The Evolution of GameMaker: Insights into the Game Engine Landscape Over 25 Years

Earlier this month GameMaker (currently managed by developer YoYo Games) celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary. If it were a person, it would not only be old enough to order a drink at a bar, but it could also be experienced enough to leave its day job and chase its ambitions of becoming an indie game developer.

In essence: it might be the kind of individual who would utilize GameMaker.

It’s that type of individual (regardless of age) that constitutes GameMaker’s core userbase, remarked Gamemaker’s head Russell Kay in an interview with Game Developer. Thirty years ago, he was programming games like Lemmings 2 and Grand Theft Auto and now wishes he had a tool as advanced as GameMaker when he first began his journey. The software is so adaptable that it can be embraced by novices to grasp the fundamentals of game design, while also serving as a robust engine for commercial titles such as Fields of Mistria, UFO 50, and of course Undertale. YoYo Games even created its own studio simulation game to celebrate the milestone.

That YoYo Games (now owned by Opera) has thrived for 25 years is an achievement in itself; that it has done so by supporting the smallest studios in the online gaming industry is nearly miraculous. It reached this milestone after a challenging year for the game engine sector—one that began with Unity announcing a “Runtime Fee” that could potentially cost developers on a per-install basis and concluded with it shamefacedly retracting that idea as more developers migrated to engines like Godot.

Unity and Unreal Engine creator Epic Games also laid off hundreds of employees during that time, facing the reality that the service provider market is no longer the endless cash source some had anticipated.

In light of upheavals like these, what can these studios and other software providers learn from GameMaker’s enduring success?

GameMaker’s longevity comes from supporting developers with big dreams

During our discussion, Kay acknowledged that GameMaker is not the most complex development tool available. This is partly due to its user base not primarily being seasoned programmers. He referred to it as the “bedrooms to billions” mentality—with a stronger focus on “bedrooms” than “billions.” “You have individuals who can take their ideas to a wider audience…it’s about the creative aspect, not necessarily the commercial side,” he stated. “It’s not about trying to create the next Call of Duty; it’s about thinking outside the box and asking ‘what is going to resonate?'”

The GameMaker developer community, he noted, is largely comprised of these “creative” developers seeking to tackle significant problems, strengthened by a supportive “technical” community that digs into the software and explores solutions to bring these ideas to life. The business rationale for engaging this type of audience is that as they grow in their development skills, they come to trust GameMaker. They take the software with them from their school or hobbyist experiences into their professional endeavors. “We want individuals to see GameMaker not just as a tool they picked up in school, tried, and moved on from to proper game development,” Kay expressed, adding that he wants developers to think of GameMaker as “a serious tool employed by serious projects, and it’s worth considering.”

Image courtesy of YoYo Games.

One of the most essential forms of support any small developer needs is the ability to distribute their games—large or small—across platforms beyond just PC. Kay mentioned that when he joined YoYo Games in 2009 as chief technical officer, the software only supported PC platforms, and extending any game to Mac, Linux, console, or emerging mobile platforms required additional effort. Kay recalled that there was a change in mindset within the company after Derek Yu released Spelunky, a game he prototyped in GameMaker but couldn’t release due to platform constraints.

One of Kay’s initial major objectives was to introduce support for these platforms to GameMaker as soon as possible. The timing was perfect, particularly with the mobile market poised for a remarkable boom in the types of 2D games GameMaker excels at creating. In the years following the
“`

The company has been proactive in keeping the engine modern with existing and emerging platforms, ranging from the PS Vita to the increasing utilization of WebGPU.

“That’s how we’ve ensured longevity,” he stated. Overall, the engine has remained “fairly consistent,” and it effectively operates in a similar way to how it did 15 years ago.

“You could still follow a tutorial from 15 years ago and it wouldmostly function,” he remarked, glancing aside to recall what had become outdated. “There might be inaccuracies, but it would generally work.”

How should toolmakers be assisting game developers?

