Post

Chevy Ray
@chevyray.dev

a thing that makes game engines interesting is that the best engine for a game is one made exactly for it, but the best engine for prototyping and experimenting with a game is one that assumes as little as possible about it.

Chevy Ray
@chevyray.dev

it feels like there are big game engines that make very few assumptions (unity, unreal, godot) and ones that make many large assumptions (rpg maker, adventure game studio, renpy) but it really feels like for me the sweet spot is in the middle and has little representation

IntangibleMatter
@intangiblematter.net

I haven’t used it but it feels like Gamemaker Studio might fit into the middle ground? Every time I see people use it for a specific thing like an RPG it feels like they’re twisting the engine to do something it wasn’t supposed to which implies that it’s got stuff it’s designed for

0 reposts1 like

Chevy Ray
@chevyray.dev

i would just call game maker “general purpose” even if it doesn’t succeed, because that’s what it aims to be. the thing about general purpose engines is that they all feel *exactly* that way to me which is why i don’t like them

IntangibleMatter
@intangiblematter.net

Right, yeah that’s fair. Sometimes I find myself wanting to do things from scratch but also there’s too much boilerplate I don’t like doing that all games need so engines make sense for me Though Gamemaker is definitely more opinionated than like, Godot. And Source is more opinionated than both

Chevy Ray
@chevyray.dev

not everything, it’s more like: it covers every kind of game i want to make very well, but not one type specifically and not in a way that is uncomfortable or sluggish like general purpose engines feel

Chevy Ray
@chevyray.dev

but yes, batteries included and more along those lines! too much configurability adds too much friction, too many points of error or deprecation, too many mixed code styles and all the connective tissue is where the suffering occurs