Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Extremophile

Unity Make games, not engines (from a programmer viewpoint)

This topic is 1835 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement

Most already answer your question.

 

And this is the main problem with a lot of open source game engine of yesteryear.Till Unity came and eat everybody lunches, to a point UDK (and later, CryEngine) went free and/or cheap.They always add the latest buzzword technology, but never bothered to focus on the key issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to make the game and not the engine, but say I wanna make some Torchlight clone. I need to build game maps, so obviously I would need to write an editor. To save data I need to add serialization, then if I want more complicated objects I will need gameobject + component architecture, and it goes on... Finally that pile of code becomes an engine, depending of what is your definition of an engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to make the game and not the engine, but say I wanna make some Torchlight clone. I need to build game maps, so obviously I would need to write an editor. To save data I need to add serialization, then if I want more complicated objects I will need gameobject + component architecture, and it goes on... Finally that pile of code becomes an engine, depending of what is your definition of an engine.


It's not about NOT writing an engine; ultimately the end product WILL be an engine, albeit very specific to the game. You can then reuse aspects that are generic in the next game and so on until you end up with software that could be made generic enough for a family of game styles (or whatever). And this is the key issue: the description you gave of the components you feel you need are very game-centric because there is a very clear and specific goal to the project (Torchlight clone). Already the direction is focused and the design anticipations are reasonable for an actual end product, rather than trying to guess what you think you'll need for the Super Uber MegaEngine (tm) that will do every game style on the planet, kill CryTek dead in the water and even make you coffee whilst you're at it (and on your first coding attempt to boot!). It's a philosophical position rather than a literal, immutable rule. Edited by GeneralQuery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would like to make the game and not the engine, but say I wanna make some Torchlight clone. I need to build game maps, so obviously I would need to write an editor. To save data I need to add serialization, then if I want more complicated objects I will need gameobject + component architecture, and it goes on... Finally that pile of code becomes an engine, depending of what is your definition of an engine.


It's not about NOT writing an engine; ultimately the end product WILL be an engine, albeit very specific to the game. You can then reuse aspects that are generic in the next game and so on until you end up with software that could be made generic enough for a family of game styles (or whatever). And this is the key issue: the description you gave of the components you feel you need are very game-centric because there is a very clear and specific goal to the project (Torchlight clone). Already the direction is focused and the design anticipations are reasonable for an actual end product, rather than trying to guess what you think you'll need for the Super Uber MegaEngine (tm) that will do every game style on the planet, kill CryTek dead in the water and even make you coffee whilst you're at it (and on your first coding attempt to boot!). It's a philosophical position rather than a literal, immutable rule.

 

 

All right. The article was aiming at people who want to remake a complete engine like Unity even if a high percentage of features will be useless for the game they had in mind. Then I guess I agree with it, it would take a decade.

Edited by Extremophile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!