Soooo why is pic related being shit on?

There's few to no reason to make a 2d game in unity.

Fuck that, make an honest to god Fallout game

Did I miss something?

In the style of the originals or NuFallout?
If it's the former then go ahead, but if it's the latter then there are probably better engines to use.

Ok I see, isn't really the engine itself but the dev unable to code properly and to polish his shit

So any new info on that Amazon engine lumberyard?

Well, I'm not a wizard. How an actual engine work? How you start from scratch?

No the engine is shit too, it's just that the coders are also shit.

1. Too many shitty amateur projects have been made with it, since it's so widely available.
2. Unity doesn't make their source code available by default, unlike Unreal. So it can't be effectively modified most of the time, which gives it a strong performance ceiling.

The biggest reasons people hate it is due to devs rather than the engine itself, but the engine itself has plenty of shit too.
It used to be THE free engine, but now you got both UE4 and CE3 which are also free, and both are massively more technologically advanced. UE4 is also more user-friendly as long as you aren't a lazy shit who doesn't want to learn C++. CE is by far the most pretty but it's buggy and badly documented, unless you got some experience it's probably a bad pick.

Nah the engine is shit, but the devs who use Unity usually overshadow the shittyness of the engine.

Old Fallout. I'll probably never do it but it doesn't stop me from coming up with some ideas.

Fallout is dead to me. I don't want seem like I know Fallout better than the good devs that made it so it's best to make something new.

You choose a framework/library and build on top of it the features that you want. What framework/library you want to use is probably going to be based on what languages you know. You've got the resources of the internet at your beck and call user, go find out.

Agree with that. The original Shadowrun Returns was very poorly optimized until they tweaked it again.

On top of this comes a pants on the head retarded module system that won't let you code properly to safe your goddamn life.

There are few books out there that teach you how you cobble together your own engine. The fun starts when you entertaining the idea of making a 3D game, because the frankly, the math behind that all can drive you fucking apeshit.

There are way better engines out there, the only real advantage to Unity is that it's very easy to use therefor it's very attractive if you want a relatively fast development cycle (depending on the game you're making) or if you're not that experienced.
You can absolutely make good games with it, but if you really know what you're doing then you'd probably use a different engine.

One of the complaints that I have to the old Fallout titles is how sprites block things. Like if I drop a gun near a tree, I'm not getting it back. Also, the other sprite related limitations but I guess is worth not having to make a 3D title.
Would a pseudo camera turning thing work in a 2D game?

The engine is not bad, it's just engine hipsters that prefer their unkown engine and hate the mainstream. The problem is how easy it is to make games on it, and since most of the indie devs brute force learning object oriented programming instead of learning from a proper school, they don't know shit on how to optimize the game, so it got a bad stigma.

Lol no, it's fucking retarded to make your own engine, you are gonna waste two years of your life for some minor improvement in performance, and if you decide to change your project in a way some features get scrapped you just wasted time implementing them. What people need is to spend time learning in depth OO so they stop making fucking inefficient code.
On indie devving you really can't spend time doing an engine from scratch, until you launch your first game your income is literally zero, your first step is to launch one or more good ideas in a way to help pay your bills or at least start your portfollio. Developing your own engine comes much later once you are already stabilished and possibly have your own game dev studio.

It worked in topico.

twitter.com/natosha_bard

This is Unity's "engineering" tools lead by the way.

How is Game Maker for 3D?

Every time I see this question asked in /agdg/, the reply is always "It technically can, but it's shit, use something else." I have yet to see the reasoning for why.

Eh. C'mon user, don't judge bald people :^}

That girl most be a hardcore gamer, she has an alienware laptop with pink LCDs.

Because it is the gateway for lots of Hello World games. Because it was, at the time, the most user friendly and documented of the free engines, people went to it en masse. Newbies and not-so-newbies decided to start with it and their so called community started to grow. Seriously, starting with Unity was almost a god send if you knew next to nothing, as you could find solutions to your problems with ease via google searching their forums.

Of course other free engines existed, but not as well documented (for better or for worse). Keep in mind this was at least 5 years before Unreal became "free" too.

By itself, Unity isn't bad, but the people who use it are. They see the word "FREE" and they download it. Then they make a shitty pseudo game and think they are developers because of it. It doesn't help that a lot of the indie clique were part of the people I describe, ushering their piece of shit art games to steam because their agenda pushed them through greenlight upon greenlight, which in turn inspired more people to do the same "because it's easy with Unity y'all!", thus repeating the cycle

...

Nigga you must really suck at programming if a fucking 2D engine will take you two years to make.
Even if you suck at maths it wouldn't take that long.

Could you explain in any more detail why you think C# was an innapropriate choice? I'm not a fan of Unity either but I'm guessing they chose C# for compatability with multiple platforms. Do you have anything at all to back up your assertions that the 3D is less optimized because of the language?

kekerino carmack shit on muh programming courses full of pajjeets and changs that go on to program excel for the rest of their miserable life before they blow their brains out, no one successful and interesting in video games has come from a tech school.

...

He thinks developers need to "learn OO in depth" instead of making an engine, do you really think he has any idea what he's talking about?

Do you want me to go in depth with this or what?
What you need to know is that C++ is king when it comes to speed, which is needed since 3D will require lots of complex math to be done for a multitude of things.

Yeah go ahead and try to go in depth

because of how terrible optimized games made with it are, which to me is very fair since any shit made with it overheats my GPU and that only happens with Unity made games.

I can give you a pretty detailed rundown.
Disclaimer: I've been using Unity for about three years, so I'm a bit bias, but I'll do my best to be objective.

I'll start with the pros of the unity engine, and then the cons.

PROS
>Has great documentation for all of it's high level features
>NOTE: However, the GC issue can currently be manually resolved, in a manner similar to C++ (manual memory management), but most are ignorant of this.
>If you can make it on any other engine, you can make it in Unity, but, it requires indepth knowledge of the engine to do more "low-level" tasks
>Optimization is completely possible (more on this in cons)

CONT in next post

It was a rhetorical question.
If you want to learn more why C++ is faster than C# you can google it.

CONS
>Due to the huge userbase, and answers for every little stupid error for high-level features, there is A LOT of handholding (which results in people not really knowing what is going wrong, and shitty unoptimized "one size fits all" solutions)
>NOTE#2: Due to a lot of shit being on here (shittly coded or not), people use this for a lot of their projects, and it leads to shitty unoptimized code, and plenty of shovelware due to the availability of this… plus shitty quality control of actual code, as their concern is (((profits)))
>Optimization is completely possible, but it requires in-depth knowledge of C# (with C++ "like" memory management schemes)

I've written in both languages before and I understand why there would be a speed difference. I was wondering if you had any real facts besides "C++ is faster than C#", for example I'd be interested to see benchmarks related to their 3D rendering.

Look at their EULA, it's shit.

It looked very promising, and I was considering switching, but their EULA turned me off.
Not to mention their entire engine is structured around twitch and streaming platforms; which is imo produces (((cancerous))) games (as compared to say, focusing on good gameplay first, not what will get your players the most views on twitch).

Unity (and arguably any quality engine) uses the ECS design pattern, not OO design.

This is the one that sold me, I won't play anything made with jewnity

oy vey but they do it for your own good

Every game I've played made with Unity has shitty code optimization. And unity itself has this bizarre bug in installing it that fucks up if you're installing over a wireless connection.

