I mean it’s easy to reimplement entire games if you’ve built it modularly. Just swap your core game logic to run on another library and the game works the same it did before.
I bet they will do so for their next game but reimplementing a entire game is FAR easier said than done, something like that could very well bankrupt a smaller studio!
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
Overwrite7445@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Game Dev isnt just code. Remaking a project from scratch is a massive undertaking. Porting the code could be difficult too especially if relying on core unity libraries.
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
Not downplaying the effort, it still takes time. But not impossible.
How you made it all matters in situations like this.
BURN@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Technically you’re not wrong. The work is done, the logic already exists.
But systems like Unity aren’t like other code where you can rip one section out and still have 80% of a working codebase. Game engines are as fundamental to most of their game code as the language it’s written in. It’s not like you can just drop things into unreal or godot, connect a few interfaces and call it good. You still have to write the whole thing from the ground up.
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
As I said, it depends on how it’s built. And how proprietqry the engine is.
Unity from what I know supports universal code/mesh/texture formats, but if the devs opted for the “easier to use” proprietary systems- well, that’s a problem.
Now what I don’t know is how easy are scenes to export in Unity. They’re probably built with Blender or something else though in most cases, unless Unity has drastically changed.
BURN@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Assets are safe, but they often need to be re-rigged or re-formatted. It’s still a non-trivial task though. Levels will need to be rebuilt, open worlds have to be started almost from scratch, and a lot of other things I can’t think of off the top of my head.
The real problem is underlying systems. Unity often handles networking, render engines, game logic and most other things. The reason Unity was so popular was because it was easy to use (and free). Game code will need to be at minimum heavily refactored, if not rewritten, as anything that interfaces with the engine needs to be changed over. Just like you can’t just port c++ -> c# without major changes, you can’t port a game engine without major changes too.
Unless theyve built everything as a separate code bundle, only interacting with the engine at a bare minimum, there’s no way to change with minor impact. It’ll be a huge project that will also require the engineers to learn a new stack that behaves differently, further slowing down the process.
Cypher@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Look I’ve written game engine wrappers and converters for all sorts of code and file types.
It would honestly be easier to fire up Unreal Engine 5 or Godot and start again.
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
Well I’d say that was true 5 years ago. Is it still? I’d not be so sure.
Small projects might as well start from scratch.
But projects with years of devtime are best ported.
AeonFelis@lemmy.world 9 months ago
The surface area is huge. This is not an SQL database where you can just change the ORM’s backend.
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
Depends how it’s built.
AeonFelis@lemmy.world 9 months ago
If you don’t use anything from the engine itself, implement everything from scratch, only using the engine as an entry point that launches your own code, and pay unity two thousand dollars per year per seat for that privilege - I guess porting should be fairly easy.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 9 months ago
It also depends on how many engine unique features you used, and what optimizations you applied. It’s certainly possible, but doing it without changing any game logic will require very complicated translation layers which will likely cause performance issues. It might very well be easier to treat it as a porting and refactoring project. You might not even realize which behaviors are unique to each engine if you don’t regularly develop in multiple engines.
dog@suppo.fi 9 months ago
This is true, and I vouch for gamedevs to first test other engines to see the differences.
Calculating for the future is extremely important in pretty much everything.
Also I wouldn’t say there would be performance issues, unless you somehow completely screw up coding and compiling said code.
Projects should work on top of a bottom layer, or translation layer as it’s sometimes called; game logic calls for functions from there, instead of directly from the engine. This is also important for code security.
_move_entity might be calling the proprietary unity_move_object with a different reg stack, but when compiled the performance should be +/- 0.
CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 9 months ago
But not moving could be far worse based on what some devs are saying.
AeonFelis@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Not moving is what they’ll do if “changes are completely reverted and TOS protections are put in place”. In such a case, while punishing Unity is still desirable, there won’t be installation fees that justify the costs of rewriting the game.