you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

It seems like a good strategy to improve time-to-market by leveraging an existing engine, and then if you're successful enough then maybe you can afford to create your own.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    I think it would be quite rate for something like this to be feasible at all. Decisions like this are set in stone before development starts, and tend to dictate the development direction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    If you're a megacorp sure, don't think that applies to most indie games tho lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    Few indie devs have the resources to achieve byte compatible and bug compatible clones, AND getting better performance at the same time. It's really only feasible if the original game used a well specified subset of functionality from an inefficient engine. If you did any messing with the internals of the engine, etc, it gets expensive fast.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I'm not going to say you're wrong, but it also adds a ton of complications. Presumably they wrote an entire compatibility layer to map from Unity calls to their own engine. That work doesn't need to be done at all if you start from scratch with your own engine and targets.

    You are right that they probably couldn't afford to make their own engine originally though, and this presumably lets them not pay royalties on future sales. I wouldn't say it's a good strategy, but if you end up with a boatload of cash and a game with a long tail then it's a good tactic. It's just not something you should plan on doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Even if they didn't plan for it and build that compatibility layer, that boatload of cash gives them a lot of options.

    It seems like a classic time-to-market and "don't step over good to get to perfect" example to me. Get a product out, start getting revenue, then make it perfect.

  • source
  • parent