it's good how they've finally decided to integrate Jolt Physics and funnily enough I noticed that in the merges today so I built the Engine from source to test it
@@user-og6hl6lv7pYou know that you are lying, Jolt is not ‘basic physics’ and Godot had 3d physics even now, just not Jolt. and to the person below you, stop with the stupid conspiracy posting. Open Source is free and has dozens of more pressing issues, it is unrelated to the presumption of their ‘work ethic’. The fact you are basically a ghost profile and you are saying the most wrong thing in the world is proof to me that the internet is ‘dead’.
@@user-og6hl6lv7p theyd rather spend their time slapping together ragebait on twitter with culture war buzzwords than put in actually good useful features or trying to promote queer communities in a graceful, positive way.
Getting WebGPU and support for C# supporting web export would be AMAZING and really make it a comparable platform to Unity in most of the ways that matter.
Slay the Spire 2 is built using Godot, that's kind of amazing. I'm planning on building my own engine in a few months. I have no illusions as to the difficulty of it...
that's cool, good luck! i'm using my own engine built on SDL too. although "engine" might be too big of a word, it's just all the tools and code snippets i've accumulated over the years.
Building your own is certainly an undertaking, but there are some equally massive benefits. Not being reliant on a separate source for bug fixes and feature integration are the best reasons to go this route.
It's because nothing is perfect or pretty good from the start, many people know and understand how to do things, many people can change or do it, even you can have contributed for it, like the guy from the raycast drama on c# have contributed. But not everything can be done from the start also, trash talking this is trash talking the core team and the collaborators because here is open. I really wanna understand what happened, but i believe that is not that simple
@@ivensauro the "guy from the raycast drama on c#" tried to contribute but ultimately had his ideas ignored and condescended to. i don't think anything really came of it.
Whatever makes C# easier to use is good in my book. You know what C# already has? Namespaces. I actually predicted this a few months ago (on another video from this channel), that if GDScript won't go away, it will become more like C#, inevitably. It's just not a good language (as it is now) to make any large scale projects,
Engine-specific scripting languages will always be objectively inferior to more general use ones, especially compiled languages like the direct C family.
idk why you'd use c# with godot to be honest. c++ already works so much better for anything but really simple scripting, at which point you're better off with gdscript. it just seems like the worst aspects of both.
@@Flooffy And while I use both from time to time, I actually prefer GDScript a LOT to C# and its very bloated enterprise system way of trying to do even simple things.
I will soon drop off Godot. I am just making my main gameplay in its engine then doing the port to unreal/CryEngine. I WILL return once I can trust it can pull off high quality textures, large environments and better lighting. Keeping an eye on the mesh streaming. I am ready to run back to and stay with Godot in the future however I unfortunately think its one or two years behind of where I want it to be in 3D. (I am not asking for anywhere near Unreal or CryEngine graphical fidelity. I just want it to push really cool graphics at a distance without effort)
Yes, lack of mesh and texture streaming are the biggest pitfalls of 3d in Godot. The GI system itself isnt really good for large scenes either. Definitely some catching up to do.
Godot needs a decent even if basic IK system. Doesn't have to be Unreal but even Unity let's you do some rudimentary foot placement IK for slopes/stairs out of the box. Pretty basic and expected for 3D games now.
As a C# Godot-er i will wait to see if they are honest about the web export and documents; I cannot count the number of times i have had to guess at the .Net API equivilent becuase of the structure of their docs site
they did say that the end of 2024 seems the most promising because of the usual microsoft updates, so maybe maybeeeee Q1-Q2 2025 is when we'll finally be free?
Docs are always the first casualty when managing where resources will be allocated. They are also the best place for people wishing to contribute, but not familiar enough with the internals of the project itself.
wasn't this technically already possible with ResourceLoader.load_threaded_*() methods? edit: nevermind, i guess what may be in the works is doing this automatically instead of forcing the users to have to write their own system for it
Interesting! What other kinds of software have you built using Godot? I hadn't considered using a game engine for applications, I am sincerely curious how you use it.
@@RarebitFiends Examples: jorgerosa ( point ) itch ( point ) io - I have a few examples there ( all is free, as usual ), besides the games, I have a music and video player, brougth to life an vintage train ( that existed in my city ), the famous Botafogo ship and an dinossaurs "encyclopedia". More stuff will be added, I´m now on a "History of Portrugal" with all kings, etc. I have more at sourceforge and in the web too. Can´t remember all by now. - All this software are only my "excuses" to learn and having GREAT FUN with Godot. 🙂
@@RarebitFiendsthe Godot editor itself is built on Godot lol. So basically you can create any application you can think of. I guess its best for content creation apps like material creators, pixel art creator etc. I haven't built one myself so dont know exactly how its done but I'm guessing they just use Godot's regular UI system together with subviewports.
@askeladden450 Oh wow, I didn't know the editor was actually built using Godot! 🤯 I have actually had an art application in mind, I may have to consider Godot myself. Thank you for the reply!
The proposed core performance improvements are incredible, but what did it for me is that they want to rework Skeleton2D Even right now you can create some incredible stuff with it, but it can be complicated to use. Not to mention it sometimes bugs out in strange ways I strongly believe that Godot has a 2D bone animation suite that can potentially rival the giants of the industry, and it is natively integrated within the engine. No need for third party software or runtimes. The 2D bone animation workflow just needs a bit, or a lot more love ❤
The 3D part is even worse so it makes sense that they will have more work to do on that part. Also remember most Godot contributors are not paid so it's up to them on what features they want to work on and when.
I hope a lot of the improvements to the 3D stuff can trickle down to the 2D stuff. There isn't much reason for them to be as separate as they are anyway, but the whole CanvasItem abstraction just seems to be very much its own separate world with only stuff like subviewports bringing them together.
Took them forever to integrate Jolt, better late than never I guess but they should've at least kept Bullet in the first place rather than making their own broken physics engine
@@psuw Kind of, their point because you cherry picked half of it is that engines/frameworks change API's and components literally all the time. SO yeah,I would say they were right. 'Godot' 'reinventing the wheel' is literally every software job ever. Why did you think before AI that many copied code from Stack Overflow to make their code work?
Its funny they mention the lightmapper, because that is also a criticism of mine. The absolute majority of devs is going to have RT capable hardware, so why is the baking still done via the CPU? Even before hardware RT it would've been kinda weird. With hardware accelerated RT for baking I cant imagine it taking more than a handful of seconds, much better than previous "up to an hour" baking...
