Comments on: HaXe vs Unity3D vs XNA vs others

By: Aidan

Aidan — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 07:09:45 +0000

Unity3D does have a free indie version now, it has almost everything the pro version has.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 04 May 2010 22:42:07 +0000

I would use Unity. I was on this same quest(also a flash dev) and that’s where I landed. It was an easy transition from Flash. You can do 2d with it just using image planes and an orthographic camera and still have all the benefits of physics on your 2d objects. I believe they are working on a 2d feature set that will be out soonish but there are a few scripts around that help if you poke around too. I got a game prototype up in a few hours with it my first day. They have a great community too.

By: James

James — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:18:44 +0000

Flash all the way. Sometimes taking the road less traveled can give you a competitive edge.

I once built an entire interactive environment suit using a nearly non-visible component built in flash (using xml-sockets), javascript for the bulk of client processing, and flashvars to communicate between the two. It allowed the clients MUD to operate seamlessly in multiple browsers with what looked like AJAX–but without all the slowdown

The point is use the tool that is appropriate for the job and target. This day and age small-budget games are all about being affordable, fast, casual, and easy to access.

What fits the bill? Flash and *maybe* unity. Flash 10 can utilize hardware acceleration. Combine that alchemy and lots of static typing via Haxe and you’ve got yourself a recipe for SPEED.

On the plus side you can take your skills and experience with you.

Also nearly everyone has a browser, and nearly everyone has flash installed (as compared to Unity and Silverlight).

This coming from someone who has only been programming for eight months. Go figure

By: bugshake

bugshake — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:22:15 +0000

Just a note: I am playing with the same choices right now, which is probably why I ended up on your website, and for me the main reason to choose any programming language is the support for content. For example flash is great with video streaming, Unity3D is great with all sorts of 3D models. Java started out nice but doesn’t seem to have developed much. For you, the main content seems to be shaders and hardcore programming, which means XNA or something like Ogre3D.

By: Godheval

Godheval — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:51:57 +0000

I’m sure you know this by now, but Unity’s Indie license is now free.

I was wondering how, if at all, this changes your decision? And did you come to one?

By: fingerprint211b

fingerprint211b — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:42:16 +0000

If you want to work with C++, I suggest you check out ClanLib, it’s awesome. As for the ones you mentioned, I’d go with XNA. Simply because it’s incredibly easy to use, but is incredibly powerful. Also, C# is an awesome language

By: Paul O'Reilly

Paul O'Reilly — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 03:57:21 +0000

Using Haxe’s flash memory class gives the speed improvements attributed to Alchemy…

Another approach that looks extremely appealing is using python, with the Panda3D engine. Panda’s graphic framework is written in C++ for speed, while the programming we do (as users) is in python.

for more details:
http://www.panda3d.org

By: WiseMoses

WiseMoses — Sun, 31 May 2009 23:15:35 +0000

The information for Unity3d is incorrect.

With Unity 3d (indie/pro version) you can use C#, Javascript and BOO to program in, not Python.

With Unity iPhone (basic and advanced) you can program with C# and javascript.

Unity is uses Mono(.NET), they have done an awesome job.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:22:01 +0000

Thanks for the info Lee! I didn’t know that it could read SWCs yet. My only worry is that NME/Neash are still very much in beta. Last I heard, sound hasn’t even been ported yet.

By: Lee McColl Sylvester

Lee McColl Sylvester — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:39:18 +0000

You’ve got your facts wrong a little. You can use AS3 libraries in haXe. You simply compile your AS3 classes into a SWF, then call -

haxe –gen-hx-classes myClasses.swf

and it’ll generate the necessary haXe extern files. All you do then is include the SWF in your compile script with -

-swf-lib myClasses.swf

and it’ll use the classes you need in your haXe app. You even get full compiler checking thanks to the extern files.

If you’re interested in SDL, why not give NME a try? It’s built for haXe, and if you also use Neash, you can output to SWF (Flash 9/10) and NME / SDL from the same code. It makes for absolute flexibility (though you still don’t have an SDL web plugin… Yet!).

By: dcfree

dcfree — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:54:12 +0000

Nice post. Amazing how many of us are trying to find the “right” engine to develop in. I agree that it depends on your audience, but it sure would be nice to have one engine cover as many bases as possible. Unity is looking pretty good right about now, except for its low player penetration. Had no idea about PushButton. Will definitely have to check it out.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 08:33:43 +0000

Hi,

what about Leadwerks and blitmax or C++

By: admin

admin — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:57:15 +0000

Hi Greg, thanks for the info! The engine looks very well thought out. However, no matter how good the engine is, Flash AS3 is still very limited in its performance for advanced development. Even with FP10, its hard to produce a game like Doom 1 without severe slowdowns. At least Alchemy and haXe help a little, but even they are limited. *sigh*