Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Leadwerks Game Engine 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 Leadwerks Game Engine is ranked 75th. 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.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Versatile flow diagram script model
Leadwerks's flowgraphs resemble flowcharts where each box represents a function or value, with connections between them representing program flow. This provides a better at-a-glance indication of game logic than a simple list of events, and makes complex behaviors easier to accomplish.
Pro Built-in level editor
Has an acceptable 3D map editor that is easy to use.
Pro Handful of Prefabs and Scripts
For example, you take a model (e.g. torch), add a light source to it, add a particle generator (for fire) and save it as a prefab (one file). Then this prefab can be used to add many torches with fire and light.
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 Very buggy
Leadworks is a not complete, it's a work in progress. As such many parts of the engine are clunky, especially the level editor.
Con Documentation and support are limited for non-coders
The flowgraph editor can be used with free script assets to build games without writing any code, but this is not directly intended or encouraged by Leadwerks.
Con Highly misleading advertising
Con Not a complete solution
Pixi only provides the renderer.
