zippy VS Panda3D

Nothing is without the cons. I would say:

* Libraries: there is no NPM ecosystem to get anything you need.

* Stack-overflow: If you looking for a aswers there might not be anyone who encounters it before. You might have to dig really deep to find some thing.

* Some times you might run into a compiler bug usually related with performance of the generated code. Like it generates correct code bug it's slow for no reason and minor changes to the code make it fast again.

* Relying on OpenSSL especially v3 especially on windows is a big problem, but thats more on openSSL i think. I actually wrote a library around this that uses platforms HTTP/SSL instead: https://github.com/treeform/puppy

* Not having HTTP gzip support in standard library. You can always work around with zippy though: https://github.com/guzba/zippy

* async stack traces are really hard to read.

* not enough docs around the different ways to do threading. There is no one solution some times you want a quick thing, some times you are doing CPU tasks other times you are doing network tasks (where async is better). But many big languages struggle here, there is no one fits all threading solution.

It's definitely not style case insensitivity which everyone loves to bike-shed about.

One last example of Nim’s performance is taking a look at zlib. It has been around for so long and is used everywhere. It has to be as fast as possible, right? After all it uses SIMD and is very tight and battle test code. Well, then the Zippy library gets written in Nim and mostly beats or ties with zlib!

Panda3D (MIT/C++) https://github.com/panda3d/panda3d

For open source 3d engines that use Python check out Panda3D or Ursina. They're both a blast to use and let you write your codd how you want.

[0] https://www.panda3d.org/

[1] https://www.ursinaengine.org/

Panda3D: Let's you make games with c++ and python. I don't think there is an "editor" or anything like that with this engine, but it does look like there have been some decent games made with it. Could be good for smaller games. Modified BSD License.

I know a lot of people recommend Godot because it's super good but if you want a more code oriented and batteries included engine I recommend Panda3D [0] it's open source, super mature (it's actually one of the oldest continously developed game engines), and can be used form Python and C++. Not sure why it's not more popular it's flexiable and super fun to use.

[0] https://www.panda3d.org/

Some of the game engines we have now have photogrammetry technology built-in, meaning that developers can easily integrate it into their games. This allows for even more detailed and realistic environments to be created in 3D games. The most prominent being Unreal, Unity, and Lumberyard -- including new and beginner-friendly ones like Panda3D and Yahaha. All of these game engines have photogrammetry at their core to help developers create realistic 3D models and textures quickly and efficiently.

Make sure to provide your junior developers or any new members with the resources and tools they need to succeed. This could include coding books (The Self-Taught Programmer was my favorite before), online tutorials, or access to development tools and software. There are game engines available that can be a training ground for new devs, some of the game engines I’ve tried are Panda3D, GameMaker and Godot. I’ve also tried newer engines like Yahaha, but this one is pretty easy compared to other engines so there’s really not much of a challenge. The point is, no matter what resources and tools you provide, make sure they are tailored to the skill level of your junior developers.

...and there are some samples in the source https://github.com/panda3d/panda3d/tree/master/samples

It's not my project, but https://www.panda3d.org/ is to my knowledge the next best step after Unity and Unreal game engines. Unlike those, panda is open source and available for C++ and Python.