I didn't specify what kind of engine I was talking about, if you are gonna build a simple 2d engine you might as well save your fucking time and use one that already exists. WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU REINVENTING THE WHEEL?

It's not my fault that education in america is fucked up, there actually exists good schools of programming around, why the fuck go trial and error when you can learn proper programming and not fuck up from the beginning?

Why the fuck you want people to reinvent the wheel? Why waste your time redoing basic things when it's very unlikelly you would ever need to mess with those things in the first place? Jesus christ you guys are really engine hipsters, do you fucking realise there are more efficient methods of learning than trial and error?

Because of its awful history for one (used to be the free version didn't allow custom shaders or prefab shadows, for instance).

It's still slow as balls and nobody has ever been able to produce a unity game that runs on the hardware the graphics quality of the game should require. Even top of the line hardware can have fps drops in very simple games.

Shills argue that that's because most unity users are indies and don't know how to program, but even professional developers, including AAA devs, are incapable of making a non-slow unity game, so that obviously can't be an issue on this end.

Unlike other engines such as cryengine and unreal engine 4, the source code is not available under any circumstances, which prevents any modifications or workaround for possible bugs, but much more importantly, means it's a lot harder to make an interesting game with original ideas that touch deeply into rendering, controls, or core logic.

There are also tons of issues when using it for development, but I haven't used it in forever and deleted my compilation of issues encountered because I didn't think I'd need to dump it in a thread anymore.

ECS and OOP are not mutually exclusive concepts

I don't think you know what an engine is in regards to coding and programming.

because retards use it more often than competent people, and it gives the engine a bad name

What are you talking about? "Trial and error", "reinventing the wheel"? Have you programmed anything before?

Actually, 2D games are so simple you almost have no reason to use an existing engine if you know how to program. Writing your own engine will practically take you a day longer than working on the game proper, except you can tailor your engine perfectly to your needs which can net productivity and performance wins, as well as not requiring license or royalty management.

Or you can just use the framework of an existing engine that respects your freedoms and tailor it to your needs.
Don't use proprietary software like Unity kids, it's bad for you.

Whoa, what a great multitasker! No wonder she's the lead

Maybe I don't want to sign away like 15% of my profits for something I could to myself?

Not all engines require royalties, only the jewish, non-free ones do.

Even non-proprietary engines (unless they're cuck-licensed) are no good for that, and not using an engine doesn't imply not using existing libraries.

Godot is non-proprietary and it requires no license.
Are you seriously saying that FOSS have "cuck licenses"?
Are you gonna say open source is communism next?

Requires no royalties*

I don't know why people are having problems with the Asset Store. I managed to get my asset there on my second application (they told me to included some examples of use the first time, which is a reasonable request).

surely it's just shills pointing out AAA devs haven't properly adopted unity yet and that's why optimization is shit
granted muh AAA's engines are poorly optimized and the games run slow as shit in current year too so I don't see the point
this is a real, genuine issue and why you should avoid unity
no idea why you needed to pad it with silliness when getting to the real reason, but suit your tastes

Paying 15% is worth it compared to trying to build a 3D engine from scratch. Now of course if you're working on minecraft v2, i.e. don't need models, skeletal animations, pathfind meshes, non-naive AI, non-flat surfaces, special effects of any kind, etc. then yes, you're wasting a lot of money by paying that 15%.

Godot is not free software as it is cuck-licensed.

...

A unity game that looks half as good as another engine will have double the system requirements for good performance.

Don't know about Pillars of Eternity, but all the other games you listed, and more, such as krosmaster, the forest, and clash of clans, have severe performance issues.

So if one wanted to make a 3d platformer like Banjo, what's a good alternative to Unity that won't have garbage performance?

What languages will you be working in?

Explain

UE4

Is MIT a cuck license now?

See

Yes, precisely. If it doesn't respect the 4 freedoms in a way that the program can be modified and redistributed without the source, it's a cuck license.

That's more than likely due to having a UDP connection instead of a TCP connection.
Which can lead to the dropping of packets (which is way more likely over wireless), and thus, a corrupted download of the installer.

you're misinformed.
the decompiled source code is available on github, and all users are legally allowed to do so.

wrong, you can release fixes directly to unity, but nobody wants to navigate their decompiled code for bugs

wrong, you can access openGL, and other low-level APIs through native C++ code.
A lot is exposed through their native C++ functions and such, and can be used in high level C#

Of course ECS borrows elements from OOP

Yeah it's a democracy type of deal, so to really get anything done you need a lot of votes to get the issue noticed, and immediately resolved in the next release.

I agree with your sentiment though, that statement I made is a bit idealistic heh

Deserts of Kharak. I think Remastered is their own engine though, or maybe modified/upgraded Homeworld 2 engine.

I don't know programming, I want to get a prototype made so I can shop it and find a team. I should soon have enough to start offering people jobs and hopefully start my own studio or independent publishing company.

looks pretty good for not!diablo, excellent perfomance
performance issues on dx9 and with experimental graphics extras, far better on the mid-tier graphics settings (still looks very nice) and with dx11 forced
another don't hit max settings game, this one was developed lazily but with dx11 it runs great
devs have just caught up with the curve, game can look very nice, performance tied to physics modeling and extreme circumstances of the sort you would expect framedrops on
much less to do with visual engine and much more to do with the matter at hand, and even then they've just improved performance again through the updates
another physics heavy game, but on modern rigs it runs just fine, and it looks fucking excellent for an indie 10$ game. DX11 support not available, sadly.
game runs better than that new sims that has similar graphical fidelity, CPU heavy mostly because of the topic matter but in general anyone with a decently recent CPU shouldn't have issues with running the game
It can look absolutely amazing, too.

Go learn programming then, you're trying to learn how to use a bike when you can't even stand.
I suggest starting with Python or something easy like that, "Learn Python The Hard Way" is a nice book.

I do know basic logic and such, and I've taken a few classes on shitty languages like Java and C#. I wish there were a flowchart system I could use rather than having to type text. Syntax kills me.

I'm just going to butt in and say PoE looks like absolute shit and maybe even worse than diablo or any cRPG game from the 90s.

After your code for some time it will become second nature.
And I reccomended Python because the syntax is one of the easiest ones out there.

*After you code…

I'm talking about the guy suggesting making your own engine before they do any gamedev. If you know how to do proper efficient coding you don't need to make your own engine. If your knowledge of efficient coding is so bad that making an engine yourself would give you meaningful experience, you might as well look into formal training/knowledge sources which will give you the same benefits of making your own engine on a much smaller time frame, time is important for indie devs because YOU ARE NOT MAKING ANY MONEY UNTIL YOU RELEASE YOUR GAME, "I made a simple engine that nobody is going to ever use" is not a thing that generates money.
The objective of making your own engine is to learn is what's the proper way of doing things, if you are not looking at formal sources of knowledge you are basically doing trial and error, testing an implementation method, comparing them until you find the most efficient one. In the end, you don't really need to waste time getting hands on experience on something you most likely won't use and that you can also get just by studing the previous work already done.

this user is spot on, listen to em'

whoops I got it mixed up with Path of Exiles, which does in-fact look good. I thought it was made in Unity, but it's actually a custom engine.
The more you know, I guess.

