It's literally a revenge fork of Godot. Made for completely petty reasons.

Now, the actual Godot engine does have a good documentation beneath the hood because it'd industrial software. There's an asset library, several published games and utilities, detailed documentation and more.

Dang!
Looks, like I have thrown in a bit of German.
(spurs = Sporen)

Thanks for the hint - corrected.

I had a go at making a Neverwinter Nights module a few years ago. It was fun, but very time-consuming. I spent quite a while making about 3 different areas before I gave up. And that is a situation where you are given the engine and a whole bunch of assets as a starting point.

Making video games is a full-time job - it's very hard to do as a hobby.

This is pretty apparent but games are a form of interactive art. Just like any other form of art, the question of how hard it is to learn is quite subjective, since it depends on the person asking the question.

If you are interested, the best way to find out is to just try it out. You can watch a couple of tutorials, make a few small games on your own and join a few game jams. If you are any good at it, you'll figure it out. If not, you'll still have a much better idea about the process of making a game, which I believe is quite valuable in itself.

Always sad when talent go to waste.

Good point.

Yeah, I can get dark sometimes.

I know for a fact that some people have a significantly higher threshold than me based on some of the content they consume that I just wouldn't, but the more unsavoury aspects of life get to me somewhat less than the average and it is always something I have to be mindful about in social situations when something is about to leave my mouth or fingers.

At some point, I was talking to a friend about how I'd rather die if I had a choice on the matter (and I was ranking them) and she commented that my line of thought was somewhat depressing and I think that's when I really realized I was a little outside the norm in that way.

"Is game making hard?"

It can be as easy or hard as you make it... or... wish it to be.

There are simple engines using primarily drag-and-drop interfaces where you (alone) can create basic experiences with little knowledge... as well as complex engines where you will need a hefty knowledge base and potentially a team to make something happen. It runs the entire gamut (and a number of available engines in-between).

IMHO the first thing to ask yourself is:

"What genre of game do I want to create?"

That will certainly lead you toward a small list of engines that would be best (and easiest) to create that genre.

Next question:

"What is the purpose of my game?"

Is this a commercial endeavor or solely a personal project? That will further filter the engines.

Next question:

"Are you interested in learning some coding for adding functionality, or are you only willing to use basic engine functionality as-is."

And I'd always think about assets...

... are you willing to use / purchase stock assets or are you (or your team) going to make them custom?

If you answer these questions -- and with a few searches -- the appropriate engine(s) should become apparent relatively quickly.

But if you've never made any game prior, I'd first find a cheap, easy-to-use drag-and-drop engine and make a level of two. Get the feeling for map creation, triggering spawn points and events, and generally for creating a video game experience.

That will give you an idea of the basics and how far you wish to go with game making. It will also go a long way to best answering your initial question: "Is game making hard?"

Anyway, just my 2 cents

Things always get more complicated once money is involved (which realistically most successful open-source project beyond a certain scope will need).

It is a concern not unique to Godot and a strong argument for putting a project under a well known respected foundation if you can.

His points may or may not be valid where Godot is concerned, but unfortunately, he wrapped them up in a very long essay where he got really theatrical and imho, somewhat whiny. If he wanted to raise awareness about a problem as opposed to just vent about his personal issues with the leadership of the project, he should have been more succinct and impersonal in his writing. Right now, he looks like someone who got burnt and is angry about it and it is not clear from looking at his writing that he's not at least partly responsible for how things turn out.

They do. But Godot is not communicating this properly at all, which is where most of the grievance of the author comes from. But agreed, some parts, especially the later ones, did get a bit too personal at times, but it does not invalidate everything he wrote.

Chapters 2 and 3 describe very well the overall nature of Godot and that it might not be what it seems at first glance.

EDIT:
As highlights, I can recommend 2.1.1 and 3.2.4. Potentially also 2.1.8. And throughout the entire thing, he includes examples from a ton of other devs beside himself and some of their grievances with Godot

There's a reason most big-sized mods never see the light of the day, despite having 60-70% of the work done already, now imagine that but starting from scratch :P

I'd recommend starting with something short and simple, and see if that's your thing

I will do that.

*nod*

-

Join the club :)

There's nothing in this document that will help you if you're trying to make games. Keep this horseshit out of it, skip it entirely, and watch some youtube tutorials on how to use Godot. The author would apparently rather write about non issues than write a tutorial that's beneficial to the community.

Correct. There is not because.... that was not the intent of it? Don't know what to tell you.

Whether or not it's "HS" as you say is up to everyone to decide.