[HN Gopher] Godot founders had desperately hoped Unity wouldn't ...
___________________________________________________________________
Godot founders had desperately hoped Unity wouldn't 'blow up'
Author : kruuuder
Score : 118 points
Date : 2024-09-06 18:41 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.gamedeveloper.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.gamedeveloper.com)
| debo_ wrote:
| I like how it was the Godot maintainers that ended up showing
| demonstrating their Unity.
| ajnye wrote:
| Well we gave up waiting for Godot
| al_borland wrote:
| The timing of it all is almost Unreal.
| doublerabbit wrote:
| Shock waves like an level 3 Quake inside an Arena.
| taejavu wrote:
| Please, can we not? These weak puns are not even funny, and
| if HN devolves into Reddit, I have nowhere left to go.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| You can just not read a comment, you know
| neilv wrote:
| Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_Godot
| throwaway314155 wrote:
| The engine is actually named after that reference.
| calcsam wrote:
| Founders rooting for their competitors to self-destruct is pretty
| rare in devtools.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| It makes some degree of sense. You might assume a bunch of
| refugees hitting your product would be good, but in my
| experience, people who transition voluntarily/gradually are more
| willing to adopt a new paradigm. _However_ , people who are
| moving under duress (because their previous product suddenly
| vanished/went out-of-support/changed licensing) are generally
| less flexible. They haven't had time to adjust, and just want an
| apples-to-apples equivalent for the thing they are used to as
| quickly as possible, because they're trying to get back to work.
|
| Presumably they didn't want Godot to suddenly get an influx of
| help tickets or message forum posts that were all rephrasings of
| "This interface doesn't have a button exactly where I expect it
| from Unity. Godot sucks."
| foresto wrote:
| I have seen this same pattern in long-time Windows users
| approaching Linux, becoming frustrated, and then posting online
| about how bad [they think] it is.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| I have used Linux daily for years and can provide many
| objective things wrong with it. No rose-tinted-Windows
| glasses required.
| nurettin wrote:
| Windows glasses are usually grayed out for some unknown
| reason, and there is no apparent way to clean them up.
| Sometimes taking them off and then putting them back on may
| suddenly clear the gray areas.
| passwordoops wrote:
| I'm using this analogy with every instrument we have at
| the lab. Thank you
| asimovfan wrote:
| can you please talk about what linux refuses to do that you
| are trying to make it do?
|
| or in general what is wrong with it, i am sincerely curious
| lupusreal wrote:
| It doesn't have the button exactly where Windows has it.
| keyringlight wrote:
| I'd say the core difference for those migrating is that
| they evolved with different 'evolutionary pressures'.
| Broadly speaking there's equivalent functionality for a
| lot of things, but windows has a lot of GUI while linux
| has a lot of config files and terminal commands to
| accomplish things.
|
| Where I think the friction is the distance between new
| migrants coming to linux with glowing advertisements of
| it mostly being a drop-in replacement for windows but the
| GUI not offering everything, and crucially not hinting
| where to go to find things, so people head off to do web
| searches and play the lottery of if they get good/recent
| information appropriate to the distro and version they
| chose. Linux seems to be polarized between great for
| simple use cases (browser, gaming within the steam walled
| garden, etc) and those willing/able to dive into the
| terminal, but between those can be a wide gulf which is
| hard to cross.
| jsheard wrote:
| For one the Nvidia drivers are still a pain, and Nvidia
| has 83% discrete GPU marketshare per the Steam survey, so
| the _majority_ of Windows users venturing into Linux are
| immediately going to run into whatever the Nvidia issue
| of the week happens to be. Those who are already sold on
| Linux know to just get an AMD card in the first place,
| but that requires the benefit of foresight.
| trashburger wrote:
| Blame Nvidia for that one. They have actively refused to
| work with the community for the longest time.
| jsheard wrote:
| I don't think the average person cares whose fault it is,
| they just want their computer to work, and Nvidia has
| incredible mindshare over on the Windows side of the
| fence so most people are going to keep buying their
| hardware and almost immediately running into problems
| when they give Linux a shot.
| WiredSlumber wrote:
| Wayland is being pushed out more and more, and it still
| has many problems for me on my Nvidia card. I know it is
| mostly Nvidia fault, but at the end of the day, I am not
| here to assign blame, I just want to use my PC.
