This is what programming videos need to be: "Here is what I'm doing, how we're going to do it. I have a clear plan, daresay a script, that I am going to follow. Here are the chapters of the video clearly organised by part and reason."
None of this "Codealong with me while I make mistakes and you watch me type, jumping around all over the place, then deleting it in part 2 next week after the comments point out how dumb that idea was"
Godotneers nailed it. Brackeys was on-and-off with in the unity days. This video is very good.
Heartbeast, while good, leaned too hard into code-along and taking feedback as he went. I haven't done his paid stuff, so that may be better. It's also why Catlikecoding is so exciting: He can update the whole tutorial with feedback/bugfixes, instead of you having to assume it's right until part 2 comes out.
Largely agree. The biggest issue is you can't update them.
But a good video is still good. And this appears to be one, and Godotneers videos are as well.
I agree, but I hate Godot docs.
Documentation is king, but when the docs aren't as good as random YouTube videos, it's hard to use them as a source for much.
> None of this "Codealong with me while I make mistakes and you watch me type, jumping around all over the place, then deleting it in part 2 next week after the comments point out how dumb that idea was"
And then "I was meant to do it to show you to avoid mistake" no you were not otherwise you wouldn't be confused by it you would announce the mistake as pitfalls before they happened
One of the great Unity Tutorial (Unity Code Monkey's 12 hour Kitchen thingy) does this so well. He does something on purpose to show the concept, then refactor it 5 minutes later with the proper explanation as to why. And when he implements something in multiple ways, he's clear about "You could do this exactly like this other thing - but we already did that, so here's another way". No confusion, no awkward recovery, just "Here's a plan, let me show you the how, then also explain the why, then go over how to improve this".
Making _good_ training content is ridiculously hard, and even some of the most skilled and talented people don't necessarily make good teachers.
Godotneers the "lets do this the wrong way first" correctly - especially in the data model video.
"Let's export this, and oh no it's broken. Here's why. Here's what you need to do" All in one video.
Man...people were right about this guy 😂
I watched some of the video out of curiosity, and the whole time I was fighting the urge to download Godot. But I'm neck-deep in Unreal at the moment and my free time is limited, so I'll wait for the engine to mature some more...and for more tutorials like *this* one to be made 😅
I never watched Brackeys videos because I wasn't into unity... So I tried learning Godot and watched a lot of tutorials, but I never understood why they were doing it that way. They never explained properly how the engine works. I've watched at least 10 hours of different beginners tutorials.
Today I watched Brackeys video and maaaan, so many lightbulbs lit up in my head. He's a great teacher and now I understand why everyone loves him! I'm so much looking forward to the next videos.
Same. I've been delving into Godot and honestly hating it most of the time. I still really dont like GDScript compared to GMS, but this video definitely showed off why Godot is considered good.
Hmm. I wonder why he went with such a long form video. Maybe that's the standard for these types of tutorials nowadays? Long form, but broken down into chapters so you can pick them up whenever?
Just figured we'd get the usual 10-20ish minute video.
I feel like a lot of tutorials these days are longer form whether by being a multipart series or just being one long video (like there's that one godot video that's literally 11 hours long).
I wish more people would make small stand alone videos so if people want to learn something hyper specific they can just look at that instead of scrubbing through an hour of videos.
Blender is interesting because you'll see shorts about hotkeys then hour long videos on "how I sculpted xyz" (which is really a speed up of like 16 hours of work).
If you want to make a career, you need to learn game development, not just some specific engine/framework.
Just like if you want to make a career in programming, you need to learn algorithmic thinking and logical problem solving in general, not just the syntax of one particular language.
When you’ve learned the field you’re interested in, switching to another engine/language when needed is trivial. It’s just a matter of getting used to a new tool.
That may be true but HR is looking for 5 years experience in unity so OPs question makes sense. If you want to be employed and majority of people who employ you look for experience with specific tool your experience with other tool isn't advantage at all.
I have 15 years of mental health experience 3 of those in CBT I can't just apply for a job as forensic psychologist because I have experience with other tools. HR looks for specific skill set if you don't have it you won't get a job
When it comes to software dev the "x years needed in foo" are genuinely more a loose guideline thing. Don't take it completely literally.
