Links: gamefromscratch.com/four-godot-4-graphic-demo-scenes/ Synty Bundle (Ends soon): www.humblebundle.com/software/syntys-polygon-game-dev-assets-bundle-3-software?partner=gamefromscratch ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Support* : www.patreon.com/gamefromscratch *GameDev News* : gamefromscratch.com *GameDev Tutorials* : devga.me *Discord* : discord.com/invite/R7tUVbD *Twitter* : twitter.com/gamefromscratch ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Humble link contains an affiliate code that enables you to direct a portion of your purchase to support GFS (and thanks so much if you do!)
Godot is what Blender used to be: Made fun of and quite behind in technology. But it has the similar core values to what Blender has and look at Blender now, it's thriving and has become one of the industry standards. I still think it's a bit behind and perhaps also the art assets in these demos aren't adding to the quality either. But I'm rooting for Godot and hope that one day it'll be on par with the other engines.
god, I remember when the advice was "dont waste your time learning blender, nobody will hire you if you know how to use it because it's just not the standard and you'll get laughed out of the interview if you put creations from it into your portfolio". I remember thinking like hey, if it can make models that look as good, albeit at the time with a little more effort than maya or 3ds, why would anyone care? And legit now, I don't think I'd even consider switching to contenders over blender.
The beauty of open source is that progress is exponential. The bigger the community gets, the faster the engine improves, and the more people switch over, etc.
@GameDevGeeks I don't know about that. Even when blender got popular, other alternatives are still being used and quite successful. I learned that the success of one thing dose not necessarily mean the failure of another. The world is not as competitive as people like to think
PSA! The sponza demo that Intel provides is STUPIDLY unoptimized, the trims and the lionhead and all that jazz is actually polymodelled, and easily 30k tris+, when they should have been 3k tris with normals. Godot also uses Forward+ rendering, which adds an extra cost per rendered light source so I think for those areas, emissive mats would be better. But yeah, just a heads up if anyone plans to try out the sponza demo provided by intel and runs into performance issues-- it's not a godot problem, it's an intel problem.
@@surfacedfox oh, it may depend on the pc, and maybe the clusters are not configured, i saw someone using them and still had 60 fps with hundred lights on a scene
@@cybershellrev7083You don't need to pray. Its happening already. If you feel so insecure you can download the engine and test it's features to see for yourself before making any assumptions. It's less than a 100MB anyway.
Thanks for showing off my Bistro port Mike! I really appreciate that one is getting around, it was a lot of work to set up to proper spec. Hopefully people have fun with it and it was cool to see the performance on an M1 Mac!
@@ercanunsalerturk6138 If we're talking about desktop, the GI techniques used (SDFGI, SSAO and SSIL) probably wouldn't be terribly performant on most systems in VR. You might be able to get away with lightmapped GI and reflection probes but Godot has some major performance hurdles such as a lack of content streaming and proper static batching. If you're developing for VR and need graphical fidelity, Unity is a better bet right now. When it comes to standalone VR I think it's a flat "no" at this point, Godot's mobile capabilities are fairly underdeveloped and some techniques are only available on desktop.
Aslong as this kicks Unity's ass, I applaud and support Godot. Keep it up guys this is looking great. HUMILIATE Unity please. It's not a tool, it's their CEO who's the tool.
@@meeloks.1013unity shot itself in the foot by trying to introduce installation fees (paid by the game developer), then tried to erase mention of their TOS not being retroactive so they could apply the fees to ALL games made with unity. i.e. Unity got too greedy and godot got all the more popular because more indie devs are choosing it instead
4:19 I left the godot 2 years back but randomly this video came on my home page feed, and at this moment my eyes didn't even blinked one time what a photorealism the godot is reaching. 😨😨 And soon it will beat the unity❤❤
You should definitely play around with it. I'm still doing some 2D projects, but I got really into the 3D stuff with Godot 4 and it's been a lot of fun. I used an app on the iPad which lets you scan environments. I did a quick scan of my house and I put it into a "game" in Godot and had my 3D character running around my house. It's actually got me thinking about converting some of my 2D projects into 3D instead. Since the engine handles both pretty well, I figure I can mix it up and use both.
