Those engines serve a different purpose than a library like Raylib. They give you a bunch of stuff out of the box like lighting, raytracing (esp Unreal), pathfinding, and a ton of helper functions used in making a game like vector calculations.

Raylib helps you draw stuff, play sound, and do the basics. But you're gonna be writing your own lighting/raytrace/pathfind/etc functions and it's ultimately going to take longer. The upside is if you need to do something very unique, all of the power to mske it reality is in your hands because Raylib isn't opinionated on how your game logic works and how it's packaged up. It's just the delivery guy to give the result to the user.

I think engines like Unreal, Unity, and Godot will remain popular with people who are more interested in creating a game than creating a game engine.

> if yes what are the things that raylib is missing that these engines have?

Asset management and import pipelines, rendering pipeline, loads of ready-to-go features like environments, baked lighting and global illumination, AO, reflections, particle systems, input mapping and event propagation, scripting, audio systems, GUI systems, and lots more.

Raylib is a library that you could use to build all that stuff, but otherwise it's a useful library, not a fully-featured game engine.

If you don't want a game engine and know exactly what you features you need and want to build only that, then Raylib is a great option.

If you don't want to write a global illumination system or asset management pipeline but would rather focus on creating gameplay, then a game engine is a good choice.

Raylib is more of a low level runtime library than an engine. Godot, Unity, Unreal etc. come with very extensive interactive tooling for game creation. Modern engines are really about interactive content editing and collaboration in the development process. This is essentially table stakes for game development in larger teams, and comes with a lot of added internal complexity.

Raylib is for hobbyists that want control over everything, but don't want to go through the hassle of dealing with DirectX/OpenGL. It isn't competing with Unreal/Unity at all.

I don't know that any open source project will ever compete with Unreal and its high end tech targeting the AAA space. But beyond that, Raylib doesn't give a ton of things an engine does because that is not the point of a library like it. This is to let someone build their own engine how they want, Unreal/Unity/Godot/etc let you give up some control and decision options to skip a ton of work building out a lot of basic features.

Raylib basically just draws graphics.

Unity and Unreal do anything most games will ever need and have massive ecosystems.

For example , Unity has built in physics , navigation, asset management, input handling, build systems, audio processing, etc.

Unreal has that and arguably more.

Godot is getting there, but still has growing pains. In larger projects things get weird.

The scope/feature set of both is just quite a lot wider, from IDEs to an ecosystem of 1st and 3rd party libraries and extensions. The rendering engines and their capabilities are also quite different (with Unreal and Unity both being quite a lot more advanced).

We never needed them, it is all about where do you want to spend your development budget.