>There just aren't enough games per engine to get the heavy machinery shaken down properly.
It's more a quality than quantity problem. The best showcase of Godot is a badly reviewed port of a wii game, one which is made with some closed source fork of Godot engine. And that Wii game still is probably more ambitious than 99.9% of anything else shown publicly, be it a fully shipped game or a tech demo. If you could make one big splash, the rest will come out and start poking in (again, similar to what Godot did. But they had the fortune for someone else to make a splash in the form of bad PR).
Stride is in a similar footing, it has a few successful shipped games from multiple rebrandings ago, but that was when the engine was a closed source, in-house engine. Someone has the start the charge and oftentimes the engine makers are too busy working on the engine to properly battle-test it. But whoever is starting the charge needs to do a lot of things that get in the way of actually making their game. And you know that old mantra: "make games, not engines".
Using an untested one is like half game, half engine dev (compared to 90% engine dev, 10% game dev for rolling your own). And put simply many lack the talent to do that. And the few remaining are either already in industry, or choosing to work with proven tech.
----
by the way, your work in your Rust metaverse was really impressive. That's exactly the kind of trailblazing I'd want to do myself, but I feel I wanted to learn more in the C++/C# world of game development before jumping into Rust. My long long term goal (5-10 years out) is to one day hope for a proper renderer/engine core made in Rust while binding to some nicer scripting language above. I tire greatly of segfaults and especially concurrency issues in other languages.
It's more a quality than quantity problem. The best showcase of Godot is a badly reviewed port of a wii game, one which is made with some closed source fork of Godot engine. And that Wii game still is probably more ambitious than 99.9% of anything else shown publicly, be it a fully shipped game or a tech demo. If you could make one big splash, the rest will come out and start poking in (again, similar to what Godot did. But they had the fortune for someone else to make a splash in the form of bad PR).
Stride is in a similar footing, it has a few successful shipped games from multiple rebrandings ago, but that was when the engine was a closed source, in-house engine. Someone has the start the charge and oftentimes the engine makers are too busy working on the engine to properly battle-test it. But whoever is starting the charge needs to do a lot of things that get in the way of actually making their game. And you know that old mantra: "make games, not engines".
Using an untested one is like half game, half engine dev (compared to 90% engine dev, 10% game dev for rolling your own). And put simply many lack the talent to do that. And the few remaining are either already in industry, or choosing to work with proven tech.
----
by the way, your work in your Rust metaverse was really impressive. That's exactly the kind of trailblazing I'd want to do myself, but I feel I wanted to learn more in the C++/C# world of game development before jumping into Rust. My long long term goal (5-10 years out) is to one day hope for a proper renderer/engine core made in Rust while binding to some nicer scripting language above. I tire greatly of segfaults and especially concurrency issues in other languages.