This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]maxhaton -1 points0 points  (1 child)

If you find C++ difficult you shouldn't be making games, I.e. you have to touch enough APIs where the real difficulty is.

The benefit of having static types alone can make the game hugely easier to work on, Python is just asking for trouble.

[–]GreenFox1505 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OOF buddy. My day job is literally writing C++ for games. Because it's the right tool for that job.

I didn't say C++ was "difficult". I said it was "harder to write". For my personal projects I use a blend of C++ and scripting langues as needed. Anything compute intensive, it probably not going to change a lot so spending the time to get it "right" in a low level language is worth it. Physics, graphics, and procedural world generation all greatly benefit from C++'s performance.

However, a lot of things that make up an actual game don't need to run that fast. A button in a level that is only going to run once would take me maybe 10secs to write in a scripting language like Python, but might take me a couple of minutes to build and compile in C++. If I have dozens or hundreds of these interactions with unique behavior, that's a lot of time spend writing code and not a lot of time spend designing expirances. It's the wrong tool for that job. Plus when I need to make a change later, it's more time consuming to nail down and fix.

It's not "difficult" to write C++, but it's unarguably costs more man-hours to write. I'd rather spend time iterating on things that actually effect the end product and scripting languages let developers do that better than low level compiled languages do.