| lupusreal wrote:
| You can just... not use wayland. The "push" is easy to
| defy. Just don't use it.
| redserk wrote:
| So just switch to Linux from Windows and immediately
| start deviating from distribution-supported defaults...
|
| This suggestion comes up implicitly in a lot of weird
| hardware cases. It really isn't a selling point for a
| user wanting a good first (or recurring) impression.
|
| Just to call out: X11 isn't all rainbows and unicorns
| either. Wayland (for the various defects I've
| encountered) is a desperately needed improvement.
| nzeid wrote:
| Worth mentioning that I've had AMD blow up on Wayland as
| well, so I only have my one device with an Intel iGPU
| running Wayland. Everything else X11.
| tedunangst wrote:
| I would blame the people who insist that of course Linux
| will just work, I don't need to worry about it.
| tiberious726 wrote:
| I agree, but it doesn't matter who is to blame. It still
| doesn't work.
| bluesign wrote:
| The problem is, which distro?, which DE? Even which
| drivers? Every distro usually has some missing pieces,
| when you raise that, people would say: ' oh you are using
| X thats why, it works on Y'
| dmonitor wrote:
| For me, Linux is capable of doing everything
| productivity-wise much better than Windows, but my home
| PC is practically a toy for me to use Discord and play
| video games. Screen sharing on Discord is an open issue
| with lots of third party solutions, but none of them are
| perfect. Video games is around 95% of the way there
| (thanks, Valve/Proton!), but that 5% can be annoying for
| a device that is essentially my alternative to buying a
| Playstation. I think a large share of "PC enthusiasts"
| fall into this category. The two main use cases for a
| $700 graphics cards are to play Elden Ring and run an
| LLM, and you can guess which one is more popular.
|
| Then there's the minute ambiguities that continue to
| perplex me, which are mostly down to lack of
| standardization across distros. Most distros come with a
| bunch of premade user groups, but good luck figuring out
| what each of those groups give access to. The actual
| purpose of various root level folders is inconsistent,
| making manually installing programs confusing, and
| oftentimes figuring out where the package manager put an
| installed program is vague as well. The other day I
| installed openSUSE on a server, went to disable password
| access in /etc/ssh_config, only to find it doesn't exist.
| Had to google around before finding out they moved it to
| /usr/etc/ssh_config. I am used to googling as part of how
| I navigate daily life (so much so that I pay for it with
| Kagi), but most people don't want to be arsed with
| googling things.
|
| Dotfiles are also annoying, and I think that is a
| universal complaint among users given how many dotfile
| management solutions there are around. The fact that you
| have to edit config files at all is a turnoff for many
| people (I prefer the benefits config files bring, but not
| everyone is so easily convinced). Things like this are
| navigable with enough experience, but people have gotten
| so used to Windows' quirks and error resolution process
| that learning a new system with a whole new set of
| pitfalls just isn't worth it.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| For reasons we won't discuss, I want the caps lock key on
| my keyboard to map to the 'end' key instead.
|
| On Windows, it's just an AutoHotKey script. On Linux?
| Literally impossible. I've spent _days_ dicking with
| various config files, rebooting and relogging dozens of
| times. Even got so desperate I asked chatgpt. Gave up
| after a week or two.
|
| To anyone else reading this: this is not an invitation
| for fixes. Whatever you're going to suggest, I've already
| tried it and I'm super not interested in any opinions
| about it.
| btreecat wrote:
| Fortunately posting about it publicly is akin to asking
| for more engagement.
|
| No mention if you tried to compile the firmware, or use
| the custom mapping configuration available to your
| keyboard, what kind of keyboard you have, or what
| specifically hasn't worked.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| AutoHotKey is a godsend.
| Spivak wrote:
| Windows for all the terrible imposed by the business is
| actually pretty nice.
|
| * Active Directory / Group Policy has no equal to the
| point where FreeIPA and sssd threw in the towel and
| supplement AD and support group policies directly.
|
| * RDP is the better technology full stop. X forwarding is
| really cool and VNC is... there but RDP got the
| abstraction right.
|
| * SMB for all its warts is better at file sharing than
| anything that Linux has to offer and FUSE, while great,
| is a band-aid over the wrong permission model-- why Linux
| does mounting a filesystem have security implications?