All nice on paper but who knows when most of this will actually make it in, will probably take years and years, Godot 5.+ era, since most of these haven't even begun getting contributed to or found any volunteers. Unity has an ambitious and awesome sounding roadmap too, and their history is shaky so who knows if they will execute most of it properly. But at least they have people on the paycheck working on it. Drawbacks of open source.
@@Aereto like 2 sponsors and zero devs. They gained devs and sponsors over it too. That drama is literally half a year old now. We all moved on, why can't you?
@@AHeinermann Wow, still hampering on people who are talking about the shitshow that happened involving Godot? "Sponsors are still sponsoring." The current ones, maybe, but what about those did sponsored for Godot in the past?
Godot's use of C# is horrendous. Why? Because the Godot Team (mostly Juan) deliberately chose to use C#, a compiled language, as a file-based interpreted script language. But also because it had to be used in a similar way as Unity does (as if picking up Unity's bad design ideas is good...) This absolutely sabotages C# and the utility and productivity it is capable to provide. Instead of looking into the assemblies of the solution through reflection to find relevant classes for nodes, it instead refer to classes through their cs file. This effectively makes it impossible to use external C# projects (such as libraries) outside of the game's directory, it makes it impossible to effectively use namespaces (directory paths of each files supersedes namespaces) and it makes it impossible to define partial classes (as it involves multiple cs file which messes up with Godot's Scripts Server). Then, for whatever works, Godot cannot display C# implementation of nodes correctly, nor debug them correctly in Visual Studio (only VS Code is "supported" for debugging). Furthermore, although there are nuggets for Godot to refer to from any c# projects, the engine will not find anything in projects within the game's directory EXCEPT the game cs project. I really don't know why the Godot Team is so obstinate in making C# into a script language. They could have the best of both world with gdscript as dynamic scripting language and C# as a compiled language. But no! Instead, using C# became completely useless if not counterproductive to use in Godot vs gdscript. Until C# is treated as the tool that it is, it will be impossible to create big projects using the language in Godot.
Yeah c# in godot sucks. Just use C++ tbh. I have seen some action around moving it to the gdextension api instead of the weird script approach it uses now (juan even wrote up a proposal for it); not sure how far that has progressed though.
I think the actual big showcases for Godot will be in 1 or 2 years when all the devs that migrated after Godot 4 and the Unity fiasco have their games ready.
Someone tell this to the people on the open source project that said "fragmentations is bad" when godot only did this after the fork. With competition everyone wins.
What sort of stuff, just out of curiosity? I listened to the annual update of the rendering engine at GodotCon and the lead mentions that performance wise, it's basically at a point they're happy with, and mentions some ideas like enhanced lighting or integrating Rive
Well duh the 2D part of the engine is more developed so it makes sense they will have a lot more to do and the 3D side. It's funny people always complain about how bad the 3D is in Godot but when they make steps to improve that I always see people selfishly complaining that 2D isn't getting more features yet the 2D in Godot is already way more solid and capable of making professional games.
they should compete with other 3D engines tho. 3D has always been a major weakpoint for Godot. They focused so much on 2D in the past and did cool stuff, but there is only so much you can achieve with 1990s Contra style of tech. Especially if Godot ever hopes to get picked up by a bigger studio
Engine aside, they should address the management problems that scared away so many contributors to fork projects. Should've been a learning experience for them, but instead they doubled down on their cult-like behavior.. now instead of 1 cult-like organization, we have 2 or 3 and they hate eachother. Not good. Forks are normally good for development but the Godot people didn't handle this well at all. In fact they couldn'tve handled it any worse.
It was also a lower priority. The engine's strength quickly became 2D where high quality physics and stuff were less important or work aroundable. Plus jolt could be added easily, the beauty of foss, so why waste resources on a not urgent feature?
They have listed the majority of things that I'm currently not satisfied with in Godot. I like Godot more every new update or post they make. I'm curious what it'll look like in 10 years.
I thing that the streaming, the full integration with Jolt, the better multithreading support and the headless capabilities should have the max priority cause those are necessary improvements to allow Godot to become a real competitive option in the market for studies making at least AA games and not just little indie games. Also I could suggest a better solution for specular aliasing but maybe that's just me. I haven't developed nothing for IOs with Godot until now but the fact that they only mention Metal renderer but nothing about IOs (but they do for Android) make me think that either the support for IOs works like a charm or more probably they don´t care.
And this is the list of things that are too much for them, and they expect the community to handle... because hiring people? I doubt they'll do it, as it could disrupt the power balance within their sect.
They wait for the new version of Godot so they can change the logo and theme. It's pretty useless. Much interesting fork with a completely unique direction is "The Mirror".
@@LyubomirIko Holp up now, didn't GFS posted a video not long ago about how the devs behind The Mirror would no longer be forking Godot and that they will be moving onto something else?
@@MrERJ1992 and that's why it's a much more interesting and unique project. But I think they will still be able to fork new updates and functionalities.
Godot physics is broken and they have nobody with knowledge on making a physics engine so it's good they finally decided to bite the bullet and use a third party solution
I personally think they are wasting time with internal code editor. Only hobbyist developers use Godot's inbuilt editor. Anyone with slightest bit of experience prefer using VSCode or Ryder. They could have offloaded that work and could have simply focused on writing a plugin for VSCode that doesn't suck.
Godot foundation wasting precious contributor workhours is nothing new tbh. Look at the physics. Or how community is building 10 different Terrain plug ins all spread out instead of unifying to build one Official good one cuz Juan doesn't think it belongs as a core feature.
@@verendale1789 I think this mentality is holding Godot back in a lot of ways. GD Extensions was made to make Godot even more modular, so I don't see why they can't have an official Terrain editor but as an extension download. This is the route Blender has taken now and it makes sense in practice.
I must say though that the internal editor was instrumental in helping me get into coding my games. Before that I was only using the blueprints in Unreal Engine but when I tried Godot and saw how easy it was to use Gd script in the editor I was hooked. I still think the internal editor is an excellent feature for get new people getting into game dev. Especially those who know little to nothing about coding. Then as they get more experienced they will move to VS code.
