, Juan often says that Godot isn't there yet and hasn't reached parity with other engines...in the meantime, my advice is the following: try to work around the limitations of this engine, to create a game that takes advantage of its strengths.

[@GodotNoContext]

@@FR3NKD You're kidding? They got over $20 millions for W4 Games and cannot find money for Godot? 🤡

[@saulsantos4132]

Dude that money is not for godot. That money is expected to be used for w4 on making their services( consoles, senior services, cloud and multiplayer services etc). And the investors didn’t give it for free, but for w4 services, which can’t be used at all in godot , becuase the foundation need’s to remain independent from the company. @@GodotNoContext

[@cryelectric]

Okay, the good luck with the Unreal Engine. Bye

[@easylemon6640]

you get what you pay for

[@enhex]

in the past I've used another open source engine that worked just fine

[@Shoobybuhdooby]

Accent, clickbait, video monetization. In the first thirty seconds.

[@harrylane4]

You can criticize the other two if you want but it's pretty messed up to argue that "speaking with an accent" is somehow a knock on the guy.

[@Shoobybuhdooby]

@@harrylane4 meh

[@enhex]

i don't control the monetization nor receive money from it as I'm under 1000 subscribers. also I wouldn't call it clickbait as the title/thumbnail are informative - broken Godot icon because Godot is broken, and the guy responsible who deceive people about it.

[@Shoobybuhdooby]

@@enhex “From the bottom menu, tap Content . Select the video that you want to monetize or turn off ads for. Tap Edit . Tap Monetization .”

[@zuulmanra]

@@Shoobybuhdooby He is under 1000 subs thats what he means. He cant control monetazation at that point are you purposely being stupid? Also making fun of someone's accent? How old are you? Clearly you are a hurt godot user coping here :)

[@friesencr]

Makes me appreciate how awesome Lasse was.

[@enhex]

yeah, I was thinking about mentioning exactly that in the video

[@friesencr]

@@enhex He's the GOAT and no one knows him.

[@GamingwithPortals]

I think Godot is best suited as a 2D engine. When I'm making projects it's Unreal + Blueprint for 3D and Godot + GDScript for 2D or for lighter things like applications or doom-style renderers I just use python with PyGame. I would, for your case, use UE4.27 or UE5 with blueprint to make your game. It's a learning curve but it's not very hard to take preexisting code and map it over. Even in different langs. it's pretty easy so C++ to BP (Which is based of C++) should be simple.

[@Yipper64]

Ive been debating using Unity just because I have been disappointed in Godot's 3D features. Ive used unreal engine, just not a huge fan of it. It almost feels restrictive in how much it does for you out of the box.

[@GamingwithPortals]

@@Yipper64 I do think Unreal is wayy too heavy for simpler 3D games if that's what you're going for. Godot's 3D isn't good either, I agree with that. It seems there isn't really a good 3D engine right now.

[@GamingwithPortals]

@@OverbiteGames I know Unreal is heavy but really? Only 20 FPS on that system? I've done similar on a worse spec'd pc (Intel i7 10700k (Overclocked to 4.85ghz) and an RTX 3070 OC) with 32GB of DDR4 and I never really drop below 60 on Unreal no matter what is going on. Maybe there's something up with your example, but that's suspiciously low considering your build.

[@mezohx]

​@@GamingwithPortalsNot that heavy, I suppose. The engine runs at pretty well on a GT 1030 and 16 gigs of ram. Don't bother asking why I have a gt 1030, I just do. Both UE4 and UE5 runs pretty good.

[@GamingwithPortals]

@@mezohx Yeah, with a GT 1030 your biggest issue is probably gonna be the VRAM if you have the 3GB model. Unreal Engine isn't inherently heavy but def has a lot of features, especially with lighting and shadows, that still use GPU, CPU, and storage resources.

[@mert6230]

Godot is absolutely free what gain do they have to trick people? Are you serious that you prefer unreal engine over godot and call out godot for being opensource you can add stuff that you need with plugins or with coding but you want one click results not really wanna work for your game is that it?

[@GodotNoContext]

Godot's leadership exploits the free labor of volunteers who contribute to the project with their work or donations. All the while Godot's leadership co-founded several for-profit companies like W4 Games, Ramatak, Lone Wolf Technology, etc. Most contributors to Godot are not even aware of these companies created by Godot's leadership.

