We are building a VR fitness game [1] with Godot and are working towards a store release in the Meta store.
Also Meta is funding part of the VR development of the Engine.
The problem is that Unity is so prevalent at the moment that it's hard to convince people to work with you if you are not using it, but traction of Godot is growing and the things that are coming will make it even more attractive for developers to break out of the Unity monopoly.
Probably. I never learned unity either, when I was younger I used to build games in C with allegro and the transition to gui based development always just seemed so much harder to learn (or at least harder for me to get interested in, with allegro it was all code and I could iterate from drawing a window, adding a square, move around with keys, etc.)
The upcoming version Godot 4.0 is on par with Unity, with several 2D and 3D subsystems (physics engine, lighting, 2d grid...) being rebuilt in full. It's getting traction in terms of tutorials and courses [1], and several publishers paying attention (e.g. Valve making sure that the Steam Deck will be supported).
Unity has many more features, a much wider community to look for answers to issues you come across, supports consoles out of the box, and has an enormous asset store which can save time.
That said, I prefer Godot.
Firstly because it's free and open source. That's a big deal to me, though I get it's not a priority for most people. I've contributed to the Godot source, and frequently compile my own custom builds with new C++ modules or experimental edits to the code (which is relatively straightforward, even for someone like me who hasn't touched C++ in about 15 years).
It's also a lot quicker and more self contained than Unity, which takes forever to open a project, forever to compile your scripts. Godot is lightning quick by comparison, even when using C#.
Unity has more mature and polished features, but it also has a lot of redundancy, for every feature you have 2 or 3 options of "legacy" or "experimental" versions of that feature, and it's often unclear which is the best choice, having to navigate through a huge list of packages, and googling for blog posts and documentation about things but being unsure which "version" of a feature is being referring to.
The asset store in Unity might be huge, but not all of it is high quality, and often expensive. You might pay a chunk (not huge, but not pocket change) for some system or framework that looks ideal on the marketing page, only to find that whoever wrote the scripts weren't really thinking about flexibility for your use case, and wastes time that you were supposed to be saving by paying for it. Godot's asset library is much smaller and mostly confined to scripts and tools, rather than models and textures, though there is some of that.
Godot has the same issues any MIT, volunteer-led open source project has: incomplete features with weird UX, features that get bumped back months or years because the dev who was working on it in their free time no longer has that free time, lack of real b2b level support for a commercial project. But for me as a solo, indie game dev, it's kind of freeing to be a part of that and to get involved in the community and the engine internals in a way that Unity gives you no access to. Ok, I can't ring up a case manager for my account and get an answer about this or that Godot feature, I can go on Discord or Github and maybe get an answer if the right person is looking, but more importantly I can just go straight into the source code and understand it for myself, and even tweak and fix it in a way that is truly free.
I've also found that once you get used to some of the UI/UX jank in Godot, the design philosophy of how things are structured conceptually is insanely productive. Unity is a hot mess of menus and panes, loading bars and modals, prefabs and components. Godot just gets out of your way - in part because it has fewer features, but I've yet to find something I wanted to do where I couldn't do it - just sometimes it takes a bit of creativity with the tools and API.
In terms of features, for me it feels like a lot of core features in Godot are assets that you have to add to Unity.
My best example are Tweens. I would expect this to be a very core feature of a game engine and yet in Unity you have to rely on something like dotween.
Also the Animation system in Godot is super awesome. If you are coming from Blender it's basically no learning curve at all. Again a feature that I would exepect to be a core of a game engine.
Oh yeah, AnimationPlayer/AnimationTree is definitely a killer feature for Godot, though the UX can be a bit clunky. The ability to call arbitrary functions on things in the scene tree on an animation track is just, chefs kiss