@user-qc6xh4sv7j I was using PolyCam. It isn't perfect and some of the environment looks "melted" is the best way I can describe it. If you look at any scanned 3D environments, they have that "scanned feel" where they aren't smooth.
Are there some somewhat normed tests between Unity and Godot scenes in term of performance? Its really hard - just from a feature list - to estimate how far Godot can take a project if its targeted to be a more complex 3D game. And at what parts one of the other engine will have a significantly better optimization.
Great work Mike. Godot maturing nicely atm. Ive been working on a game as solo developer for 4 years, gearing up for an early access release this year. Can I email you about it?
I have several of the synty packages and one thing I should warn people about is that some seem to get the wrong scale and their origin/center point is also not in the middle of the geometry so that makes it so that they don't work with gridmaps. I have had to put a lot of the models into blender and fix the origin and re-exported with the correct scale. This makes it easier to work with, but you do have to do quite a bit of work. It looks like synty provides packages for Unity and Unreal which make it easier to work with. It would be nice if they could get someone to do that for Godot as well :)
Can't export Lumberyard demo in Godot 4.0.1 - got just grey screen... In editor it looks exactly like in video, but play button results grey screen....
Did you ever try playing this scene? My computer just opens a runtime window, shows the godot engine logo & then goes to a gray screen & it never plays.
IDK what's wrong with your setup, but you are doing quite a disservice with it. I've seen Sponza looking way better in Godot 4 (Addixff video) and the first TPS example looked downright broken. Are you on Windows machine?
Why don't I use Unity for 3D? The performance of the Godot engine is so poor that the TPS-DEMO with the highest settings on my 3050Ti cannot run smoothly. Godot4 can't save its 3D, maybe Godot5! Those who like to torture themselves can use it.
Unity has auto lod? Or hlod? Don’t judge by an unoptimized scene, for me as an igpu and low end pc there was an abandoned space high quality demo that ran at 20 fps on my pc in the default sethings, with a lot of effects enabled.
Unreal is better for 3D than Unity, and Godot is better for 2D than Unity. And Unity is the only one that isn't open source, so you can't even modify the engine to suit your personal needs. So, where does it fit in?
TPS demo sucks in a matter of performance. It would run horrible even in Unity or Unreal. One huge mesh, no occluders, no LOD, etc... It's a relic of Godot 3 and it still needs to be ported to Godot 4 properly.
Sad that Godot cant go anywhere further than a demo, there are no AA games that are made with Godot simply cause the engine is not scalable for serious 3D projects so it wont go any further than a few demos for the next few years
It's all fun and games until your PBR textures look and dead inside becasue Godot can't handle rough/metal/normals well-- not to mention your textures will be badly managed in memory, pixelizing your normals and making it look like they are flat textures-- then in an actual game context you will have tons of flickering artifacts (especially if you use GI which can't even map a cube correctly half time). Godot can make a pretty scene, sure, but it absolute makes a pretty scene look dead too-- and even worse when you start moving around in a game world. You compare any model imported into Godot against the same scene in ANY other engine-- and Godot's is flat and blurry and splotchy just in the most basic comparison. Even what's showcased here, you can see how blurry that is, with a lack of of depth in the bricks and textures because Godot flattens PBR to look like bland soup. 4.0 got better than 3.x, but it's still worse than, literally, every other 3D PBR engine out there. Then we have different shadow map sizes for different lights (you need a 16K shadow map for a spotlight to match your directional light), so your lighting is not consistent without considerable performance implications. And yet still... on that... the shadows are really really really badly dithered. And add another gross layer on top of all this... no mixed lightning mode for when you need performance. Good 2D engine. Terrible 3D engine.
@@GreySectoid then don’t sure what going on, i saw good (or atleast in my opinion, my eye can’t see the best other’s can) pbr materials on normal with godot
I’m pretty certain Godot won’t be able to match Unity HDRP. I’m a big fan of Godot, but to be honest I’ve yet to see a Godot game that looks as good as most Unity URP games, in 2D or 3D. Even Unity’s built-in renderer looks better than Godot out the box. Though Godot’s SDFGI is a definite boost to improve and simplify lighting.
@@gameweavers I mean, I think pretty much every game engine has surpassed Unity at this point. But then again I only use Open Source engines, so Unity was never an option to begin with.