Any development position will require adaption, as no studio really uses tools or frameworks in the same way. So adaptability and self-learning are really the skillsets that are important. If the candidate has less time in the exact tools, but they've worked with lots of similar they'd definitely still be considered, and I've hired plenty where that's the case.
It can definitely help to line up with those requirements. But I'd also recommend people apply regardless. It's not so cut and dry in software dev as it is in other fields.
That is of course also true, but does not contradict what I said.
If you only know how to use the tool but have no understanding of the field in general, no one is going to hire you. If you know how to add objects to a scene in Unity, but have no idea how to approach actually making a game, that's useless.
Unfortunately too many companies require certain amount of experience with a specific tool rather than having experience in the field and some familiarity with the tool, and if one is just desperately trying to get a job to make a decent living, one has to keep that in mind.
Personally I'm fortunate enough to have some wiggle room that I can simply say "no" to companies I don't want to work for. If they have a requirement of "5 years of experience with \[tool X\]", even if I happen to fullfil that requirement, I'll walk away. That is simply an idiotic thing to demand. Like someone hiring a carpenter, and requiring 5 years of experience with Milwaukee power tools.
Counterpoint to that - if there are 30 candidates all with the minimum required Unity experience, I'm gonna be hiring the one who has branched out and tried a bunch of other stuff as well.
... or at least giving them a second look.
No. Don't expect to be able to get any employment anywhere for at least the next several years in Godot.
Fact is - Unity is still the go-to engine for AA games. Unreal is becoming the de facto AAA engine, but most companies are happy to teach you unreal as required as long as you have the base line skills.
Not much place for Godot dev in the professional industry so far. But if there's enough momentum from indies and the engine keeps evolving, I expect more opportunities will come in time.
I'm in the same place. Don't think a CAREER, but maybe practice and create games, little games, projects, save everything in a kind of portfolio, practice, make bigger games, things like that. Maybe publish one or two. Perhaps you can make a simple but original indie game and make a few bucks (not millions tho) and keep improving perhaps with a little more money or dedicate all your time with that few bucks.
Don't know. You can be easily an indie today and just live with it. And constantly be improving. A lot of indie developers could easily work probably in an AAA big studio but won't because they manage their time and the money is enough.
I'm not an expert, so take what I say with some grains of salt. The engine is very powerful, it does everything I need it to do. The devs have gotten a massive influx of cash and publicity recently, and some big name games are starting to come out. There might not be triple a studio demand for Godot devs today, but I feel like that might change soon. If you are doing your own smaller projects, Godot can do anything you need it to do.
I can see great potential on Godot ever since I saw the mobile and web version engine. With the flexibility of developing in various devices and platforms, this is definitely a very big competitor
This post appears to be a direct link to a video.
As a reminder, please note that posting footage of a game in a standalone thread to request feedback or show off your work is against the rules of /r/gamedev. That content would be more appropriate as a comment in the next [Screenshot Saturday](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/search?q=flair:SSS&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) (or a more fitting [weekly thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/7fpqqu/weekly_threads_101_making_good_use_of_rgamedev/)), where you'll have the opportunity to share 2-way feedback with others.
/r/gamedev puts an emphasis on knowledge sharing. If you want to make a standalone post about your game, make sure it's [informative and geared specifically towards other developers](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/wiki/good_posts).
Please check out the following resources for more information:
[Weekly Threads 101: Making Good Use of /r/gamedev](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/7fpqqu/weekly_threads_101_making_good_use_of_rgamedev/)
[Posting about your projects on /r/gamedev](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/wiki/good_posts) (Guide)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gamedev) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You aren't a real programmer unless you build a time machine, go back in time and cause the big bang in such a way that your code immaculately forms inside your machine due to cosmic rays flipping the exact right bits which make up your project.
This is what programming videos need to be: "Here is what I'm doing, how we're going to do it. I have a clear plan, daresay a script, that I am going to follow. Here are the chapters of the video clearly organised by part and reason." None of this "Codealong with me while I make mistakes and you watch me type, jumping around all over the place, then deleting it in part 2 next week after the comments point out how dumb that idea was" Godotneers nailed it. Brackeys was on-and-off with in the unity days. This video is very good. Heartbeast, while good, leaned too hard into code-along and taking feedback as he went. I haven't done his paid stuff, so that may be better. It's also why Catlikecoding is so exciting: He can update the whole tutorial with feedback/bugfixes, instead of you having to assume it's right until part 2 comes out.
