When comparing Torque 2D MIT vs HaxePunk, the Slant community recommends Torque 2D MIT for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” Torque 2D MIT is ranked 4th while HaxePunk is ranked 22nd. The most important reason people chose Torque 2D MIT is:
Torque 2D gives developers complete access to the source code. This removes all barriers one may hit when trying to extend and/or customize the engine they are working with.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Extremely extendable and customizable
Torque 2D gives developers complete access to the source code. This removes all barriers one may hit when trying to extend and/or customize the engine they are working with.
Pro Cross platform
Torque 2D runs on Windows, OS X, iOS, Android, Linux, and Web.
Pro The scripting language is quite powerful
Torquescript is a fast and easy to use C++ like scripting language that ties all of the various elements of a project together. It supports a large complement of functions including math, physics, object manipulation, fileIO, and more. Torquescript features:
- Object-oriented programming
- Transparent interconnection with internal C++ objects
- Built-in fast 2D math (vectors, matrices, and quaternions with all corresponding functions)
- Well-documented standard library (hundreds of functions out-of-the box)
- Component system (aka Behaviors)
- Dynamic asset and module loading
Pro Highly performant
The engine utilizes a combination of batched rendering, asset management, and a module system that allows for high frame rates on all platforms.
Pro Box2D physics
Torque 2D MIT's utilizes Box2D for all physics calculations. Anyone with prior knowledge with Box2D by itself or through other engines can easily transfer their knowledge. Nearly all of the Box2D API is exposed to the scripting language, making it a quick process to port games to the engine without having to learn an entirely new system.
Pro Joystick and multi-touch support
Useful for mobile games and soon consoles (OpenFL has a console port in the works).
Pro Crossplatform testing/releasing
HaxePunk uses OpenFL which means you can compile to just about every device. A lot of the rendering code has been optimized so if you use HaxePunk’s graphic classes you are pretty much ready to deploy on any target.
Pro Generic entity system
A generic Entity system that only uses what you “attach” to it. If you need collision masks they are available but if an entity doesn’t need to collide with anything then simply don’t add a mask. Same goes for graphics.
Pro Written in Haxe instead of AS3
This comes with blazing fast compile times, proper static typing, multiple output targets, and a powerful macro system.
Pro Multiple collision masks
HaxePunk has added several collision masks beyond what FlashPunk had including a grid with slope values, circles, and polygons. This is in addition to FlashPunk’s tile grid and hitbox.
Pro Tweens
Tweens are available just like they are in FlashPunk. If you need to interpolate values for sounds, movement, etc… it’s probably already available as a tween. There is also a VarTween that lets you interpolate any value you want.
Cons
Con Project seems to be abandoned
Seems to not be developed/supported anymore.
Con Lacking documentation
The engine documentation is incomplete. Not all of the engine API is fleshed out and the number of tutorials is pretty small. All current and future documentation effort is up to the community, via the Torque 2D MIT GitHub wiki.
Con Rentware
Con Messy / fragmented documentation
Not a lot of documentation is available.
Con Small comunity
It’s a small but growing community.