I agree, and I’m a big fan of Godot. I’ve been looking at Flax recently and even that’s really impressive compared to Godot, and is pretty enjoyable to use. I’ve been waiting for the stable release of 4.0 before jumping into 3D but I’m glad that I spent a lot of time last year looking at Unity and Unreal in that regard. I still can’t decide what engine to use, but Godot is currently the bottom of my list when it comes to 3D. I still love it for 2D though.
Hazel is not made by one man. Cherno has a team and they are working full-time on it. Do you really follow his channel? Also, we haven't seen it being used for anything other than some small projects. Claiming it has better graphics is too much desperate, IMO.
@@NuttachaiTipprasert Hazel is pretty much one man, Cherno gets lots of donations and free reviews from people. However, he is the architect and the main developer behind it. Others just contribute little here and there. I have used Hazel and its 3D renderer is superior to trashy overhyped overrated Godot "Engine".
@@leeoiou7295 No licensing issues, cross platform, multiple renderers, lightweight and fast, quite easy, comfortable, good plugin system, easy creation of custom plugins, great documentation (web + builtin), good builtin UI API, comfortable for quick prototyping (gdscript), flexible node system, scenes saved as plain text (easy recovery, git friendly, easy fixes with any text editor), quite big community and many devs behind the project. Rendering is not best and unoptimized - this will probably change in the future, but in fact it is not so important. You can always customize the renderer if you know how to do that (Godot with editor compiles in minutes). For now the worst thing is the lack of tools needed for creating big worlds (terrain editor, texture streaming, etc), and no marketplace with high quality asset packs ready to use.
Links:
gamefromscratch.com/four-godot-4-graphic-demo-scenes/
Synty Bundle (Ends soon): www.humblebundle.com/software/syntys-polygon-game-dev-assets-bundle-3-software?partner=gamefromscratch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Support* : www.patreon.com/gamefromscratch
*GameDev News* : gamefromscratch.com
*GameDev Tutorials* : devga.me
*Discord* : discord.com/invite/R7tUVbD
*Twitter* : twitter.com/gamefromscratch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Humble link contains an affiliate code that enables you to direct a portion of your purchase to support GFS (and thanks so much if you do!)
Godot is what Blender used to be: Made fun of and quite behind in technology. But it has the similar core values to what Blender has and look at Blender now, it's thriving and has become one of the industry standards. I still think it's a bit behind and perhaps also the art assets in these demos aren't adding to the quality either. But I'm rooting for Godot and hope that one day it'll be on par with the other engines.
when that day comes, Unity and Unreal go broke
god, I remember when the advice was "dont waste your time learning blender, nobody will hire you if you know how to use it because it's just not the standard and you'll get laughed out of the interview if you put creations from it into your portfolio". I remember thinking like hey, if it can make models that look as good, albeit at the time with a little more effort than maya or 3ds, why would anyone care? And legit now, I don't think I'd even consider switching to contenders over blender.
The beauty of open source is that progress is exponential. The bigger the community gets, the faster the engine improves, and the more people switch over, etc.
@GameDevGeeks I don't know about that. Even when blender got popular, other alternatives are still being used and quite successful. I learned that the success of one thing dose not necessarily mean the failure of another. The world is not as competitive as people like to think
@@IPutFishInAWashingMachine while in unity the bigger the community got the greedier the investors and CEO got
PSA!
The sponza demo that Intel provides is STUPIDLY unoptimized, the trims and the lionhead and all that jazz is actually polymodelled, and easily 30k tris+, when they should have been 3k tris with normals.
Godot also uses Forward+ rendering, which adds an extra cost per rendered light source so I think for those areas, emissive mats would be better. But yeah, just a heads up if anyone plans to try out the sponza demo provided by intel and runs into performance issues-- it's not a godot problem, it's an intel problem.
Well forward+ is intended to run hundreds of lights at not bad costs.
@@saulsantos4132 My own personal testing made it drop by a significant bit at around 60 lights so
@@surfacedfox oh, it may depend on the pc, and maybe the clusters are not configured, i saw someone using them and still had 60 fps with hundred lights on a scene
Ofc using the least amount of shadows
@@saulsantos4132 Interesting. I'll definitely look into cluster config! I am definitely aiming for the lowest denominator though, so yeah 😅
Someone: "Godot is not capable of good graphics, I'll just use Unreal."