I'm an idiot amateur hobbiest, and I was able to get into and learn Godot partially because it had an inbuilt code editor that was super easy to start with. Therefore, purely as a tutorial for fools like me with no understanding of technology, I really appreciate the work put into it. I may never make a game but I learned a lot and had a lot of fun thanks to them making it comically easy to start.
The only time those guys are right, is when they change their stance to match reality to gaslight their cultist followers with the illusion of intelligence.
You must not be a Unity user, they depreciate most of their features at some point. It's their MO. They over promise and when it doesn't immediately meet expectations they just trash it and promise a better alternative that may or may not come. GDScript itself is wayyyy older than the lifespan of Unity having a it's own scripting language. The reason they deprecated it is because they can't commit to anything long term and actually try to improve it.
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls nitpicking Unity for deprecating features and praising Godot at the same time is the hypocrisy. Here's the list of known Godot regressions: 1). OpenGL backend in 4 is not complete, half-year ago it didn't even support reflection probes. 2). Occlusion culling has been remade, yet it still not able to work with dynamic occluders. When you turn on/off visibility, you get CPU spikes. Older occlusion system was less CPU-intensive and it was more accurate. 3). Lightmapping. Yeah, sure, it's moved on GPU, but why can't you produce shadows from transparent objects? 4). Global illumination. SDFGI was announced as significant feature of fourth version. But it drops framerate each time you move camera. What a wonderful innovation from Juan Linietsky! He planned to rewrite it into HDDAGI, but it was postponed two times (to 4.3 and 4.4), and now the pull request is stated in draft condition, because it was postponed third time! And you can continue that list further.
@@Capewearer this is apples and oranges, almost like you didn't bother to actually try and comprehend me and just want to argue for the sake of arguing. Sad, get a life
Generally speaking I think they focus on the right things. The one thing I cannot fathom is how any larger project (10.000 lines of code and more) could ever live with a propgramming language that doesn't have a "global error checker" a.k.a. a compiler. That's a non-starter from the get go. I get that GDScript is nice for beginners and tutorials, but for any kind of serious work I wouldn't even write a single line of code in it.
Imagine that, the things people complained about when the community managers were banning people left and right are the things they're now focused on. Maybe they should have just addressed these issues at the time without all the unnecessary drama.
Not a good climate for this engine, it used to be a kind of wholesome community with good feelings, now it's community is honestly insufferable and toxic, acting like Godot is perfect and the devs can do no wrong, it's cultish and fanatical.
No one cares. It's you anti godot people who are unwelcoming and toxic. Literally chased your two lead devs out within a few weeks. Including the one you tried martyring against godot. Just go away.
No mention of improved support for modern languages such as Zig, Rust, and Mojo. They are still in development too but if it was a priority it should be on the roadmap. No mention of it seems like they are going to rely on others to enable that support.
The current particle system is honestly awful. Dozens of options crammed into a small window and no shape preview makes creating particles a giant pain in the ass
We should forget 3D graphic fidelity, and focus on 2D functionality and improvements, as well as 3D functionality. Don't bother competing with UNDREAL and UNITY on the AAA quality front.
I can't take GDScript seriously without nullable types. And it seems it isn't a priority for them to implement that (despite there being already at least one PR implementing it). What a pity.
@@SenkaZver "More like milk out more views from antigodot types lmao" And here we go with the diehard Godot fans already coming out of the woodwork....
@@scottcastle9119 it's hard for me to use other engines now that I'm used to Godot. It's understandable if you don't like it, it's not the same for everyone obviously...
Ehhh if you want to make something simple and fast then godot is a no brainer and compared to other engines it's learning curve is much better But i'll agree. GDscript is an absolute cancer to use, the .net integration is held together by ducktape and there are so many problems with either no fix online or you'll spend hours/days trying to implement an imperfect solution.
I would consider Godot for low poly game projects. But given the schism, I'll look into Godot forks to see which team of developers prove themselves capable if they have improvements or tweaks that give them a performance edge over the main on specific situations.
@@tapo9478 "high fidelity" is questionable, it looks closer to a Source game like Half Life 2 or some Xbox 360 titles than anything really modern like Battlefield 5 or Doom Eternal. But then again it is a Solo project so still impressive. And not like Tarkov is a looker either.
@@tapo9478 take off the drugs. RtV looks like a cheap "tactical" shooter made from generic assets. Lighting is flat, vegetation is from early 2000s, buildings are flat boxes with projected textures. And what's bad, it stutters. Of course, it doesn't work well on old hardware.
what's wrong with terrain3d? a lean core with modules means that specific features like terrain can be iterated on much more rapidly because they can ship and update on their own schedule. a bugfix or feature update can come out immediately without waiting on a whole new engine release.
Don't expect it any time soon. The Godot team is super reluctant to add any significant feature even if it's been requested for several years. Either way if you need terrain in Godot use Terrain3D, it seems to work pretty well.
this is a weird one. i've heard the justification about wanting to keep the core simple and generic, but then you've got stuff like a whole vehicle system that nobody ever uses because it doesn't work and a bunch of rendering features that nobody uses because they're so niche and a bunch of specialized UI components that only exist because the editor uses them... like i really feel like more games have terrain than tree-based menu interactions or janky car physics.
What tantrum? You mean the tantrum that a bunch of people threw at Godot for joking about calling themselves Wokedot? Or the people spamming the GitHub?
He posted a video about it shortly after the kerfuffle. In short, he will report on engine forks when they do something notable and distinct in the source code, covering the fork itself is pointless since nothing has changed really from a code/features perspective just yet.
I'm still curious why the launcher refers to it as the 'Godot Game Engine,' especially now that Godot is used for so much more than just games. With apps, tools, and all sorts of creative projects being built on it, calling it just 'Godot Engine' feels more fitting-or maybe that's just me! Either way, it's exciting to see how the engine is evolving. Thanks for sharing this update with us, Mike!
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls I would say that the snowflakes are the devs of the engine. There was an ongoing fork without the bullsh1t, just dev'ving. reddot.
Really? Are there new features? I was under the impression it was just a fork for political brain rot spergs who don't like the other side political brain rot spergs. Are you saying it has some new and unique features though? Do tell?
@@RarebitFiends some ppl just wanna kick back, relax and not think about politics when working on something they like. At least for me it sometimes feels like ads but for other ppls opinions instead of commercial products and I support having a right to not associate yourself with politics whan you just wanna do what makes you happy :P
I was a bit worried about what might happen after the whole Godot Twitter disaster, especially since the dev supported it. But honestly, I’m hopeful that the Godot Engine will keep getting better like it always has!