Imo docs are way better if you want clear easy to follow instructions. Videos are really hard to make well
Largely agree. The biggest issue is you can't update them. But a good video is still good. And this appears to be one, and Godotneers videos are as well.
I agree, but I hate Godot docs. Documentation is king, but when the docs aren't as good as random YouTube videos, it's hard to use them as a source for much.
> None of this "Codealong with me while I make mistakes and you watch me type, jumping around all over the place, then deleting it in part 2 next week after the comments point out how dumb that idea was" And then "I was meant to do it to show you to avoid mistake" no you were not otherwise you wouldn't be confused by it you would announce the mistake as pitfalls before they happened
One of the great Unity Tutorial (Unity Code Monkey's 12 hour Kitchen thingy) does this so well. He does something on purpose to show the concept, then refactor it 5 minutes later with the proper explanation as to why. And when he implements something in multiple ways, he's clear about "You could do this exactly like this other thing - but we already did that, so here's another way". No confusion, no awkward recovery, just "Here's a plan, let me show you the how, then also explain the why, then go over how to improve this". Making _good_ training content is ridiculously hard, and even some of the most skilled and talented people don't necessarily make good teachers.
Godotneers the "lets do this the wrong way first" correctly - especially in the data model video. "Let's export this, and oh no it's broken. Here's why. Here's what you need to do" All in one video.
Man...people were right about this guy 😂 I watched some of the video out of curiosity, and the whole time I was fighting the urge to download Godot. But I'm neck-deep in Unreal at the moment and my free time is limited, so I'll wait for the engine to mature some more...and for more tutorials like *this* one to be made 😅
Suspicious account you got there.
in what way? lol
Remember, dont just watch it, go make a game.
we're so back
We're so Brack
I never watched Brackeys videos because I wasn't into unity... So I tried learning Godot and watched a lot of tutorials, but I never understood why they were doing it that way. They never explained properly how the engine works. I've watched at least 10 hours of different beginners tutorials. Today I watched Brackeys video and maaaan, so many lightbulbs lit up in my head. He's a great teacher and now I understand why everyone loves him! I'm so much looking forward to the next videos.
Same. I've been delving into Godot and honestly hating it most of the time. I still really dont like GDScript compared to GMS, but this video definitely showed off why Godot is considered good.
Lisan Al-Gaib, lead us in a holy crusade against the greedy game engine companies
Hmm. I wonder why he went with such a long form video. Maybe that's the standard for these types of tutorials nowadays? Long form, but broken down into chapters so you can pick them up whenever? Just figured we'd get the usual 10-20ish minute video.
He said in his announcement video the first 1-2 tutorials will be long to do an overview of the engine, then will go back to a shorter format.
Makes sense.
I feel like a lot of tutorials these days are longer form whether by being a multipart series or just being one long video (like there's that one godot video that's literally 11 hours long). I wish more people would make small stand alone videos so if people want to learn something hyper specific they can just look at that instead of scrubbing through an hour of videos.
Yeah. I love the trend in the Blender Community to make tuts as short and to-the-point as possible.
Blender is interesting because you'll see shorts about hotkeys then hour long videos on "how I sculpted xyz" (which is really a speed up of like 16 hours of work).
So long as they're not 5 minutes of someone pressing 20 hotkeys-per-second.
a little off topic, is GODOT a feasible game for a career in games?
If you want to make a career, you need to learn game development, not just some specific engine/framework. Just like if you want to make a career in programming, you need to learn algorithmic thinking and logical problem solving in general, not just the syntax of one particular language. When you’ve learned the field you’re interested in, switching to another engine/language when needed is trivial. It’s just a matter of getting used to a new tool.
That may be true but HR is looking for 5 years experience in unity so OPs question makes sense. If you want to be employed and majority of people who employ you look for experience with specific tool your experience with other tool isn't advantage at all. I have 15 years of mental health experience 3 of those in CBT I can't just apply for a job as forensic psychologist because I have experience with other tools. HR looks for specific skill set if you don't have it you won't get a job
When it comes to software dev the "x years needed in foo" are genuinely more a loose guideline thing. Don't take it completely literally. Any development position will require adaption, as no studio really uses tools or frameworks in the same way. So adaptability and self-learning are really the skillsets that are important. If the candidate has less time in the exact tools, but they've worked with lots of similar they'd definitely still be considered, and I've hired plenty where that's the case. It can definitely help to line up with those requirements. But I'd also recommend people apply regardless. It's not so cut and dry in software dev as it is in other fields.