Also someone:
Godot users like to pretend it's on par with Unreal or Unity because they're in denial.
An AI plugin in Blender will fix that.
@@cybershellrev7083 unreal?
Not a chance
Unity?
We're closing on it
@@RenderingUser - I'll pray to that.
@@cybershellrev7083You don't need to pray. Its happening already. If you feel so insecure you can download the engine and test it's features to see for yourself before making any assumptions. It's less than a 100MB anyway.
Thanks for showing off my Bistro port Mike! I really appreciate that one is getting around, it was a lot of work to set up to proper spec. Hopefully people have fun with it and it was cool to see the performance on an M1 Mac!
Thank you for your hard work. This demo is so inspiring and it's the one that I was looking for to see what we can do with Godot 4.
It actually runs great on a base model M1 8 gig MacBook Air as well; great work!
You did great logan! A question, can that sort of visual quality be applied to VR?
@@ercanunsalerturk6138 If we're talking about desktop, the GI techniques used (SDFGI, SSAO and SSIL) probably wouldn't be terribly performant on most systems in VR.
You might be able to get away with lightmapped GI and reflection probes but Godot has some major performance hurdles such as a lack of content streaming and proper static batching. If you're developing for VR and need graphical fidelity, Unity is a better bet right now.
When it comes to standalone VR I think it's a flat "no" at this point, Godot's mobile capabilities are fairly underdeveloped and some techniques are only available on desktop.
Gee i got an urge to use Godot all of a sudden
mmm same, i wonder why?
Aslong as this kicks Unity's ass, I applaud and support Godot. Keep it up guys this is looking great. HUMILIATE Unity please. It's not a tool, it's their CEO who's the tool.
Umm... What do you really mean by CEO being a tool not an engine? Do you mean Unity have much more talented marketing team than engineering team?
@Dmitry Kolesnikovich I mean the ceo is a corrupt piece of shit
@@dmitrykolesnikovich haha, that's so true!
It will ;)
Congradulations you are now a time traveler.
This truly aged like a fine wine.
godot devs are all wine drinkers. Chapeau!
Why? I'm out of loop.
@@meeloks.1013unity shot itself in the foot by trying to introduce installation fees (paid by the game developer), then tried to erase mention of their TOS not being retroactive so they could apply the fees to ALL games made with unity. i.e. Unity got too greedy and godot got all the more popular because more indie devs are choosing it instead
4:19 I left the godot 2 years back but randomly this video came on my home page feed, and at this moment my eyes didn't even blinked one time what a photorealism the godot is reaching. 😨😨 And soon it will beat the unity❤❤
Godot is killing it!
Such a leap over Godot 3.x! Really makes me want to take the leap to 3d
You should definitely play around with it. I'm still doing some 2D projects, but I got really into the 3D stuff with Godot 4 and it's been a lot of fun. I used an app on the iPad which lets you scan environments. I did a quick scan of my house and I put it into a "game" in Godot and had my 3D character running around my house. It's actually got me thinking about converting some of my 2D projects into 3D instead. Since the engine handles both pretty well, I figure I can mix it up and use both.
3D is life my brother. 2D is for the birds my brother. Make all your cinematic dreams come true.
@@lyghtkruzpls what’s name of the app you use for scanning?
@user-qc6xh4sv7j I was using PolyCam. It isn't perfect and some of the environment looks "melted" is the best way I can describe it. If you look at any scanned 3D environments, they have that "scanned feel" where they aren't smooth.
Open-World Games in Godot! 😍
open world is a game killer
@@m0-m0597 boring open world*. Outer Wilds would be nowhere as good a game if it wasn't open world. Same with games like Skyrim or Minecraft.
@@harrasikaOuter wilds... Masterpiece.
Are there some somewhat normed tests between Unity and Godot scenes in term of performance? Its really hard - just from a feature list - to estimate how far Godot can take a project if its targeted to be a more complex 3D game. And at what parts one of the other engine will have a significantly better optimization.
Great work Mike. Godot maturing nicely atm. Ive been working on a game as solo developer for 4 years, gearing up for an early access release this year. Can I email you about it?