![แฉกลโกงงานวัด 2024 [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.106 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/taC5dpP3HXA/mqdefault.jpg)
it's good how they've finally decided to integrate Jolt Physics and funnily enough I noticed that in the merges today so I built the Engine from source to test it
Too little too late. It shouldn't take 5 goddamn years to implement BASIC physics in a game engine. These guys are time wasters.
@@user-og6hl6lv7p They already had "BASIC physics", they're just changing to a better physics engine.
@user-og6hl6lv7p I agree, it looks as if they're doing nothing for most of the time which is weird
@@user-og6hl6lv7pYou know that you are lying, Jolt is not ‘basic physics’ and Godot had 3d physics even now, just not Jolt.
and to the person below you, stop with the stupid conspiracy posting. Open Source is free and has dozens of more pressing issues, it is unrelated to the presumption of their ‘work ethic’.
The fact you are basically a ghost profile and you are saying the most wrong thing in the world is proof to me that the internet is ‘dead’.
@@user-og6hl6lv7p theyd rather spend their time slapping together ragebait on twitter with culture war buzzwords than put in actually good useful features or trying to promote queer communities in a graceful, positive way.
Don’t confuse webgpu support with webgl. What godot currently has is only webgl renderer support for the web.
Getting WebGPU and support for C# supporting web export would be AMAZING and really make it a comparable platform to Unity in most of the ways that matter.
They had me at improved multithreading. That's going to be a big deal, if and when they update the code architecture.
Slay the Spire 2 is built using Godot, that's kind of amazing.
I'm planning on building my own engine in a few months. I have no illusions as to the difficulty of it...
that's really cool, what are you using for it?
@Bananenbauer123 My engine? I'm planning on using SDL3, and embedding my own scripting language called Toy into it.
that's cool, good luck! i'm using my own engine built on SDL too. although "engine" might be too big of a word, it's just all the tools and code snippets i've accumulated over the years.
You can do it
Building your own is certainly an undertaking, but there are some equally massive benefits. Not being reliant on a separate source for bug fixes and feature integration are the best reasons to go this route.
jolt as physics is good move
2:45 Godot Physics was never removed, just made not the default for awhile.
It’s exciting to see how far along Godot is coming. It’s gone from a little-known engine, to completely competing with the biggest engines out there.
I wouldn’t go that far but it does seem like an engines more indies will feel more comfortable using maybe AA could be wrong tho well see
Not in 3d space, but it's definitely in 2D.
Gamemaker and Unity specifically
@Mempler it's highest profile games are 3d. cruelty squad, cassette beasts, sonic colors, artic eggs....
@@SirRichard94 don't forget kinitopet and Buckshot roulette
@@SirRichard94 Those games are not high quality and have a lot of jank. They're only good because of their trash qualities.
a little disappointed at the lack of pixel perfect 2D support. one of my biggest gripes about the engine
I'm pretty happy the new Asset Store is on the horizon.
So happy to see traits on the list. This will make composables so much easier and robust.
Exciting news! I hope for the refactoring change and the traits system
I still can't believe someone at Godot thought returning a string dictionary from a raycast is a good idea
Holy shit what????
Yeah, especially when the node form has methods that return the collider object. So they definitely know how to do it properly...
It's because nothing is perfect or pretty good from the start, many people know and understand how to do things, many people can change or do it, even you can have contributed for it, like the guy from the raycast drama on c# have contributed.
But not everything can be done from the start also, trash talking this is trash talking the core team and the collaborators because here is open.
I really wanna understand what happened, but i believe that is not that simple
It's probably legacy behavior. Years ago everything was strings, strings everywhere and it was probably the biggest criticism they had.
@@ivensauro the "guy from the raycast drama on c#" tried to contribute but ultimately had his ideas ignored and condescended to. i don't think anything really came of it.
Whatever makes C# easier to use is good in my book.
You know what C# already has? Namespaces.
I actually predicted this a few months ago (on another video from this channel), that if GDScript won't go away, it will become more like C#, inevitably.
It's just not a good language (as it is now) to make any large scale projects,
Pretty much what sets programming languages from scripting languages.
Engine-specific scripting languages will always be objectively inferior to more general use ones, especially compiled languages like the direct C family.
idk why you'd use c# with godot to be honest. c++ already works so much better for anything but really simple scripting, at which point you're better off with gdscript. it just seems like the worst aspects of both.
I don't think GDScript will go away, and it doesn't have to go away. This is a language they made specifically for their engine
@@Flooffy And while I use both from time to time, I actually prefer GDScript a LOT to C# and its very bloated enterprise system way of trying to do even simple things.
I will soon drop off Godot. I am just making my main gameplay in its engine then doing the port to unreal/CryEngine. I WILL return once I can trust it can pull off high quality textures, large environments and better lighting. Keeping an eye on the mesh streaming. I am ready to run back to and stay with Godot in the future however I unfortunately think its one or two years behind of where I want it to be in 3D.
(I am not asking for anywhere near Unreal or CryEngine graphical fidelity. I just want it to push really cool graphics at a distance without effort)
same, was doing fine with it until it came time to really crank on it so i bit the bullet and just learned unreal, but i do miss godot
Yes, lack of mesh and texture streaming are the biggest pitfalls of 3d in Godot. The GI system itself isnt really good for large scenes either. Definitely some catching up to do.
In the next year or two other engines will move on as well so Godot will always stay behind little bit.
Godot needs a decent even if basic IK system. Doesn't have to be Unreal but even Unity let's you do some rudimentary foot placement IK for slopes/stairs out of the box. Pretty basic and expected for 3D games now.
wait, is cry engine free to use? That'd be nuts
As a C# Godot-er i will wait to see if they are honest about the web export and documents; I cannot count the number of times i have had to guess at the .Net API equivilent becuase of the structure of their docs site
Same, the docs website is ass. C# is definitely very low on their priority list.
Well it's our job to improve the docs, do the extra step and add it while you are at it
they did say that the end of 2024 seems the most promising because of the usual microsoft updates, so maybe maybeeeee Q1-Q2 2025 is when we'll finally be free?
