学习路径Learning path · 第 1 阶段Stage 1
S1 · 选引擎
S1 · Pick an engine
这一步决定什么：决定后面四阶段你有多少自由度。引擎的短板不会消失，只会被你绕着走。
What this stage decides: how much freedom you have in the four stages after it. An engine's weaknesses do not disappear — you just route around them.
先问瓶颈在哪
选引擎前先回答一个问题：我这个项目，最难的部分是什么？
Ask where the bottleneck is
Before picking an engine, answer one question: what is the hardest part of this project?
| 你的瓶颈 | 别选 | 为什么 |
|---|---|---|
| 玩法逻辑复杂 | 3D 引擎（Godot/Unity/Bevy） | 2D 引擎在状态管理上更省心，复杂逻辑用 3D 引擎是白付成本 |
| 想要 3D 表现 | 2D 引擎（Pixi/Phaser） | 2D 引擎没有 3D 管线，后期迁移等于重写 |
| 要发到网页 | Bevy / libGDX | 原生引擎的 Web 导出往往不完整（存档、性能、加载） |
| 只有一个人 | 什么都行，但别选 Bevy | Rust 的编译错误信息对 AI 很不友好（见 S2） |
| Your bottleneck | Avoid | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Complex gameplay logic | 3D engines (Godot/Unity/Bevy) | 2D engines are easier to structure; complex logic in a 3D engine is a cost you pay for nothing |
| You want 3D visuals | 2D engines (Pixi/Phaser) | 2D engines have no 3D pipeline — migrating later means rewriting |
| It must run on the web | Bevy / libGDX | Native engines' web exports are often incomplete (saves, performance, loading) |
| You are working alone | Anything is fine, but not Bevy | Rust's compile errors are very unfriendly to AI (see S2) |
三类引擎的实际差别
原生引擎（Godot / Unity / Bevy / libGDX）—— 功能完整，但导出到网页通常残缺。
Web 引擎（Pixi / Three.js / Phaser）—— 打开就是网页，但没有构建系统，你要自己解决打包、缓存、版本。
⚠ Three.js 不是完整引擎 —— 它没有场景管理、物理、资源管理。你要自己搭壳。这不是缺点，但要知道。
The real difference between three kinds
Native engines (Godot / Unity / Bevy / libGDX) — full-featured, but the web export is usually incomplete.
Web engines (Pixi / Three.js / Phaser) — open a page and it runs, but there is no build system; bundling, caching and versioning are yours to solve.
⚠ Three.js is not a full engine — it has no scene management, physics or asset management. You build the shell yourself. That is not a flaw, but you should know.
本站的判断
⚠ 下面是我们的判断，不是数据。
如果拿不准，Godot 是最不容易出错的选择 —— 官方文档完整、MIT 许可、脚本语言（GDScript）接近 Python，AI 生成代码时错得最少。
但如果你只做网页游戏，别为了「引擎更强」上 Godot —— Web 引擎的迭代速度对单人项目更重要。
Our judgement
⚠ What follows is our judgement, not data.
If you are undecided, Godot is the least likely to bite you — complete official docs, MIT licence, and a scripting language (GDScript) close to Python, which means AI-generated code makes fewer mistakes.
But if you are only making a web game, do not pick Godot for "the engine is stronger" — a web engine's iteration speed matters more for a solo project.
常见失败
- 选了「以后可能要用 3D」的 2D 引擎 —— 迁移成本远大于当初省下的
- 被星数吸引 —— 引擎的星数反映知名度，不反映「AI 能不能写对」。星数高的是 C++ 引擎（Godot/Three），而 AI 写 C++ 明显比写 TypeScript/Python 弱
- 先学引擎再想做什么 —— 顺序反了。先有玩法，再选工具
Common failures
- Choosing a 2D engine "in case I need 3D later" — the migration cost far exceeds what you saved.
- Being tempted by star counts — stars reflect notoriety, not "can AI write it correctly". The high-star engines are C++ ones (Godot/Three), and AI writes C++ clearly worse than TypeScript or Python.
- Learning the engine before deciding what to build — the order is backwards. Have the gameplay first, then pick the tool.
数据依据
本页的引擎事实（星数 / 许可 / 最后提交日 / 脚本语言）来自 GitHub 官方 API，
快照时间 2026-10-05，见首页的「引擎事实表」。
⚠ 其中 cocos 与 love 的许可在 GitHub 上是 NOASSERTION（机器无法判定），
须读官方 LICENSE —— 本站不替它们判断。
Where the facts come from
The engine facts on this page (stars, licence, last push, scripting language) come from the official GitHub API, snapshotted 2026-10-05; see the engine facts table on the home page.
⚠ For cocos and love the GitHub licence field reads NOASSERTION — machine-undeterminable. Read the official LICENSE. This site does not judge for them.