That's almost exactly what the Blueprint system in UE4 is.

Christ user do you know anything about coding? All that shit is simple enough to do albeit tedious except the AI but even with a pre-existing engine you're still going to need to git gud at doing AIs anyway. The truly difficult part in 3d engines is handling the interaction between objects.

or code it be your confusing making an engine with coding an API?

Oh wow this looks awesome, might have to take these fags up and use my free student access

Please don't delude yourself, the blueprints of course have lots of limitations.
You should just accept that you CAN'T abstract coding away, if you do that you get shit like RPG Maker.

Keep this in mind. It's no replacement for a solid grasp on game logic. At the end of the day you still need to command your entities around with well-defined rules.

I do have coding knowledge, just nowhere near enough to actually make a script from scratch in unity

Learn coding then.

Well, it doesn't matter which engine you choose for this part… you're going to have to go through tuts, and at least learn the syntax of the game engine to do anything significant.

I'm trying to, but it's not that simple. To learn a language you have to have a project you're working on so that you actually have a reason to work on it.

But for a game you need to know a lot of the basics before starting.
It's complicated but I'm doing progress, slowly.

Although I have to say the unity tutorials do absolytely nothing to explain to you and you might as well not even do them

You'll just have to start simple then, like with pong.

Also bear in mind that your first game will suck. Maybe your second one too.

What helps me is also high-level analyzing a game I'm playing, like Rocket League. Conceptually it's a simple game: cars knock a ball around until it reaches a goal. Think about how you might implement such a thing.

Are you literally unironically mistaking pillars of equality for path of exile?

Think of learning the basics of programming as a stepping stone.
It's a smart idea to do this, and will prevent headache in the future.

That's because you're overwhelming yourself with high level concepts like programming in a game engine.
Start. Small.

In all honesty those are there to give you a very rudimentary view, and not anything significant.
A core aspect of coding is being resourceful, and that means having the experience + logical understanding of what is occurring to break down what is actually going on, and how to use it in depth can be garnered via the documentation.
This also includes things like scouring documentation to understand things, finding answers to problems via searching, and coming up with solutions on your own via understanding what is actually occurring in your scripts.

So to sum it up, if you have no idea what they're actually doing in the first place, then the "high level concept" tutorials will be of no assistance.
Learn the basics of the language first, and then go into a more advanced topic that uses everything you learned to do something significant (i.e. scripting for a game engine).
I'd recommend getting a book, and learning from there (DO THE EXAMPLES). A good book is C# in depth by jon skeet
Also, learn the basics of programming, like logic, how to write pseudo-algorithms, conditions, loops, etc.

I dig the laptop. Its the Twitter feed that worries me.

#GG has fizzled and she is just complaining about it on Twitter a month ago? Like is she just trying to join the "cool" nutjobs clique or something?

underrated post

I see Pillars of Eternity's name more often, used it instead of Path of Exile
see

It doesn't support animated meshes. There's a plugin for it that costs $6 but it's slow as fuck and pretty much shit, and doesn't work with the current GM version.
You can only use GM for 3D games if your game consists entirely out of basic shapes that animate by rotating and translating.

And that's my point you stupid cunt. People start learning a language and make a game in an engine they don't know at the same time. If you've no grasp of how a well designed game works you're going to hammering screws in with a shovel because you don't know any better. This is also why anyone with any experience tells new programmers "do not make your first game your dream game" because you're going to fuck up. Everyone does. It's a learning experience.

Your first game is going to be a piece of shit and will not make you money. Your suggestion of 'lol just go to school to learn' not only doesn't make you money but is probably going to cost you money. Anyone that jumps out of a job to start learning gamedev is a fucking retard. In the same way that you shouldn't quit your day job to start learning how to draw.

Retard

Jackpot is right, plus it recently readjusted their pricing, paid users are not happy since most of them now can't afford their licenses anymore.

Not really considering how much shit was pumped out on UDK and even U3 by modders. Shouldn't have to spend your time unfucking the engine when it was meant to be there for the exact reason off not having to waste time on shit like that.

By that I mean shit that ran properly.

blueprints are just for stuff that aren't even worth bothering whipping up a code for like a button that opens the door

It's actually meant for all design tasks, including things like AI and movement "code", where anything that slows down the game too much can later be programmed in C++ instead and called into from blueprints.

Like "steam" they are a buisiness. They exist to make money and take credit, not facilitate greatness.

There are better engines, the best one should be used. The growth of the best shouldn't be limited to providence.

John Carmack sets the standard in not patenting his work. He has issued a debt in honour and glory to be repaid.

I would like to see things get better, people limited by nothing but their ability which will improve as they try. Their talent will cease to be what they engage, it will be who they are, every interaction making all better.

Oh yeah? Weren't items on the ground highlightable for picking them up, even if behind something else? Most things you got were grabbed from the inventory of killed enemies anyway.

It's buggy and inefficient and annoying and not used in the industry. If you want to learn a real engine, at least go use Unreal Engine.

It also has an extremely lax license.

Just use a grenade or rocket launcher on somebody and check it out yourself.

9/10 the game running on the engine will run like absolute shit.

Pretty much /thread right there but I would like to add that they lead to all engines drastically changing their pricing models allowing amateurs and indies to use top of the line engines.

The pricing model thing seems like the more important effect. UE4 followed suit a while later. There's probably going to be a dearth of engines in the next five years unless Unity et al crush them.

If a dev is in it for the money they might as well fuck off. I also hope you understand that "efficient coding" within an engine implies that you understand how the engine is implemented. In the end, it sounds like you have very little experience with what you're talking about. Instead of getting LOUDER, consider getting a better grasp on your subject and focusing your argument.

The actual engine is written in C++. You knew that, right ,retard?

While many here will call me a shill for saying this I think Steam and Unity have both been the biggest positive forces in gaymen in the last 20 years.
Steam removed the need to convince a publisher to put your game on the shelf and Unity pricing removed the need to convince a publisher to give you money.

People will say "but all the shit games" and yes there are more shit games but this is simply because there is more games and if you can't see why more games is a good thing you need to stop and think before replying.

|
|>
|
|3
|

I think calling Steam and Unity the biggest positive forces in gaming absolutely does make you a shill. Or it reveals how shallow your appreciation for videogames and videogame culture is.

How so? I have been around awhile and I know engines were once all custom then they were sold at huge cost and now they are sold at low cost. I see this as a way of improving games as dev times are drastically reduced making bigger projects possible by smaller teams. Smaller teams = more low budget operations that aren't primarily concerned with investor ROI.

As for online stores they remove the need to use a publisher to get your game on shelves once again removing a corporation primarily concerned with ROI.
Steam is far from the best online store but they are the biggest and if you are going to release a game for commercial sale you would have to be mad to not release on steam.

How do you cancel an engine that might or might not run with your assets on it? It's legally implausible.

Your point?

Ah, maybe you're not a shill but merely clinically retarded.

The only sane reply in here.
People will still believe whatever they want to believe.

While they have no case and know it they could still take the devs to court and just drag it out until the devs ran out of money putting them in a financial situation that forces them to spend less time on a non-profit project.

It wouldn't be the first time someone has sued knowing they had no case but knowing they have the money to win a legal battle of attrition.

