[enbugger]

Yet another one. Along with Stride, Godot, Unigine, O3DE, Flax and tens more. All look like they just want be clone of UE: generic dark UI with inspector, scene hierarchy, asset browser in the bottom and play button in the top. Zero creativity and innovation. Where's Emacs or Vim of game engines which brings its own unique philosophy?

[lukan]

"Where's Emacs or Vim of game engines which brings its own unique philosophy?"

All forgotten in obscurity.

When making a game, people are usually not so much interested in the philosophy of their tools, but shipping things with it as soon as possible.

That means working as expected.

[enbugger]

And then the forums and subreddits are flooded with miserable folks complaining about how destructive, inextensible and unpleasant to use those experiences are. This is not the problem of UI in engines itself, it's problem of how long it takes to bring it to acceptable state with all those moving parts. For UE, Unity and Blender it took decades.

[StopDisinfo910]

Complaining is a lot easier than actually doing anything.

Realise that the people you are slinging mud at are actually busting their asses to provide game engines to the public some of them for free and with the source.

[fodkodrasz]

To be honest for most developers editors are much alike. While Emacs and Vim guys debate on their philosophies and config files others just open their favourite editor/IDE and ship.

[stavros]

This take has given me second degree burns. I must have never shipped anything then, what with vim being my favorite editor.

[mikkupikku]

Lol, I haven't tinkered with my emacs config in nearly 10 years now. Most vim and emacs users put together a config they like over maybe a few weekends then get to work. We have deadlines to meet just like all the rest of you.

[wvbdmp]

I don’t understand this take. The abundance of game engines has never been greater, both open and proprietary. As has the abundance of indie games. Some people make a distinction between more batteries-included engines with editors etc. and “game frameworks”, which are supposedly more bare-bones libraries such as Bevy or Babylon.js. Maybe that’s what you’re after?

[lelandbatey]

Complaining about the UI color and button layout of an game _engine_ is a bit like comparing aircraft carriers by the color of the rug in the control room. What about the built-in tools for organizing and connecting assets, format support, how user input is handled, the batteries-included ways to model game state, and all the ways of interconnecting all those things in the code the engine provides? Does anyone have interesting comparisons/notes around those subjects as it relates to the S&box engine?

[aDyslecticCrow]

Who cares about the UI. A game engine is the library code needed to make games, not the editor UI. Just use vim to edit your files if that's what you want.

[knollimar]

Not all game files are text and the non-text parts massively benefit from good UI.

[intrasight]

I am confused by this as well (not a game developer). The engine is under the hood and has no UI. The UI is in the car cabin.

Non-text file editing is done in a 3d model or image editing app.

[daeken]

The vast majority of non-text editing in game development isn't done in modeling or image manipulation apps, it's done via the game engine's editor. That's true whether you're using Unity, Unreal, Godot, or a homebrew engine.

There are the rare engines with no editor to speak of -- where things are either done programmatically or other textual definitions -- but they're very very very few and far between.

The engine itself doesn't have a UI, but working with any major engine without using their editor is functionally impossible.

[aDyslecticCrow]

Code is code, use a text editor.

3D assets can be made in your 3d program of choice.

Skeletons and animations are also somewhat standard. Use whatever tool you prefer.

Textures are bound to 3d assets, and use plenty of 3rd party tools.

USD makes scenes interchangeable. Use or write tools to fit your needs.

compute shaders are also somewhat standard. Work them out in python until you're happy with them.

Thats alot of it, if you really hate all game engine UIs. But the UI was good enough for the developer of the engine so mabie it's good enough as is.

[knollimar]

I think the game engine UIs are very good for hooking parts together, personally.

[jazzyjackson]

I would suppose anyone being creative and innovative with their game engines are happily using their creation without trying to turn it into a community or business model to the point where you would have heard of it.

[mikkupikku]

Emacs and Vi were both born from an era when industry standard UX had not yet been developed, so they were both explorations in relatively uncharted UX space. This kind of thing only happens anymore when you get a project lead by somebody ignorant/indifferent to established conventions who sets out to make something new without caring if anybody else uses it.

So the projects you desire almost certainly do exist, but they're languishing in the obscurity they earned with their indifference to convention.

[Fnoord]

wasd is that, and then 1-9 (tho 9 and such is hard to reach) for the weapons/spells/tools, with keys near wasd for other binds, and the mouse for free look, autorun, shoot, and alt with scrollwheel for swapping weapon, too. This way, you use practically only the left side of the keyboard, but that is because keyboards aren't even an ideal input device for gaming. Something like an Azeron device (think: Orbweaver) would be far better.

BG3 has F5 for quick save and F8 for quick restore. Like the old ways.

As for game engine, who cares how things look in-game? Just make it theme-able and mod-able. Cheaters gonna cheat anyway, no way to hold that back on the client-side.

[Philpax]

https://bevy.org/