I have several of the synty packages and one thing I should warn people about is that some seem to get the wrong scale and their origin/center point is also not in the middle of the geometry so that makes it so that they don't work with gridmaps. I have had to put a lot of the models into blender and fix the origin and re-exported with the correct scale. This makes it easier to work with, but you do have to do quite a bit of work. It looks like synty provides packages for Unity and Unreal which make it easier to work with. It would be nice if they could get someone to do that for Godot as well :)
Can't export Lumberyard demo in Godot 4.0.1 - got just grey screen... In editor it looks exactly like in video, but play button results grey screen....
Because it had no camera. Add a camera node.
Thank you! Looks very impressive.
Did you ever try playing this scene? My computer just opens a runtime window, shows the godot engine logo & then goes to a gray screen & it never plays.
IDK what's wrong with your setup, but you are doing quite a disservice with it.
I've seen Sponza looking way better in Godot 4 (Addixff video) and the first TPS example looked downright broken. Are you on Windows machine?
Sponza ruclips.net/video/RnD2WYfYXtc/видео.html
He said while showing off the Lumberyard scene that he's on an M1 Max Macbook running 4 instances of Godot plus screen cap software simultaneously.
aww, yes because high quality games can't be rendered on windows
@@Digitalgems9000 other way around... he isn't on windows, yet criticises the look.
@@GonziHere I thought Mike uses windows when he showcases Godot
Thanks for reminding about this bundle, I almost missed it.
Ex unity devs be like: hello there
why it lag like hell ..
please list the hardware you're using in the description.
Arriving here after the Road To Vostok announcement.
I just noticed, but you're using the special mouse cursor pack thing that was from that one popular youtube video!
looks not bad at all, I feel like if you were graphics focused you'd still go with Unity (with the better looking renderer) or Unreal
There needs to be a map pack that has the exact same assets in UE5, Unity, and Godot for comparison.
What fps did you get with the Synty bundle? Especially on the m1 macbook
so first one with glitches, second one with 2005 graphics and running slow AF and the lumberyard one which at least is decent
None of those scenes were properly ported to Godot 4 and he showcased them running all at the same time on an M1 laptop...
Why don't I use Unity for 3D? The performance of the Godot engine is so poor that the TPS-DEMO with the highest settings on my 3050Ti cannot run smoothly. Godot4 can't save its 3D, maybe Godot5! Those who like to torture themselves can use it.
Unity has auto lod? Or hlod? Don’t judge by an unoptimized scene, for me as an igpu and low end pc there was an abandoned space high quality demo that ran at 20 fps on my pc in the default sethings, with a lot of effects enabled.
Unreal is better for 3D than Unity, and Godot is better for 2D than Unity. And Unity is the only one that isn't open source, so you can't even modify the engine to suit your personal needs. So, where does it fit in?
@@TheOnlyGhxst Unreal isn't "open source", it's "source available".
😅😅😅😅 lol wait for godot 5 :D
TPS demo sucks in a matter of performance. It would run horrible even in Unity or Unreal. One huge mesh, no occluders, no LOD, etc... It's a relic of Godot 3 and it still needs to be ported to Godot 4 properly.
Nice
TPS demo actually sucks, its scene consists of one big mesh. And it didn't have occluders for a long time after adding them in Godot 3.4.0.
Sad that Godot cant go anywhere further than a demo, there are no AA games that are made with Godot simply cause the engine is not scalable for serious 3D projects so it wont go any further than a few demos for the next few years
come back after godot 5. godot 4 just has too many problems
nice, godot get greatness.
As a Godot hater I am really impressed.
Godot is awesome!
Damn 😮
I Love FOSS!
The Restaurant/bistro-Scene looks like Unreal Engine 5!!!!
The lighting looks kind of bad still. Lumen in UE5 is still far better.
