My game project

So I decided to seriously start on my game but I came across game maker which everyone over there says that you can type gml in a fraction of the time of c# even the site says type 80% faster than native luangauges. Would this time diffrence be major or barely noticable.

 

What sort of game are you trying to create?

 

If you are unsure then try both out, but I can say unity is very good in many ways. My biggest problem was I quickly discredited unity based on its complexity. This cost me many hours because I used lesser game engines that take longer to develop things but on the surface appeared easier to use. So I advise you give both a fair try before making a decision. Make sure you take into account every feature you want: iap, ads, multiplayer, multi-plat, etc

 

2d adventure

 

I like unity better just wondering if game maker luanguage was truly 80% faster than typing c#

 

Ah I don't have any experience with that.

 

What platforms are you interested in supporting? Unity comes with support for Windows, OS X, and Linux along with the various mobile platforms and WebGL entirely for free. GameMaker only supports Windows for free. Any additional platforms cost money.

I've never worked with GameMaker, but glancing over the GML reference I feel like it is simply another C-style language. It appears to have a bit less complexity but it doesn't have the more advanced capabilities of C# either.

 

It would be pc and ios and android I was jut wondering if it really was that fast compared to c#.

 

I have no doubt you would save typing for the basics, but anything complex you would have more difficulty with because Mono's C# framework, which is used by Unity, has a lot of time savers that won't be present in GML.

Frankly I don't think it is worth switching to save a bit of typing because you'll have to pay for the same number of platforms that Unity already provides for free.

http://www.yoyogames.com/studio

Windows support is free, but OS X and Linux are only available with the purchase of the Professional tier. Additionally if you want Android support that's another purchase and iOS is yet another purchase. Off-sale it adds up to $748.

 

Difficult to judge development speed based on typing speed alone. Like, what contributes to that? Shorter function names? If so, I'd favor however long the name needs to be to describe exactly what it's doing, because it would take you much longer to figure it out otherwise. And how comprehensive is Gamemaker intellisense/auto complete vs c# with Resharper or VisualAssist? Just because a function/typename is shorter doesnt mean it takes less time to type, especially with autocomplete. Engineering takes more time to design than it does to type. How long would it take to find the proper api functions that you need to finish a task? A part of implementation time is taken up searching for the right api calls. How long does it take to go to the api documents to search exactly what you need? How much do gamemaker functions wrap functionality to simplify tasks? What if you need more refined control than calling a helper function? Of course you'd be typing out a lot more, but that's the cost of having that control.

There are a lot more important reasons to choose a language than the speed it takes to type a language. In fact, that's probably the least important aspect, if a factor at all. The most important question is if an engine and its api can help you make the game that you want to make.

 

You'll just have to try it. Nobody can tell you if it will be easier for you or not. Well sure they can and all that is based on if it is easier or not for them. It's like a lot of people find working in Unity much faster and natural than working in other languages yet myself and others find it much faster and more natural just working in C++ or whatever. There are a lot of people out there using C++ programming and relatively low level APIs (compared to Unity) making games. There are a lot using GameMaker. A lot using Unity. Just try different things and stick with the one that works best for you.

 

I decided to go with unity because eventually I want to make 3d games also I realized gml is only used in game maker .

 

If I remember correctly, can't Game Maker do 3d? Well more like Doom 3d kinda 3d? Not sure if it can do what games look like today, but I think it does the 3d like Duke Nukem and Doom kinda 3d.

 

Lol I meant 3d as in today

 

Also note: unless you're a really slow typist, how "long" a language takes to type makes pretty much no difference in the grand scheme of things. Unless you're trying to write a game in brainf*ck, at which point may whatever god(s) you pray to have mercy on your soul

 

What is that it looks horrible?

 

Try AdventureGameStudio (AGS) then. It's a very mature engine for adventure games. And 100% free. Also Unity is THE engine for 3D games, but for 2D it's an overkill. You could also try out GDevelop which is also free and very fun to use.

Lastly, when using Unity, you could try out Playmaker or similar tools. It'll get rid of some of Unity's complexity.

 

Yea i'm getting playmaker soon, wish we had a built in visual script like unreal does.

 

Well, it's on the roadmap. No idea how soon it will be there though. The very least they could do would be to simplify making custom events to be used with EventTrigger component.

 

If it's as good as bluebrints or better then I can wait.

 

You may want to look into Adventure Creator on the Asset Store. It is made specifically for adventure games and has a visual scripting language specifically made for them. If you decide to go with PlayMaker it is made to work with it too.

 

I've done a little programming with GML - I don't think it's going to make a huge difference. If you're new to programming (assume you are or you wouldn't be asking), I wouldn't consider GML to be much easier/harder than C# (or at least, the C# that you'll be writing for Unity specifically).

Mind you, if you're just interested in 2D, GameMaker is actually really nice - might definitely be an option to consider instead of Unity. Just depends on your needs and what you see yourself developing in future.

 

Ah... I just realised you already made your decision and pretty much answer everything that I was pondering in my post. I feel like a damn fool now... a DAMN FOOL!

 

Unity was made for being easy to use. Everything from the non-virtual Start, Update, etc. functions to the lack of [SerializeField] for serializing fields. It's not a bad thing except for the bad habits you pick up like spamming public fields. Unity's as easy to use as it gets for a full-fledged game engine.

 

Does Game Maker compile to native code? If it does, you could get better performance out of it since C# runs on Mono haha.

If you want to make simple games, you can use either engine. If you ever want to move beyond 2D or make a complex game, Unity will probably be the better option.

Unity is adding a visual scripting language? Stingray and Unreal both have one, right? The pressure is on to produce something fantastic

 

GameMaker's language is interpreted according to Wikipedia.