Why I'm Glad I Didn't Use Unity 

Im not hating...but if you used pygame to make a 2d game thats literally lowest level programming possible. Thats arguably easier than a traditional 3d engine.

@@etopr4986 What do you mean by low level?

@@etopr4986 Do you mean high level? Btw I'm not writing this to be rude. But isn't a low level language like assembly or machine code? High level would be like all the known languages. Well from what I researched anyway.

@@TechOrionater I mean low level PyGame is literally just moving 2d sprites around its beyond simple. Its like really baby level "engine".

@@TechOrionater There are two different kinds of low and high level, in this case I dont mean close to hardware I mean not complicated

This joke is so overused it's not even funny

@@herre3147 well 12 people actually think its funny

@@shashikanthp3145 Good for you, but that doesn't mean it isn't overused. On any video where someone does something impressive at a younger age you see this joke at least 3 times in the comments.

@@herre3147 It was funny and the first time I saw it mate

no but its true i was always fascinated at how the lights of the fridge turned off and clicked when you were about to close it

*CHONKY BRAIN*

i don't really call that as a big brain motive it is more likely that he's wise.

But It literally doesn't matter? "Videogame time is over, Timmy" "But moooom, I made this game" "Cool beans, So?" "Limit doesn't count" "Are you playing a game?" "...yes" "Then as I said before, videogame time is over"

Just say you're play testing your game to find bugs, then it makes it sound like you're working on it rather than just playing it.

*P L A Y* testing

LOL, one of the best comment here.

Bruh why not just reinvent the whole binary system and program with 0 and 1s

@@118andrey i dont like 1s, i think I'll go only 0s

Stopped the video at 2:00 for looking at "reinventing the wheel" comment but yours is better :D

I made gta 5 using binary

Price is not d issue. It's learning & solving problems . Unity is for lazy people. It cannot run at every devices properly . Heavy resource taker .

@@zz-ly4qd it is heavy, that's true, but most computers can Run Unity just fine, while it does take a lot of memory. it's totally worth it, the software itself is amazing, but I don't think it's right to say unity is for "lazy people" since programming itself requires a lot of work, regardless of what domain or field of it you choose, wheather that be AI,gamedev,webdev, etc....

⁠@@zz-ly4qdyou just disrespected everyone who uses unity even though you still have to put work into it like mabey I just want to make a game like how is it lazy to make a game your python ect: is making an engine and a game , so what ? how is it lazy to make a game

Unity fixed their price btw ( not trying to contradict your comment since it was a while ago though )

All the people here are professional essay writers

"A frame is both supportive and inflexible" great quote!

@@EelcoHillenius That's a pretty good quote, but I would add "and open source is a welder"

@@LegendLength hes getting stronger

​@@EelcoHilleniusThat's indeed a good point!

He gets more clicks by putting Unity in the title

Yh unity is better for views

Yeah exactly! But unity keyword can bring more views:) the reason I watched the video

Unity is the de facto game engine. Beginners to Pro's. Indies all the way up to more or less AAA. (not sure about AAA) It is like the main one that the business model was to give the engine tools to costumers at a reasonable price. Or you go with Source or Quake and make a mod out of a other game on the market. Totally acceptable title. Like he said this decision began YEARS ago. Better tittle. "Why I'm Glad I Didn't Use Unity or made mods for games" And instead focused on data science instead of game making tools.

@@Kednems You would to. Its the way of youtube now. I do no agree with it but how it is. We should blame youtube algorithms or ourselfs. Clickbait is annoying, it is like prices in shops, why be $1 when you can look cheaper and better with 99cents

Hahaha :D I hope you made your own buckets from scratch.

@@JamesTsividis Of course. This project started many years ago when my first stone age tools were made. My first game will be completed.... soon. I'm so glad I didn't use Unity.

@@wartem have you created electricity yet?

What a dumb question. Uve already created a device, even though simple, capable of commenting on you tube. Hope you finish your game soon.

Ultimate DIY. I salute you.

I agree but hes also right that you learn a lot by developing your own stuff. Imma be sticking to unity tho.

And you’ll find it easier to get a job if you know the current frameworks.

@@snooksv3172 Compared to what exactly? Possessing deep knowledge of how those frameworks have to function under the hood? I'll take the person with real knowledge over surface level knowledge any day of the week. Any numbskull can memorize apis. A true professional asks why.

