Engine Selection
Last updated
Last updated
When starting a game project, one of the most critical decisions is selecting the right engine. With many options available, it’s important to find the tool that best fits your project’s needs, your team’s experience, and your desired workflow. In this guide, we’ll briefly explore several popular game engines—and even touch on creating your own engine—so you can make an informed decision.
is known for its forgiving and flexible environment.
Strengths:
Highly open-ended, allowing multiple approaches to problem-solving.
Vast asset store and extensive community resources.
Weaknesses:
Its flexibility can lead to inconsistent practices if not disciplined.
The “do-it-your-way” nature means that beginners might struggle without clear guidance.
Unity’s approach is both a boon and a burden: while it lets you experiment freely, it demands careful planning and best practices to create a professional product.
is renowned for its robust, structured workflow.
Strengths:
Provides a “best-practice” framework, reducing the learning curve for experienced developers.
High-end visual quality and powerful built-in tools.
Weaknesses:
Less flexible compared to Unity; there’s a prescribed “way” to do things.
Can be overwhelming for beginners due to its depth and complexity.
Unreal’s opinionated design offers strong guidance at the expense of flexibility, making it ideal for developers who appreciate clear direction.
Strengths:
Exceptional graphics out of the box, especially for environments and lighting.
Powerful terrain and vegetation tools, ideal for large open worlds.
Weaknesses:
Sparse documentation and a smaller community compared to Unity or Unreal.
Steep learning curve, especially for solo developers or small teams.
CryEngine shines when visual quality is the top priority, but it demands a high level of self-sufficiency and technical competence due to its less guided, resource-light ecosystem.
Strengths:
Native C++ support with a straightforward, low-level API.
Emphasis on performance and direct control over systems.
Weaknesses:
Smaller community and ecosystem compared to major engines.
Visual tools and editor features are limited and dated.
Leadwerks appeals to developers who prefer direct, code-first development and want full control without engine-imposed conventions, but it lacks the polish and ecosystem of more mainstream options.
Strengths:
Lightweight and easy to learn, with a user-friendly scripting language (GDScript).
Completely free and open source, with a rapidly growing community.
Weaknesses:
Lacks some advanced features found in larger engines.
Smaller asset ecosystem compared to Unity and Unreal.
Godot’s minimalistic approach makes it perfect for indie projects and developers who value open-source tools.
Strengths:
Offers a balance between flexibility and structure.
Designed with modern hardware in mind, ensuring efficient performance.
Weaknesses:
Still growing its community and ecosystem.
May require more hands-on work as its toolset evolves.
Flax is a promising choice if you’re looking for an engine that’s modern and performance-oriented without sacrificing too much creative freedom.
Strengths:
Modular architecture and high customizability.
Open-source nature encourages community collaboration and transparency.
Weaknesses:
As a relatively new project, it may have a steeper learning curve and less mature documentation.
Not as widely adopted as Unity or Unreal, which might affect community support.
O3DE is ideal if you need an engine that can be tailored to your specific needs and you’re comfortable working with an evolving toolset.
Strengths:
Lightweight, with a focus on code over drag-and-drop interfaces.
Highly customizable for developers who want full control over their game’s architecture.
Weaknesses:
Steeper learning curve for those unfamiliar with low-level programming.
Fewer built-in features compared to full-fledged engines like Unity or Unreal.
MonoGame is best suited for developers who prefer coding everything from the ground up and who enjoy complete creative control.
Creating your own engine is a path less traveled—but sometimes the best solution for unique or highly specialized projects.
Strengths:
Tailor the engine exactly to your project’s needs with minimal bloat.
Complete control over every system and feature.
Common Pitfalls & Misconceptions:
Building an engine is not “doing it all by yourself”—it involves integrating numerous third-party tools (e.g., FMOD for audio, PhysX for physics).
Requires significant time, expertise, and resources.
Maintenance and scalability can be challenging without a strong technical foundation.
There’s no one-size-fits-all game engine. Unity offers flexibility but demands discipline; Unreal provides a structured framework ideal for high-end visuals; Godot’s simplicity makes it accessible for indie developers; Flax and O3DE are emerging options that balance modern features with customization; MonoGame is perfect for those who want to code from scratch; and building your own engine is a viable—but challenging—alternative when off-the-shelf options don’t fit your unique vision.
Evaluate your project’s requirements, your team’s expertise, and your long-term goals to decide which path is right for you. Each option has its own set of trade-offs—choose the one that aligns best with your vision and capabilities.
is famous for its visual fidelity and real-time rendering power.
is a C++-focused engine with a clean, no-frills approach to game development.
is an open-source engine that emphasises simplicity and efficiency.
is an emerging engine with a focus on high performance and modern graphics.
is an open-source engine backed by industry veterans.
is a cross-platform framework that provides a simple foundation for 2D and 3D game development.
For more on creating your own engine, check out resources like and the book Game Engine Architecture.