Interesting question that highlights a broader challenge with vibe coding in any domain: the choice of framework matters less than having clear architectural boundaries that guide what the AI generates.

The comment about games needing play-testing and visualization is spot on. What's worth adding is that this is actually a general principle — vibe coding works best when you have explicit architecture upfront constraining where and how generation happens.

This is one of the ideas formalized in the Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto (https://agilevibecoding.org) — specifically "Architecture guides and constrains generation." Whether you're building a game or a web app, if the AI is generating code without clear structural boundaries, you accumulate unmaintainable complexity fast. For game dev, that means thinking through your state representation, entity model, and rendering separation before you let the LLM loose.

For frameworks: anything with strong conventions and heavy LLM training data (Godot, Phaser, Love2D) will work better than opinionated engine-first workflows.