Lua or C# vs Visual Scripting

#1
Visual scripting does have its place.
But I wish they would keep Lua or C sharp as the engine's main scripting language.
Some game studios I know are already switching back to a scripting language after years of using visual scripting.
I like the idea of visual scripting. But I just can't use it for production.
Blue Print in UE4 gives, in my opinion, a perfect visual scripting environment.
Even then, it's mainly used for fast prototyping or simple tasks.
C# or Lua is a much better choice.
I'm sure you have had this discussion a million times. But visual scripting trend is fading away.

Re: Lua or C# vs Visual Scripting

#2
disagree i believe its the future of game creation if crytek would pull heads out of there butts the flow graph is what made there engine popular in the first place



Visual scripting does have its place.
But I wish they would keep Lua or C sharp as the engine's main scripting language.
Some game studios I know are already switching back to a scripting language after years of using visual scripting.
I like the idea of visual scripting. But I just can't use it for production.
Blue Print in UE4 gives, in my opinion, a perfect visual scripting environment.
Even then, it's mainly used for fast prototyping or simple tasks.
C# or Lua is a much better choice.
I'm sure you have had this discussion a million times. But visual scripting trend is fading away.

Re: Lua or C# vs Visual Scripting

#4
Hi tothespace,
As I've spent many years developing my simulator with Lua, it's not surprising I would like to see Cry Engine continue to support Lua!
Yes, visual scripting (e.g. flowgraph) does have its place. But its prime use is for setting up maps, particularly for defining AI behaviour.
It is not suitable for creating entities, apart maybe for very simple ones. Over the years I've seen people create complex entities entirely programmed with flowgraph. That's a *bad* idea: as the flowgraph gets bigger and bigger it will quickly become almost impossible to develop and maintain. Using a scripting language is several million times better.

Lua has always been overlooked in Cry Engine, but in fact it's surprisingly powerful and yet very easy to use. Debugging is very easy - I often write a few lines of test code which I can immediately execute in game mode, no need to compile and reload Sandbox.
I'm still using Cry Engine 3. Although obsolete it is perfect for my simulator, while CE5 has some serious problems e.g. the apparent innability to render 5 * 14 km terrain grids, essential for the simulator (it works well in CE3). If Crytek drops Lua entirely then I won't be able to support CE5. I would be interested to hear from Crytek whether Lua will continue to be available in future versions of CE5.
Chris

Re: Lua or C# vs Visual Scripting

#5
Visual Scripting is fine and dandy for small/medium interactions but anything more complex and you just lose readability, you have a mess of boxes and lines. IMO normal text scripting with a good debugger and code-completion/introspection is very nice and would be a petty if modern engines stopped supporting those,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Callyde Jr and 3 guests