Okay. So Urho3D is right up your alley then? What is your experience and opinion of Urho3D?
Well, I’ve started tampering with it about february… and still I’m messing around… so it’s early for me to get the whole picture… flexible it is, and that’s important… but you pay a price for it with a more in convoluted pipeline… for now i’m porting some 2d apps i did in cocos to get the feeling, so let’s see what happens…
what’s your impression about it?
Well, since I have been learning shaders, because I want to create my own ocean (with realistic rolling waves - hard job ), I haven’t really used the engine, other than to create a terrain. However, here is my take…
I like it’s features, the examples, and it seems to have potential to produce good games. I kinda like the editor, although I think it’s way outdated, and could be improved significantly, so it is not exactly what I was looking for. I was looking for an engine with an editor that allows me to work entirely from (scripting needed only for more game logic - sort of like Game Maker), and with better control, since that would allow me to work faster, and have more time for modeling and artwork.
So I think that was the only downside for me, so far.
I just came across Urho’s build on, and the editor seems to be what I desire. So I am looking at giving that a try. All in all, I will still be playing with Urho3D, in the same way as I am playing with jMonkeyEngine, because I learn something from each engine, and as I said, I am learning the c++ language from angelscript code.
I see. Then you’re probably better off with that. Urho c++ it’s much more programmer centric imho. Editor is fine but a bit rough. I still have problem with importing models…
The sharp/js version are probably more comfortable. Especially if you prefer to work on art…
Yes. Improving the editor I think can do a whole lot for Urho3D.
I think I would enjoy using it more, along with the c++ coding, which I think I am going to enjoy learning, since I like angelscript…appreciate your input.
I do the “oh my god I’m stuck” coding for a friend that uses Godot.
Did you check what perf was like without the Godot editor running? That thing is a machine hog, the only real knock I have on Godot is that the editor is such a painfully slow eating monster. Not a fan of the source-project structure, but it is what it is and livable enough that I don’t really complain much on that off day I get dragged into it by my friend.
Don’t forget that in that 109fps shot that Godot is still running and rendering behind it … and it has a whole lot of GUI to render on top of that - there’s likely more going on in the GUI than your scene and the 4-way split edit viewport combined and multiplied a few times.
Framerates in general:
It’s not odd for even minor work to drag a framerate down in any project. Going from 100 -> 70 FPS is more meaningful than 1000 -> 300 FPS.
Without the fps, it seemed like it’s performance wasn’t to my satisfaction. Running on my emulator, it’s stalling - that’s just with my terrain doing a slow 360.It may also be the case that my other running processes were contributing to the lag.
However, if the engine itself is hogging my resources, then I wouldn’t find it pleasurable to work with. I prefer an engine that allows me to work without too much lag. Hence why I am unable to use UDK, although that seems to be a great engine.
Godot is an easy engine to use, and I think it might do well for games that do not require much detail. I have seen demos of it, all of which appear low poly, but they look great.
I guess some persons are good at making things work, or I need to get a more efficient pc, like a quad core.
Well, I was getting “solid” 20fps with Godot without editor. It is fine when editor consumes CPU, but I should be able to see something on optimized builds, but I did not. But that was some time ago, so they could fix this now.
In general I get low frame rates with engines, so having solid 60fps on my i7 2600K is a party!
Only Unity end UE4 gave some solid frame rates. And commercial games. (I use nVidia GTX660).
I was not able to get anything about Godot in 3D. As for 2D it had too many bugs for me to handle,
and there are many much better 2D engines around there to bother. Also high demand on graphics hardware
locked it off my embedded targets, so Godot have no use for me at the moment. But I follow in hope things will
change after some time.
What I like about Godot is script-GUI integration, where one can write some portion in script executable in editor and
get nice properties window Unity style (even better). But inability to get adequate help and inability to get some result
forced me to move on.