Care to actually make an argument or is that asking too much of you?

These things are good as far as lowering the barrier to entry, but they're still inherently exploiting their users. They don't respect videogame owners or makers as much as they deserve because at the end of the day they're still trying to profit off their backs.

The real forces for good are those that lower the barrier to entry and increase the spread of games without tying them to proprietary platforms whose purpose is monetization.

Who would've thunk.

Does Unity still massively overcharge for their basic plugins?

You don't get tools like EU4 being made for free as the open community projects just can't apply the same level of organization and manhours within a timeframe that allows for support of the latest technologies.

While in a perfect world you would have a free top end engine and a hugely popular free distribution network the economic reality is that just isn't going to happen.
I see the current situation as much better than 10 years ago when most indie games couldn't dream of supporting features that are built into commercial engines and they had no option but to deal with a publisher to actually move units.

cons is basically every fucking engine on earth minus asset store

i love how ppl are using this twitter meme incorrectly.

well meme'd, my friend.

I'm nodev, but i'm a programmer and i use unity as a hobby. Optimizing the garbage collector, the "biggest problem" in the engine, is doable with only a mild annoyance of avoiding the generation of excess garbage, and timing the clean-up calls through a few tricks. makes it sound like you have to be an expert in low level coding to solve the issue, but the forums have a lot of clues even beginners can follow for it. It's just that literally no one bothers with optimizing the code. Once it sorta-runs, they shit the game out. That's what you get for working on a tight budget. As a hobbyist, i had great fun figuring the GC out and working around it.

...

HEY ASSWIPE, HERE'S A HISTORY LESSON
C and C++ doesn't have a fucking garbage collector.

Modern C++ has reference counting instead!

Can't say I've ever needed one, either.

I tried Cryengine too and now that's a broken engine. It's free, but you'd be better off learning C++ and making your own. FFS importing simple assets in it

Working around a slow and brutal garbage collector is the minimum a game programmer should be able to do, as far as i'm concerned.

I was just shitposting

I first heard about it from Holla Forums + /n/, but I don't use twitter so there's that

What do you mean exactly?
A plugin, feature, and asset are different things.

A lot of features you had to pay to get access to years ago (via getting a license) are now provided for free.

I guess I did word it like that, huh, but yeah you're right it's not too hard to get around a lot of the GC issues by just being aware of how to avoid creating garbage, using the disposable interface when you have2, and having a memory pool design architecture for the more heavy objects.
I agree with your sentiment, it was entertaining, and quite a learning experience to work around the GC'er.

it's not the engine, it's the mono C# framework, which is a wrapper for the native C++ code
already typed it out, oh well

thank god though, if I have to take care of all the pointer members in the destructor why not have it happen automatically instead. smart pointers really help in managing the mess that C pointers are

it has a relatively inefficient render pipeline (which is much better these days than it used to be) compared to UE4, Q3, etc

on top of that, the default shaders really aren't the best and, unfortunately, the best free replacement set on the asset store got its alpha rendering fucked up when they implemented their new physic shaders
older shaders CAN be fixed with a little editing of the pragma line or something, but its a symptom of an underlying problem with unity's updates as the editions advance: code and function deprecation.
What worked before now sometimes requires workarounds. Even the level change code has been deprecated and replaced with a need to call the level management tool set at the top of the script.

its ease of use attracts many relatively unskilled devs (which in itself is not a problem) who expect the engine to solve issues for them (which is a problem). Many issues with inefficiency can be solved just by implementing code to disable areas that aren't in use. This will drop the renderer, the code execution, everything for these areas, and they can be reactivated at any time with similar code

and even that's not much of an issue anymore since unity's occlusion culling is now available to free users

you really can't expect to jump into unity and make a game with AAA graphics and 60 fps. It's not happening. but a good game with lastgen graphics is absolutely no problem. There's nothing you can do in other engines that can't be done in Unity

The really awful part is that Boost has had smart pointers for over a decade. (The history page suggests the concept of a refcounted automatic pointer goes back as early as 1994) They were considered for C++03 but ultimately rejected. IMO this held the language back a lot because C++0x kept getting delayed.

I want this quote to be on every wall of every NoDev on this planet.
I want this to be a motto for every coder that is only beginning his journey through the wonderful life of coding.
No matter what language you're using, if you have a certain level of coding and when you're ready to say that you don't ever need a GC anymore, i congratulate you.
YOU DID IT
You now know pain pointers.

Just use rust :^)

I will close your threads and recompile you so hard, even a grade A deobfuscator won't even recognize you!

...

And what do we have here?

Why don't more things use reference counting for on-the-fly destruction instead of depending on some monolithic process to halt everything at random intervals to clear data?

...

I couldn't tell you. My best guess would be that a GC lets you stall the deconstruction (which cuts into your performance) until you're able to do it. A refcounter that hits 0 would have to be destroyed immediately. Idiomatic Java has you just make objects everywhere, so it makes sense to just sweep 'em all up at once.

Just guessing though. I haven't done deep enough Java/NET/Lua/etc to look into the pros and cons of GC vs refcounts.

Because despite the issue with stop-the-world GCs, reference counting is significantly slower across the lifetime of the program than garbage collection.

It's an alright engine, especially if you're just starting out. Make some simple games, learn how to code and eventually you will be ready to make a game that will be worth a damn. (So far I have made two games in Unity, a simple First Person Shooter and a simple 3D platformer which friends "helped" with)

That said, It definitely has its flaws. Competition is coming out for the free games engine though, so this may actually make them fix these flaws (Though they probably won't because judaism)

If you are looking to become a dev, don't release your initial games. They are shit. Mine are shit. Let friends and family play them. Start off simple. Once you feel good enough, once you feel like you know how to make games - THEN start making your proper game. Release it, take the criticism and improve. Then keep doing that. Keep improving. To improve oneself is the key to success.

because Clickteam Fusion and Construct 2 are the more superior choices for non-programmers

What? So if you "come up with it first" you pretty much get free hold? Even if its completely shit? That's stupid.

I was about to call you out on thinking C++ being faster because it is, and is superior in the long run. automatically makes it better but you also know the counter point with C# being massively easier.

That is a huge point to remember. Even though C++ gives you "full range" with shit like like actual memory manipulation and hardware level interaction If your game needs to go that deep you probably shouldn't be using Unity in the first place. your sanity is kept in tact with not needing to deal with things like garbage collection. The overhead for C++ is too much.

Although, unity fucks up a lot of the benefits of c# since unity is written in c++ anyway, and has to interpret c# code into c++.

Technically, once its compiled, the assembly code should always be the same, but certain shit get fucks over. Like how nulls are handled.

Then there is shit like object and gameObject hierarchy, and traversing parent-child relationships. Where there is like 20 different ways to do it, but only about 2 ways that are definitively better and more efficient that it makes you wonder why they even let you do the other 20 ways.

FUCKING
GENIUS

Some sprites covering the MC disappear but the range so small that the MC's sprite also ends up covering the gun.

Which would you prefer, every single respected programming lecture on a HDD at your disposal, or a five hour personalized lecture from Carmack himself?

udemy.com/unrealcourse/learn/v4/

and

udemy.com/unitycourse/

Unity might not be perfect but I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't just put bindings into Mono for that reason. It's not like they built their own .NET runtime.