Then again, I suppose they didn't promote Einstein when he was working at the patent office. Apparently he didn't put enough of his effort into memorizing the surface level details of whatever machines they were using at the time. He was too busy, you know, completely reinventing our understanding of time and space.

There's plenty of reasons to developing a library similar to what already exists. Even the wheel needs to be reinvented all the time. Otherwise we'd use wooden wheels on everything, and that's just insanity. It really depends on whether you want to do work by having deeper understanding and making things from ground up with those base understandings, or if you want to get good at executing recipes. The first is more time consuming, but allows you extreme flexibility and potential for serious innovation / originality. The second is extremely efficient, and allows you to get complicated stuff done fast, as long as you stay within the territory the recipes are made to handle (otherwise you will need to create hacks / systems on top of systems etc., essentially working around the approach you've chosen). I would much rather do the first, assuming I'd get good pay and have the time needed for it - but the second is better for dishing out prototypes and new combinations of existing functionality. Basically the first is truly creative: Creating something from nothing. The other is recomposition, creating something from what already is, but in novel ways. Both are legitimate, but frankly I think the more follow the line of reasoning of the first, the better (or maybe we're just oversaturated with the second, I don't know). For me, I prefer the first, even though my current path is the second. I suppose the grass is always greener.

How is that?

What did you use to make? They oftlenly costs some dollars and I'm broke af

@@kartoffel245 if you are talking about free game engine, you can use Godot(2d-3d), Unity(2d-3d)and Unreal Engine(3d)

Yeah I used to use scratch too. I stopped using it because of the garbage new 3.0 update

@@iagoaraujo617 thanks UwU

@@iagoaraujo617 Free?

Godot and Python have a similar coding system right? Not the same, but similar...

@@ZiRR0 GDscript (Godot's scripting language) is very pythonic.

C++ is faster and better for games development

It helps that Godot was built specifically to be user-friendly.

@@lmpstudio2321 “better” is a subjective term. It is more performant though

TRUE BROTHER

This. I have a dozen games ideas burning inside me. I want people to play them before I die and it seems like the only way is just to do it myself.

@@cbalan777 lololol

@@cbalan777 why don't you tell me? Man, I've been thinking of what my first *unity* project should be

@@AyushGupta-wn6zd You mean tell you about the kinds of games I want to make? i have all sorts of ideas. Racing games, sports games, family games, adventure games, etc. I have more ideas than I know what to do with.

@@cbalan777 yeah, anything

Well said

@Anton Karpov Yeah, it's not really a game framework, more of a game library so you still have to write your engine on top of that.

this is prob the best comment on this whole subject

I wouldn't really say it's developing an engine, it's more like building a skeleton for your game. In my opinion, it's a lot more fun and fulfilling, and it'll also be more flexible for the game. It also gives more creative opportunities and I learn more than by using pre made engines, which I find a bit limiting and hard to push what you want them to do sometimes.

This is the problem everyone is missing. I myself would go with my own from scratch, I've been making graphics engine at my university for a long time and I surely can do impresive stuff, plus doing your own engine means much lower overhead and much higher degree of control. But then when I think about multi-platform (what if my PC game is successful and I need to port to Switch or even Android/iPhone?), the whole editor stuff for level development, animations are also a bitch to do from code, and the list goes on...

@@pifopifo1000 I am in the opinion that every game developer should (or at least try to) write their own 3D engine before using existing one like Unity or Unreal. It gives a lot of understanding how everything works on lower level and helps making more concious decision when working with big engines in the future.

@@Tasaq313 Luckily making games is just a hobby for me, since I have programming in school. But I will consider making my own game engine or at least trying in the future.

I think you're conflating unrelated ideas here. Developing a game without a game engine doesn't require you to develop an engine yourself. You can't develop an engine out of the blue. You'll build a game as a monolithic set of intertwined functionalities that can't work on their own. You will code only what you really need to code, and you won't build libraries unless they're actually gonna save you time and effort. No game engine originated before a game, or from the making of a single game; they were the coalescence of experience and in-house libraries that grew from repeated code and eventually into a framework and then into an engine. I have a small framework of my own for roguelikes (built on lua/love2d), and its origins are exactly that. I never intended to make one. It just emerged naturally from a few years of writing the same stuff over and over. And then, btw, developing a game without an engine probably still means you'll be using a framework that also comes with a lot of what you need already done for you, like pygame, love2d, raylib, etc.

for me, it feels like that raylib is something between a graphics library and a game engine

@@darakushitatamashi8837 there really aren't strict definitions as far as I know. It can be argued that Pygame isn't a graphics library either because it can play sounds.

