Is blueprint nativization a magical tool to make Blueprint as nearly fast as C++?

When blueprint nativization method hadn’t been created, many people complainted that blueprint was much slower than C++ in performance(sometimes it could 10 slower than C++ as I remembered correctly). But since the creation of this magical tool, more and more people are changing their opinion about blueprint’s performance- as they can create an entire game in blueprint and then nativizing all blueprints into native C++ to achieve a massive boost in speed. And i am not an exception- i have also successful nativized my entire- blueprint game into C++ without any error, and the speed of the game has increased significantly far beyond my expectation.

So i am wondering, in a near future when this method has been optimized, will people who are not good at C++ can still create bad-■■■ game(even AAA game) with just only Blueprint Nativization Method?

(Here is a good video show the massive difference between Blueprint and Blueprint Nativization in term of performance:)
link text

There are many resources on this field already that you can find on the forums and the AnswerHub, so I won’t write a Grim tale here. Generally speaking:

  • Nativized Blueprints will never be as efficient as pure C++
  • You’ll always access more things from C++ than BP, so you’ll very likely need to write C++ anyways if you want to have access to anything non-trivial
  • There are no “AAA” games without a real programmer

Anyways, you can of course create “bad-■■■” games with just Blueprints if you can limit your scope, but you’ll probably never have an efficient PUBG or Fortnite sized game without C++ coding.

Thanks for your reply- watching that livestream has gave me a little more about what i actually can/ can’t do with Blueprint Nativization. Maybe with a small-scale project when speed is trivial, we can absolutely covert entire blueprint into C++ to make the game as good as possible, but if we are looking for something more complicated, C++ will be a better option both in term of time-saving and performance.

Kristof’s answer is really good. Here are some useful links to give you more informations.

Make sure to mark Kristof comment as your answer to close the subject :slight_smile: