> That's just the nature of gamedev. It's a mix of code + tools to leverage the team composition of a development studio.

Implicit in that statement is the assumption that video+audio is optimal for teaching complex GUIs. I dispute that.

It's likely the highest ROI way to package it, relative to active effort, i.e. excluding time waiting for video encoding. You record a few minutes, narrate over it, and post it.

This is where I've found Lynda's tutorials great. They align the text to the video so you can see and read at the same time. I was able to get pretty far by reading Unity In Action though, which was purely just a book tutorial and I really enjoyed it. So I don't know, I would attribute it more to a younger audience who is more receptive of videos over written tutorials.

> I would attribute it more to a younger audience who is more receptive of videos over written tutorials.

Is this really true? There's some inherent advantages to words and pictures vs video and audio that can't be hand-waved away as 'preferences' or 'learning styles'. Has an entire demographic really chosen a medium that nullifies such powerful techniques as skimming, copy/paste, seeking without laborious workarounds, variable speed of consumption etc.

Depends on the tool - e.g. LibGDX, MonoGame, Cocos2D-x - are more programmer-friendly, i.e. code-oriented approach. Unity, Atomic, Godot - these are designer's tools.