> close-up image of a cat's face staring down at the viewer
> describe indiana jones
> looks inside
> gets indiana jones
Okay, so the network does exactly what I would expect? If anything you could argue the network is bad because it doesn't recognize your prompt and gives you something else (original? whatever that would mean) instead. But maybe that's just me.
Worker attrition is way too high nowadays to keep deep knowledge in niche fields I believe. Old school seniors have retired and are being replaced by nobody.
You can notice this in a lot of hardware products with "noob" mistakes that the prior product generation did not have etc. Software is probably the same but the product is too opaque to see into so ot just feels crappy.
> It's also an attitude that, if taken to its logical extreme, demands society have an underpaid underclass that suffers so the rest of us can have nice things.
That is how (modern) society works already on a global scale. I am not saying it's good, but it's the way things are.
The worlds economy isn’t underpinned by an underpaid underclass.
Every major commodity cobalt, shoes, cellphones etc has large scale automated production. What’s going on is essentially a parallel system where people making almost nothing can barely out complete automation. However, because both are occurring at the same time consumers wouldn’t notice a significant change if 100% of that production was automated.
Granted without infrastructure and a skilled workforce you can’t instantly swap to automation, but that’s a different question.
> Every major commodity ... etc has large scale automated production.
the automate-able industries have done it, leaving behind the ones that aren't as automatable. This is why there's still many developing countries that export cheap labour. You can think of those as the "underpaid" class.
Not necessarily bad, since i believe they are not being forced under lock and chain in slavery. They are merely economically incentivized.
I don’t think there are low value non automate-able industries right now. Try and name some.
That’s not to say nobody is making subsistence wages making shoes, just that there’s robots making shoes in another factory. It may not be 1:1 in every niche as a train isn’t a drop in replacement for a long haul trucker, but they are still in competition.
The root problem is people do "fall" for advertisements. They are everywhere because ... well, they work. There's rarely any critical thinking involved and often ads are not even identified as such and people consider them "information".
Godot is great. I am afraid it's still a very long way before they become for game development what Blender is for 3D modelling these days. If it will even happen at all. So any improvement and funding is more than welcome.
> I am afraid it's still a very long way before they become for game development what Blender is for 3D modelling these days
Makes sense. Blender is coming up to being 30 years old soon, and it still isn't heavily embedded into the mainstream pipelines, but it's getting closer every day.
By contrast, Godot is about 10 years old, but still has eaten some of Unity's pie. Cannot wait to see how Godot is in about 20 years, surely they will have surpassed Unity at that point :)
Yes, it has. But game engine adoption takes time, it's not immediately clear that it is eating some of Unity's lunch, as games have to be developed, launched and appreciated before it's obvious for the average (developer) person.
Look at some of the games that made Unity popular in the first place, and the people/companies that made them. Lots of them are moving to Godot now, but again, it'll take time before those people/companies launch the games.
Do you mean renpy? You might not have heard of it, but it's more or less the de facto engine for new visual novel games. Hence having so many games as well, the barrier to entry with using Python+mostly static images is basically non-existent.
From the perspective of a hobby unity dev who's making a jam game in Godot to feel it out, Godot has a lot of rough edges, weird choices, and stuff that's just missing.
Stuff that I've encountered so far:
- A very annoying issue where the editor will lock up after my Linux laptop wakes up from sleep. I've lost work because I've closed the laptop without remembering to close Godot first.
- Performance issues with large assets or too many assets. A single pixel art asset pack ([LimeZu's Modern Interiors](https://limezu.itch.io/moderninteriors)) brought Godot to its knees until I pruned it. The large tilemaps in there will also slow the tilemap editor to a crawl.
- I've been struggling with getting the dynamic tilemap rules to behave as expected. YMMV
- I'm not a fan of Godot's single-window UI approach, especially when it comes to scripting. You can futz with editor settings to make this slightly better, though.
- You can't mix 2d and 3d stuff like you can in Unity, and the 3d side of things is way rougher than 2d.
- They're still working out what direction to take with an Asset store.
- The shift from Unity's GameObject>Component model to Godot's single script per node approach has been an awkward adjustment for me. I keep replicating the old model by making prefab nodes that are basically just components.
- I miss Unity's play mode scene inspector. Godot is halfway there. You can poke around in the scene tree, but you don't see that update in the editor.
- The collision system isn't as straightforward as Unity
- It'd be nice if we had a bit of a slot system like we have with Vue Components for when we nest things under packed scenes.
The good stuff:
- There's only one type of signal/callback instead of the three different systems Unity can use. The signaling system is well-implemented instead of feeling bolted on.
- Godot doesn't differentiate between a Scene and a Prefab like Unity does. It avoids the don't destroy on load juggling you have to do and gives you a bit more control
- Some neat shortcuts for boilerplate stuff are built into the editor. For example, if you're adding SFX, you often want to provide several similar SFX clips to provide variety. When you set the SFX in the editor, you can assign a Randomizer to it, which takes a list of SFX and plays them randomly based on the weights and mode you set. You can even set pitch and volume adjustments to add even more variety.
- The fire-and-forget tween system is very convenient.
A lot of people compare Godot to Blender. It's not at the level that Blender is at now, but it does give me Blender pre-2.5 vibes- A solid base for enthusiasts that can be honed into polished software for the masses. I hope that Godot glows up the same way.
As relevant to Godot, most of my work is with kids (as relevant here on both ends -- teaching kids to code, and making educational activities). I haven't used either Godot or Unity much, and was trying to decide. For a variety of reasons, open-source is a huge win*, so I was leaning that way.
I don't expect much 3d or to be doing too many things which are overly fancy. Much more on the "weekend hack" or "kids afterschool activity" side of things, and much less on the serious game development side.
From your list, it doesn't sound like there are (m)any showstoppers to just picking Godot.
* (1) Avoids licensing issues installing / uninstalling on classrooms full of computers (2) Advanced kids can learn more, since they can look under the hood (3) Guaranteed long-term support (kids activities are sometimes not updated for a while) (4) Automatic FERPA / COPPA compliance and proper handling of student data. ...and the list goes on for quite a while longer.
From my own adventures into Godot, for that use case, I'd recommend using Godot very much.
If you know some basics, you can whip up a simple platformer, top down game, old-school top down shooter and such very, very quickly. A decent tutorial can have you at at something functional on the screen in half an hour or so. And then you can start playing around to make it cooler.
All while teaching kids some basics of programming.
I regularly get fake NXP chips even from the big distributors. Not going to name them here, but it happened at least with the ones starting with A, D and M. Their excuse is always the same: Telling us they just sourced other distributors because of shortage at the manufacturer, but won't name these "distributors". Really annoying.
I buy almost exclusively from Mouser and Digikey for this exact reason. They are both very active about ensuring that what they sell is what they say it is.
I'm sure that even they get scammed from time to time, but I've never had a problem with my orders (or at least, none that I've noticed). Their prices are higher, but I consider their markup well-earned.
> describe indiana jones
> looks inside
> gets indiana jones
Okay, so the network does exactly what I would expect? If anything you could argue the network is bad because it doesn't recognize your prompt and gives you something else (original? whatever that would mean) instead. But maybe that's just me.