| Why after 30 years do we still pretend the filesystem is
| reliable and paper over the reality that it isn't.
|
| * NTFS got the permission model right where for the most
| part Linux is still clunking along with chmod. You don't
| have to deal with user ids sharing a single global
| namespace. Directories only being able to be owned by one
| group. NFSv4 even adopted NT ACLs wholesale as well as
| NT's identity model.
|
| * Windows has undergone truly heroic efforts to make
| remote home directories work where Linux you will never
| stop dealing with issues.
|
| I think the, deserved, Microsoft hate has blinded folks a
| bit to the good things Windows has going for it. I know,
| tragic, the worst person had some good ideas.
| HideousKojima wrote:
| How do I get a drive to mount during boot ( _during_
| boot, not after like FUSE does it) without having to look
| up the command to get the drive 's UUID, look up the
| syntax for a new fstab entry, and edit fstab manually?
|
| A few distros/DEs have straightforward ways to do this
| with a GUI but there's no universal solution, and this is
| something almost anyone using Linux for a home media
| server is going to run into.
| o11c wrote:
| Both GNOME and KDE have GUI disk/partition managers in
| their control panels.
|
| If you aren't using one of the big two, it's your own
| fault (or the fault of whoever sweet-talked you into
| trying their non-mainstream DE).
| yongjik wrote:
| Linux didn't support per-monitor fractional scaling until
| fairly recently. I only got it after I changed to Wayland
| about a year ago (not sure if X supports it these days),
| and then it turns out Wayland doesn't support color
| profile (or at least that's what I learned from random
| Reddit posts).
|
| So I guess I could either go back to X and have
| uncomfortably large letters or stick with Wayland and
| tolerate slightly off colors. Yay.
|
| The IME shows Korean characters in slightly wrong size
| whenever I type and gvim keeps throwing UI error messages
| in the console. At least it allows the input to go
| through, so I guess it's fine?
|
| Hibernation used to work, and then stopped working for
| about two years, and then started working again after the
| latest upgrade. No idea why, I'm not gonna question the
| system when it works.
|
| (BTW, I think the last time I had to worry about IME or
| hibernation in Windows or Mac was about twenty years
| ago.)
| coreyburnsdev wrote:
| not a fan of linux font/text rendering either. doesn't
| look too bad on my 4k but the 1080p monitor is unusable
| for me. fonts also look so airy and thin, and white on
| black looks weird as well.
| anymouse123456 wrote:
| I've been using Linux for decades on workstations,
| servers and laptops. I love Linux. I'm super grateful for
| Linux. I can't imagine living in Windows. I don't want to
| be trapped by Apple. Even through my gratitude-colored
| glasses, Linux leaves a lot to be desired.
|
| I had 2 Linux Dell laptops in a row that either had Wifi
| OR bluetooth, never both. I swapped the radio in the
| second one and things were okay for awhile.
|
| Neither of these, nor the Asus laptop I later purchased
| supported sleep/hibernate when the lid closes. Out of 4
| laptops in 7 years, the only one that supported this
| incredible future technology was my Lenovo Carbon X1, the
| two Dells and the Asus all repeatedly tried to commit
| head-death suicide in my backpack.
|
| My current workstation that runs Ubuntu 22.04 and now
| 24.04 was going great until I got some update that
| swapped me back from Wayland to X11. Now things are weird
| and I've got to make time to fuck with it to figure out
| how to make this RTX 4080 work with Wayland.
|
| It's the worst operating system in the world, except for
| all the others.
| novaleaf wrote:
| if it makes you feel better, I only use windows, and none
| of my computers (laptops or desktops) sleeps/hibernates
| properly. Most of them work most of the time. Some none
| of the time, and none all the time.
| tcmart14 wrote:
| Long time linux user here. I often hop between my work
| windows machine, home linux desktop, BSD laptop and macOS
| laptop.
|
| I can nitpick and find issues with all of these systems.
| I think there is a bit of a little saying that sometimes
| go around that, "all OSes just suck." On Windows 11, I've
| got ads, inconsistency between different windows provided
| by Windows (some have the newer UI look and some are
| still stuck with their Windows 7 like when adjusting
| print settings or advanced settings), and I can never get
| Bluetooth headphones with a mic to just work consistently
| (same with my co-workers). On macOS, the reorganization
| of settings have sucked for a number of settings,
| clicking with my mouse half the time does the view where
| it shows all the applications in my virtual desktop view
| (don't know the proper name of this) and having to
| augment macOS with Magnet. With Linux, some of the pains
| you've already mentioned. And of course those are same
| what even worst on desktop BSD. If I sit down I can
| probably think of more for all the platforms.
