What Do LOVE2D Developers Actually Want?

[zalander]

Hey everyone,

I've been working on guified, a UI system for LOVE2D, but as it grows, I’m wondering: What do LOVE2D devs actually want?

I enjoy making utility libraries—sometimes to make programming easier… and sometimes just to make it more cursed and chaotic. So before I go too deep into development, I wanted to see what people actually need.

Should I aim for:

1. A simple UI solution – Lightweight, easy-to-use UI elements with minimal setup.
2. A complex but powerful UI solution – Something highly customizable but with a learning curve.
3. A helper library – A collection of commonly used LOVE2D functions (e.g., input handling, math utilities, etc.).
4. An all-in-one framework – A complete system with UI, debugging, modularity, and more.
5. A game-focused UI system – A UI library specifically designed for game UIs rather than app-style layouts.
6. A debugging & dev tools library – A set of tools for debugging, logging, and performance monitoring in LOVE2D.
7. An entity/component system – A lightweight ECS-style system for handling game objects.
8. A plugin system for LOVE2D – A framework that allows developers to extend LOVE2D easily with modular plugins.
9. A network library – A simple way to handle multiplayer/networked applications in LOVE2D.
10. Something else? – If you have a completely different idea, let me know!

The goal is to build something the community actually wants, instead of just guessing. Let’s discuss!

[dusoft]

It's pretty subjective, so my two cents:

• I prefer libraries that are simple to use (provide simple API), but cover wide-enough cases. The issue with some libraries are that they plainly offer set of deep level APIs that I have not time, nor interest to learn. On the other side, a set of couple of basic functions that integrate those deep level functions, is easy to learn and use.
• I don't have strong preference on weakly-tied vs one-for-all helpers or frameworks. In PHP I enjoy using Laravel all-encompassing framework, but sometimes I prefer to work with a couple of independent, small footprint libraries instead. Same goes for Lua/LOVE - I might use a couple of helpers by knife or Hump or combine them...
• All your points are not exclusive, but personally all-in-one-framework is just overkill. Both to develop an maintain as to use (steep learning curve). Separate reusable components work well enough (i.e. Symfony in PHP) and one just needs to learn whatever part they need to use.
• So e.g. for UI - I would like to have simple library that covers enough cases, but does not force me to learn deep-level functions. If it's part of the framework, then let me learn UI component first without requirement to learn the whole framework at once.

I think this is what LOVE excels in, it allows you to quickly jump in and test basic graphics stuff without need to learn anything else. And once you are ready you can move to learn its other modules.

[MrFariator]

It's probably better to develop what you yourself need, and then share that if you believe others might find it useful. Maybe give it a little round of polish, if needed. As such, I'd advice not to make assumptions about others' workflow or needs, without going out and figuring out for yourself.

Personally, I don't want to reinvent the wheel so I don't mind grabbing a collision library like bump, but a lot of the work I otherwise I run into can be solved with smaller, self-contained codesnippets or libraries. Even a singular function for a certain math problem is fine. I find more value in those than larger systems that would take effort to integrate.

[dusoft]

Yep, develop what *you* need, that always works. Also, developing something means maintaining it. We have too many libraries hanging around here that do not work even after smaller LOVE upgrades anymore. So, I would like more people to understand it's easy to throw something out there, but it's more difficult to keep it maintained and working over a couple of years. People often miss or underestimate that.

[zalander]

Thanks for the input, everyone! I see a general preference for libraries that are simple to use but flexible enough to cover a wide range of use cases. It also seems like many prefer modular tools rather than large, all-in-one frameworks, which makes sense for keeping things lightweight and adaptable.

Based on this, I’m thinking about focusing on a set of independent utility libraries rather than a full framework. Maybe starting with something like:

* A minimal but extensible UI library (keeping it simple but customizable).
* A debugging tool that provides real-time insights without bloating the project.
* A small, focused networking helper to simplify multiplayer or client-server setups.

Would any of these be useful to you? Or is there another pain point in Love2D development that you wish had a better solution?

[dusoft]

I wouldn't mind an engine (for arcades, adventures, any genre ...), but that's a lot to ask from anyone!

That would be another step to make LOVE even easier to start with for some.
(And I know this contradicts a bit what I said before ...)

[loofy2]

https

but you guys already added that into v12.

Great job team!

[togFox]

I'd give a beer to anyone that can make a light- weight text box that is documented.

[zalander]

I wouldn't mind an engine (for arcades, adventures, any genre ...), but that's a lot to ask from anyone!

That would be another step to make LOVE even easier to start with for some.
(And I know this contradicts a bit what I said before ...)

Say less, random stranger on the internet! An arcade/adventure engine sounds wild, but now I’m lowkey tempted. What kind of features would make it actually useful and not just another bloated mess?

Also sorry for the late reply