Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Codea vs Pixi.js, the Slant community recommends Pixi.js for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” Pixi.js is ranked 56th while Codea is ranked 107th. The most important reason people chose Pixi.js is:
Pixi is a WebGL renderer, but can fall back to canvas if WebGL is not supported or turned off.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Helpful code editor
Errors show up live, as you type. Smarter autocompletion picks up your local and global variables, including nested types. Everything else is just plain smarter, from indentation to highlighting.
Pro Ships with music and sound packs
Codea ships with three great music and sound packs, composed just for Codea and free for you to use in whatever you create.
Pro You can code on an iPad and easily distribute the game
Pro Location library
Location library lets you make use of the GPS inside your iPad. Get your latitude, longitude, altitude and more with a dead-simple API designed specifically for Codea.
Pro Supports WebGL w/ canvas fallback
Pixi is a WebGL renderer, but can fall back to canvas if WebGL is not supported or turned off.
Pro Will be familiar to ActionScript developers
Pixi.js uses a code structure that's very similar to ActionScript.
Cons
Con Not a complete solution
Pixi only provides the renderer.
