this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
2017 points (99.3% liked)

Games

32480 readers
1141 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Picture taken from their Twitter

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 149 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Because changing the engine in an existing project is a huge pita that requires many, many hours and possibly in some cases a full rewrite.

This also applies to games that would be released in 2023 or 2024.

Nobody should be considering Unity for a new project, but it's understandable to make either decision for many existing projects.

Ripping out the engine of your game isn't a trivial thing.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Many many hours is a massive understatement.

Thousands and thousands of hours is more appropriate

[–] terny@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know how you could change the engine without rewriting the entire thing basically from scratch.

[–] mee@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It really depends on how modular their codebase is. The Doom 1/2 modern ports they did in 2019 use Unity. But it's actually still the original Doom underneath and just using Unity for input and output to make porting easier

[–] cozycosmic@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I agree, although a lot of the work going into a game is the game design, art, and iteration, and not just the programming and rigging. And it may actually be a catalyst to rewrite parts better

[–] my_hat_stinks@programming.dev 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Strongly disagree. While a lot of work does go on to art assets which should be simpler to migrate, the code is absolutely what makes the game. There are tons of very successful games with low quality or stock assets, there are very few popular games with broken code.

Even then, it's still a lot of effort to check every asset you're using to ensure they work as expected in your new engine.

[–] TechieDamien@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I agree for a specific scenario: if you don't use many unity specific packages or assets. Then, perhaps you are correct, still I don't blame anyone staying even in that case, as it is still daunting to take on such a task.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

You're completely right