Gamestudio could compete with unity just by making a more powerfull game engine and give up on lite-c.
Lite-C is a strength. Being a
programming language instead of a
scripting language, it should be faster than Unity's scripts (although the Unity devers reckon their script (used properly and optimised well) can be as little as 50% slower than a compiled language), and since Lite-C supports just about all traditional C syntax, it is no obstacle to a programmer beginning with the engine whatsoever.
A7 is not my first choice beacuse even if you put a lot effort in developing your game won't change the fact the graphics will be kind of poor or the engine will be unoptimised.
Hmm... there's a fine line between comparing A7 with another engine and going off-topic talking about A7's capabilities. I would call this particular chunk off-topic simply because it is unsubstantiated. If you want to talk about A7's capabilities in this thread, it should only be done
in comparison with Unity, and those comparisons should only be made if they are also
backed up by feature comparisons between the two. This isn't some rule I'm pulling out, it's common sense.
Similar to you, WDID: It's all well and good to discuss the impact of Unity Indie going free on Gamestudio, but most of your two posts here is paying out A7 without any reason behind it. I'm not going to say you're wrong; I'm just saying no one is going to take a seasoned A7-hater seriously if there's no "this is why I say this"
Jibb
