The problem is having one singular “industry standard” in the first place. If Adobe is eventually dislodged for something else it would eventually become just as bad, because there would still be no meaningful competition to keep it in line.
Affinity is catching up every year, but they still have a ways to go to become an industry standard. I’m rooting for them every step of the way, though.
Get good at c++. Learn how to use open source 3d rendering engines like Ogre or Irrlicht. Find an open source physics engine you like. Combine into 1 program, now you have a game engine that can be developed on any os and you’ll be able to optimize your game far more than you ever would on unity or unreal. Use open source everything and don’t pay a cent for any software. I’m fairly certain the game Kenshi was developed this way more or less and by just 1 person too.
That is a way to develop an entire game that doesn’t support enshitification. I don’t know who needs to see this so there it is. Not supporting enshitification can extend further than just sticking to gimp and blender.
Last I checked Adobe doesn’t have any 3d game engines, so that’s not really a solution, heh. (Also, godot is already a FOSS 3d engine which is gradually replacing Unity)
Additionally, developing a game requires many, many different parts. It’s not just the engine, it’s making the models, it’s making the materials, textures, shaders, programming, scripting, writing, and so on. Some, like 3d modeling, already have decent FOSS tools (Blender for example). Others, like the Substance suite (material authoring and texture painting) or Photoshop (image editing) don’t have a good enough FOSS alternative to be replaceable. Furthermore, many studios have specialized plugins or companion programs the studios developed or purchased which are only compatible with Substance, Photoshop, etc.
So you’re not just fighting game engines, you’re fighting every step of the process. Adobe (and Autodesk, fuck Autodesk too) products, when used, tend to be deeply embedded in most professional workflows. You’d have to replace the software and any specialized plugins or programs designed specifically to interface with the software. I mean, good luck, it’s just a hell of a lot more complicated than you seem to think.
Making a game isn’t easy regardless of which software ecosystem you use. People just need to know there are options.
“more complicated than I seem to think”. I’m not going to dox myself just to win an argument. I still stand by my claim that there are viable ways to develop fairly complex games that don’t involve the unity + a bunch of corporate shit nor unreal + a bunch of corporate shit.
You say they’re viable, but most people don’t want to make their own engine to make a game. Most people wanna make a game, not a game engine. Furthermore, while I honestly believe that the FOSS community could easily match commercial projects, doing so requires people to acknowledge the software’s shortcomings, talk to the professional users about what kinda UI they want, and so on. That means you can’t throw lines at them like “user inexperience” or “just learn a new program”. They’re professionals, having to learn a new program cuts into their income. Learning new programs means they aren’t making things, which means they aren’t making money.
I know I’m kinda rambling a bit and may not be super coherent (if so, I apologize, I’m running on low sleep), but I’m not trying to be a doomer or say “that’s impossible”; I think what I am trying to say is that I don’t think the FOSS community currently has all the necessary software features or ease of access for professionals.
Last time I tried to develop a game I accidentally built a game engine instead. Consequences of just doing what seems interesting instead of focusing on building an actual thing
I’d argue that there is, but we are just too used to the Lightroom or Photoshop way of thinking/workflow. We don’t entertain other programs because it is difficult to learn a new way of doing things and return to a place of competency. And the less people use a piece of software, the less there will be documentation to help others learn.
I’m not sure if its a conspiracy theory or verified, but I do think that Adobe were okay with people (amateurs) pirating their software. We didn’t have the money to pay for it anyway, but it got us to become proficient at using Photoshop so that when we eventually had money, we were locked in.
Or… How about using a different program instead of Adobe’s so that we van eventually change what the “industry standard” is?
You have a weird sense of humor
The problem is having one singular “industry standard” in the first place. If Adobe is eventually dislodged for something else it would eventually become just as bad, because there would still be no meaningful competition to keep it in line.
Affinity is catching up every year, but they still have a ways to go to become an industry standard. I’m rooting for them every step of the way, though.
