|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyanmac
535 days ago
|
|
I don't disagree at all with any of your insight. It took Unity and Epic well over a decade each of support and proven games to even get their foot in the door with some studios. And to this day quite a few prolific studios will still use custom tech. Assembly has obvious dev strain that helped with c/++ adoption, while Rust isn't trying to claim it will relieve such strain in C/++, outside of bugs and safety. But I've seen enough game code bases to know thats a very distant, low priority in the modern gaming scene. For those that do care: Rust for those studios won't be adopted as abruptly "we're using Bevy now!". Studios will probably start slowly tooling parts of Rust in more critical parts of the engine, or using frameworks made over the coming years. Most engineers not dedicated to that work may ever even know there's Rust under the hood. ----- I guess my main reservation comes from me looking from a different lens. It won't be Naughty Dog nor IDTech that will make the "Quake" of Rust, it'll definitely a small, lean team closer to that of Croteam, or at least a yet unknown studio with that kind of discipline for optimization built into their culture. And with the current landscape it's not going to be trying to fight with AAA games to achieve that milestone. But it'll build it's own community around it and overall rise all ships from that. How high it goes from there, I can't say. ---- P.s. I do appreciate the history lesson. Also reminds me how I'm a bit sad that Microsoft killed so much of the potential C# scene last decade. C# always felt like a good middle ground between the nwas that was Java for Game Development while still staying in a safer space for those who don't need blazing fast C++ support. At least they still supported C# itself to a point where we almost have all the tools needed to work a basically unmanaged environment when needed. |
|