[@SlayerDUDE1993]

skill issue

[@RuiRei]

@Enhex is deceiving you 🤔

[@RuiRei]

So is @GodotNoContext 😨 why do you hate Godot so much? It's a FOSS that's a gift from the contributors to Humanity. And it's just awesome. Not perfect, no, but awesome nonetheless. And they're working hard to improve it. They just don't have enough resources to work on everything simultaneously, so they have to prioritize what's most impactful for their users (which they definitely listen to). Both of you (if you're even two different people) are very ungrateful. But you can always switch to another engine and stop posting nonsense about Godot or its incredible team of developers. Here, have a hug 🤗hope it makes you feel better 😊

[@Octahedran]

@@RuiRei If you go to his channel page then click on the link in his about page he has a book about it, tbh I only skimmed it and its not great, plus I have seen all of this before with blender but you can take a look if you want

[@zuulmanra]

@@RuiRei "It's a FOSS that's a gift from the contributors to Humanity" its a broken mess lmao

[@RuiRei]

@@zuulmanra then why do you use it? Use something else. I hope no one's forcing you to use Godot. I can call the police if you want ;)

[@zuulmanra]

@@RuiRei Who said I am using it? Are you receiving revelations from god? lmao

[@mert6230]

In godot you can use jolt physics. You really didn't do research to fix your problems withe engine did you.

[@GodotNoContext]

The author of this video literally makes comparisons of Godot's built-in physics with unofficial, third-party Jolt physics at 4:42.

[@mert6230]

@@GodotNoContext not the oficall plugin addon he says he tried to put it in himself. Not using the plugin.

[@MrXrayez]

@@mert6230 Sorry, but no. He didn't say this. He only said that Jolt Physics itself (the third-party physics library) is not broken, and he used Jolt for one of his C++ projects. If I'm mistaken, please provide a quote. His argument is that Godot presented its features as production-ready, which contradicts the broken state of Godot, where Godot's physics is one example.

[@mert6230]

@@MrXrayez 5:28 he says he implemented jolt in to his own code.

[@MrXrayez]

​@@mert6230 He said, "For my game I did my own Jolt physics integration into my C++ code." The world doesn't revolve around Godot, it is possible to use Jolt physics in other frameworks or your own custom application. Jolt is not developed by Godot developers, it is a third-party physics engine. Context: the author apparently has a game project where he doesn't use any game engine. Even then, he talked about Godot's broken built-in physics, not Jolt. In all contexts here, Jolt is a superior physics engine according to the author, he never complained about it in his video.

[@skullmangordon]

I honestly tried Godot's 3D only once and it was the worst experience I have ever had, Saying only for more modern 3D games But if you wanna make really simple games, with PSX style or so, Godot can be good for you.

[@GodotNoContext]

Thanks for exposing these issues! Just because something is seemingly Open Source doesn't mean it cannot be evil. Unfortunately, there exist wolves in sheep's clothing, and Juan Linietsky with his extensive corporate background as a business consultant reveals much about his "snake oil" marketing practices (I bet you've heard about Juan's W4 Games commercial company). Also, the video thumbnail you created for your video is direct and to the point!

[@RenderingUser]

What "snake oil" marketing practices exactly?

[@GodotNoContext]