Get good at c++. Learn how to use open source 3d rendering engines like Ogre or Irrlicht. Find an open source physics engine you like. Combine into 1 program, now you have a game engine that can be developed on any os and you’ll be able to optimize your game far more than you ever would on unity or unreal. Use open source everything and don’t pay a cent for any software. I’m fairly certain the game Kenshi was developed this way more or less and by just 1 person too.
That is a way to develop an entire game that doesn’t support enshitification. I don’t know who needs to see this so there it is. Not supporting enshitification can extend further than just sticking to gimp and blender.
Last I checked Adobe doesn’t have any 3d game engines, so that’s not really a solution, heh. (Also, godot is already a FOSS 3d engine which is gradually replacing Unity)
Additionally, developing a game requires many, many different parts. It’s not just the engine, it’s making the models, it’s making the materials, textures, shaders, programming, scripting, writing, and so on. Some, like 3d modeling, already have decent FOSS tools (Blender for example). Others, like the Substance suite (material authoring and texture painting) or Photoshop (image editing) don’t have a good enough FOSS alternative to be replaceable. Furthermore, many studios have specialized plugins or companion programs the studios developed or purchased which are only compatible with Substance, Photoshop, etc.
So you’re not just fighting game engines, you’re fighting every step of the process. Adobe (and Autodesk, fuck Autodesk too) products, when used, tend to be deeply embedded in most professional workflows. You’d have to replace the software and any specialized plugins or programs designed specifically to interface with the software. I mean, good luck, it’s just a hell of a lot more complicated than you seem to think.
Making a game isn’t easy regardless of which software ecosystem you use. People just need to know there are options.
“more complicated than I seem to think”. I’m not going to dox myself just to win an argument. I still stand by my claim that there are viable ways to develop fairly complex games that don’t involve the unity + a bunch of corporate shit nor unreal + a bunch of corporate shit.
You say they’re viable, but most people don’t want to make their own engine to make a game. Most people wanna make a game, not a game engine. Furthermore, while I honestly believe that the FOSS community could easily match commercial projects, doing so requires people to acknowledge the software’s shortcomings, talk to the professional users about what kinda UI they want, and so on. That means you can’t throw lines at them like “user inexperience” or “just learn a new program”. They’re professionals, having to learn a new program cuts into their income. Learning new programs means they aren’t making things, which means they aren’t making money.
I know I’m kinda rambling a bit and may not be super coherent (if so, I apologize, I’m running on low sleep), but I’m not trying to be a doomer or say “that’s impossible”; I think what I am trying to say is that I don’t think the FOSS community currently has all the necessary software features or ease of access for professionals.
Last time I tried to develop a game I accidentally built a game engine instead. Consequences of just doing what seems interesting instead of focusing on building an actual thing
Macromedia Flash wakes up to find itself in a coffin under two meters of concrete with a tombstone calling it a dozen of different names.
Idk which one it was at the time, but when I installed Flash into my systems back then they did promote their capability to create 3d games.
Can’t disagree. They both also love to litter their data all over the system. Worse than malware in that department.
There is nothing as good and as easy to use as lightroom and photoshop
I’d argue that there is, but we are just too used to the Lightroom or Photoshop way of thinking/workflow. We don’t entertain other programs because it is difficult to learn a new way of doing things and return to a place of competency. And the less people use a piece of software, the less there will be documentation to help others learn.
I’m not sure if its a conspiracy theory or verified, but I do think that Adobe were okay with people (amateurs) pirating their software. We didn’t have the money to pay for it anyway, but it got us to become proficient at using Photoshop so that when we eventually had money, we were locked in.
I personally stopped using them when you could no longer just buy and own them. Now I just don’t edit my photos much which sucks.
Same here, CS6 PS+LR was the last one I bought.
I would very gladly pay to own them again but I will never pay a subscription for them.
Joke’s on you, I still use Paint Shop Pro 7.
Yes, but actually no let’s fuck them anyway :3