When comparing FlatRedBall vs ct.js, the Slant community recommends FlatRedBall for most people. In the question“What are the best 2D game engines?” FlatRedBall is ranked 44th while ct.js is ranked 46th. 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.
ct.js is bundled with examples, docs, and easy to follow tutorials. Documentation and tutorials are available in a side panel on every screen.
Pro Skeletal animations with DragonBones support
You can import skeletal sprites and animations from DragonBones, which is also free. Skeletal animations are added to objects through code; developers can listen to marked events in animation, and ct.js automatically associates sounds in a DragonBones project with the game's assets.
Pro Good code editor
The built-in code editor comes with error checking, type checks, code completions accompanied with docs, multiple cursors support, and other modern features.
Pro Open source (MIT)
This means that no one will ever put any features behind a paywall and that you can reliably use ct.js in any projects without worrying about licensing. And you can hack on ct.js!
The repo is at https://github.com/ct-js/ct-js
Pro Tileset support
ct.js supports tiles in rooms, including collision checks and some extra editor tools, like bulk migration to a new tile layer or shifting by an exact value.
Pro WebGL and WebGL2 support
Starting with v1.0.0-next-1, you can now write WebGL games. WebGL support is based on Pixi.js.
Pro Modular approach
ct.js has a "Core" library that provides basic drawing functions, room and asset management, and mouse interactions. Any other functions are added to projects as "catmods", or simply modules. These modules can be enabled or disabled in one click, and can inject their code in different game loop stages, e.g. after drawing all the objects, leaving a room, or when a new object is created.
Pro Applicable to most genres
ct.js aims to be a general game engine and provides tools in making games of any genre.
Pro Dialogue and visual novel system with support for Yarn
A module ct.yarn allows developers to import a YarnSpinner project to create branching, data-driven dialogues and visual novels. An example is also bundled with ct.js.
The dialogue tree is made in a separate app, though.
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 Tile editing is a chore
No live brushes with automatic corner drawing, no fills or rectangular/linear placement. All tiles should be placed by hand, with a "Shift" key to place multiple tiles at once. This will make you ragequit if you want to make sophisticated RPG scenes :D
Con No built-in particle system
Con Slower than native games