When comparing FlatRedBall vs GameMaker Studio 2, the Slant community recommends FlatRedBall for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” FlatRedBall is ranked 41st while GameMaker Studio 2 is ranked 77th. The most important reason people chose FlatRedBall is:
Just check the commit frequency on github :) https://github.com/vchelaru/FlatRedBall/commits/master Plus Victor takes community input seriously and is known to shift around priorities based on the pressing needs of the community
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Continually improving and open source
Just check the commit frequency on github :)
Plus Victor takes community input seriously and is known to shift around priorities based on the pressing needs of the community
Pro Very easy to use
Simplifies routine tasks such as adding entities and files to the game, or tuning parameters, via the FRB Editor called Glue
Pro Great community
Very active chat on gitter: https://gitter.im/vchelaru/FlatRedBall
Victor (the creator of the engine) is available throughout the day to answer questions and solve any problems that may arise, along with the rest of the community members who are ready to assist in any way they can.
Pro Extensive documentation
Very good documentation not only regarding the API details, but also lots of tutorials covering different aspects of using FRB, either on the code-side or on using any of its tools.
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 The editor's UI looks dated
Although functional, doesn't look as flashy as Unity for example, which may put some people off.
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