When comparing ENIGMA Development Environment vs GameMaker Studio 2, the Slant community recommends ENIGMA Development Environment for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” ENIGMA Development Environment is ranked 41st while GameMaker Studio 2 is ranked 82nd. The most important reason people chose ENIGMA Development Environment is:
Almost full support for GML, The ability to create and access C++ types, templates, and functions, compile DLLs and other C/C++ scripts
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Raw C++ power and GML accessibility
The ability to create and access C++ types, templates, and functions, compile DLLs and other C/C++ scripts
Pro Cross platform
Support for Windows, Mac and Linux.
Pro Compatible with GameMaker
Enigma can support over 90% of gamemaker's GML language
Pro Friendly user interface
besides the powerful combination between GML and C++, beginners can also use drag and dropping.
Pro Free and Open Source
Pro Faster than GameMaker
Written in C++, many features have been demonstrated running much faster than interpreted equivalents in GameMaker (up to 10-20 times faster than GM 8.1).
Pro Under active development
Changes are made daily to add new functions/fixing bugs.
Pro Helpful error messages
A full stack trace with available cores and memory information as well as operating system and Java version including file names and number is generated whenever an exception is encountered, with a handy link to submit the issue to GitHub.
Pro Quick prototyping
Pro Good user interface
Pro Well-optimized engine
Pro Has a trial version (but limited functions, can't export)
Pro Many unofficial tutorials
Most GMS1 tutorials are fine for GMS2
Pro Highly customizable IDE
Although users must work within the IDE and editor, GMS2 has many options to customize the look and feel
Pro Good documentation
Pro Huge, generous community
Con A few bugs & glitches
Because Enigma is under very rapid development, with new functions added almost daily, some bugs and unexaplainable glitches can happen, though they also gets patched quickly.
Con No code refactoring
Like any C++ based programs, the ability to refactor is limited. However, the new Ide for engima will support a few refactoring cababilities
Con Not the best scripting language out there
GML is just weird; if you want to learn programming, it is not the best because it teaches bad habits and has many odd shortcuts and shortcomings that won't transfer to a real language
Con HTML5 export is buggy, doesn't "just work"
Con Quite expensive
Windows ($100) + HTML5 ($140) + Mobile ($400) + UWP ($400) is $1,050, plus $800 anually for each console export separately. But doesn't do anything any of the free engines can't do, and the stability and tech support aren't great.
Users frequently report crashes and hangs, particularly when working with assets, and the software uses a complicated underlying meta-file structure that may become corrupted and cannot be rebuilt
Con Limited support for OOP
Con Small development team
The core programming team is only 5-10 people, with about 30 employees total, so bug fixes can take a long time to be addressed, and there aren't many official tutorials