Options for developing a web-based game

views:

264

answers:

+2 Q:

Options for developing a web-based game

I am currently looking around for some tools for developing games on the webs.

I want to avoid Flash because I have seen that many Flash games stutter a lot even on mid-end machines. The good thing is everyone has Flash on their computers, but the performance really hurts a lot.

So are there some sort of a Game Engine (or other tool) that allows web-based game development, yet at the same time, not as slow as Flash?

+2 A:

For action style games, flash is probably still your best option. You could also check out Silverlight and JavaFX.

UpTheCreek 2010-02-09 12:59:12

+3 A:

WebGL

CopperLicht - fast WebGL JavaScript 3D Engine

WebGL isn't supported by many browsers yet, but it's the future of 3D web games.

Sam Hasler 2010-02-09 13:12:41

Travian is one of the most succesful Web-based game, Weewar is also very succesful. There's exactly *zero* 3D need in such kind of games. So it may be "the future of 3D web games" if 3D web games have a future, which is still very doubtful at this point. It is certainly *not* the future of all web games.

Webinator 2010-02-09 13:25:06

@WizardOfOdds good clarification. thx

Sam Hasler 2010-02-09 13:26:50

+3 A:

Canvas and JavaScript

2D

3D

Creating pseudo 3D games with HTML 5 canvas and raycasting

There many canvas + javascript games on the web that you could view source and see how they're made.

Sam Hasler 2010-02-09 13:13:18

JavaScript is still far slower in performance that Flash Player/AS3. And it will take you twice (if not more) the time to build anything. Also maintain JavaScript is a nightmare when it gets a little big!

TandemAdam 2010-02-09 20:02:09

@TandemAdam AS3 is based on ECMAScript, the same as JavaScript, so how can it be easier to maintain? And with modern JITs performance shouldn't be a problem; Firefox even uses the same JIT - Tamarin - as Flash. And Chrome's JIT - V8 - is faster still. Fire up Chrome and take a browse through http://www.chromeexperiments.com/

Sam Hasler 2010-02-09 23:58:08

Just because the syntax and object model are the same does not mean the work-flow is the same! Both languages are implemented very differently. For one, JavaScript must deal with the DOM, so that instantly makes working with the language more complex, and tightly couples it. Also each browser has implemented JavaScript differently, so there is more complications there (some implementations don't even conform to the ECMAScript standard).

TandemAdam 2010-02-10 18:36:28

@TandemAdam, I agree that the DOM is slow, but when you're scripting animations on canvas you're not dealing with the DOM. And with a good library/framework cross browser differences can be abstracted out.

Sam Hasler 2010-02-11 10:00:39

Ok I must say you have convinced me a little. And I will have to go give canvas a go. I am still a little sceptical of the work-flow though. Mainly because when doing flash stuff I always use movieclips with nested animations built in Flash. Not sure how or if you could get close to this kind of detail in canvas, without writing hundreds of lines of JavaScript.

TandemAdam 2010-02-11 19:09:41

So are there some sort of a Game Engine (or other tool) that allows web-based game development, yet at the same time, not as slow as Flash?

No.

Kylotan 2010-02-09 14:56:33

Then, what about Unity, web-bases version? I've seen its demo running on my browser and it looks nice and fast.

unknownthreat 2010-02-09 15:55:50

My answer was somewhat flippant. ;) Unity may well run pretty fast but obviously it isn't technically part of the browser nor has much in the way of market penetration. If you want to count arbitrary plugins that the user will have to install then obviously you could use pretty much anything.

Kylotan 2010-02-09 16:00:28

Such vague comments! "you could use pretty much Anything"! really? There are only a select few plug-in that meet the requirements. What ones are you thinking of (please don't say Director Shockwave!)

TandemAdam 2010-02-09 19:38:11

My point was that writing a plugin yourself based on an existing open source 3D engine isn't terribly hard. That gives you about 100 options. So the question is usually about which of the existing options with existing market penetration to choose. (But why not Shockwave? It works fine for Sherwood Dungeon.)

Kylotan 2010-02-10 10:28:49

(Or a 2D engine... that gives you another 100 options or so.)

Kylotan 2010-02-10 10:29:38

+5 A:

Flash

I think Flash is still your best choice, and probably will be for at least 5-10 years. Usually its not Flash itself that is "slow" or "stuttery", but it's the developers. Flash Player with AS3 is actually extremly fast.

Although, Flash definitly has its stregths and weaknesses, and I usually try to use it for what its best at. And that is throwing around vector/bitmap graphics in 2D.

Unity3D

If you want fast 3D in the browser I would strongly recomend Unity3D. There are a bunch of games and tests you can see live around the net. Sure Unity is a plugin that new users will need to download and install, but there are a lot of benifits.

One of the biggest benifits in Unity, is that you are using Mono Which is "An open source, cross-platform, implementation of C# and the CLR that is binary compatible with Microsoft.NET" that can compile to almost any platform (including Windows, Mac, and even iPhone). So you can basicly write once - deploy everywhere.

TandemAdam 2010-02-09 19:52:10

Despite my answers I agree. Canvas + JavaScript, and WebGL may be promising but until they're fully supported on most users browsers (particularly IE) they're only a curiosity for now (private projects, demos, etc. nothing aimed at a mass audience). I gave my answers not because I thought they were the best solution, but for completeness, to show how the answer may change in time, and because these technologies need pioneers to test them out and move them forward.

Sam Hasler 2010-02-13 11:51:20

Totally agree with you Sam! I am pretty excited to see what happens in the future with JavaScript/Canvas/WebGL. But we are just not there yet!

TandemAdam 2010-02-14 03:53:24

I'd like to point out haXe. haXe is not only a great and expressive language, but can compile to both serverside platforms as PHP and NekoVM, as well as clientside platforms as Flash and JavaScript. Also, in contradistinction to ActionScript 3, it produces faster byte code for the AVM2, and allows "direct" memory access through special opcodes that are not exposed in AS3, but were designed for use with alchemy.

Due to its nature, it's probably one of the best languages around for web apps in general. Also it has an active, growing and helpful community. I suggest you subscribe to the list, or use the irc channel, rather than using the community forum, in case you want to be a part of it.

greetz

back2dos

back2dos 2010-02-10 16:52:58

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

Options for developing a web-based game

WebGL

Canvas and JavaScript

2D

3D

Flash

Unity3D

related questions