Docs are always the first casualty when managing where resources will be allocated. They are also the best place for people wishing to contribute, but not familiar enough with the internals of the project itself.
Competition leads to innovation :)
I'm surprised they don't mention streaming. It's one of the major thing holding godot back for big 3d worlds.
Edit:my bad, they do at 4:50
They do. See 4:50
@@TrizZzleoopsie, thanks 😅
They do. See 4:50
wasn't this technically already possible with ResourceLoader.load_threaded_*() methods?
edit: nevermind, i guess what may be in the works is doing this automatically instead of forcing the users to have to write their own system for it
So great news !! - It´s the only engine that I use to develop anything, and not only games. 🙂
Interesting! What other kinds of software have you built using Godot? I hadn't considered using a game engine for applications, I am sincerely curious how you use it.
@@RarebitFiends Examples: jorgerosa ( point ) itch ( point ) io
- I have a few examples there ( all is free, as usual ), besides the games, I have a music and video player, brougth to life an vintage train ( that existed in my city ), the famous Botafogo ship and an dinossaurs "encyclopedia". More stuff will be added, I´m now on a "History of Portrugal" with all kings, etc. I have more at sourceforge and in the web too. Can´t remember all by now.
- All this software are only my "excuses" to learn and having GREAT FUN with Godot. 🙂
@@RarebitFiendsthe Godot editor itself is built on Godot lol. So basically you can create any application you can think of. I guess its best for content creation apps like material creators, pixel art creator etc. I haven't built one myself so dont know exactly how its done but I'm guessing they just use Godot's regular UI system together with subviewports.
@askeladden450 Oh wow, I didn't know the editor was actually built using Godot! 🤯 I have actually had an art application in mind, I may have to consider Godot myself. Thank you for the reply!
@JorgeRosa Awesome, I will check out your works, thanks! And I hear you on having fun with Godot, it's one of my favorite open source projects.
streaming, vm enhancement and namespaces should be at the top honestly
traits >>>>>> namespaces
@@Klayperson indeed, that's important aswell, but at least there are workarounds for traits
The proposed core performance improvements are incredible, but what did it for me is that they want to rework Skeleton2D
Even right now you can create some incredible stuff with it, but it can be complicated to use. Not to mention it sometimes bugs out in strange ways
I strongly believe that Godot has a 2D bone animation suite that can potentially rival the giants of the industry, and it is natively integrated within the engine. No need for third party software or runtimes. The 2D bone animation workflow just needs a bit, or a lot more love ❤
[insert "Waiting for Godot" joke]
Really looking forward to traits!
I see 100% focus on 3D, but 2D engine is far from being perfect and I would like to see improvements to 2D part of Godot too.
The 3D part is even worse so it makes sense that they will have more work to do on that part. Also remember most Godot contributors are not paid so it's up to them on what features they want to work on and when.
@@Xero_Wolf I agree. I have chosen Godot knowing all that. Its not a complain - more like "I wish 2D got some love too", thats all.
I hope a lot of the improvements to the 3D stuff can trickle down to the 2D stuff. There isn't much reason for them to be as separate as they are anyway, but the whole CanvasItem abstraction just seems to be very much its own separate world with only stuff like subviewports bringing them together.
2D in Godot is very good, 3D is minimally viable at best so it's good they're finally taking it seriously
I'd love to see more 2D stuff as I prefer 2D games, but I can wait for the 3D. It is lacking a lot. Some of it will trickle down to 2D too
Took them forever to integrate Jolt, better late than never I guess but they should've at least kept Bullet in the first place rather than making their own broken physics engine
Welcome to Godot. reinventing the wheel then scrapping it all over again.
@@MyPer76 you have no idea how frameworks and engines work, clearly
@@SenkaZver that has nothing todo with frameworks???
@@psuw Kind of, their point because you cherry picked half of it is that engines/frameworks change API's and components literally all the time. SO yeah,I would say they were right. 'Godot' 'reinventing the wheel' is literally every software job ever. Why did you think before AI that many copied code from Stack Overflow to make their code work?
The physics programmer was scouted by a AAA studio.
Its funny they mention the lightmapper, because that is also a criticism of mine. The absolute majority of devs is going to have RT capable hardware, so why is the baking still done via the CPU? Even before hardware RT it would've been kinda weird. With hardware accelerated RT for baking I cant imagine it taking more than a handful of seconds, much better than previous "up to an hour" baking...
All nice on paper but who knows when most of this will actually make it in, will probably take years and years, Godot 5.+ era, since most of these haven't even begun getting contributed to or found any volunteers. Unity has an ambitious and awesome sounding roadmap too, and their history is shaky so who knows if they will execute most of it properly. But at least they have people on the paycheck working on it. Drawbacks of open source.
And with the recent situation, they ostracized present and future sponsors. We'll see if the developers can deliver or flop.
@@Aereto That drama died a while ago now, get over it. Sponsors are still sponsoring.
@@Aereto like 2 sponsors and zero devs. They gained devs and sponsors over it too.
That drama is literally half a year old now. We all moved on, why can't you?
@@AHeinermann Wow, still hampering on people who are talking about the shitshow that happened involving Godot?
"Sponsors are still sponsoring."
The current ones, maybe, but what about those did sponsored for Godot in the past?
why can't I see it on their website
I can't find it either
@@dshcfh actually I just took another look and it's a link in the footer, in the "Project" section
hope there some more attention about multiplayer things
Godot's use of C# is horrendous. Why? Because the Godot Team (mostly Juan) deliberately chose to use C#, a compiled language, as a file-based interpreted script language. But also because it had to be used in a similar way as Unity does (as if picking up Unity's bad design ideas is good...) This absolutely sabotages C# and the utility and productivity it is capable to provide.
Instead of looking into the assemblies of the solution through reflection to find relevant classes for nodes, it instead refer to classes through their cs file. This effectively makes it impossible to use external C# projects (such as libraries) outside of the game's directory, it makes it impossible to effectively use namespaces (directory paths of each files supersedes namespaces) and it makes it impossible to define partial classes (as it involves multiple cs file which messes up with Godot's Scripts Server).
Then, for whatever works, Godot cannot display C# implementation of nodes correctly, nor debug them correctly in Visual Studio (only VS Code is "supported" for debugging). Furthermore, although there are nuggets for Godot to refer to from any c# projects, the engine will not find anything in projects within the game's directory EXCEPT the game cs project.