Yeah C++ learning curve is hueg.
C++ programmers say that you need around 10 years of experience to truly master it.

Make Space Invaders.
Make Pong.
Make Tetris.
Make Pacman.
Make Ricochet.

Pick one and have fun.

lots of unity games have bad performance because it's an engine that a lot of amateurs use to make simple games that shouldn't have the issues they do, but because of the amateurishness of the developers there's a distinct lack of polish.

The engine isn't particularly flawed, it's the developers.

FTFY

Woa, let's see your code then mr Carmack.

I thought Carmack coded in C?

...

Reminder that the focus at Unity has shifted away from trying to make a good engine, and towards milking would-be devs via the asset store before they burn out.

I'm actually good with programming logic, I worked with Javascript and PHP for years as I'm mainly a webdev.

It's just that unity has a lot of different shit that can't be solved simply with knowing logic.

I've been kicking around a few ideas in my head in the last few days, so I'm probably going to try and start one today.

If you make a tool that even a fool can use…

… fools are sure to use it.

switched from C to C++

no wait, assembly + C to C++

Carmacks one, they are entertaining to listen.

...

all those grills using the CSI geek girl archetype to win at interviews.

It's almost too easy, with all the betas pretending to be qualified recruiters in tech and science.

Gamebryo works fine, Bethesda give it it's bad name.

Bethesda can't shut down OpenMW, there is no legal precedence for them to do so, the closest thing for a legal basis for litigation is the fact that the engine contains reverse engineered formulas relative to game mechanics, these things are already planned to be de hardcoded in post 1.0 and could also be de hardcoded in order to avoid a lawsuit.

Please stop repeating this meme.

Maybe she's a real expert, maybe she graduated top of her Comp Sci class yall goyim don't know.

Gamebryo can't do ladders.

Are you retarded or is this just shitposting?

youtube.com/watch?v=ysxrDtWQfF4

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinity_II

Basically this. Bethesda is pretty sue happy and above picking on the little guy for the slightest reason.

...

i bet they get mad whale pussy

OpenMW is primarily developed by non US citizens I don't think Bethesda can even file a lawsuit without any reason.

Even in the USoA there is nothing illegal about OpenMW. You still need the assets from the original game to run Morrowind in the engine.

I was just replying to the guy talking about Beth crushing the OpenMW team with a frivolous lawsuit won by attrition but I think because the OpenMW teams leads are not american that Beth wouldn't be able to file such a lawsuit.

Obviously there's nothing illegal, I just want this may may to die, as well as the ladder may may.

I agree with this. Steam and more accessible engines aren't perfect, yeah they're just there to make money and in that regard still limit options. But ultimately they did, to at least some extent, lower barriers to entry and let more people make games without having to get money from marketing executives and all that. Which is great, because sure, I hate those lazy artsy/retro indie games, but I also HATE realistic gritty bald space marines too, so it's not like the big companies are doing what I want either. They just make garbage with higher production values.

So yeah, I wish Unity were the best engine ever and totally free, and I wish Steam weren't a platform for Valve to make money first and foremost. But considering nobody else made those things for free, having somebody else make them for profit is a lot better than them not existing at all.

Divinity II really reinforces how shit Bethesda is at Gamebryo.

Every game reinforces how shit Bethesda is at everything. Sureai and Obsidian show how shit beth are when it comes to open world RPGs especially the writing and story. Modders show how shit Beth are at their own engine, graphics modders show how shit beth are in their graphics department.

The only two things Bethesda do well are legal mumbo jumbo and marketing/pr. Oy fucking Vey.

Completely 100% false.

What if you get a whole bunch of anons together and if there are any people who would want a lecture on the same thing, one of them can get the HDD set to share, while everyone else (including the guy who'll get a duplicate lecture to that of the guy who chooses the HDD set) gets their personal lectures to share?

did you know that history and lectures doesn't teach anything?

No…!

Good.
Now you know.
but that doesn't mean that you should burn even book in our house. Shit can be useful sometimes

I have seen people here complaining about C# scripting and its performance "for 3D". This is an unfounded complaint since you could be using non-V8 JavaScript for all I care if it's only going to be used for scripting, as scripting is more often than not one of the smallest and least CPU-consuming parts of a game engine. Fuck, you are probably not going to be using scripting for 3D at all because anyone with a single neuron will understand that you should implement those operations in C/C++ and then bind their calls to your language of choice. This is what every would-be-slow engine such as LÖVE, libGDX or PyGame do to circumvent the fact that the languages they are using wouldn't be optimal for high performance graphics rendering or physics. Not to mention most of the time spent in a game engine loop is GPU bound (shaders, postFX, etc) and not CPU bound, so language is irrelevant.

Second, using C++ won't magically make your shit faster. The most obvious example was a benchmark the libGDX guys did against SFML in which libGDX beat the fuck out of SFML despite one being Java-based and the other one C++ based, respectively. This is because libGDX guys bothered optimizing their shit whereas the SFML guys did not. This has probably changed ever since but the libGDX blog post is still floating around if you search for it.

The main problem with Unity, in my opinion, is that it's overused for no good reason, or for straight up jewery in the case of the devs who use it to encrypt and lock down their assets. It's more or less like the game engine version of Windows in the sense that it's the only piece of software people know, and it's not even the best one out there, just the most marketed one.

Sometimes when I hear Unity devs talking about Unity, I hear stuff such as "yeah, you always have to recode your character controller when you start a new project because the default one is shit", or "the default physics engine is bad and you should recode it ASAP". So it seems the engine comes with some default components but they are not very good, so it's more or less like a dragondrop editor with some basic libraries, right? Well, maybe they really need Unity for that dragondrop, but then you realize their games are procedurally generated. Why would you ever use Unity, then? Because it's "easier" even though you are basically programming everything by yourself? Well, it's not actually "all by yourself", you still have some very basic libraries at your hand… that you could find in any other dedicated libre library such as OGRE, Bullet, anax/EntityX… so basically, you are using Unity just because it's the only thing you know or because you need a pretty IDE to handhold you. None of these are good reasons, so it's only natural people mock Unity babbies.

The only valid reason I could see is that Unity can effortlessly export to many OSes, but so can Java or C++ if you give a damn about not using platform-dependent features (which isn't something you don't usually need), not to mention many companies don't even release their games in more than one or two platforms. Fuck, I could even see the community argument as something resembling some sort of killer feature if it wasn't because there are many, many other engines and libraries with big communities.

tl;dr Unity devs are babbies who are willing to sacrifice their complete ownership of their game for no good reason. Unity is outclassed by many dedicated libraries and engines, and in the case of 2D, this is twice as true. Why would anyone choose Unity over the many better alternatives is hard to understand. Why would anyone code their procedurally generated 2D game in Unity is beyond human logic.

Inbred.

Because it's a beginner level engine, it's simple and straight forward. Being the best beginner engine means that there's much more info about it, and it's much easier to get help in case something isn't working.

You're looking at the problem from only one perspective.

If you're already a pro at programming then there's no reason for you to use an engine at all, so of course you wouldn't go with unity.

Wasn't it done in assembly?

