PlayMaker News > General Discussion
Why Playmaker and not Bolt
netlander:
Very biased replies above.
After having used Playmaker for a while I moved to Bolt and never looked back, here are my reasons:
* One to one mapping with Unity APIs (helps you understand the ins and outs of Unity without any weird abstractions).
* Feels less cluncky and more responsive
* Ease of nesting Units
* Better performance
* Looks much better than the outdated PM UI
* Fewer bugs (in my experience)
* Fast growing community
* Could go on... May be later (in middle of breakfast right now).
Here's a comparison chart: https://support.ludiq.io/knowledge-bases/4/articles/222-compare-visual-scripting-tools-for-unity
Fat Pug Studio:
While we're at it, i could recommend one (actually two) solution that encompasses the best of both worlds, it's FlowCanvas + NodeCanvas. FlowCanvas is a typical visual scripting solution like Bolt (but i like it better, personal preference) fully integratable with NodeCanvas, which is a solution similar to Playmaker, state machines, actions, etc.
Never had the time to delve deeper though.
netlander:
Yes I have looked at both (and the possibility of using them in tandem) but they just didn't have the kind of clear documentation that Bolt has at the moment (can't comment on anything else as I have not used them).
For me Bolt seem to have hit the sweet spot in terms of clear direction, ease to reason about, good visuals, responsiveness, flexibility, etc...
jeanfabre:
--- Quote from: netlander on July 29, 2018, 04:59:41 AM ---Very biased replies above.
After having used Playmaker for a while I moved to Bolt and never looked back, here are my reasons:
* One to one mapping with Unity APIs (helps you understand the ins and outs of Unity without any weird abstractions).
* Feels less cluncky and more responsive
* Ease of nesting Units
* Better performance
* Looks much better than the outdated PM UI
* Fewer bugs (in my experience)
* Fast growing community
* Could go on... May be later (in middle of breakfast right now).
Here's a comparison chart: https://support.ludiq.io/knowledge-bases/4/articles/222-compare-visual-scripting-tools-for-unity
--- End quote ---
Hi,
Yes, it's ok to prefer one tool over the other, that's the great thing about the Asset store.
Do you have some benchmark for performances? I'd be interested in checking them out and possibly see where the performances differences are. What's important to understand with PlayMaker is that it doesn't use Reflection which is always impacting performances, but instead uses plain scripted actions, which means that de facto, performances are in theory better.
Not that PlayMaker do offer some Reflection when you are using SetProperty, GetProperty, or CallMethod, and it's not recommanded to use them unless you have no other options and you don't know how to code ( you can alwasy ping me if you need a custom action, I'll happily provide)
For example, one could try as an exercice to reverse engineer in Bolt the 2d platformer demo that I reversed engineered in PlayMaker, and then we would have a very good base for benchmark. I did extensive testing for that project and the footprint in memory is 1Mb ( size of the PlayMaker FSM dll) and 1 to 3/4 fps in the worse scenarios ( webgl) compared to the original scripted version.
you can see all the results of the benchmark below:
https://github.com/jeanfabre/PlayMaker--UnityLearn--2dPlatformer
Bye,
Jean
djaydino:
Hi.
I would also like to see a version from the Unity 2D Platformer Demo, as i don't think that the performance will be worse than any of the other 'State Machine' visual scripting tools.
Also that comparison chart does not come from a independent party.
Which means that it is not reliable.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version