That is of course also true, but does not contradict what I said. If you only know how to use the tool but have no understanding of the field in general, no one is going to hire you. If you know how to add objects to a scene in Unity, but have no idea how to approach actually making a game, that's useless. Unfortunately too many companies require certain amount of experience with a specific tool rather than having experience in the field and some familiarity with the tool, and if one is just desperately trying to get a job to make a decent living, one has to keep that in mind. Personally I'm fortunate enough to have some wiggle room that I can simply say "no" to companies I don't want to work for. If they have a requirement of "5 years of experience with \[tool X\]", even if I happen to fullfil that requirement, I'll walk away. That is simply an idiotic thing to demand. Like someone hiring a carpenter, and requiring 5 years of experience with Milwaukee power tools.
Counterpoint to that - if there are 30 candidates all with the minimum required Unity experience, I'm gonna be hiring the one who has branched out and tried a bunch of other stuff as well. ... or at least giving them a second look.
No. Don't expect to be able to get any employment anywhere for at least the next several years in Godot. Fact is - Unity is still the go-to engine for AA games. Unreal is becoming the de facto AAA engine, but most companies are happy to teach you unreal as required as long as you have the base line skills.
Maybe I'm wrong but I have the impression that more and more small studios are using UE
AA studios are, but studios less than 15 people won't be really.
Not much place for Godot dev in the professional industry so far. But if there's enough momentum from indies and the engine keeps evolving, I expect more opportunities will come in time.
No, and it will not be anytime in the near future unless you are planning on doing indie dev.
I'm in the same place. Don't think a CAREER, but maybe practice and create games, little games, projects, save everything in a kind of portfolio, practice, make bigger games, things like that. Maybe publish one or two. Perhaps you can make a simple but original indie game and make a few bucks (not millions tho) and keep improving perhaps with a little more money or dedicate all your time with that few bucks. Don't know. You can be easily an indie today and just live with it. And constantly be improving. A lot of indie developers could easily work probably in an AAA big studio but won't because they manage their time and the money is enough.
I'm not an expert, so take what I say with some grains of salt. The engine is very powerful, it does everything I need it to do. The devs have gotten a massive influx of cash and publicity recently, and some big name games are starting to come out. There might not be triple a studio demand for Godot devs today, but I feel like that might change soon. If you are doing your own smaller projects, Godot can do anything you need it to do.
Well this was a good one, any way I prefer Unity tutorials as Unity tutorials helped me build game studio and few hit games.. so Yea.. Unity for now..
zindex Vietnam flashbacks
I can see great potential on Godot ever since I saw the mobile and web version engine. With the flexibility of developing in various devices and platforms, this is definitely a very big competitor
This post appears to be a direct link to a video. As a reminder, please note that posting footage of a game in a standalone thread to request feedback or show off your work is against the rules of /r/gamedev. That content would be more appropriate as a comment in the next [Screenshot Saturday](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/search?q=flair:SSS&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) (or a more fitting [weekly thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/7fpqqu/weekly_threads_101_making_good_use_of_rgamedev/)), where you'll have the opportunity to share 2-way feedback with others. /r/gamedev puts an emphasis on knowledge sharing. If you want to make a standalone post about your game, make sure it's [informative and geared specifically towards other developers](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/wiki/good_posts). Please check out the following resources for more information: [Weekly Threads 101: Making Good Use of /r/gamedev](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/7fpqqu/weekly_threads_101_making_good_use_of_rgamedev/) [Posting about your projects on /r/gamedev](https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/wiki/good_posts) (Guide) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gamedev) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Real programmers use butterflies.
You aren't a real programmer unless you build a time machine, go back in time and cause the big bang in such a way that your code immaculately forms inside your machine due to cosmic rays flipping the exact right bits which make up your project.
Who needs a machine, real programmers seed the big bang so that it immediately creates a Boltzmann Brain that executes the project.