About 20 something games. I usually go through whenever I add new things and delete things I'm not interested in anymore. Most of my wishlist is either early access stuff I'm watching reviews on, or stuff not out yet.
Same, if I don't want it when it's 5 bucks, I won't want it when it's 30. If I for some reason change my mind, then I'll just go back and find it again.
Professional game developers do not want their game engines to automatically update because when you upgrade engine versions things usually break. This happens in Unity, Godot, Unreal, and every other engine or framework I’ve seen in games. For big changes, this is inevitable. So professional game developers download the engine directly from the provider and not a service that will automatically update the engine version from under your project.
I don’t even know why Godot is on steam. Probably to gain more discoverability and popularity.
Because if you want professional game developers to exist then you have to be welcoming to them when they are just aspiring game developers. Kids who play lots of games and want to have a fiddle around with tools for making games are much more likely to do so if there is a way to access them that they are familiar with and already associate with gaming.
While this is true, I feel a loss for the familiarity of going to a website, downloading an executable, and running it without worry. I still do that with most of my software. In fact, that’s how I got steam.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that because there is an option to install via Steam that people should stop downloading directly from Godot’s website though. Both of those things can exist beside one another.
godot doesn’t break stuff in minor releases, and steam version of Godot has separate release tracks for each version (you can switch between godot 3 and 4)
I forget who and I’m too lazy to search, but a company just announced a recurring $10,000/month donation to Godot. A few others are donating too. So they do have some monetary support!
My understanding is that running on game consoles can’t be officially supported, because they can’t integrate the necessary proprietary code into the engine while keeping it open source.
They can’t distribute the proprietary bits in with the engine, so you have to work with the Godot team and a publisher which you probably would be doing anyway.
I mean, it’s easier to port a game running on Godot than something written in Assembly. So I’m not shocked to hear that
But up until Unity decided to stick some TNT up their ass and light it last week, the king of porting was Unity. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but if you’re a tiny indie company who wants to get something on Xbox, PS5, the Switch, PC, and even maybe mobile if the game is tiny, Unity was the engine for you.
To be fair, the only reason Godot can’t port to consoles as easily as Unity is for licensing reasons. Console manufacturers don’t want their console build code released as open-source under MIT like Godot is, so that’s all relegated to third-party services/plugins
and there’s many third/almost first party companies to do it for you, they just almost by definition need to charge for it - cause Microsoft and Sony charge them.
The one is even made by the devs and returns its profits to development
Before Godot 4 the 3D engine was pretty far behind, think early 2010 teach. With Godot 4 it got an insane upgrade which puts it in par with Unity as far as I understand (not a unity expert), but still behind Unreal (then again, everything is behind Unreal.)
Unfortunately it takes multiple years for a 3D game to be developed, so it’ll be a while before we see actual released 3D games with Godot 4.
Not many tools supported out of the box. Its beauty comes in its modularity, so anyone could have always made an add-on - but that takes time and money, what most small devs don’t have (but Sega and Tesla could).
Then more recently the devs have had time, and so could make these first-party - and very recently much more stable long term funding, so I’d expect these tools to improve rapidly.
All that being said you could toss a 20 million polygon default cube in UE5 and it’d look/run pretty good
Why would Steam be worse than Unity? You are mixing things together. Steam Hosts FOSS for free as far as I know - how is this a bad thing in your eyes?
Unity is a game engine, Steam is some bullshit market place that locks other software behind all sort of junk like drm. As far as i know Unity doesn’t promote gambling to kids
Here is their reasoning, basically summarized as “it’s easier to get everything for games into a new language than bolting it onto an existing language”. I also recall seeing a blog post where they said their initial implementation of GDScrip took fewer lines of code than embedding Lua did.
I wishlist every game that looks like it has potential; check it every couple weeks to see if there’s any 90% off deals. Pretty much don’t bat an eye at anything below that.
I have that disabled or blocked. I don’t check my email all that often, and most of the alerts I did get were below the purchase-worthy discount, so it wound up just being a lot of spam.
I use isthereanydeal for buying any game and my list is HUGE. I don’t buy anything until it’s massively discounted but my library is way bigger than anyone I know because they buy everything for $60+.
steam
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.