Wouldn't graphics be considered a platform-dependent feature with OpenGL and DirectX and whatever special snowflake graphic API that one faggot with the custom linux build uses? I mean for the most basic commands they are the same, but if you try to do something clever with shaders or types sizes or whatever it all implodes violently

If you're writing your own renderer, but generally that's one of the primary reasons people choose an engine. Anyway I'm pretty sure OpenGL is reasonably platform independent although setting up the context is not

I could kind of understand that argument for 3D games (although not much; look at some official OGRE examples or tutorials and you will see how easy it is to render an object), but for 2D games? Have you tried libGDX or LÖVE? It doesn't get much easier than that, and in combination with Tiled not even the dragondrop argument applies.

If anything, using Unity for 2D adds so many layers of bloat it becomes harder to use than these tools. If you can reprogram the character controller, you can program with these libraries, and if you can make a better physics engine than the one that comes with Unity you can pretty much do anything.

Yes, with some C for DirectX bindings, if I am not mistaken.

Well yes, but if you are using raw OpenGL/DirectX then my post doesn't apply because you are low level enginedevving to the max and that's some steps above just making an engine with libraries. Basically, if you want to do the graphics stuff by yourself, you probably have already discarded Unity.

However, you can just use OpenGL, which works in all platforms, or simply use a library like OGRE3D which abstracts all this horrible stuff much in the way Unity does.

But that's not the only thing Unity does. For someone just starting out it's a great tool.

For 2D, yeah sure, use Gamemaker, or fuck, make it yourself. Shit's easy.

Might as well reccomend RPG Maker while you're at it.

It's fine for babby's first vidya but more specialised engines are normally superior.

Sadly university lecturers for games development are fucking terrible at their jobs. I had one tell me Unity was better than UE4 because he found the latter too hard to use. Ironically Unity is probably the harder thing to use competently because optimisation is a dick.

I also find Unity games to have a distinct 'look' and a poor one at that. That is possibly more a result of shitty devs but still.

Yep. In fact all really early games, including games made by Blizzard, where written in assembly. This is why I implied C++ isn't the king of speed.

It's still pretty amazing to me. Assembly is hard.

Dude what.

It's not so much hard as it is extremely tedious, time consuming, and takes a deep knowledge of the language to write a program faster than a C++ program (due to tricks and commands they never put in the compiler). The only hard part is when shit breaks and you gotta track it down. Basically extreme autism is what it takes to power you through it.

Assembly isn't hard at all. For example, it's orders of magnitudes easier and less error-prone than C. the problem is that it's very tedious because of the low-level at which it lives. Basically all description of what the program does must be spelled out in comments if you want to have a chance to ever find out the place where there's a bug to fix and even then you'll spend a long time trying to guess what you were thinking when you wrote that part.

Are you talking out your ass again, user?

...

assembly was the main reason why C was created.
so yeah, put it back into your ass.

It wasn't because assembly was hard, it was because it was a pain to debug. Stop spouting uninformed nonsense anytime.

maybe we'll take you seriously if you stop saying stupid things

And inherently not portable.

AND.
Since every fucking processor had a different fucking assembly language, the C was the best compability layer that we've ever had.

Absolutely. This is also why unix gained traction despite being a buggy unpatchable mess: thanks to C, programs didn't need to be remade every time the machine changed.

If someone can code in assembly already why would they convince their bosses to create a new language? The real reason is because you have to do very tedious steps to do otherwise menial tasks. C was made for convenience not to make it easier.

Thats what the progress for, Jay. To make tedious things less annoying.
But it beats me why the fuck ppl has created a fucking Bootstrap.
A library that no one asked for, but now everybody is asking for, because it makes sites look cool.

who am i kidding, CSS isn't even a real language
>inb4 LESS/SASS
oh…

What the hell goes on inside that head of yours? You're being insanely pedantic while making it clear you don't understand basic English.

No assembly programmer went to their boss and asked the to 'create' C.

What didn't it make easier? Less code required, less error-prone, easier to read, easier to write, but somehow it wasn't easier

Are you actually shitting on bootstrap?
What the fuck?

i feel like i'm in the void
and there's no 'return 0' for me in the end

I'm trying to get into web dev and once I realized bootstrap is just a collection of php, css, and js scripts I sort of avoided it. I suppose I felt it'd make me understand what I'm doing less if I depended on it.

Go (re)read The Humble Programmer you uneducated faggot. It's not for "convenience", it's because it's needed for the tasks required of computers today, especially if you want those tasks to be done within a programmer's lifetime.
Convenience is making your bed soft, necessity is building a bed because the floor keeps flooding with 2 feet of water and you'd drown in your sleep without one.

Might as well avoid jquery, too, with that reasoning

...

Why did you post that, user?

This reminds me of their fetish for boost

It's a parody of jquery culture. With the whole leftpad thing I think it rather fits js as a whole.

I didn't mean it was not a necessity to get things done practically. When I said convenience I meant along the lines of "This saves me some time"

Convenience is a relative concept, and depends on context. For example, higher level languages were once considered a convenience, yet today are regarded as a normal part of life.

yeah, fuck Bootstrap

Because everyone can pick it up and shit up some unholy abomination. It's the RPG Maker of the modern era.

Lisp is older than C. Not that I'd expect a clinical retard to know that instead of talking out his ass.

...

It's not bad, it's just not good, and has a lot of optimization issues.

Specialized engines are always better.

Are you implying that Lisp is higher level than C?
Because that's arguable. It's technically just as low, just for a machine that we don't use.

Were you born this way or did you go through a lobotomy?

(20)

Don't worry, rpgmaker is still the rpgmaker of the modern era. Just look at how many default asset rpgmaker games are on steam now. Look at how many motherfuckers are too lazy to even change the title screen art away from the default. Shit's awful

Examples? I believe you, I'm just curious.

Understand what you're telling people to do.
I, for example, suck enormous dick at math.
I would HAVE to go back to school if I wanted to learn how to code, there's no other way around it.

So I have three options here:
OR

Not everyone has the same skillset as you. Not everyone knows how to fucking shit out their own engine, much less apply it to actually making a game.
I would never get into coding.
I wish I could, but I suck ass at math. But try to see it from a different perspective instead of your elitist enginedev point of view.

You're talking about the people who tried to sue a cardgame over copyright infringement because it was called Scrolls.

Having trouble finding the really bad ones. It's possible some of them replaced it after the initial 'push' on steam, because I'd never remember their names to be able to call them on it. However, just skimming through 21 pages of rpgmaker trash I can say with certainty that Victim of Xen and Last Heroes (which I think is now 3 games) just use default art assets (character models, tilesets, enemies, probably music too judging by how much stuff comes with the program already). There are 22 pages of rpgmaker games, and even some of the higher rated ones are clearly just default shit with no artistic skill needed (other than maybe writing? I doubt it though considering even the "best written" rpgmaker games are still in the same tier as the shittiest newgrounds videos)

Christ, this is the fanfiction.net of games. So many shitty mspaint characters, edgelord protags and rainbow-haired heroines. I think this shit makes it through greenlight on bots alone, because there's no way a decent number of people would be willing to say they'd buy this garbage this many times in a row

To be fair, the default assets of RPGM are better looking than most of the ones they try to push on their store, with rare exceptions. And since everyone wants to publish their assets through them to get dosh, RPG Maker sites for resources are becoming increasingly rare.

I have some hope for Daggerfall Unity, but I'm not holding my breath.

