ct.js vs Luanti
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted game engines & frameworks options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
ct.js
Free 2D game editor with a visual interface and code
VS
Luanti
Open-source voxel game engine and server
| Feature | ct.js | Luanti |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Game Engines & Frameworks | Game Engines & Frameworks |
| License | MIT | LGPL-2.1 |
| Language | TypeScript | C++ |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, binary | docker, bare-metal, binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 331 | ★ 13,421 |
| First released | 2018 | 2010 |
| Replaces | GameMaker Studio | Minecraft |
Why pick each one
Choose ct.js if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Written in TypeScript
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is ct.js or Luanti better?
Neither is universally better. Luanti has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are ct.js and Luanti free and open-source?
Yes. ct.js is licensed under MIT and Luanti under LGPL-2.1. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run ct.js and Luanti with Docker?
ct.js: check the project docs for container support. Luanti: yes.