Godot maturity (especially regarding 3D)

:information_source: Attention Topic was automatically imported from the old Question2Answer platform.
:bust_in_silhouette: Asked By RandomShaper
:warning: Old Version Published before Godot 3 was released.

I have landed on top of Godot a week ago or so. I find it very enjoyable to work with and I’ve started learning to prototype ideas and probably do the real development when it’s time.

I can live with little bugs. I’ve already found and reported some no show-stopper issues. But I see the list of issues growing every few hours.

I’m especially concerned about those issues about physics/collisions. And due to the fact that they still say it’s not too much proven for 3D I’m wondering if it’s reliable enough for actual development.

I’ve also checked a bit about… well, I won’t say that curse word, so let’s call it Duality6D divided by two ha-ha. It’s widely proven for 2D and 3D and now free for little devs, but the fact that it’s privative frightens me. (I was a former user of the Smashed fruit with sugar added SDK and they changed the pricing and license terms making it a very bad option for me. And what’s more both they and Duality… owners can do it everytime they wish.) For Godot, being OSS and not forcing splash screens nor ads is very valuable for me.

What’s your opinion/experience on this matter?

I would say, 2D is awesome. Make games with it.
3D is not so great, and it will be reworked in v3.0 anyways. If I were to make a medium/large 3D game now, i would choose Duality6D or the Real Engine. Anyways, waiting for Godot should bring you improved features during this year, if you can :stuck_out_tongue:

Zylann | 2016-06-01 20:15

I can wait a bit more. I’m still at the design phase and also have to maintain another project. By the way, I’ve found an engine called Duality actually exists (a recurrent pun, I guess, ha-ha). Regardless what I do in the end, I’ll keep an attentive eye on Godot because it’s future looks bright.

RandomShaper | 2016-06-01 22:00

:bust_in_silhouette: Reply From: GlaDOSik

3D is dated, but OK. You can make a very pretty game with the right art style (unshaded materials + hand painted textures, retro look like Devil Daggers has). You can even bake the lighting in Blender and try something more realistic looking. Unfortunately, there are problems related to animations in 3D. Some of the classes are old and buggy. 3.0 should not only bring the new renderer, but also modernize a lot of classes related to 3D.
Right now, I’m working on a 3D project and my plan is to use 2.0 and upcoming 2.1 to make a prototype and test the art style. Some things won’t change, so I can code for an example a character controller. But I definitely won’t work with animations or write complicated shaders.

Interesting point. Could you specify what kind of animations are problematic? Bones?

How do you know those roamap details? I’ve checked Godot’s Trello but I cannot find such detailed info.

RandomShaper | 2016-06-02 09:58

I think that AnimationTreePlayer has some issues. Just look for AnimationTreePlayer in Issues on GitHub and you’ll find them. There were a lot of roadmaps - one on Google docs, one on old website, one is on Trello. I don’t think they are updated but Juan often share his plans on Facebook and GitHub. These informations are scattered.

GlaDOSik | 2016-06-02 11:56

I’m marking your answer as accepted because I think there cannot be much left to be said. @Zylann’s point is also OK but he contributed with a comment, so no need to pick one.
Anyway additional views from more people are welcome.

RandomShaper | 2016-06-02 22:58