Since GameMaker’s launch, the software provider market for game developers has surged significantly. Numerous software companies have aimed for stability by providing metaphorical tools to metaphorical prospectors heading for the metaphorical gold rush instead of venturing into the market themselves. Many of these toolmakers are indeed offering services that rely on generative AI, assuring developers that they can save time and resources with generated assets and code—but many of them fall short, often producing poor-quality products.

A creative, not-so-technically-inclined audience might seem like the ideal target for such tools, right? Not necessarily, he said. Working with this demographic has shown him that these developers are not always searching for the most perfect or efficient technical solutions. A lot of toolmakers can misinterpret what they think developers require versus what they actually need, leading to software that complicates the game development process.

“It’s about recognizing that you are optimizing for the right things,” he noted. For instance, an AI tool that can produce 10,000 assets sounds advantageous, but it is not beneficial if you don’t know which 10,000 assets you would actually want.

It is also important to keep in mind that chasing technological trends isn’t always the right move. Kay explained that games created in GameMaker do not carry the stigma often associated with raw Unity or Unreal Engine games, as players can’t easily identify them as a “GameMaker game” from a distance. “It’s actually quite challenging to look at a game and say it’s made in GameMaker these days, because… you’d be surprised at the variety of games currently being produced.”

Because Unity and Unreal have integrated lighting and navigation solutions, developers are often tied to a specific “look” or “feel” of a game that players can subconsciously recognize. When developers have resources to break away from that particular “game feel,” or desire their game to have the look and feel optimized by those engines, it can be beneficial. However, Kay mentioned that it’s generally more complex to “escape the creative confines” in a 3D game engine compared to a 2D one like GameMaker.

Don’t expect any AI tools in GameMaker anytime soon, by the way. Kay shared that YoYo Games is “experimenting” with the technology, but have not yet found any immediate solutions suitable for the game development process.

How did Unity’s Runtime fee debacle impact GameMaker?

After Unity ignited a widespread backlash among its users with the proposed Runtime Fee, GameMaker announced a pricing change of its own: one that made the engine accessible for more users and eliminated subscription plans tailored to smaller developers in favor of a one-time fee. The changes were welcomed positively.

Did YoYo Games implement these changes because Unity pushed many developers to seek new tools? Kay stated the answer was “no,” indicating that the changes had been planned months prior to Unity shaking the indie game development landscape.

However, he sheepishly admitted that YoYo Games did “delay” in announcing its new plans while they awaited the consequences of Unity’s decision to unfold. He mentioned that the company has seen a “notable increase” in new users over the past year. “There’s a higher appreciation for alternative game engines, and a recognition that there is more choice available than just Unity. [We’re observing] a distrust of large corporations and individuals looking for something that’s straightforward and easier to comprehend.”

Interestingly, Kay noted that YoYo did not experience the same phenomenon as Godot, where developers eagerly adopted the tool and expected it to function just like Unity. Since GameMaker shares fewer similarities, there was less pressure on it to match its competitor’s standards.

Image via YoYo Games.

He mentioned he stays engaged with the teams behind Godot, and that the two engines are not necessarily competing in a vacuum. He indicated that Godot’s open-source model is influencing how YoYo Games envisions the future of GameMaker. The company has already released part of its engine as open source and may consider doing the same for additional features in the future.

“It is a model that I believe engines should adopt, since studios must have the ability to create custom versions for specific games,” Kay remarked. “It’s a way to develop optimizations that cater to them, not necessarily for everyone.”

There will always be aspects that YoYo needs to “keep proprietary,” but he envisions his company’s closed source to open source approach, as well as Godot’s open source to closed source model (with the establishment of W4 Games) as key trajectories for the future of the game engine landscape.

No tool can be suitable for everyone, so create the one that best serves your users

It’s not enough to say that GameMaker reached the 25-year milestone merely through a “steady-and-slow” approach. YoYo Games’ ambitions have been modest, certainly, but many modest companies falter over time. It is more accurate to state that the company has been cautious with its aspirations, and much more judicious with the areas it has chosen to expand quickly.

Instead of abandoning the indie philosophy of 2D game development, the company