You have to consider the market for Godot: indie developers. They don't need cutting edge features; they need a good workflow, ease of use, a good community, stability, etc. Unity is actually really annoying in this regard, because they're _constantly_ deprecating features in favor of new features that are half baked and poorly documented. It feels like a really unstable platform to build on because by the time you're done with a project most of the things you built now need to be thrown away because the underlying engine changed so much, or you're halfway through a feature and you have to decide if you want to rewrite a huge chunk of code to support something new that came out. Unreal Engine is also going through this at the moment (although they're better about backwards compatibility). Hearing that they're dropping blueprints in favor of verse has a lot of people stuck in "uh, should I bother learning the current engine right now". I don't think it'll hurt UE in the long run, but I could easily see them losing some short term adoption. Stability in a platform is a very important feature!

Building on an engine is a HUGE investment, and nobody serious picks a game engine because of its feature velocity, they pick it based on what it can do today.

Also in terms of marketing I think this is pretty clever. I know a lot of game developers (I used to work in the industry), and pretty much everyone I know despises AI on some level. HN is mostly business people who see dollar signs, but creatives just see destruction of art forms they care about, so none of their users are going to see this as a bad thing.

▲

maiybe 4 hours ago | parent [-]

For many years, it's been difficult to build game engines. It's never been easier today. A half-decently funded startup team could get to Godot feature parity within 6-12 months. There's no VC in games anymore (especially not middleware), so it's less unlikely, but they don't have a moat on features.

When you go to invest in an engine. One with Claude Code natively infused and another that says "meh" to AI. Which would you have your small indie dev team choose? Smart money says velocity. I suspect the Godot-slayer I am imagining will start getting buzz in /r/aigamedev subreddit as the only way to quickly code a game. A little better design and 3D work from Anthropic, and we are off to the races.

Regarding game dev hatred of AI, I've been to GDC for the last 3 years for the explicit purpose of talking about AI in games. The wall of hatred isn't holding strong. It used to be universal. Now, not so much. People on their laptops claude coding during presentations. 20% of talks being about AI in games, and _sponsored (!!!)_ talks about AI are getting the largest crowds at GDC this year. The times, they are a changin'. This is only a clever marketing move for a certain set of developers, which I totally agree are the (maybe?) majority today. I said 3-5 years though, not 6 months...

▲

overgard 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh god. If you really believe you can vibe code an engine in 6 months I challenge you to do it. I think you'll find you've wildly underestimated what goes into an engine.

▲

maiybe 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Well, this is fundamentally where we end up disagreeing. Within the timeframe of a single mobile app development cycle, the entire coding infrastructure of the world changed. Our collective day-to-day coding experience has morphed within 15 months.

Here, you're making a negative argument, it "can't" be done. Maybe. Historically, correct. I prefer to image what could be done. As insane a statement as it sounds just 15 months ago, a small dev team could get it done, I'll stand by that. Framing is up to you, to each their own!

▲

anonymousab 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Even getting through the discussions and negotiations with the 3 big game console companies to support their platforms can eat up so much of your time window. You can't really vibecode your way out of that - though I suppose you could generate your email responses or an AI meeting participant and risk blowing up the business relationship.

▲

overgard an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

As a professional developer that's using these tools professionally and worked on multiple game engines and even written a few of my own... nope. Sorry, just, that's so much hype not grounded in anything. I'm guessing your job is to promote this stuff based on that being your purpose of going to GDC?

Also, you're really misunderstanding why people use Godot in the first place. They've always been way behind Unreal Engine and Unity on flashy features, that's not their value proposition. A lot of churn on half baked slop features would be counter to why people want to use it. Developers in a stressful industry want tools they can trust, not buggy unstable things that are constantly changing out from under their feet (a lot of teams freeze their engine version per-project for this very reason).

	▲	maiybe 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> that's so much hype not grounded in anything. Not grounded in anything? Really, anything? There's no evidence you've seen in the last three years that has had any impact on what you think is possible with AI coding? I'm not a game dev by trade, I am AI researcher turned AI engineer (not the "AI engineer" of the modern era, like getting ML deployed in prod). That being said, I have tried and failed to make plenty of games over the years. Every mistake in the book. Making my own engine, trying to do 3D game as first approach, making mobile apps 2010, using Unity for personal projects, switching to Godot. I'm not at your level in game dev, but I've seen plenty at scale. > I'm guessing your job is to promote this stuff based on that being your purpose of going to GDC I'm not an AI hype maker, I'm a stunned observer. A person who has said "no way" AI will impact coding for the last 10 years. I am watching evidence in front of my very eyes and my workflow and simply adapting to the reality on the ground along with reasonable projection of capabilities into the future (based on velocity and reasonable assumptions). I don't need to convince you of anything, but I'm confident your beliefs won't hold up against the stockpile of evidence gathering now and in the near future. Since you took a swing and miss on who I am, I'm going to guess that you are reluctant to incorporate these tools into your own workflow (perhaps having cast them off quickly after some frustrated probing) and have a deep-seated skepticism of the tech that doesn't really matter what I say. Where's my inference coming from? The idea that you've conflated that AI coding by its very nature needs to be buggy and unstable. I wish you luck on holding the line as it slips past us on an exponential curve.