@@RenderingUser This video covers several examples of this already, I recommend watching it if you haven't already. For example, the lead developer of Godot proclaimed that they enjoy to innovative while failing to reinvent the wheel to begin with, and broken physics is one example. If you ask specifically about W4 Games, then there's a conflict of interest between Godot and W4 Games. Years ago, Juan Linietsky assured that there's no entity behind Godot, while members of Godot PLC (Project Leadership Committee) already operated Godot-related for-profit companies. Nowadays, numerous commercial companies behind Godot are collectively controlled by its leadership, such as W4 Games, Ramatak, Prehensile Tales, Lone Wolf Technology, etc. Juan literally lies that he's not a technical leader of Godot anymore, while he remains in his leadership role in Godot (he still portrays himself as the lead developer of Godot, despite his claims). Iif you research these issues yourself, you'll find that Godot makes many false promises, creates false hopes or false expectations (for example, by constantly comparing Godot to Unity or even Unreal). Everyone has their own vision of "The engine you're waiting for," a slogan masterfully crafted by Juan Linietsky. Godot is literally named after "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett, where two dudes keep waiting for someone called "Godot" who never arrives! This alone is a red flag. Of course, they will constantly "joke" about this, but this is done to diminish doubts. These aspects eloquently emphasize the "snake oil" marketing practice of Godot. They don't even have to spend a dime for marketing because Godot's leadership knows that any random will blindly promote Godot to strangers, merely based on a naïve belief in the so-called "bright future" of Godot, all the while Godot's leadership capitalizes on the free labor of volunteers. Most Godot contributors don't even realize that they work for the commercial agenda of Godot's leadership. The community also starts to adopt these practices little by little, like there's a video titled "Godot Visual Scripting is Back", which is very misleading, to say the least (Godot's VisualScript has been removed starting from Godot 4.0 and Godot's leadership haven't expressed any desire to bring it back). Overall, these issues might not be as apparent on the outside, otherwise, Godot wouldn't be able to attract the cult following it currently has. Godot makes a lot of these grandiose claims, to the point where a vocal part of the Godot community believes that they can compete with engines like Unreal, which is ridiculous! To summarize, their words don't match actions, there exist many contradictions that are not addressed, and this constitutes highly hypocritical, deceptive behavior. When you attempt to raise these issues up for a discussion, you'll eventually be labeled as a hater of Godot, and even banned. If you have a specific question, I can answer it and support my words with facts, evidence, and testimonies.

[@GodotNoContext]

@@RenderingUser This video covers several examples of this already, I recommend watching it if you haven't already. For example, the lead developer of Godot proclaimed that they enjoy to innovative while failing to reinvent the wheel to begin with, and broken physics is one example. If you ask specifically about W4 Games, then there's a conflict of interest between Godot and W4 Games. Years ago, Juan Linietsky assured that there's no entity behind Godot, while members of Godot PLC (Project Leadership Committee) already operated Godot-related for-profit companies. Nowadays, numerous commercial companies behind Godot are collectively controlled by its leadership, such as W4 Games, Ramatak, Prehensile Tales, Lone Wolf Technology, etc. Juan literally lies that he's not a technical leader of Godot anymore, while he remains in his leadership role in Godot (he still portrays himself as the lead developer of Godot, despite his claims). If you research these issues yourself, you'll find that Godot makes many false promises, creates false hopes or false expectations (for example, by constantly comparing Godot to Unity or even Unreal). Everyone has their own vision of "The engine you're waiting for," a slogan masterfully crafted by Juan Linietsky. Godot is literally named after "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett, where two dudes keep waiting for someone called "Godot" who never arrives! This alone is a red flag. Of course, they will constantly "joke" about this, but this is done to diminish doubts.

[@GodotNoContext]

@@RenderingUser If you ask specifically about W4 Games, then there's a conflict of interest between Godot and W4 Games. Years ago, Juan Linietsky assured that there's no entity behind Godot, while members of Godot PLC (Project Leadership Committee) already operated Godot-related for-profit companies. Nowadays, numerous commercial companies behind Godot are collectively controlled by its leadership, such as W4 Games, Ramatak, Prehensile Tales, Lone Wolf Technology, etc. In general, if you research these issues yourself, you'll find that Godot makes many false promises, creates false hopes or false expectations (for example, by constantly comparing Godot to Unity or even Unreal). Everyone has their own vision of "The engine you're waiting for," a slogan masterfully crafted by Juan Linietsky. Godot is literally named after "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett, where two dudes keep waiting for someone called "Godot" who never arrives! This alone is a red flag. Of course, they will constantly "joke" about this, but this is done to diminish doubts. These aspects eloquently emphasize the "snake oil" marketing practice of Godot. They don't even have to spend a dime for marketing because Godot's leadership knows that any random will blindly promote Godot to strangers, merely based on a naïve belief in the so-called "bright future" of Godot, all the while Godot's leadership capitalizes on the free labor of volunteers. Most Godot contributors don't even realize that they work for the commercial agenda of Godot's leadership. The community also starts to adopt these practices little by little, like there's a video titled "Godot Visual Scripting is Back", which is very misleading, to say the least (Godot's VisualScript has been removed starting from Godot 4.0 and Godot's leadership haven't expressed any desire to bring it back). Overall, these issues might not be as apparent on the outside, otherwise, Godot wouldn't be able to attract the cult following it currently has. Godot makes a lot of these grandiose claims, to the point where a vocal part of the Godot community believes that they can compete with engines like Unreal, which is ridiculous! To summarize, their words don't match actions, there exist many contradictions that are not addressed, and this constitutes highly hypocritical, deceptive behavior. When you attempt to raise these issues up for a discussion, you'll eventually be labeled as a hater of Godot, and even banned. If you have a specific question, I can answer it and support my words with facts, evidence, and testimonies.

