When comparing Stencyl vs Phaser.io, the Slant community recommends Stencyl for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” Stencyl is ranked 6th while Phaser.io is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose Stencyl is:
Visual scripting in Stencyl is based on the [MIT Scratch](http://scratch.mit.edu/) project, which was designed to teach programming. Script elements fit together like puzzle pieces, ensuring that data and function types cannot be mismatched.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro No coding required, great drag & drop interface
Visual scripting in Stencyl is based on the MIT Scratch project, which was designed to teach programming. Script elements fit together like puzzle pieces, ensuring that data and function types cannot be mismatched.
Publish iOS, Android, Flash, Windows and Mac games without code.
Pro Haxe scripting available for advanced users
Power users can also write code in Haxe (similar to Actionscript 3) to create their own custom classes and extend the engine.
Pro The original concept for Ghost Song was created using Stencyl
The original concept for Ghost Song was created using Stencyl 3.x
Pro Great performance on every platform
Stencyl exports your games to native code so they have great performance on every platform.
Pro Very fast to develop with
Pro Good tutorials, courses and books
There are plenty of great learning resources available for Phaser.io.
Pro Super-simple loading of assets
Pro Great community resources
Pro Animating is easy
Pro Excellent tools for sprites
Pro Built-in Arcade Particle system
Pro Easy to learn
Pro Support for Arcade Physics, Ninja Physics and p2.js
Pro No install required
All you need to do is attach Phaser script to a HTML page even without installing any extensions.
Pro Very active development
This is one of the most developed frameworks right now.
Pro WebGL and Canvas rendering modes
You can choose WebGL or classic HTML canvas element for game rendering.
Pro Easy to learn
Most task are done just using 2 or 3 lines of codes...
Pro Has separate versions maintained by developer and the community
The creator of phaser(photonstorm) has given the older(Phaser 2.0) source code to the community for their own maintenance, and has made Phaser 3.0 with a different style and approach, trying to make it easier for beginners to learn.
Pro Easy to understand if you have used flash
Phaser provides a similar approach as to that of Flash games, where you can load assets and place them on a stage, and even improves upon the shortcomings of actionscript. It is very easy to shift from flash to HTML5 development because of this approach.
It needs much to improve for mobile games, it was left in the era of Flash games. In Android you can not even put the native keyboard, you can not access things like native camera, GPS or native text input.
Con Only available via subscription
There should be an option to buy it outright, especially considering it is written by a one man team....this is not exactly an Adobe level enterprise with shareholders, so there is no excuse!
Con Slow release cycle
Con Not a powerful engine
Should be used for basic games only.
Con Tile system is somewhat inflexible
Con Poor performance
As long as your map is not larger than 600*400px, everything is fine.