|
| At the end of the day, all of them suck, its just a pick
| your pain. So just as you said, each one is the worst
| operating system in the world, except for all others.
| desumeku wrote:
| For every "objective" quality you bring up, I can call it
| subjective.
| bongodongobob wrote:
| I find this hilarious because HN in general has the same
| complaints of Windows not being exactly like Linux. Even
| Windows 11 not being exactly like Windows 10. Humans truly
| are all the same.
| ThatMedicIsASpy wrote:
| And then they redesign everything every time. W8, W10, W11 -
| W11 is the biggest offender with changing the context menu.
| The only positive thing I can say about Windows these days is
| it does work really really really well with touchscreen
| input.
| SR2Z wrote:
| > The only positive thing I can say about Windows these
| days is it does work really really really well with
| touchscreen input.
|
| This was always the point, wasn't it? MS wanted Windows to
| compete more closely with the iPad with the Surface - it
| just turned out that only parts of what they tried were
| good (the Metro style turned into Fluent).
|
| I've been using Windows since 98 and I frankly feel like
| the current UX is at a high point. It's responsive,
| thoughtfully laid-out, and supports modern stuff like
| omnisearch (I have configured my Start Menu to NOT give me
| Bing results) and multiple desktops.
|
| The enshittification is a real shame because I've been
| really enjoying the changes.
| inhumantsar wrote:
| imho as a surface pro user who doesn't use the keyboard
| cover, that's a significant overstatement.
|
| it's much, much better than it used to be, but there are so
| many inconsistencies and annoyances that I would be hard
| pressed to recommend it. selecting text is painful. the on-
| screen keyboard is decent but swipe input won't register
| half the time and it routinely fails to open when it should
| or stay closed when it shouldn't.
|
| with a pen, it's extremely picky with tap inputs. if the
| pen tip moves even a mm after touching, it's registered as
| a mouse drag, and unlike with mice there's no way to adjust
| the sensitivity or register a deadzone. handwriting to text
| is ok, but its constantly shifting interface regularly
| leads to errors and gestures like striking out or replacing
| a letter rarely works on the first (or even third) try.
|
| with both pen and osk, text prediction / spell correct is
| utterly moronic. often reaching for unusual words or proper
| names instead of a more common word.
|
| I will give them credit for getting to this point and I'm
| sure many of the inconsistencies come from having to
| support a wide variety of apps and backwards compatibility.
| regardless tho, it will be a long while yet before it's
| usable as a touchscreen-primary OS, let alone "really
| good".
| neonsunset wrote:
| You may be right, but chances are it would have pushed Godot in
| the right direction of avoiding Unity mistakes namely using
| custom scripting language which Unity ultimately gave up on. In
| this case, however, the forced API decisions that are contrary
| to performant interop patterns of C# are even more painful, and
| I keep getting casual reports that there is something wrong
| with the way Godot embeds .NET that leads to its consistently
| worse performance vs when being used standalone. I don't know
| the details and if anyone can shed more light on this, I'd love
| to dig into that.
|
| In any case, even if we skip the subject of performance,
| GDScript is not a particularly good language comparatively
| speaking.
| gdscripter wrote:
| I can tell you if Godot abandoned GDScript and went all in on
| C# then I would stop using Godot. I do not think C# is even
| remotely enjoyable as a language and GDScript works really
| well.
| kruuuder wrote:
| > and I keep getting casual reports that there is something
| wrong with the way Godot embeds .NET that leads to its
| consistently worse performance vs when being used standalone.
|
| This is the first time I hear that. Do you have any sources
| for that? Reposting unfounded "casual reports" isn't helpful.
| neonsunset wrote:
| I'm not saying that they are well-founded, only that there
| seems to be a consistent anomaly I keep getting told about
| and would like to hear more if this tracks or does not
| track with the experience of active Godot + C# users. It's
| just something I would like to know more about, with the
| best outcome of being proven wrong.