[@GodotNoContext]

@@RenderingUser This video already covers several examples of this. I recommend watching it if you haven't done so yet. For instance, the lead developer of Godot proclaimed that they enjoy innovating but fail to reinvent the wheel, and broken physics is one such example. If you specifically ask about W4 Games, there's a conflict of interest between Godot and W4 Games. Years ago, Juan Linietsky assured that there's no entity behind Godot, while members of Godot PLC (Project Leadership Committee) already operated for-profit companies related to Godot. Nowadays, numerous commercial companies behind Godot are collectively controlled by its leadership, such as W4 Games, Ramatak, Prehensile Tales, Lone Wolf Technology, etc. If you research these issues yourself, you'll find that Godot makes many false promises, creates false hopes, or false expectations (for example, by constantly comparing Godot to Unity or even Unreal). Everyone has their own vision of "The engine you're waiting for," a slogan masterfully crafted by Juan Linietsky. Godot is literally named after "Waiting for Godot" by Samuel Beckett, where two dudes keep waiting for someone called "Godot" who never arrives! This alone is a red flag. Of course, they will constantly "joke" about this, but it's done to diminish doubts. These aspects eloquently emphasize the "snake oil" marketing practice of Godot. They don't even have to spend a dime on marketing because Godot's leadership knows that any random person will blindly promote Godot to strangers, merely based on a naïve belief in the so-called "bright future" of Godot, all the while Godot's leadership capitalizes on the free labor of volunteers. Most Godot contributors don't even realize that they work for the commercial agenda of Godot's leadership. The community also starts to adopt these practices little by little, like there's a video titled "Godot Visual Scripting is Back," which is very misleading, to say the least (Godot's VisualScript has been removed starting from Godot 4.0, and Godot's leadership haven't expressed any desire to bring it back). Overall, these issues might not be as apparent on the outside; otherwise, Godot wouldn't be able to attract the cult following it currently has. Godot makes a lot of grandiose claims, to the point where a vocal part of the Godot community believes that they can compete with engines like Unreal, which is ridiculous! To summarize, their words don't match actions, there exist many contradictions that are not addressed, and this constitutes highly hypocritical, deceptive behavior. When you attempt to raise these issues for discussion, you'll eventually be labeled as a hater of Godot and even banned. If you have a specific question, I can answer it and support my words with facts.

[@azagwen]

Enhex is deceiving you.

[@abrarambles]

You covered majority of the problems in a very demonstrative way. Thanks for making this video! Also what is going on with Wicked engine transforms 😅

[@enhex]

thanks! regarding Wicked engine, I don't know tho I opened a Github issue for it.

[@forestrf]

T.T

[@KorathiHeatwave]

no to competent ppl, bully them out, more yes man. With this approach Godot will remain a 2D engine

[@SnakeEngine]

I wouldn't worry too much about Unity and just keep using it, it's no like Unity will pull that selfdestruction mode again, at least never without backtracking, simply because it would be suicide. I doubt its licence model will ever be the problem for little indie guys. And if you have to worry about licence issues, you made your millions anyway. So I really wouldn't worry if you value your time and want to get things done.

[@anthonyewell3470]

They recently just had a revenue increase while they were firing employees. What does that tell you about the buisness model? They have to make money for shareholders. If they made those types of decisions because they had to, then rest assured, they'll do it again, if not before imploding.

[@enhex]

I forgot to mention it in the video but I'm also worried about it being closed source, as I'm developing experimental new things.

