compare with three.js

[no-zzz-un]

I'm using THREE.js for a 2d game project.

It seems like the webgl batching performance optimisation, and the interaction manager, are where pixi.js distinguishes itself from other libraries.

Are there other points? THREE.js feels like overkill for my project and I'd prefer to use something specifically 2d oriented.

[GoodBoyDigital]

Cool!

THREE.js is easily the best engine to use for 3D. In 2D land pixi.js is a pretty good alternative as its specifically built to handle 2D so its a lot faster simply because theres less to do (eg no depthBuffer).

Pixi.js is optimised for mobile and great care has been taken to ensure that the webGL renderer and Canvas renderer look exactly the same which is a nice bonus too :)

Its is also specifically a render engine so you can use it a part of your game engine / app framework rather than it being your engine/framework if ya see what I mean?

[englercj]

Considering this question answered.

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.