| Buttons840 wrote:
| GDScript is fine and I rarely encounter errors because of the
| GDScript language. The typing is optional, but if used it
| works well enough and the editor gives good autocompletions
| and will mark type errors before runtime. GDScript also
| hasn't screwed up any of the fundamentals, like implicit type
| coercion in if-statements (see JavaScript), and is thus
| capable of improving without breaking backwards
| compatibility.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| > Godot's limitations are fascinating in part because, as the
| pair stressed multiple times in our conversation, they're
| something technically savvy developers can solve themselves.
| Because Godot is open source, developers who want to add key
| features can fork the engine and modify it for themselves free of
| cost. That isn't possible with Unity or Unreal Engine.
|
| You can modify unreal. It's source available.
| yellowapple wrote:
| Yes, but can you redistribute those modifications? Under what
| terms? Having access to the source code is, like, 10% of the
| battle.
| sanderjd wrote:
| Why do you need to redistribute them if your goal is merely
| to solve your own problem? (That's the specific context of
| the quote in the parent comment.)
| yodon wrote:
| >Why do you need to redistribute them if your goal is
| merely to solve your own problem?
|
| Because "you" in this case is typically a game studio.
| "Solving your own problem" means shipping your game.
| sanderjd wrote:
| Gotcha!
| forrestthewoods wrote:
| Huh. I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
|
| Virtually everyone modifies Unreal C++ code. Some indie
| projects are blueprint only. But modifying the engine C++
| source code is practically an expectation.
|
| Can those source code modifications be easily shared with
| other developers? Well they can't be publicly dumped on
| GitHub. Can they be shipped to consume in a compiled
| binary? Absolutely.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Do you think it would make any sense for epic to forbid
| studios from shipping games that contain a modified
| engine?
| justin66 wrote:
| > Yes, but can you redistribute those modifications? Under
| what terms?
|
| They have a marketplace for selling or sharing stuff like
| that. If it's a huge chunk of code that's mostly original
| Unreal code, there are probably some license issues (I have
| no idea) with just sticking it in your github, but I actually
| have seen stuff like that on github, so, maybe not.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Yes you can redistribute modified versions of the engine to
| other parties. Public offerings need to be done through an
| epic marketplace but that can be for free. The modified
| engine is still beholden to the original license terms.
| lainga wrote:
| Does unreal expose an interface like GDCLASS for new types?
| teamonkey wrote:
| Probably UObject or AActor, depending on what you need it
| for.
|
| There are macros-as-descriptors like in Godot but they don't
| really work in the same way. But if you're asking whether you
| have access to base level objects so that you can extend
| them, yea you can.
| mrintegrity wrote:
| This article is pretty clearly LLM generated, or at least
| heavily padded out by an llm
| Noumenon72 wrote:
| I would have guessed it was written by an actual journalist
| who used to work for a newspaper. It's mixing story
| reporting, interview summarization, and quotes from
| independent sources in a way that's very familiar to me and
| seems like the work of a human. Although few places can
| afford that journalist touch any more, so maybe you're right!
| kajika91 wrote:
| What? You read the articles?
| shortformblog wrote:
| Oh my God, it's clearly a reported story by a journalist.
| PlattypusRex wrote:
| That's not really true. You can't modify it free of cost; you
| still have to pay the royalties to use it. You also can't
| modify it in any way you like, there are numerous restrictions
| in the EULA on how exactly you can modify/distribute snippets
| of code. Not only that, but you also aren't allowed to
| integrate it with any sort of software with a copyleft license,
| making it useless for any gamedevs who want to license their
| game with one. Even people wanting to use copyleft libraries or
| code with their fork are completely restricted.
| tedunangst wrote:
| Why did all these migrating game developers pick unity in the
| first place if they wanted to release a copyleft game?
| PlattypusRex wrote:
| My reply had nothing to do with Unity. It was directed at
| the statement that Unreal being source-available is somehow
| equivalent to being able to freely fork and modify Godot to
| add specific features.
|
| Furthermore, many of these devs have been on Unity for many
| years, not because it was the best, but because it was
| pretty much the only accessible and modern choice for
| smaller projects before Godot and other open-source engines
| were mature enough to release games with.
