Thank you so much for covering ezEngine! I'm one of the devs behind it. To clarify a few points here: - As you've guessed already we don't support Mac and Linux because we concentrated on the DX11 renderer so far. - Documentation is currently being worked on. Glad you checked it out at this time because there has been almost zero documentation a few months ago ;)
@@varshard0At some point maybe. It's not like we don't want to do it, but we are ~3-4 people working on and off on this project in our spare time. We all have a fulltime job and families so our time is very limited. Implementing a Vulkan renderer is a lot of work and there are other features that give us more benefit for the implementation effort.
@@C-Core Understood. Vulkan and DirectX12 are targeting a much lower level than DirectX11 and OpenGL. It's especially impressive with such a small team people.
@Amanda Archer There were a few, but not that many and most of the ones from that time are dead. The ones I can think of that I messed around with were RPG Toolkit and Sphere. Both of those were 2d engines too.
@@zoltankurti \\ Let me rephrase. Because Cvid is 'almost' non existent. Do you know of Event201? The novel coronavirus simulation held by John Hopkins, Bill & M Foundation, and The World Economic Forum? It was held 6 weeks before the outbreak and 'predicted' what is happening right now. Of course you didn't know. Guess who is the stupid one.
I'm starting to think one of the side effects of COVID-19 is the sudden desire to develop a game engine. Holy shit these things are popping up like dandelions!
Thanks for sharing this, I've been looking for a good template to start my own engine from, Never even knew this existed and I looked everywhere for open source MIT c++ engine frameworks keep up the good work
My god when I was a kid I dreamed of a day like this or one of the biggest hurdles for making games was just simply choosing an engine because there are so many of them!! This is my dream come true.
Unreal keep pushing realistic graphics, Unity is divide by so many update and unfinished features, so It is understandable that "ez" is not actually ez. lol
Lol, I had the same problem, wherein I got stuck in a loop of going back and forth between Godot, Unity, GameMaker and Defold. I finally decided to drop them all and write my own engine. Maybe a bit stupid, but I encourage others to do so, too.
@@akshayazariah I would like the idea but it's so far fetched. I didn't make jackshit with what I had in all these months or should I say years. I also would have to learn about engine programming too.
@@vaishnav_mallya Engine programming is not as difficult to people make it out to be. If you're looking to make an advanced 3D engine, you're gonna have to be heavy on math and physics. But for a simple 2D engine you won't be nearly as troubled. You'll go far by going step by step. To simplify it, a game engine requires an input wrapper, audio engine, sprite loader, sprite atlas support, and two simple math and physics engines. You can always just use Box2D or Bullet for 3D.
@@chepulis There are plenty of things that should be optional, depending on the game you are building. Forcing a modular/plugin design allows the engine to actually exclude things without a fear of destabilizing the core. It's way too easy to have one method call force you to be dependent on an entire module; and once that link is made, it's difficult to refactor without breaking anything.
Had to search about and what I found was: now to install qt binaries you need to have a QT account, Long Term Support(LTS) releases and offline installer will become available to commercial licensees only and New Qt offering for start-ups and small businesses for $499/year.
Qt was always a commercial product.I do not see the problem. Programmers have to pay bills too. Unless you are willing to give some support, do not expect bugs free engines. After all, the whole point of learning to programming isn't to get pay for doing what you love to do? The team should kickstart the project for financing it. $499 is a bargain for a complete GUI like Qt.
no offense to Godot I mean its pretty good and all, but man GDScript sucks, its like its not lua and its not python, its like worst of both worlds. Should have just used python instead IMHO.
@@masoodahmed4718 Yeah, no... GDscript has the ease of use of python and has been extended to fill Python's gaps that a game engine requires. Python being one of the most popular and efficient languages, a developer would feel right at home. It is one of the nicest qualities about Godot.
I remember a few months ago when I had "forgotten" about my childhood dream of making games. Also because in the past, the things we have now weren't easy to find. Now I'm continiously confronted with one game engine after the other. Though at the moment, still sticking with Godot for my game. Probably best to stick to one engine untill I got the grasps of game-development in general. Although this one looks nice too. Which one is actually recommended when you are more of a (3d) designer than a coder? Don't remember if you've already done a comparison of some of these open-source/MIT-license game engines before... or updated it.
It's nice to see this but there's no point to develop game engine that does not support as many platforms as possible because it will drastically narrow the number of people who will use it. People will prefer to opt for another engine that already have community, lot's of tutorials and with which have already build some AAA games. For instance, UE4 supports all platforms (win, android, ios and/or linux), there are lots of AAA games build with UE4 or Unity, UE4 have coding via Blueprints, you can build entire game only with Blueprints without one single line of code so other people (non-programmers) and designers also can use it...
Unreal is a great option, for a few reasons: - you can use visual programming and/or c++ - it has a lot of tutorials and courses - it has great documentation - it is free under 1 million dollars
I want spheres. Like, proper spheres. And proper cylinders. What engine would most easily allow me to incorporate custom renderers for spheres and cylinders so that I don't have to put up with unsightly corners?
Most likely not. For a couple reasons, first it really seems like vapor at this point, it keeps starting over and over and over. I was going to cover it... something like 6 years ago. Since then its changed languages twice and still isn't beta.
Noxid The Gamer, They support targeting linux so thats not the problem, I daily drive linux. Also linux gamers exist, and theres a large amount of them, have a look at the r/linux_gaming and thats only the people on reddit. Yeah its a low amount sharing 0.89% of steam as of april this year, I feel its a missed opportunity if not taken. But its never too big of a problem, theres always wine and proton. I feel software development is just easier better and quicker on linux, you know the os make for developing.
Downloaded the latest binaries, but it doesn't run. Any batch file I try to run gives me an error saying (roughly translated) _"couldn't find the entry point for the procedure EventSetInformation in the DLL (dynamic-link library) ADVAPI32.dll"._
@@gamefromscratch I found it quite interesting, especially the building tools, but it also seemed to me like it suffers from a sort of _RPG Maker Syndrome,_ in that most (if not all) games you find look glaringly like they were made in Roblox... And it seems like you can't release standalone apps either...
@@skaruts standalone apps is a no go. The support is amazingly bad. It's been going on the decline for years and developers aren't happy. Especially since employees have all access to code including out engine api keys and tokens
@@greenbillugaming2781 indeed. Most successfull engine are cause of community. To gain huge community engine needs to adapt to a wide audience, as many platforms as possible and lots of tutorials. That's why UE4 and Unity is popular (they are also very old engines). Unreal also provides coding in Blueprints, entire game can be build only with blueprints without one single line of code, so non-programmers or designers also can use it. And also, maybe the most important, there should be at least one or few popular AAA games build with that engine. That's where Godot Engine failed so far (but maybe it will change in the future).
@@ashwinrawat9622 The major block here is that there is only a dx11 renderer at the moment. Once a cross platform backend is implemented then porting to linux and Mac becomes easy. The team is small so doing Windows only to begin with makes sense because the can focus on features rather than cross platform woes. Once it is feature rich enough then they can focus on porting to other platforms.
@@jayrulez I guess I missed that point. Oh well, good for our choice paralysis. Game engines these days are like node js frameworks, a new one appears every week haha.