If only Hyphens were Dashes... 😒
Doing my best to make 3D games on Godot. Such a waste most people using this software for 2D games.
around 1 fps, ok
WAIT WHAT!
these are really not good demos for it
@@freeottis LMAO
Rip bloated software 😢
It's all fun and games until your PBR textures look and dead inside becasue Godot can't handle rough/metal/normals well-- not to mention your textures will be badly managed in memory, pixelizing your normals and making it look like they are flat textures-- then in an actual game context you will have tons of flickering artifacts (especially if you use GI which can't even map a cube correctly half time). Godot can make a pretty scene, sure, but it absolute makes a pretty scene look dead too-- and even worse when you start moving around in a game world. You compare any model imported into Godot against the same scene in ANY other engine-- and Godot's is flat and blurry and splotchy just in the most basic comparison. Even what's showcased here, you can see how blurry that is, with a lack of of depth in the bricks and textures because Godot flattens PBR to look like bland soup. 4.0 got better than 3.x, but it's still worse than, literally, every other 3D PBR engine out there. Then we have different shadow map sizes for different lights (you need a 16K shadow map for a spotlight to match your directional light), so your lighting is not consistent without considerable performance implications. And yet still... on that... the shadows are really really really badly dithered. And add another gross layer on top of all this... no mixed lightning mode for when you need performance. Good 2D engine. Terrible 3D engine.
How are "textures managed badly in memory"? They are stored in exactly the same format as in every other engine.
@@GreySectoid prob memory compression, there’s a pr for basis universal normal map fix.
@@saulsantos4132 Texture compression is handled by Vulkan, Godot has nothing to do with it.
Ah LillyByte here to crap on Godot some more. Whatta surprise!
@@GreySectoid then don’t sure what going on, i saw good (or atleast in my opinion, my eye can’t see the best other’s can) pbr materials on normal with godot
#Godot
now show what ue demo scenes look like
I literally do the first tuesday of every month :)
@@gamefromscratch ok ok im shutting up
Now even Godot has better graphic capabilities than Unity...
Godot user here: not sure that you are right ;-)
Are you using HDRP in Unity correctly?
@@igorthelight i am not using at all, because it is not a builtin solution and thus poorly integrates into Unity workflow
I’m pretty certain Godot won’t be able to match Unity HDRP.
I’m a big fan of Godot, but to be honest I’ve yet to see a Godot game that looks as good as most Unity URP games, in 2D or 3D.
Even Unity’s built-in renderer looks better than Godot out the box. Though Godot’s SDFGI is a definite boost to improve and simplify lighting.
Keep your fantasy, you can even say godot has surpassed unity and is catching up with unreal.
@@gameweavers I mean, I think pretty much every game engine has surpassed Unity at this point. But then again I only use Open Source engines, so Unity was never an option to begin with.
inTEL
They all look mediocre. Like scenes from Unity 3 or unreal engine 2. Even one man engines like Hazel or Lumix have better graphics.
Oranges and Football 😅
I agree, and I’m a big fan of Godot.
I’ve been looking at Flax recently and even that’s really impressive compared to Godot, and is pretty enjoyable to use.
I’ve been waiting for the stable release of 4.0 before jumping into 3D but I’m glad that I spent a lot of time last year looking at Unity and Unreal in that regard.
I still can’t decide what engine to use, but Godot is currently the bottom of my list when it comes to 3D. I still love it for 2D though.
Hazel is not made by one man. Cherno has a team and they are working full-time on it. Do you really follow his channel?
Also, we haven't seen it being used for anything other than some small projects. Claiming it has better graphics is too much desperate, IMO.
@@NuttachaiTipprasert Hazel is pretty much one man, Cherno gets lots of donations and free reviews from people. However, he is the architect and the main developer behind it. Others just contribute little here and there. I have used Hazel and its 3D renderer is superior to trashy overhyped overrated Godot "Engine".
@@leeoiou7295 No licensing issues, cross platform, multiple renderers, lightweight and fast, quite easy, comfortable, good plugin system, easy creation of custom plugins, great documentation (web + builtin), good builtin UI API, comfortable for quick prototyping (gdscript), flexible node system, scenes saved as plain text (easy recovery, git friendly, easy fixes with any text editor), quite big community and many devs behind the project. Rendering is not best and unoptimized - this will probably change in the future, but in fact it is not so important. You can always customize the renderer if you know how to do that (Godot with editor compiles in minutes). For now the worst thing is the lack of tools needed for creating big worlds (terrain editor, texture streaming, etc), and no marketplace with high quality asset packs ready to use.
You talk too fast.
Is this possible because of C#?
Sure, and c++ as well
no, C# has nothing to do with what you're seeing here.
Godot just killing 🤌🏻