[@GodotNoContext]

Yeah, I'd add that Godot often exploits the fear of missing out or something being closed-source, unfortunately.

[@Yipper64]

Yeah honestly that's where im at. Apparently Godot has a plugin that fixes the physics which would be all I need, Godot can do me fine for 2D or 3D at this point for what I personally need, and ill use it over Unity. But I also want to do VR and that requires its own VR plugin, and unfortunately the two arent compatible. Like you said, if I value my time and want to get things done, and I do, I should use Unity. I know unreal is an option and I even made this exact game as prototype before in UE4 but I do not like Unreal engine that much, just out of personal taste.

[@moe__dev]

this an eye - opener damn.

[@semaph0re]

who cares about sdfgi, its buggy yes, but just skip it, and continue making your game... maybe you are using sdfgi as an excuse so you are not actually productive?

[@zuulmanra]

dude this video covers so many problems and you are accusing the guy for not being productive? lol average godot user coping "who cares about sdfgi" people who want to make a game cares about it lol

[@semaph0re]

@@zuulmanra Great story man, but in the real world people pick an engine based on certain requirements and then 99% of the time modify the engine to suit their game/workflow. If there is something broken in Godot, I can either fix it (because the code is FOSS) or avoid the feature altogether. I'm not dismissing his complaints, Godot is buggy af in certain areas, instead I'm saying he should perhaps pick a tool that suits him, or code his own engine, but most importantly stop complaining about it through KZbin videos, because nobody gives a damn. Submit a PR or go to Unreal.

[@LiveGameDriveChannel]

@@zuulmanra The author's observations are valid, but at the same time he's clearly frustrated with any other game engine. Maybe the problem is not in the tools?

[@MrXrayez]

​@@LiveGameDriveChannelGodot is definitely worse quality-wise compared to Unity and Unreal. Also, what I've noticed, this is my observation, is that people who are affected by Godot and disappointed by it start to be more critical of other engines. This disappointment affects them to such a point that some even abandon game development altogether...

[@anthonyewell3470]

@@LiveGameDriveChannel The problem is in the tools. He doesn't want to be locked in, so Unreal is a no go, since it tries to lock him in. He doesn't trust Unity, understandably, Flax had the same issue graphically, and do I have to mention wicked? Of course if it was just a graphics issue, he'd probably first try to resolve it himself, but it's not.

[@Good_luck_981]

I Think , Bevy Game Engine Will Be Best Choice In Near Future ( 2-3 Years )

[@DePistolero]

Your frustration is out of this world with all this... Either make your own game engine and stop whining about people who have done it so we can use it for FREE, or use what you have and help those people improve what they've already done for us so we can use it for free!!! Nitpicking bugs out of these engines that have already made exorbitant amount of games is just ignorant and stupid...

[@marco6ocram]

You sound like a Unity or Unreal shill? There are plenty of success stories of games made with Godot.

[@enhex]

I literally pick Godot over both Unity and Unreal in the video 🤦‍♂

[@MrERJ1992]

Very presumptuous on your part, don't you think?

[@eduardomoura2813]

godot is the losers game engine and if godot is enough for your game I have bad news for you. of course there's successful games made with it but there are many more made with rpg maker, wolf rpg editor and many other small unpopular game engines. the point is despite godot receiving more money per month in donations than unity has in profits there's not a single feature that is complete or fully working. in 2022 they promised that ubershader but from all the small devs that used that none reported any improvement in performance or fix for the stuters when loading big shaders... they also added that navigation server but anyone that tried to use knows how bugged that thing is for 3d... they added animation retargeting, but since I believe i'm the only that tried to use that they didn't noticed that it not worked at all in most cases... ik don't work so they removed before godot 4, did they added it again? I can keep going on all day, telling about all the bugs that I found from 2018 to 2022 and are still open or "fixed" but this engine is going nowhere. better for us unity/unreal chads!

[@Cleefbag71]

So where's this chadly game of yours, then? Oh yeah, just like all the other wannabes - you don't have one. Meanwhile the guy making Road to Vostok puts his money where his mouth is and proves it's not the engine that matters, it's the developer. And therein lies your actual problem.

[@guilhermejesuinoramires6994]

Fix this your self