>As someone with 2 years of Godot experience (which seems like a lot given their lifespan), the underlying infra isn't strong enough to ward off the many competitors that will embrace AI at the heart of the engine.

Like who? Unity/Unreal? Those are completely different engines for a different audience. IMO, Godot has a unique market space and no real peers. I think this was a wise decision that only adds to their brand as something for creators rather than corporations.

AI-assisted coding is good for creators. It happens to be good for corporations because it reduces costs, but it's actually much more powerful for creators with imagination. I don't know where that argument comes from.

If AI-assisted coding can help corporations make AAA games with 1/10th the resources, then it would stand to reason it also helps indies make AAA with 1/10th the resources? I have never understood this argument.

Godot has no peers because for the last 30 years in software, it's been hard for people to make their own game engines, which made open source engines totally impractical. W4 is a non-profit organization that happened to get just enough resources and traction to make it. That underlying assumption is not true anymore, making engines has never been easier in software history. Unreal/Unity are not the competitors I'm talking about.

Monogame, Wicked, Defold, Gamemaker, Stride, Heaps, just off the top of my head