55 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Really engeenes that good for serious development nobody will give for free or sold for 100.  In case it sold it usualy  sold together with company that made it.

The Unreal engine would like a word with you.

More generally, even AAA developers are moving away from rolling their own tech. It simply costs too much to keep up with the latest advances in graphics and hardware technology with their own developers and artists/designers have become used to Unity and Unreal's workflows, so rolling your own tech would probably just mean duplicating what Unreal provides, anyway.

Tons of indies (who ship actual games) use even Unity because rolling their own engine costs too much. And most games require very basic physics. Small games often don't even need more than basic rigidbody dynamics and axis-aligned bounding box collisions. For stuff more complicated than that there's Havok and PhysX and Bullet, and if I'm not mistaken, both Unreal and Unity have integrated those.

What you're saying here was true, at one point - maybe like... 5-10 years ago - but the times have changed. It's not 2005 anymore.

43 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

But it costs a huge overheads. For example  Win10 calculator made by C# use more RAM than Win95 has require to installation on HDD and use more threads then have buttons, while have same functionality that Win95 calculator. and so on.

Are you running your code on machines that would run Win95?

Windows 95 required a single-core, 20Mhz processor and 4MB of RAM. My several years old laptop has an 8-core, 2.4Ghz CPU and 12288MB of RAM. For many apps, the productivity gains of working in a managed language often outstrip the (miniscule) performance losses. I suspect most of the overhead is due to the GUI libraries and not C#, anyway.

43 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

In close future we wil have to kinds of games - multiplayer games and no games

Yeah, no. Where are you getting this from? There's a huge single-player market out there. Bioware's RPGs like the Mass Effect and Dragon Age series come to mind. The Witcher was also very popular. And that's just in the West... Where do you live that single players are going so far out of fashion as to be non-existent?

31 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

a self-managed hierarhies of objects

What do you mean by this? Do you mean scene graphs? I was under the impression that those had fallen out of favor in the game industry in the last few years. Or are you just talking about RAII?

10 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

What do you mean by this? Do you mean scene graphs? I was under the impression that those had fallen out of favor in the game industry in the last few years. Or are you just talking about RAII?

I mean add-to-hierarhy-and-forget оbject managment technique. 

12 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

Are you running your code on machines that would run Win95?

It good for calculator but it not good for ingame objects. Its quantity on scene has growth many times in comparsion with win95 games.

15 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

both Unreal and Unity have integrated those.

Uniti dont have ever cylindric colliders. It have spheres capsules OOBB and mesh colliders same as PhysX. Also no one of it engines  uses a collision prediction mechanisms that mach more efficient than collision detection and interpenetration elemenation.

53 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Just look to docs. Ever in pro version it can not handle over 200 players per server. It just to slow for serious games that can have 5000+ clients on location for MMORG or 100k clients per server on MOBA. Also look at docs. It architecture not ready to complexive game mechanics. Rendering engine implements news of rendering technologies with 7-10 years delays. And so on. Really engeenes that good for serious development nobody will give for free or sold for 100.  In case it sold it usualy  sold together with company that made it.

I don't use Unity myself, but you're not forced to use their server by any means and can find an alternative solution if you're unable to make your own. I also don't agree with the statement about: "Really engeenes that good for serious development nobody will give for free or sold for 100." ... So what about Unreal as they don't charge you a dime to use their engine until a certain income level has been met, or if you want to customize the engine. If anyone claims Unreal isn't a 'really good engine', then I really cannot take the rest of your claims with any seriousness.

There are a lot of great games on Unity and unfortunately the reason why you see so many 'bad' games is because many new developers are using it, and it appeals to more an entry level audience. That doesn't mean if a seasoned development team picked up Unity their game would look and play like garbage.... This is far from the truth. Unity has it's problems, but no engine in existence can magically make a game good if the development team isn't putting out quality work. Heck, I've seen better games make with GameMaker Studio than some Unreal projects displayed on indie forums.

Debating on if a game is considered "real" based on the engine or language used is ridiculous. Languages and engines are tools for development. If the developer makes a good game nobody buying the game even cares what fancy tools were used... Gamers want good games to play, they don't research all the development tools used before buying. Unity and C# are perfectly fine, and I'm saying this as someone who normally uses C++ and custom engines... I was even using C# when XNA was popular and made several games... So I'm not sure what your actual experience is in game programming, or how you validate what is considered a "real game", but Unity is a great choice for C# developers.

18 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

It's not 2005 anymore.

It really not a 2005. We have a support of patches for curved surfaces since DX11 hardware (2009) that make ability to have continuos LOD. Is any of free engines support patch models or patch colliders? So it just outdated. Other example - instancing. Complete hardware support exists since  DX11 while partial GPU techniques kown since DX9.  It has been added to Unity at later 2017. So it delayed at least for 8 years. And so on. Unreal engine of cource much better than Unity but have similar whitespaces. For example complete absence of IK system and ever basic proportional navigation algos that can be described as linked blocks that makes much robust and simplier way to implementation of stearing and aimin then blueprints. and so on.

22 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

For stuff more complicated than that there's Havok and PhysX and Bullet, and if I'm not mistaken, both Unreal and Unity have integrated those.

I've heard it is very hard to replace PhysX in both UE and Unity and i don't know any game which did so. (One main reason for me to not consider them, so if anyone knows better pls let me know...)

2 minutes ago, Rutin said:

Languages and engines are tools for development

Of cource. So good developer that want to make a good game/gaming engine will select a tool that better fit task meeds. Obviuosly managed languages and free engines is not fit needs of serious development. So good developers just usualy select/make other tools that fit all needs. 

I made once a Chess game over skype in C#.
For games like this, it is better to choice baby C#, The moment you are forced to use unmanaged code in C#, i think C# is not a good match anymore.
Microsoft says managed languages are not suitable for multimedia and 3D APIs. That's why they provide them in C++.

1 minute ago, NikiTo said:

I made once a Chess game over skype in C#.

Now try do same on C++ and compare. Is your game have chess AI or it just 2 players game? Just from point where you need any (ever simpliest) chess AI you will found that C++ better option for it. Really i has made a basic AI that has solve chess tasks (find a mate in given number of moves) in couple hours on older C++  as homework  by  theory of games at 1997. And it was enought fast on Pentium 133 with 16MB of RAM. I gues C# AI never be made on comparable time and be same efficient. Becouse it unable to use stack for temporary data.

10 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Obviuosly managed languages and free engines is not fit needs of serious development.

This is a generalisation that does not hold in practice. Professionals use the best tool for the job, taking into account cost, speed of development, compatibility with target platforms, etc.

Unity comes out on top of this equation quite often (particularly for games targeting mobile platforms). Unreal comes out on top even more often for PC and console titles, with a significant number of AAA games in the last few years being shipped on the same engine available to you, for free.

Yes, those teams likely customised Unreal Engine more than you can afford to as a solo developer, but the fact remains they chose a "free" engine for AAA titles.

2 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Just from point where you need any (ever simpliest) chess AI you will found that C++ better option for it.

sure that! I was ok with C# because it was only two players playing against each other. It was for a project in school. I had no time to provide play-vs-computer option, but i planed to link for that to some 3rd party chess engine. I would not even try to code a chess engine myself, no no no, not so much fan of the chess game.

After losing years with ASM, i learned the hard way: "always use the easiest codding language that fits for the task!"