Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Microsoft XNA Game Studio vs PureBasic, the Slant community recommends PureBasic for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” PureBasic is ranked 40th while Microsoft XNA Game Studio is ranked 80th. The most important reason people chose PureBasic is:
Can create single file executables without the need to install other libraries, run time environments, etc.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Easy assets
it is very easy to import your own 2 dimensional assets
Pro Very easy to use
relies largely on drag and drop elements and has been used to create notable high quality 2d games such as DLC Quest
Pro Standalone executables
Can create single file executables without the need to install other libraries, run time environments, etc.
Pro The syntax is very beginner-friendly
Pro Same code on Windows, OS X and Linux
Same code can be compiled natively, without any interpreter for OS X, Windows or Linux, using the native GUI toolkit of the OS
Pro Many integrated features
Many libraries available without additional installations : 2D & 3D, database, network, sound, xml, JSON, http...
Pro Allows to program at a lower level than most alternatives
Pro Lifetime license
Pay once, use forever.
Pro Constantly updated
Pro Supports ARM in addition to x86, AMD64 and others
Pro Can compile to plain C code
Pro Grest user community / forums with the developer very active
Cons
Con It's dead
It is not getting updated and Microsoft does not recommend using it anymore.
Con Limited platform support
Only supports Xbox 360, Windows and Windows Phone
Con Limited free version
Free version is limited to 800 lines and can not create DLL's.
Con Some bugs are present on the Linux platform
Con Slightly bogged syntax
Sometimes the syntax bogs down, just a little with long procedure names and such. A truly minor issue.
Con Not RAD
Not a RAD environment.