| pizza234 wrote:
| This is not (entirely) correct:
|
| > Free
|
| > Game developers (royalties apply after $1 million USD gross
| product revenue)
|
| > Individuals and small businesses (with less than $1 million
| USD in annual gross revenue)
|
| > For educators and schools (no revenue limits)
| PlattypusRex wrote:
| Yes, royalties apply after $1 million, hence, not free.
| Plenty of small/medium studios use Unreal.
|
| Free for educational purposes means it is not free, since
| the royalties still apply if the game is released.
|
| Last time I checked, free means free.
| fragmede wrote:
| free means whatever the reader wants it to mean,
| including free as in beer, free as in speech, or free as
| in puppies. In this case, free until you have $1,000,000
| in revenue is free enough outside of pedantic online
| arguments about the definition of free. If you made a
| million dollars from something, having to pay the thing
| that helped you get to that place doesn't seem
| unreasonable, but maybe I'd I had a million dollars I'd
| feel differently.
| PlattypusRex wrote:
| It's pedantic to say it isn't free when...it isn't?
| Plenty of smaller games make over $1 million. It's news
| to me that the concept of free is whatever the reader
| wants it to be. Free as in beer or free as in freedom,
| Unreal is neither.
| mirekrusin wrote:
| What needs to be below 1m? Revenue of the whole shop? Or
| just that game? If you have two games how is it
| calculated? Can you create legal entity per app to manage
| limit? Is it annual revenue? Can you set publishing legal
| entity in front that takes most revenue as publishing
| cost and pays peanuts to dev shop legal entity that holds
| license?
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Per game, lifetime revenue.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| $1M per product. So if you're talking about releasing
| engine mods for free, there is no cost.
| tetris11 wrote:
| So is Firefox, and we all know where the community
| contributions there end up
| otikik wrote:
| I don't know anything about this. Does Firefox reject
| contributions?
| doctorpangloss wrote:
| Stretching $8 million to do $2 BILLION of product development is
| the hard part.
|
| So is trying to make a game engine during the worst industry
| contraction since the collapse of Atari.
|
| Being open source is kind of saving them right now.
| Animats wrote:
| > Stretching $8 million to do $2 BILLION of product development
| is the hard part.
|
| It's even worse over in Rust land. Bevy is making progress, but
| it's slow.
|
| There are several parts to this. There are the run-time
| components - the graphics stack, the physics engine, and the 2D
| user interface components are the big ones. There's the
| gameplay programming system - schematics in Unreal Engine,
| scripts for most others. Then there's a developer user
| interface to provide a GUI for all this.
|
| Open source development can do the run-time components. There's
| general agreement on how those are supposed to work, and many
| examples to look at. The developer user interface is tough.
| Open source development has a terrible time with graphical user
| interfaces. Those need serious design, not just a collection of
| features and menus that happen to compile together.
| ThrowawayTestr wrote:
| >the worst industry contraction since the collapse of Atari.
|
| Is that true? It feels like we've been in a indie renaissance
| for a while now
| runevault wrote:
| There are indies doing well certainly (had at least 3
| significant hits this year to my knowledge between Balataro
| (made with LOVE2D), Animal Well (C and a custom engine) and
| Buckshot Roulette (made with Godot)), but game developers in
| general have not been doing great. Seeing layoffs on par with
| the rest of tech.
| kevingadd wrote:
| We've had upwards of 20k games industry layoffs in just the
| last couple years, iirc. Funding has dried up too, which is
| really bad for indies since they're more dependent on it than
| established studios.
| goles wrote:
| https://archive.is/m54v5
| omoikane wrote:
| > "Pronounce it however you like."
|
| Godot pronunciation is documented at
| https://godotengine.org/press/ Godot is named
| after the play Waiting for Godot, and is usually pronounced like
| in the play. Different languages have different pronunciations
| for Godot and we find it beautiful.
|
| But there used to be an extra line that recommends pronouncing it
| like "god-oh": For native English speakers, we
| recommend "GOD-oh"; the "t" is silent like in the French
| original.
|
| It was removed in favor of making the pronunciation non-
| prescriptive:
|
| https://github.com/godotengine/godot-website/pull/638
|
| https://github.com/godotengine/godot-website/commit/c9053182...
| throwawayk7h wrote:
| huh, I always imagined the emphasis was on the second syllable,
| not the first. Of course, in French, all syllables are equally
| emphasized.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-06 23:01 UTC)