The thing is that this could have been way more successful than it will likely end up being.
It would "just" have to be better all-around. More time in the oven, really.

It doesn't seem like a "Google Glass" type of thing to me - but even those are still around, just not for the general consumer market.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: subLol, the negativity and scepticism of the article reminds of articles of other news sites when Steam for Linux and, later, the Steam machines have been announced.

Remember when *we* were quite upset that those narrow-minded other sites are so negative about it, when it just has been started and OF COURSE needs some time to evolve and can't live up to the vision just yet? :)

But this is Google.
They don't need to push anything out quickly.

Why even release Stadia in a state like this instead of waiting half a year longer and release with a lot more to offer?

Quoting: DerheimThis reminds of the Epic Store.

Exactly!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Ugh... I guess they tried, at least?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

12 launch titles? And just one for free if you pay for their service?
Are they for real?

Who are they expecting to win over with that?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The big problem I see with Urho3D is that its development more or less stopped when the main developer moved on to other things 1-2 years ago.
There are still one or two people doing semi-regular pushes to the code, so I wouldn't call it dead at all, but that is not really comparable to the work being put into Godot on a daily basis.

Though, yes, for C++ folks, it might be easier to get into Urho3D than Godot initially. Still, I think you'll end up with a dead end there sooner or later and in contrast to Godot, won't have much of a community to help or other ways to manually deal with it.

Quoting: nattydreadI've been playing with game engines recently and Godot is far from usable yet really.

What was it that was missing for you?
I know what was missing for me and decided to just roll that part on my own, but the Godot community generally wants to know reasons why people do not want to / can not use Godot to see where the shortcomings are.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuyOne throwaway comment in the trailer I thought was interesting: In the online multiplayer, experienced players can get points by mentoring new ones. I'm not sure how that's likely to work out in practice, but I thought it was a nice attempt to build some friendliness into the community.

That's something I've been thinking about as well.

Currently, in any RTS, matches between two teams are only really interesting if all players have about the same skill level.
In practice, good luck finding 4+ people of the same skill level... and forget about it if you just jump into some kind of "quick play" (if the number of people playing isn't massive).
That's also the reason new players barely exist online as they just get crushed immediately - and that's not much fun, leading to extremely few chewing through it until they got gud.
Others (like me) are just not that interested in spending the time to become great and would like to play only a few matches every now and then - but the nature of the competition makes that little to no fun so we don't even attempt to.

One idea would be to have matches in which certain players can only attack/battle with certain other players, for example a 2vs2 match where both teams have one experienced player and a new one. The experienced ones can fight only amongst themselves (until one is down), same for the new players.
A mentor program of some kind (maybe the new player can rate their mentor after the match or something?) could also be combined with that.

It's certainly a problem and good that someone tackles it with ... well, any ideas at all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Also wishlisted it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slapinGodot is in state wanted by its developers, according to their vision. Visions change very slowly, so I guess 2-3 years is too optimistic. However even now if your C++ skills and experience are good enough you can write quite decent games using it, but prepare to code a lot first. The problem is mainly a conflict of interests between minimalist public which considers any additional feature as personal insult and feature hungry public. Currently the interests lean to minimalism even at cost of lack of functions. That is not going to change any time soon, so to have some decent FOSS engine for your 3D game one have to either compose one from existing separate libraries (OGRE, Bullet, etc.) which will take human-years to complete (including asset pipeline establishment), so requires large team efforts, or take Godot + external libraries and have something coded within months which is much less effort. All the complete solutions are not FOSS, so Godot is compromise.

I have to agree somewhat.
Love to see the engine progress, but I've often been questioning the priorities and the lack of clarity of what is going on at any current time, what the plans are for the next month/week, etc.

Is it really necessary to work on a Vulkan renderer while OpenGL+DirectX works everywhere and other features are way more incomplete than the rendering?
It's not the lack of graphical bling! that keeps people from using Godot, it is the lack of features. When asking "can Godot do this?" and the answer is no, well then most people won't pick Godot if Unity or others can do it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not questioning what the unpaid contributors work on, they'll work on what motivates them and that's fine. But shouldn't the paid ones be more mindful of priorities?

I gave up waiting on the 3D navigation, for example, and started working on my own GDNative module to implement recast/detour properly for my needs. It won't be in a way that suits everyone (no editor integration, for example and only takes MeshInstance), but that's just what happens when people develop for their own needs.
It is a few weeks of work (spread over one day per week that I have for it) that would have been nice if I could have spent them on something else.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Looking at how their latest game was received, that's unfortunately not very surprising.
Hope they can get back on track with their next game, though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TMM

Quoting: TheSHEEEPYes, and that is nonsensical collective punishment that I do not support.
"Someone of you did something I do not agree with, unrelated to the project, so now I hate all of you, and the project, especially if that person's head doesn't roll".

I don't know who made the original comment but as a part of the Godot CoC team I can assure you that this is not policy for regular project members.

You say that now, and I do hope it is so. But we will see about that if/when the first real shitstorm hits and the
mob comes knocking, torches lighted.
It is very easy to give in to peer pressure, hoping it will make the problem go away.

Quoting: TMMSomeone who expresses, for instance, homophobic beliefs in public will however not be selected for any (semi) official Godot positions. Think of part of any Github teams, GSoC mentors etc.

That's your decision to make. It is your project.
Roles that include representing the project or team (say, a community manager) obviously couldn't be staffed with someone who expressed views many won't agree with.
But you will have to live with people not understanding how a persons views on unrelated topics affect their ability to be a GSoC mentor, for example.

Quoting: TMMIt is however not in any way a policy that someone who expresses themselves would face consequences just for that.

I am not sure how this statement fits with the last one.

View this comment - View article - View full comments