Construct2/GMS VS Phaser`

[Get_Bentley]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately, as someone who uses Phaser and has only used Phaser for making HTML5 games I often come across extremely polished fun games made with either Construct2 or GMS. Hell I mean some people such as True Valhalla make a living ( and I might add a pretty sizable living ) off of these UI's that from what I have seen and read really take no coding to accomplish what you want.

 

I guess what I am asking is just peoples opinions and which they use and why they use it, I know Phaser gives you complete reign over what you want to make and how you want to make it, full customization, whereas im sure GMS and Construct have their limitations. Yet you could pump out more content using C2 or GMS I feel. I personally am sticking with Phaser because I love coding everything from scratch and learning new things. I just thought I would start a discussion on this to get peoples opinions and reasoning.

 

tl;dr Construct/GMS or Phaser....... why?

[bruno_]

My choice is Phaser for freedom of flexibility, it's code, so I can do things more like I want.

Also for the price, Phaser is free and open, Construct2 has paid versions and I don't know if the free one would be enough for me.

Anyway, I like them both, and both are great choices.

[ekeimaja]

I go for Phaser because it's freeware and open source. Construct and GM are good if you have not any programming skills, and still want to make games. But how you can say that you have created that game, if creating needs just dragging of blocks, or it is made from some template? Imo self made game is made without any wysiwyg editors, coded from scratch, with some linked engine. Or then you code your own engine too.

[Daikrys]

Quote

Construct2/GMS VS Phaser

Get Ready~ Fight!!

 

The only limitation i can think of is the fact that you just cant edit the core of GMS or Construct. But! you can just make plugins to enhance your Experience and upgrade your Toolset. I quite doubt that this is a hugh limitation since you wouldnt touch the perfect balanced core of Phaser either. And if you use your own plugins you have to hack into code, so its coding like using Phaser.

In my personal Opinion, this Frameworks are pretty much equally. Whether its Debugging, Creation Comfort/Speed or Toolsets. They have their Strengths and some weaknesses which you can most likely Overcome with Knowledge. And thats the Key to all this polished Games wether they are made with Phaser or Construct 2 or GMS. If you have the Knowledge, you can make it without facing any hugh Limitations.

That said, i Believe that if you make a Quality Game. You will still use the same amount of Work, Knowledge, Sweat, not at the same Processes but in the whole Project together. Regardless of which Framework you have chosen, since all of this Three have advanced thus far.

So if it fits your needs and come in handy, its the right Choice

 

Personally i use Construct 2, because it fits my needs and its a fun way to Create Content. But i spend quite a while optimzing and polishing my Skills to use this Framework on an effective Level. Maybe its also the Reason im sticking with Construct since i spend quite some Time learning all this

 

Just my 2 cents but i guess i got some points right.

[BlackOpzFX]

On 1/14/2016 at 1:26 AM, ekeimaja said:

But how you can say that you have created that game, if creating needs just dragging of blocks, or it is made from some template? Imo self made game is made without any wysiwyg editors, coded from scratch, with some linked engine. Or then you code your own engine too.

This is exactly with GameMaker is!! You can create very polished stuff in GM:Studio and also nobody seriously makes games in GM using drag/drop. It has its own language called GML thats very sophisticated for making 2D games. I just created my 1st android app with it and it was fast and fun. I'll PM you the link.

[Rudrabhoj Bhati]

Phaser is a league ahead of both Construct2 and GM:S, hands down. But any one of them can be used to make really a good game. Making a good game require you to be a good programmer and game designer. Tools come later.

Now, about limitations, benefits and stuff- while Phaser is just a game engine, construct2 and GMS both are the complete development environments. I haven't used C2, but speaking from my GM:S experience- You get a level designer, easy way to create and manage resources, etc. But when you are using the Phaser, you need the right tools, right way to program, right way to manage resources, etc. I ultimately choose Phaser over GM:S. Here is what my development environment is like:

1. Operating System: Ubuntu 14.04 x86
2. IDE: Sublime Text 3
3. Language: Haxe
4. Engine: Haxe Phaser
5. Level Editor: Overlap2D, Buddy.bas (overlap to state object translator, custom)
6. Built Script: Custom sh script

The control Phaser gives is not limited to having the ability to edit its core, it is the ability to choose the other part of the environment. Like in Game Maker Studio, you don't have control over which programming language you are to choose, which IDE you are to use, which level editor you are to use, make your own build environment, Use on any operating system you like etc. There are ways to get over those limitations, but usually would be Hackish and require more efforts then the results would justify.
Ability to choose your development environment is a big plus. Lol, I have used Phaser even over a FreeBSD box! You can use it over a Raspberry Pi if you want. The ability to choose which comes with Phaser is amazing. It doesn't forces its choices on you.

[BlackOpzFX]

10 hours ago, Rudrabhoj Bhati said:

...Like in Game Maker Studio, you don't have control over which programming language you are to choose, which IDE you are to use, which level editor you are to use, make your own build environment, Use on any operating system you like etc. There are ways to get over those limitations, but usually would be Hackish and require more efforts then the results would justify. Ability to choose your development environment is a big plus. Lol, I have used Phaser even over a FreeBSD box! You can use it over a Raspberry Pi if you want. The ability to choose which comes with Phaser is amazing. It doesn't forces its choices on you.

As a GM:Studio user those benefits sound nice but I just cant leave GM. Its just so easy and fast!! for development. Some people hate on GML but I'm continually amazed by the number of 2D specific programming commands that do SO much of the heavy lifting for you. Its the first game environment I've ever used that really fulfills the promise of letting me focus mainly on game design instead of figuring out a script to do 'X'. Its 2D toolbox is ridiculously deep and after a lifetime of 'roll-your-own' I appreciate its ruthless efficiency for creating multi-platform 2D game. The ONLY thing I dont like about it is the IDE but thats a complaint I can live with since the stuff that impacts game creation is pretty rock solid AND it has the cheapest asset store in gaming. Most of the plugins are only $1 and even the complex extensions are under $4. Its an amazing gaming eco-system.

[jkohler]

I would go with Phaser because of the community, and because i prefer coding. Just my two cents.

[RenStimpyShow]

i use Construct2 for prototyping quickly. Once i have a good prototype, i remake it in phaser.

[lazkeer]

I think you can only choose between those 3 is by your level if you are a beginner or a not so beginner because for example GameMaker has d'n'd but also has code so it makes it more suitable for a transition from d'n'd to actual code, construct2 is just d'n'd is more for beginners, and Phaser is just code makes it harder because you have to write more code so is less visual!

It also as to do with preference because I have seen very good developers that like to use construct for quick prototypes since is easier to just drag and drop pieces of code instead of writing everything from scratch!