When comparing Starling vs Wave, the Slant community recommends Wave for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” Wave is ranked 33rd while Starling is ranked 78th. The most important reason people chose Wave is:
In addition to online [API documentation](http://waveengine.net/Engine/Documentation), the Wave Engine team provides [tutorials](http://www.indiedb.com/engines/wave-engine/tutorials) via IndieDB, plus [sample projects](https://github.com/WaveEngine/Samples) and "[QuickStarters](https://github.com/WaveEngine/QuickStarters)" via GitHub.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Lightweight
Starling is just 12k lines of code and doesn't try to do everything — but what it does, as efficient as possible.
Pro Feathers User Interface Components
With Feathers, you can easily add great user interfaces to your games — or even create business apps with Starling.
Pro Free and open source
Starling is available for free with code available on GitHub.
Pro Strong community support
Forum is always active with knowledgeable developers and with lot of inside info, and post mortems.
Pro Works with Flash
With UI, you can design it in Flash Professional (powerful 2D editor), export to swf file, use GAF convert swf file to gaf file, finnally, load gaf file to Starling. GAF can convert a lot of file swf to one atlas. Alway use same resource in design files (fla) to optimize atlas size, avoid duplicate asset in atlas.
You can use flash to create animation for starling.
Pro Hardware accelerated rendering
Let the GPU do the rendering, the CPU has more important tasks to do.
Pro Cross Platform
It can be exported to web flash player, iOS, Android, Windows, and OS X
Pro Works with AIR's native extensions
Using AIR's native extensions any native code that can be written can be run and used by the game engine.
Pro Constantly updated
New features are added regularly.
Pro Better performance than most alternatives
Starling can run more animated display objects than Unity2D and many others frameworks at 60 fps.
Pro Extensive learning material
In addition to online API documentation, the Wave Engine team provides tutorials via IndieDB, plus sample projects and "QuickStarters" via GitHub.
Pro Supports coding in C#, F# and Visual Basic
Wave Engine explicitly supports all three core .Net Platform languages.
Pro Oculus Rift support
The Wave Engine team provides an official, open-source Oculus Rift extension via GitHub.
Pro Many components are open source
Several core components and official extensions of the Wave Engine are publicly hosted on GitHub.
Cons
Con Poor text/font support
It supports only 4 features for text rendering:
- bitmap font with batching.
1.1. basic distance fields with support for outline and filters via MeshStyle.
1.2 the new multichannel distance field, the ultimate solution for bitmap font rendering. - Draw and upload texture in runtime
So every new text field required texture uploads or vertex/idnex buffer uploads.
skipUnchanchagedFrames keep the backbuffer static for scenes without changes between frames, leveraging a good rendering optimization.
Con Engine supported mainly by one man
Its open source but in most cases community features or pull request are canceled.
Con Mandatory splash screen
Games and applications made with Wave Engine must display a splash screen advertising it. No splash-free license option is available.
Con Not many tutorials available
Con Outdated UI
The UI looks like it is from Windows XP days. A refresh is much needed.