I don't like classifying MonoGame/Raylib, etc. as graphics libraries, when they clearly handle more. I'd classify them more as game libraries -- they don't handle higher-level stuff like libGDX so they're not really game frameworks, but they aren't as low-level as raw OpenGL/OpenAL.

@NeoFrags It does, but it's really more of a library.

How would you recommend to learn Raylib?

You can even check Unreal Engine 5 source code to take a peek on how cutting edge game engine are coded. Keep in mind that it is a source available software, unlike Godot which is a free software. But if your point is to study an engine, I think it is good enough.

@@bltzcstrnx Yeah, I work with UE. but Godot is simpler, less lines to read less separate code paths and so on... You need to understand how it works first - the simpler engine the better.

Imma try this

Lets be honest you cant actually make a huge game in pygame, use unreal or unity

@@pitattataaboididid8682 99% of games aren’t ‘big’ games so most people probably don’t need to be too picky in that respect

Same here

Both Love2D and Lua are quite underrated...

@@hermes6910 Yes, but not for actual development.

I was looking to use Love2D, but I think the names of the libraries are quite juvenile, which turned me off of the framework quite quickly.

theres always gonna be platforms or libraries which are superior in some ways to the popular ones. But never underestimate the importance of community support. If you have a technically amazing framework but it has not been widely adopted, you're usually better off picking the lesser framework which has a huge support community. This way you're less likely to be that unfortunate first person to identify an obscure bug, and pretty much every problem already has a solution or workaround which someone else has figured out

I feel like with JavaScript you are limited on the canvas tag? I’ve seen phaser and three.js which are surprisingly really good for JS but other than that, surely the canvas tag is only efficient for a simple snake game?

@@panasonicdiet3691 Yes, making games using Javascript does mean that you are limited to a web browser, or a web view of some sort inside an app. I'd say that the main limitations of it isn't the canvas tag itself, but the performance of Javascript engines. It is an interpreted language, after all.

The language that best supports making your own games entirely through code alone without an engine as of now is Java, which is currently the only language who's standard library grants access to OpenGL and the Apple Metal Graphics API (And is planning on Vulkan in the future I believe) without external libraries

​@@theshermantanker7043 Yes, Java is an incredibly versatile platform., and you also get a large choice of libraries to use if you want to skip the boilerplate. It's also my favorite language to work with in general. Now to be fair, if you are really into raw graphics programming you can also use WebGL inside the browser without any library.

And Ursina, which is based on Panda3D, iirc.

And Lua has Love2D with the Love3D extension.

How did you get a job with those skills?

@@ryutoki i think he is an office boy or something

@@ryutoki Game design, art direction and a lot of similar skills can be learned on practically any engine. Some/most companies may want 'pure' programmers but people with mixed knowledge and assorted skills may come handy in many fields.

Learn unreal instead. Land you into more fields than just gamedev.

Web development is extremely unusual in how many resources there are for it. Also, I’m not specifically saying people should use Pygame. I was suggesting using *any* software to work from a lower level if you are considering working in CS.

Have you checked the book " Making Games with Python & Pygame" by Al Sweigart?

@@DaFluffyPotato The reason why there’s a lot of resources for web development is because it’s a very high demand skill. As for game development, I want to get in the game development and make beginner games and then start making more advanced games. But I don’t know exactly where to start. I don’t know if I should go from Pygame to unity or start from an engine. It seems like knowing a game engine is like using word press or wix to make a website but with html,css, and JavaScript someone can do more detail. Similar to game development. But I’m trying to find a place to start to go from beginner, to intermediate , to advance in making games or from small to big games

@@sevil2467 I haven’t checked it. How far does it take you into it?

For pygame I essentially just grabbed the documentation on what everything was and then went free tying to make stuff from scratch

Lmao legend

Except I use Python

@@DaFluffyPotato He is comparing you to those people, "If you don't write your own engine you arent a real game developer" kind of a mute argument, which you don't even make in this video so idk

@Czekot A happy programmer?? Please teach me!

Technically it's more "If you don't know Assembly you're not a real programmer" since to a layperson Assembly Language is what they imagine all computer code looks like