LÖVE

I love LÖVE, it's simplicity, intuitive documentation, Lua, but it seems to me like the project is being developed at a quite slow pace. I mean, we've been waiting for 0.9.0 forever. And I am missing a couple of features in LÖVE that prevented me from creating a game that I wanted to make (you can partially blame it on my poor skills).

I want to make a 2d racing game with smooth multiplayer, ideally with HTML5 as a target. I see some real-time browser games made in flash (Curve Fever, Haxball), but I would not like to make a flash game.

So, I would like to ask you all, if you know a game engine / game framework that would include most of the following features:

- easy to write, easy to read
- well documented
- cross-platform: Win & OSX is cool, but I would love to be able to publish to Android, iOS, HTML5
- network syncing: not just a simple tcp/udp client-server. i found it dreadfully difficult to use box2d physics over the network and avoid jitter. i would rather see it all integrated in the engine.

I have a feeling like LÖVE is a bit too low level maybe? Which is perfect for learning, but once you want to do something complex, you start reading some mind-blowing documents and it's not fun anymore.

Anyway, I would appreciate your feedback guys, I know you're gaming enthusiasts and have a lot of knowledge in the matter. I've done a lot of research but did not find an ideal tool. Most of the time, the network engine is not sophisticated enough or the game engine is too hard to begin with.

patience have its rewards and its costs. also love aren't low level at all, pygame is.

if you don't like löve make some thing better

Well, I have been doing Luv.js for a while now. It's on statis at the moment, since I decided to enter the collision detection rabbit hole again. But it's next on my list. Warnings: it's javascript, not Lua. It's not exactly equivalent to LÖVE. I'm pretty sure I will change the graphics interface soon. That said, you are more than welcome to give it a try

jjmafiae wrote:patience have its rewards and its costs. also love aren't low level at all, pygame is.

OK, but you cannot use LOVE efficiently as is. You need to include Classes and gamemodes, which were not included in order not to limit developer's freedom. I also see some side-projects like LOVE for Android or LOVE for HTML5. I don't understand why it is not a part of the integrated solution. These guys are developing their time while they could be building one cohesive product, together.

kikito wrote:Well, I have been doing Luv.js for a while now. It's on statis at the moment, since I decided to enter the collision detection rabbit hole again. But it's next on my list. Warnings: it's javascript, not Lua. It's not exactly equivalent to LÖVE. I'm pretty sure I will change the graphics interface soon. That said, you are more than welcome to give it a try

Cheers, I wish you all the motivation to finish this project. But you see, I'm not looking for half-baked or unfinished solutions, I can even pay money to get a fully developed engine that I can use NOW.

stop, love are even more documented than unity3d and some of the biggest engines on the market and if you need class similar things then download lovelymün or some class libraries, love are the best 2d engine, heretic.

Unity3d, despite its name, has good 2D support if you use some plugins from the Asset Store. The upcoming version 4.3 will also introduce more native 2D support. It can also export to a web plugin.
Unity3d has a massive community and professional documentation and support.

Przemator wrote:it seems to me like the project is being developed at a quite slow pace. I mean, we've been waiting for 0.9.0 forever.

It's true that it's taking a fair amount of time for 0.9.0 to be released, but development progress is not exactly slow. 0.9.0 is just massive. It helps us when other people test it, too.

Przemator wrote:I have a feeling like LÖVE is a bit too low level maybe? Which is perfect for learning, but once you want to do something complex, you start reading some mind-blowing documents and it's not fun anymore.

Every person has a unique preference for how low-level they'd want their ideal framework/engine to be. LÖVE's style isn't for everybody, but that doesn't mean it's not for anybody either.

i love löve

unity3d might have good documentation but i had problems when i started learning unity3d i ended with giving up and then i found my true löve

You can use Libgdx, its really nice. I also found this.

jjmafiae wrote:stop, love are even more documented than unity3d and some of the biggest engines on the market and if you need class similar things then download lovelymün or some class libraries, love are the best 2d engine, heretic.

Hey, I'm not saying LOVE is poorly documented! LOVE wiki is excellent, the forum is very helpful and active, all in all it's the easiest game framework I've been given to play with (!!!). I'm just lacking HTML5 and physics syncing over network.

What also is a pain is interpolation. If I use a contant framerate then I have to interpolate all drawables. Maybe it would be better if the engine handled interpolating the drawables based on its physics?