When comparing GameMaker Studio 2 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 GameMaker Studio 2 is ranked 67th. 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
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
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
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 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.
Con Unstable
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
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.
