Oh, that bit about being forced into a 3D space even if you're making a game in two dimensions is so true. (It's like Plato's cave lol.) All game engines should be 2D. Even if you're making a 3D game. Especially if you're making a 3D game!
Duke Nukem 3D's Build engine actually was this. It was a transitional step between Doom and Quake's true 3D, where maps were drawn out in 2D, and then floors and ceilings were given height values but didn't exist on a true Z axis. Which meant you couldn't have any overlapping spaces, one floor directly above another, because it wouldn't know which map section it was supposed to be and would start bugging out.
"I am intensely aware of the way my preference for Photoshop over Figma is the result of arbitrary effects due to historical circumstances, like someone preferring Bob Dylan to Kendrick Lamar." I spit out my coffee on this one Frank. We are the same age, but I feel like I'm listening to you "old man" at me, lol!!! XXOO, Tracy
I liked BASIC a lot as a kid and it was a great environment for learning to code, but I credit Unity for my learning game development. The fact that it is opinionated gave me the frequent experience of wondering why they expected me to write my code a certain way, and then being pleasantly surprised as I came to understand.
In fact, I even feel that the areas (like animation) where Unity made the wrong architectural choices were educational -- the asset store usually contains some brilliant person's answer to the problem, and you get to read their code for free if you buy the tool.
A similar domain where the expectations of the tooling creates a sort of implicit apprenticeship is IDEs. I learned so many C# language features from auto complete suggesting I use them!
There are (digital) tools people hate, and there are tools no one uses. The balance is the point where the rage starts driving you away from the project rather than through it.
And here follows the obligatory "try Godot" response :P
Oh, that bit about being forced into a 3D space even if you're making a game in two dimensions is so true. (It's like Plato's cave lol.) All game engines should be 2D. Even if you're making a 3D game. Especially if you're making a 3D game!
Duke Nukem 3D's Build engine actually was this. It was a transitional step between Doom and Quake's true 3D, where maps were drawn out in 2D, and then floors and ceilings were given height values but didn't exist on a true Z axis. Which meant you couldn't have any overlapping spaces, one floor directly above another, because it wouldn't know which map section it was supposed to be and would start bugging out.
Hype for more Frank games!! Keep 'em comin'!
I think you’ll like this one
"I am intensely aware of the way my preference for Photoshop over Figma is the result of arbitrary effects due to historical circumstances, like someone preferring Bob Dylan to Kendrick Lamar." I spit out my coffee on this one Frank. We are the same age, but I feel like I'm listening to you "old man" at me, lol!!! XXOO, Tracy
I liked BASIC a lot as a kid and it was a great environment for learning to code, but I credit Unity for my learning game development. The fact that it is opinionated gave me the frequent experience of wondering why they expected me to write my code a certain way, and then being pleasantly surprised as I came to understand.
In fact, I even feel that the areas (like animation) where Unity made the wrong architectural choices were educational -- the asset store usually contains some brilliant person's answer to the problem, and you get to read their code for free if you buy the tool.
A similar domain where the expectations of the tooling creates a sort of implicit apprenticeship is IDEs. I learned so many C# language features from auto complete suggesting I use them!
There are (digital) tools people hate, and there are tools no one uses. The balance is the point where the rage starts driving you away from the project rather than through it.