I really don't know why the Godot Team is so obstinate in making C# into a script language. They could have the best of both world with gdscript as dynamic scripting language and C# as a compiled language. But no! Instead, using C# became completely useless if not counterproductive to use in Godot vs gdscript.
Until C# is treated as the tool that it is, it will be impossible to create big projects using the language in Godot.
The best of both worlds would be Zig and Mojo
Yeah c# in godot sucks. Just use C++ tbh. I have seen some action around moving it to the gdextension api instead of the weird script approach it uses now (juan even wrote up a proposal for it); not sure how far that has progressed though.
So what about structs and raycasts performance? I can't find anything about it.
I think the actual big showcases for Godot will be in 1 or 2 years when all the devs that migrated after Godot 4 and the Unity fiasco have their games ready.
Its already been 1 year since then... No one of actual value moved
@ your view on the industry and the art of video games as a whole is very questionable
You misunderstood the "Reliable headless command line export" improvement.
Where is the link to the article?
A more or less perfect list, can't wait, though it seems like many of these enhancements will have to wait for Godot 5 and beyond!
Someone tell this to the people on the open source project that said "fragmentations is bad" when godot only did this after the fork. With competition everyone wins.
Hardly anything 2D related on there. Sucks. They're so caught up in trying to compete with the other 3D engines.
May I ask what do you want from 2D?
What sort of stuff, just out of curiosity? I listened to the annual update of the rendering engine at GodotCon and the lead mentions that performance wise, it's basically at a point they're happy with, and mentions some ideas like enhanced lighting or integrating Rive
Well duh the 2D part of the engine is more developed so it makes sense they will have a lot more to do and the 3D side. It's funny people always complain about how bad the 3D is in Godot but when they make steps to improve that I always see people selfishly complaining that 2D isn't getting more features yet the 2D in Godot is already way more solid and capable of making professional games.
they should compete with other 3D engines tho. 3D has always been a major weakpoint for Godot. They focused so much on 2D in the past and did cool stuff, but there is only so much you can achieve with 1990s Contra style of tech. Especially if Godot ever hopes to get picked up by a bigger studio
@@rahuldey8539for example the polygon 2D workflow for animating 2.5D like animations could get some improvements.
I'm still using Godot 3.6 🤣.I haven't had a reason to change!
What kind of games do you make?
yeah, no gles2 is the killer for me
@@ADITYA3GAME I make various 2D and 3D games. Some are posted on my channel.
For me, I'm still on 3.4.5.
@@MrERJ1992That's great! I'm glad that I'm not the only one who still uses the old version of Godot.
jolt is the goat! great that they are using it
@@Ilikeeverythingyouwantedmetobe it was usable before you just had to turn it on 🤷♂️
Engine aside, they should address the management problems that scared away so many contributors to fork projects. Should've been a learning experience for them, but instead they doubled down on their cult-like behavior.. now instead of 1 cult-like organization, we have 2 or 3 and they hate eachother. Not good. Forks are normally good for development but the Godot people didn't handle this well at all. In fact they couldn'tve handled it any worse.
i just have one thing to say: typed dictionaries
I hope godot 4.5 become better i Will come and try development my dream game at godot
Why not now? What it doesn't have right now? ;-)
Certainly don't wait around, learn now and port over when 4.5 releases
Finally! Why did they wait so long to do this? 💐
Because it was a smaller team with a lot less money for a looooong time. It's only recently the godot team is basically "rich"
It was also a lower priority. The engine's strength quickly became 2D where high quality physics and stuff were less important or work aroundable. Plus jolt could be added easily, the beauty of foss, so why waste resources on a not urgent feature?
@@SenkaZver exactly
Wait huh so what are script traits?
Is there something that isnt calling the original fucntion or replacing it?
They have listed the majority of things that I'm currently not satisfied with in Godot. I like Godot more every new update or post they make. I'm curious what it'll look like in 10 years.
1:50 do you mean CPUs? GPU code is inherently multithreaded.
Sounds pretty good.
I thing that the streaming, the full integration with Jolt, the better multithreading support and the headless capabilities should have the max priority cause those are necessary improvements to allow Godot to become a real competitive option in the market for studies making at least AA games and not just little indie games. Also I could suggest a better solution for specular aliasing but maybe that's just me.
I haven't developed nothing for IOs with Godot until now but the fact that they only mention Metal renderer but nothing about IOs (but they do for Android) make me think that either the support for IOs works like a charm or more probably they don´t care.
They could get nanite and luman and I wouldn't care after their political b.s.
Mike, are you currently make a game?
The only i find missing on the roadmap is the swarm entities feature.
I was looking for the page that you're going over to look at myself, but couldn't find it annoyingly.
C# Web Export is probably one of the more annoying things that I have to deal with...
And this is the list of things that are too much for them, and they expect the community to handle... because hiring people? I doubt they'll do it, as it could disrupt the power balance within their sect.
Tell me you don't know how OSS works without telling me how OSS works
@@Alex-vq7fz Tell me you don't know how the real world of OSS works without telling me how the real world of OSS works
RIVE is absolutely required.
where is the link?
I also can't find the link
0:30 Maybe they will make it happen in Godot 5
NAMESPACES FIIIIIIINALLY
what happened to the other forked project?
They wait for the new version of Godot so they can change the logo and theme. It's pretty useless. Much interesting fork with a completely unique direction is "The Mirror".
They just mindlessly mirror everything from the main site and pretend that it means something.
@@LyubomirIko Holp up now, didn't GFS posted a video not long ago about how the devs behind The Mirror would no longer be forking Godot and that they will be moving onto something else?
@@MrERJ1992 and that's why it's a much more interesting and unique project. But I think they will still be able to fork new updates and functionalities.
I dont like there're two officially supported languages in godot. It creates fragmentation in the addon ecosystem. Godot should focus on C#.
why not update godot physics or work on its improvement
No reason to spend the huge amount of resources to fix Godot physics when jolt is already better. Just use Jolt.
@@Alex-vq7fz Jolt is good compared to godot physics but not that good compared to other game enigne
@@ulrich-tonmoy I heard Rapier is pretty good. But idk if they want to implement it
@@Kiyuja i think and its available as an addon but not integrated to the engine and similar to jolt not much improvement
Godot physics is broken and they have nobody with knowledge on making a physics engine so it's good they finally decided to bite the bullet and use a third party solution
Trait system is my most excited for feature
I personally think they are wasting time with internal code editor. Only hobbyist developers use Godot's inbuilt editor. Anyone with slightest bit of experience prefer using VSCode or Ryder. They could have offloaded that work and could have simply focused on writing a plugin for VSCode that doesn't suck.
