Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Torque 2D MIT vs Gosu, 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 5th while Gosu is ranked 51st. 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
Question 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 Lightweight
Gosu is not a game development framework, only a media library that happens to be suited to game development. (Kind of like SDL in the C world.) That means the interface is relatively small.
Pro Mature API, actively maintained and developed
Gosu has been under development since 2001. It is mature and has several toolkits built on top of it to provide additional functionality.
Pro Cross-platform, even mobile, using Ruby
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 Deploying Ruby apps is a mess
Games built with the Ruby to .exe "compiler" do nothing more than extract your source code and Ruby.exe to %TEMP%, then run it. The code is not really compiled at all. The process for wrapping games as Mac apps is a bit nicer, but you'll need a paid Apple Developer subscription to code sign the app, or users will see a warning/error when running your game.
The only way to really compile Ruby is to use RubyMotion, which does not work on Windows and requires a paid subscription on top of the Apple Developer one.
(This Con is not specific to Gosu. Deploying Ruby code has never been fun.)