MIT is still a free license, even if it is for cucks.

The MIT lisence does respect the four freedoms, it just doesn't do anything to stop anyone from taking the code and making it proprietary. It's cucked AF, but it's an alright license for a game engine, since you can lisence games made with any way you want.

Yeah, brilliant idea using a proprietary engine for this; make way more sense than what the OpenMW guys are doing.

BSD and its ilk (MIT/X11/whatever) are great. What's cuck about just letting people do almost whatever they want with your code?

*makes

Choosing licenses like MIT for the sole purpose letting assholes use your code it to help make more proprietary software is makes you a cuck, simple as.

Pushover licenses have their place, but if we had nothing but these permissive licenses we'd be totally fucked. If you don't want to use the GPL at least consider the LGPL.

Tell that to Mark Adler.

Yeah. Unity comes with a nice ECS, like EntityX; a deficient physics engine, outclassed by Bullet… there are libraries that can replace Unity almost in its entirety for 3D, and even suggesting Unity for a 2D game like some retards at 4/agdg/ do is so fucking retarded I don't even know where to start. It is not even an isolated incident.

Come on, it's not like programming is the same as regular high school maths. I used to suck at maths as well, but I am doing fine as a programmer because this is logic, not arithmetic. You need some maths to implement graphics shit or physics, or even some algorithms, but if there aren't libraries for those I am sure you will find tutorials on how to implement them in your code, so you don't even have to think about it.

By the way, it was recently discovered that programmers activate their language areas of the brain while programming rather than their angular gyrus, the "area of maths". There is no excuse, user.

The guy who wrote the decompression side of GNU Gzip? What about him?

...

C++14 nigga you don't even have to know what malloc does to have the full range of control.

How the fuck do you not know how to properly use it, it's not even difficult

He's a fairly influential if not prominent figure in modern desktop computing mostly due to zlib, which is used in a lot of places including proprietary software thanks to its versatility and liberal license. I can't speak for him obviously, but I like the BSD license because I feel that it's more practical than GPL.

Practical for jews, sure.

in all honesty I thought it had to do with the Holla Forums meme of "merely a coincidence goy", i.e. jewish implications

guess the people I originally saw using it on Holla Forums were using it wrong too

Good job, user. Could you show us your thesis on neural networks, advanced post-quantum asymmetric encryption algorithms or experimental geometry formulas applied to computer graphics? Oh wait, nobody here does that because it's mathematicians' job.

If you want to become a theoretical mathematician go ahead, but don't compare it to a programmer's job. Not even Carmack designed most of the crazy algorithms such BSP or fast inverse square root we attribute to him, he just implemented them. Dude is still a great programmer, but his job never was being a mathematician, and there is nothing wrong with that because they are two very different jobs.

I bet you don't even program.

Carmack may not have invented BSPs, but he probably understands enough about them to be able to implement it. Likewise, you may not know how to do a dot product, but you should at least know when you need it.

I want to believe you, but every time I open up /agdg/ or something similar, there's always some crazy knowledgeable dev talking about how to calculate volumetric lighting algorithms or something that goes far over my head because of the math involved.

That's probably not even a real thing, I made it up.

I realize it probably doesn't take that much math to get INTO coding, but I feel like I'd ultimately be forced to learn that kind of stuff, or else far down the line I'd be limited by what math I can't do, right?

It is a real thing.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volumetric_lighting

It's used to simulate the effect of things like sunbeams through dust or water vapor.

Based inbred.

There are some really crazy guys on /agdg/, like the guy who was making an experimental OS with cutting edge CPU features that no modern OS has implemented yet just for his text-based game, but of course, you don't need to do that to program a game, not to mention I doubt OS programming requires some heavy "traditional" maths.

Things is, programming has neat little a concept called libraries, in which you can use pieces of code programmed by other people in your program without necessarily understanding the logic under them. Most of the difficult parts of game development have already been librarized for your consumption, and thus you don't really have to worry about understanding BSP (mostly deprecated right now) to make use of BSP technologies, for example.

It all depends on how cutting edge you want your game to be, though. You will have to understand a little bit of maths if you want to make a triple A engine, but that's out of any single person team's scope. For a simple 2D game all you need to know is about dots in space, maybe really basic trigonometry (sine and cosine and what do they mean or what can you achieve with them) if you want to make use of rotation. For 3D games, you will eventually have to learn what are quaternions for, but not really about the maths behind them because there are libraries for that.

There is something funny about programming and it is that it sometimes make it easier to understand weird or difficult math concepts. Look at the Monty Hall problem: it seems to go against all logic, but if you try to program a simulation of it, it becomes obvious why it works.

So if you want to do something basic like Super Mario World, you will have to learn about dots in space, maybe basic vector knowledge (what they are, not even all the operations you can do with them) and what can you use the modulus operator for. If you want to go any higher than that you will need to have some really superficial knowledge of maths, but nothing nobody could have much trouble to understand unless you have brain damage. If you want to implement 3D stuff from scratch (you don't want to, though), you can surely find tutorials or pseudocode algorithms around there to do it, but it would recommendable to understand a bit about the subject, if only to understand the jargon.

When people say programming requires lots of maths, it's because it technically IS maths, but maths are a really wide science and lambda calculus or maths theory are very different from your regular high school maths class. You only need to do stuff such as integrals if you are working with graphs, but you won't usually do that in a game engine.

TL;DR version:
You don't need to know every little detail to how a math formula works, you just need to know what it's used for, what it accomplishes, and via this you'll know what input is required for it to properly output your desired answer.

In all honesty before I got into programming I hated math, but after I got into programming + gamedev related stuff I grew to really like math.
As in, the functionality math provides far outweights the pain of learning the basic theory of a particular formula, and it even drove me to start learning the nitty gritty of how it all works because of this (although this isn't required, but it's nice to demystify what was once an overtly complex and intimidating topic).

Oh yeah, forgot to mention this: well said user.

sage for double post

If is to be believed those libraries shouldn't be usable in many games.

So I suppose you wrote your own grid system????

I want to add one of my computer science teachers commented that, despite having studied a maths degree, she never used the stuff she learned from it in the real world. As I commented before, not even THE world class game engine developer is an expert at maths; I guess he understands it, but most of his job consists on implementing algorithms others have already described, not so much as developing his own solutions. And this is just to be a top of the world programmer, you can do a lot of stuff with programming without necessarily mastering cold hard maths.

Well, in this case you take the role of the jew. BSD libraries are free as in freedom, but some people choose against using these libraries in their programs because they can be relicensed. Barely no one but the most hardcore FSFtards (not even Stallman himself hates BSD) refuse to use a program for having such a license.

What this means to you, as a consumer of those libraries, is absolutely nothing. If you prefer to keep your whole program as BSD, do that; if you want to take those libraries and put a GPL license over it, then do that as well; if you want to hide the code of those libraries and simply aknowledge their use in your credits file, you may do that as well.

*licenses
Sorry about that.

My point is that people who decide to use the BSD license for software they write accept that proprietary software will use it; some may even encourage it because they believe it's genuinely better for society that way. GPL wants everyone "except" proprietary developers to use it, dual licensing notwithstanding. It is possible to use GPL with proprietary software, yes, but the maneuvering required to do so is so complicated that company lawyers just tell you not to do it.

