Hi, I’ve spend some time testing both engines, so maybe this post will help You a bit. I won’t write long comparison, since after reading Your post I guess that You are aware of main pros and cons of both engines. Basically both engines are different and designed to be used in different ways, I guess You will have to choose what fits You better. Urho gives You better flexibilty – You can use it as an external library and that will give You control of application from begging to the end, but will also require to write a lot of stuff from scratch. On the other hand in Torque You build upon existing template – a lot of stuff is already handled but You have to use it in right way. Let’s take level loading for example: In Torque You call one function (loadMission(%misfile) if I recall correctly) and lot of stuff is already implemented – You will see splash screen with loading status and after that You game will be set up. Additionaly You can add some logic in script (for example in function loadMissionStage2()). If You want the same result in Urho You will have to write everything from beggining – set splash screen, load file with mission, add it to scene tree, set input, set camera, set viewport, set player, run initialization logic. The same goes for other things – in Torque you have whole game framework build from core scripts (You can of course modify them), in Urho You’ll have to write this framework. Some people may prefer first approach, other may prefer latter. You want to use other view then first person? Torque has several build-in camera modes You can use them, but there may be need to rewrite some parts, becouse You want it to work a bit different – in Urho You’ll have to write it from scratch so it I will work how You want it to work from the very beggining. Player, vehicle, weapon, item? Every case is the same. Also note that upcoming changes in version 4.0 (entity-component system, new base template) will propably improve flexibility in Torque. Other users may throw stones now ;) but when I had Your dilemma, I've decided to go with with Urho... personally I prefer flexibility (but I don't mind Torque's approach) but the main reason was performance - in this field Urho is just much better, I'm using not so new computer and in my project I don't need Torque's great environment tools. Of course I'm still keeping my eye on this engine, because I really like it.