Godot foundation wasting precious contributor workhours is nothing new tbh. Look at the physics. Or how community is building 10 different Terrain plug ins all spread out instead of unifying to build one Official good one cuz Juan doesn't think it belongs as a core feature.
@@verendale1789 I think this mentality is holding Godot back in a lot of ways. GD Extensions was made to make Godot even more modular, so I don't see why they can't have an official Terrain editor but as an extension download. This is the route Blender has taken now and it makes sense in practice.
I must say though that the internal editor was instrumental in helping me get into coding my games. Before that I was only using the blueprints in Unreal Engine but when I tried Godot and saw how easy it was to use Gd script in the editor I was hooked. I still think the internal editor is an excellent feature for get new people getting into game dev. Especially those who know little to nothing about coding. Then as they get more experienced they will move to VS code.
I'm an idiot amateur hobbiest, and I was able to get into and learn Godot partially because it had an inbuilt code editor that was super easy to start with. Therefore, purely as a tutorial for fools like me with no understanding of technology, I really appreciate the work put into it. I may never make a game but I learned a lot and had a lot of fun thanks to them making it comically easy to start.
The internal code editor is a gateway drug for devs new to coding, it's a good thing overall imo
I want headless ...
Much promise, little action.
better be good
This is weird. Some very angry very weird dudes assured me Godot would be dead by now.
Can't wait to see Threat Interactive try and claim all this is a bad thing
It's not and it sure won't be anywhere near that when well known game studios are switching over or have already started making their games on it.
The only time those guys are right, is when they change their stance to match reality to gaslight their cultist followers with the illusion of intelligence.
@@SenkaZver you are absolutely right, my lil chap :D
one word. JOLT!
Unity at first also had a simpler language, there was a reason they deprecated it.
You must not be a Unity user, they depreciate most of their features at some point. It's their MO. They over promise and when it doesn't immediately meet expectations they just trash it and promise a better alternative that may or may not come. GDScript itself is wayyyy older than the lifespan of Unity having a it's own scripting language.
The reason they deprecated it is because they can't commit to anything long term and actually try to improve it.
@@GoblinArmyInYourWallsnah, it just sucked and people eventually prefered C# so it replaced Boo and UnityScript
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls nitpicking Unity for deprecating features and praising Godot at the same time is the hypocrisy. Here's the list of known Godot regressions:
1). OpenGL backend in 4 is not complete, half-year ago it didn't even support reflection probes.
2). Occlusion culling has been remade, yet it still not able to work with dynamic occluders. When you turn on/off visibility, you get CPU spikes. Older occlusion system was less CPU-intensive and it was more accurate.
3). Lightmapping. Yeah, sure, it's moved on GPU, but why can't you produce shadows from transparent objects?
4). Global illumination. SDFGI was announced as significant feature of fourth version. But it drops framerate each time you move camera. What a wonderful innovation from Juan Linietsky! He planned to rewrite it into HDDAGI, but it was postponed two times (to 4.3 and 4.4), and now the pull request is stated in draft condition, because it was postponed third time!
And you can continue that list further.
@@ZedDevStuff yeah, it sucked because they didn't give it time to mature
@@Capewearer this is apples and oranges, almost like you didn't bother to actually try and comprehend me and just want to argue for the sake of arguing. Sad, get a life
Generally speaking I think they focus on the right things. The one thing I cannot fathom is how any larger project (10.000 lines of code and more) could ever live with a propgramming language that doesn't have a "global error checker" a.k.a. a compiler. That's a non-starter from the get go. I get that GDScript is nice for beginners and tutorials, but for any kind of serious work I wouldn't even write a single line of code in it.
To reiterate the description, LIKE to add.
Imagine that, the things people complained about when the community managers were banning people left and right are the things they're now focused on. Maybe they should have just addressed these issues at the time without all the unnecessary drama.
Not a good climate for this engine, it used to be a kind of wholesome community with good feelings, now it's community is honestly insufferable and toxic, acting like Godot is perfect and the devs can do no wrong, it's cultish and fanatical.
No one cares. It's you anti godot people who are unwelcoming and toxic. Literally chased your two lead devs out within a few weeks. Including the one you tried martyring against godot.
Just go away.
Reminds me of a lot of Linux distro communities tbh
@@SenkaZver I did go away, I am here because I follow this channel not Godot or any of the forks you appear to be referencing.
@@cepheus3d I do believe that's a coping mechanism, that has been known as long as humanity lived. The fable of Fox and Grapes is about such people.
@@dysfunc121 don't mind that lil chap here, he a bit salty but he alright, talks about forks all the time :D
c# web export crying in the corner
They could have added support for rive as well...just like Defold.
I need Rive for Godot please
Already is in Alpha (as an extension)
No mention of improved support for modern languages such as Zig, Rust, and Mojo. They are still in development too but if it was a priority it should be on the roadmap. No mention of it seems like they are going to rely on others to enable that support.
I really want a modular vfx system like Niagara. Current one is too limiting.
The current particle system is honestly awful. Dozens of options crammed into a small window and no shape preview makes creating particles a giant pain in the ass
godots biggest issue is not being on any mainsteam language like c++/c or c#.
Godot natively supports c#, and can be used with c and c++.
WebGPU must be one of top 3 priorities, so important to publish games on the web since it supports all platforms, and no downloads needed.
No "get a new twitter manager"? Sad, would have liked to try it out :(
If you wanna try it out, why should you let some Twitter drama stop you?
@reptiliannoizezz.413 Probably because of my unproductive elitism
making decisions based on twitter drama lol
@user-lk2vo8fo2q >ignoring red flags
We should forget 3D graphic fidelity, and focus on 2D functionality and improvements, as well as 3D functionality. Don't bother competing with UNDREAL and UNITY on the AAA quality front.
Hard disagree. 3D is esential
For 2D you can use any other engine, there's a sh*tton of them and all are good.
I can't take GDScript seriously without nullable types. And it seems it isn't a priority for them to implement that (despite there being already at least one PR implementing it). What a pity.