As a practical example: The EASTL was formally released recently (it was available as early as 2010, though the maintainer says that it was only about 60% of the library which I assume means it was headers only). They could have made it GPL, but chose to use BSD instead, meaning that virtually everyone can use it for every purpose. They've also submitted a case study on improvements that could be made to the STL. These are for the betterment of every program, including proprietary.

There's an argument to be made about using LGPL which another user brought up I think, but I still use BSD 3-clause as my go-to.

The point of GPL isn't who uses it, it's that any publicized changes to the software be contributed back.

Meh, I'd reply but this thread has already gone off the rails. OP has his answer: Unity is an okay engine but its accessibility means it's easy to make shitware.

The reason to use bootstrap is so that webdevs can focus on more important things than 'starting from scratch'

Of course anyone can know if a website is written with bootstrap because they all tend to look the same, but unless you got some dedicated front-end guy or an existing framework, you just better use it or other existing ones

I see that you have nothing to say, so you decide to completely change the topic. Well done, if I was American, I'd probably clap at you.

What I was going to say is that the argument of "licensing is for contributing changes" misses the point because video games are meant to be distributed, so you're splitting hairs. Even then, licensing governs distribution as a whole, not just when you make changes.

But whatever.

Clap clap clap clap.

But if there were nothing but permissive licenses, there wouldn't be any non-permissive licenses to license your proprietary code as, and thus no proprietary code.

Congratulations, you will never make anything that isn't derivative of other projects. Nor will you understand most of the code you copy from a tutorial, and as such you will never be able to optimize or change anything properly.
You're like a nurse that says he doesn't need to keep studying to become a doctor because other doctors can do the procedures for him.

Except I already do, you crippling retard.

I take it, you have never programmed anything bigger than a Hello World in Python before. You don't know why libraries are used because you have never tried to implement the things they do from scratch, let alone take a peek at their source code. This is stupid, and your argument more or less compares to a wannabe doctor who maintains that you need to know how to build a syringe out of petroleum and unrefined iron to become a TRUE doctor.

Not only that, your analogy is also shit because doctors barely understand what's going on in a hospital if they are taken out of their field. The easiest example would be sterilization, which is a vital part of any hospital yet medics usually only know the bare minimum of the procedures being done there. What's more, some doctors fail to know what are some specific prosthetics for if they aren't directly related to their field. Everybody uses "libraries" and there is nothing wrong with that because you aren't a Superman who can do everything by yourself.

Anyway, as I said, things like the fast inverse square root (not implemented by Carmack despite popular belief) were barely understood by the people implementing it, and directly relied on their upstream mathematician friends to follow their instructions. Maths papers are often as optimized as they can get, and optimization on the computer side is done with computer-specific techniques.

Why even reply? People with NIH syndrome can't be cured with logic. They have to be bitten in the ass by having to maintain every dependency in their project first.

False.
Invented != implemented.
False. The reason why the magic value worked is what they didn't understand, and no mathematician was involved in the development of the method. A mathematician later proved that the value was a good approximation for the best value for a fast inverse square root.

If you haven't played it, pirate Human Resource Machine. Or buy it, it's not bad or anything.
It introduces concepts that you'd use in Assembly in a really nice way. It helped me with learning Assembly quite a lot.

Except I'm not saying you shouldn't use libraries, you illiterate faggot. I'm telling you to learn enough to be able to do it so you can if you have to, and can change existing open source libraries to fit your needs.
If you can't do that, you cannot develop for consoles until people more intelligent than you make shit for you to do so. And, again, will be unable to create any non-derivative games. Feel free to make a liquid simulation that includes mixing liquids. You won't find a library to do it for you, but there's plenty of game ideas you could execute with it.

And after HRM, try TIS-100.

As a linuxfag, linux support it shitty as fuck. Sometimes I have to use OS X or Windows to be able to actually play games that Unity claims "Run perfectly on Linux." But let me tell you the real reason I hate Unity:

As a longtime devfag (both games and non-games), it makes it too fucking easy to make a video game. "Why is that a problem? Isn't that good?" you might say. It might be good that anyone can now make a game, but it's also a problem too that ANYONE can make a game!

There's something I like to called "the Barrier to Stupid," regarding technology. Back in the early days of the internet, it was mainly scientist, engineers, and academics who were using the internet to communicate and collaborate. That was because it might be a bit difficult for an average Joe to set up a networking card in his computer, install the drivers, configure the dial up connection, and know how to connect to a remote server. You had to be somewhat smart to be able to use technology. Nowadays smartphones are so easy for highschool dropouts to instagram selfies of their nudies to anyone they choose. This is because someone made technology easier to use, and lowered "the Barrier to Stupid." This also applies heavily to video game development.

Back when I started to learn how to program (so I could make games), there were some basic editors and tool out there, but you also needed to be able to do a lot of programming. Making your own engine was not only a popular and interesting thing to do, but necessary. Sure you had things like XNA, DirectX, libSDL, etc. that gave you basic things like Graphics, Input, and Audio, that are the molecules you need to make your solution, but there was a lot that you had to build of from scratch.

Think about it this way. If you needed to make your own engine, you needed to actually take the goddamn time to build Scene/Node system, Camera system, Collision/Physics manager, etc. but that gave you time to think over your design ideas and refine them. So let's say that it would then take you 1.5 months to implement a game in Unity, versus 8 months to build the engine from scratch. That's an extra 6.5 months to think about your game; take the time to refine it. Not just shit out some crap. People who also don't tend to take the time to do something, don't tend to do it right, they just want a quick result. There's a reason why many Unity games are so shitily implemented.

Say what you will about Phil Fish, I do have a good level of respect for him that Fez was implemented from the ground up with XNA and not Unity.

tl;dr: Unity performance/claims are garbage, it's too fucking easy to make a game, so there's a lot of shit out there (that also makes the engine look bad).

He didn't do that, he only did the art and design. The programmer stopped working with him and Phish pretty much guilt-tripped him into signing over all his rights to him during the time they recorded Indie Game: The Movie.

Real time rendering in Unity on a GTX 980.

Significantly better than the current version of the engine, though. When will this new unity version launch?

...

But that's wrong, you pedantic fuck. Look up the Wikipedia article on it.
That's also false. The original constant was probably found through bisection, and apparently the creator of MATLAB (a mathematician, if you didn't notice) was involved in it.

Nevertheless, the algorithm is as is. You either understand the entirety of it, or you don't, because the only difficult to understand part of it is the line with the magic number. The rest is plain programming magic that only makes sense if you know what the fuck does the magic number mean, which they didn't. In other words, the number was the central part of the algorithm and the rest of the algorithm is there to serve the magic number. Chances are the guy who implemented the algorithm (not Carmack) copied it from somewhere or someone else, because it would be impossible to know what to do with said magic number if it was the only thing he knew.

Should I learn to implement my own software renderer because OpenGL already does some things for you? Should I design a GPU to learn how they REALLY work? Should I master everything about AC to know how electricity gets to my computer so I can use that for the betterment of my games?

God damn, is there somewhere I could download and run this demo on my own rig? No luck with search engines.

Funny, both writing a software renderer and learning how CPUs work were second year courses in college. Now true, that's a CPU and not a GPU, but the answer is yes; if you want to be a good programmer that is.