Rust while nice still has to catch up with 30 years ecosystem of tooling.
Many game studios won't bother using it if it doesn't come on the console vendors devkit, just like it happened with C, C++, or middleware like Unreal and Unity.
True.
But it also doesn't have to put up with 30 years of legacy cruft.
Don't you want Rust to still be around 30 years from now?
Sure, but with the cruft of the next 30 years, and not the cruft of the last 30 years
Thing is, where some see cruft, others see infrastructure ready to use today.
What does it mean that "Rust now plays in the C/C++ league"? Is this referring to the Rust Foundation announcement or some other recent news?
I believe they're talking about Rust's performance vs C/C++, but I could be wrong
Is that only a recent phenomenon, though? Hasn't it always been competitive?
What they likely mean is that C++ gamedev libraries have been heavily optimized over the course of many years, so while there is no theoretical limitation on Rust's equivalents, polishing them to the same degree is nontrivial and takes time. Bevy is the closest and that is a recent development (last couple of months).
The API looks very clean and the development speed is outstanding for an open-source product.
After reading that Rust now plays in the C/C++ league I'm really excited about Bevy.