We must have wildly different ideas about what a nullable type is, because Godot 4 has had them for ages. I use them extensively.
variant is nullable fwiw. also everything that derives from Object, though that's more like a null pointer.
Mike trying to milk out more views from Godot community:
More like milk out more views from antigodot types lmao.
We still show up in his other videos. You people only show up when godot is in the title.
@@SenkaZver "More like milk out more views from antigodot types lmao"
And here we go with the diehard Godot fans already coming out of the woodwork....
@@SenkaZver cope harder. You can't handle criticism so you have to demonize any people who criticised Godot, even if I blame Mike for clickbait.
@@Capewearer oh so this makes sense. You're a chud
@@Capewearer seriously dude, get a life
Might be hard when most programmers are banned.. =/
objectively untrue, most programmers are not banned
MIKE MIKE MIKE ON A TRIKE DO DO DO!
I tried Godot last night but just couldn't do it.
It takes more than one day to get a good idea about any engine
@Vegan_Kebab_In_My_Hand just wasn't for me. But that's good it's getting more updates.
@@scottcastle9119 it's hard for me to use other engines now that I'm used to Godot. It's understandable if you don't like it, it's not the same for everyone obviously...
Ehhh if you want to make something simple and fast then godot is a no brainer and compared to other engines it's learning curve is much better
But i'll agree. GDscript is an absolute cancer to use, the .net integration is held together by ducktape and there are so many problems with either no fix online or you'll spend hours/days trying to implement an imperfect solution.
nicee
Huh. Weird. I was told Godot was going to die because of a bunch of very fragile dudes got easily offended at a joke and forked it.
I would consider Godot for low poly game projects.
But given the schism, I'll look into Godot forks to see which team of developers prove themselves capable if they have improvements or tweaks that give them a performance edge over the main on specific situations.
there is no schism, and road to vostok is a great example of a high fidelity 3D FPS survival game.
@@tapo9478 "high fidelity" is questionable, it looks closer to a Source game like Half Life 2 or some Xbox 360 titles than anything really modern like Battlefield 5 or Doom Eternal. But then again it is a Solo project so still impressive. And not like Tarkov is a looker either.
@@tapo9478 take off the drugs. RtV looks like a cheap "tactical" shooter made from generic assets. Lighting is flat, vegetation is from early 2000s, buildings are flat boxes with projected textures.
And what's bad, it stutters. Of course, it doesn't work well on old hardware.
@@tapo9478 Sûre it’s good now…but Godot doesn’t scale well for big games; it’s going to be interesting to see what happens with it.
damn now i am hyped.
No terrain lmao
what's wrong with terrain3d? a lean core with modules means that specific features like terrain can be iterated on much more rapidly because they can ship and update on their own schedule. a bugfix or feature update can come out immediately without waiting on a whole new engine release.
Don't expect it any time soon. The Godot team is super reluctant to add any significant feature even if it's been requested for several years.
Either way if you need terrain in Godot use Terrain3D, it seems to work pretty well.
this is a weird one. i've heard the justification about wanting to keep the core simple and generic, but then you've got stuff like a whole vehicle system that nobody ever uses because it doesn't work and a bunch of rendering features that nobody uses because they're so niche and a bunch of specialized UI components that only exist because the editor uses them... like i really feel like more games have terrain than tree-based menu interactions or janky car physics.
@@tapo9478 that's third-party solution, it may be broken with each Godot update.
Hi Mike. Godot lost me with their little woke political tantrum. Have you seen the Redot fork?
You’re a victim of Twitter bait. Redot is already dead. Just pulling from the Godot repo
What tantrum? You mean the tantrum that a bunch of people threw at Godot for joking about calling themselves Wokedot? Or the people spamming the GitHub?
You’re a victim of Twitter bait
lol
He posted a video about it shortly after the kerfuffle. In short, he will report on engine forks when they do something notable and distinct in the source code, covering the fork itself is pointless since nothing has changed really from a code/features perspective just yet.
I'm still curious why the launcher refers to it as the 'Godot Game Engine,' especially now that Godot is used for so much more than just games. With apps, tools, and all sorts of creative projects being built on it, calling it just 'Godot Engine' feels more fitting-or maybe that's just me! Either way, it's exciting to see how the engine is evolving. Thanks for sharing this update with us, Mike!
Does it still comes with a politically radicalized pr team?
One twitter drama and you dorks latch on it forever. Is this your whole personality or something?
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls 100 Points it is.
Are you are an actual dev who wants to make games, or someone who wants to cash on Twitter posts all day?
@@GoblinArmyInYourWallsthey literally can't survive without drama and never matured enough to move on from things.
I wish your comments came with a bit of intelligence. But I guess not....
Was hoping there would be some effort for visual scripting/programming.
Redot Game Devs 💪💪
Redot? That woke engine that chased away based financial supporter Starkium? Nah
@SenkaZver Redot is about Game Development Progress not Politics. Redot is doing things for the game devs that really matter.
@@SenkaZver Wasn't Redot supported by the _anti_ woke...?
@@reptiliannoizezz.413 yes, and godot isn't. Makes it one of the better choices
👎Woke game engine. 👎
Snowflake
Oh dear lord wow a *checks notes* a Twitter drama had rotted this man's brain
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls I would say that the snowflakes are the devs of the engine.
There was an ongoing fork without the bullsh1t, just dev'ving. reddot.
@@GoblinArmyInYourWalls go check the thread. Wokot team even banned platinum sponsors, in a full woke rage attack.
@vxvicky ...they banned people who spammed. Deserved bans.
Meh, Redot's looking really interesting right now
How?
Really? Are there new features? I was under the impression it was just a fork for political brain rot spergs who don't like the other side political brain rot spergs. Are you saying it has some new and unique features though? Do tell?
@@RarebitFiends some ppl just wanna kick back, relax and not think about politics when working on something they like. At least for me it sometimes feels like ads but for other ppls opinions instead of commercial products and I support having a right to not associate yourself with politics whan you just wanna do what makes you happy :P
This only matters if Redot ends up performing better than Godot in some way, or if it has features that Godot lacks.
No it isn't.
I was a bit worried about what might happen after the whole Godot Twitter disaster, especially since the dev supported it. But honestly, I’m hopeful that the Godot Engine will keep getting better like it always has!
They gonna GoFork themselves or what?
I'm confused.