15 replies to this topic

[fireside]

I'm just curious about how many people here have the Unity web plugin on your computer and if you don't, is it something you would load to play a game? I have it on mine, but then, I use the engine. I know Kongregate has a Unity section, but I don't think it's as popular. I really just think of it as a place to off load a free game without any responsibility for keeping up a site. After trying it, I see it doesn't work very well except in full screen on my current game in progress, and it still looks a little stretched and off compared to desktop release. Still acceptable, I think.

[TheNut]

According to Unity's website, they have 139M installs.

I installed it once to try out someone's demo, but removed it afterwards. Installer was huge, took a while to load the game, and there was texture popping. I'm at the point now where if it's not HTML5, I won't bother (basically, tech has to be built into the browser). I'm even like that with some downloadable games. The ease of typing in a URL and have everything delivered to my browser is a lazy man's dream. No setup, no 3rd party requirements, no hassle. Especially if it's just blowing away 2 - 3 minutes of entertainment.

[alphadog]

I agree with TheNut. Plugins are going the way of the dodo. See your local Flash installation for details.

[Schoening]

html5 for the win

[tyree]

Im the opposite. games that dont use a plugin really cant compete

[fireside]

I agree tyree. There's really nothing far enough in 3d. WebGL is promising but it usually crashes on my computer and I think a lot of people are more afraid of it than a plugin.

[Stainless]

HTML 5 / WebGL is the route we are being pushed to take.

For example, Adobe have stopped development on flash and started creating html 5 editing tools

However the technology is not there yet. WebGL works on a tiny proportion of machines at the moment, canvas can be slow and buggy, it's just not ready yet.

Plugins are ok at the moment, but hasn't Microshaft dropped plugin support for windows 8?

[tyree]

your talking about for mobile. mobile is not the world. mobile is mobile. that push is so the people that make the browers can have more control over it. html 5 is not a better alternative to plugins. with micorsoft thats for mobile/tablets which fall under mobile.

Im surprised the idea of being told what you can and cant put on your device hasnt raised any eyebrows. but thats probably because phones and tablets are gated devices to begin with. essentially the complete opposite of computers

[fireside]

Quote

but hasn't Microshaft dropped plugin support for windows 8

Hadn't heard that, but It wouldn't surprise me. I'd switch to Linux if I wasn't using Unity, but I think a lot of people are in that kind of boat, where they are using software not supported by Linux. I'll probably buy a slightly older model laptop that has Windows 7 on it pretty quick and hold on to it until Linux becomes more useful or something else comes along. I think we are moving into engines, etc, that have multiple ports like Unity.

[Stainless]

tyree, on 12 November 2012 - 11:28 AM, said:

your talking about for mobile. mobile is not the world. mobile is mobile.

http://www.neowin.ne...pport-for-metro

Looks like it's metro that does not allow plugins, in windows 8 you would have to use whatever they are calling it... legacy mode?

[Mihail121]

Never installed and I don't plan to. I consider Unity to be a great framework, the 3D variant of Flash in every way, but to install another huge plugin? Won't happen for sure. I am not a great HTML5 / WebGL fan, don't get me wrong, but why installing a huge plugin when Chrome already features an embedded Flash player with full support for Stage3D? Why Unity won't utilize that? Asking the users to install something 5 minutes before actually playing a game is in my eyes a serious breach of usability.

[fireside]

Unity exports to Flash, but you have to pay for the exporter. As far as the plugin, it's not very large, and I think most people consider it more secure than downloading a program. Unity's web plugin will also be compliant with NACL, which is a Chrome native client, so it will run without a plugin on Chrome in the future. There are a lot of options around right now, and nothing is really settled when it comes to 3d. It really boils down to how much a person will use it. I use it because Kongregate has quite a few games that use it and I use Unity as an engine. It's great, but I really don't think we can have individual plugins for every engine around. We need a more universal option that just works.

[Stainless]

Flash is dying.. It never was that good, but it filled a need. Now it's niche in the market is being replaced by all sorts of things.

It's weaknesses, that in the past were just a minor problem, have become serious issues and no quality solution has appeared.

Unity is good for what it does, but we all know the issues with it.

[tyree]

to mihail would you install any game on your computer. stating that flash is embedded in chrome and your alright with it. seems to state if unity was included in chrome you would be alright with it too.

that follows the line of thinking, whatever the developer of the browser decides. Im alright with it

[Mihail121]

I would install a game on my computer, of course, and I would also download a game in the browser, no issues with that. But, when I do run the game on my PC or in the browser a message comes up saying "You need to install XYZ" my experience will be ruined and so I would remove the game right away. Usability is a very important factor for me. Of course I would play Unity stuff if the plugin was included in the browser, this makes it easier for me, the user, to play the game. As a developer, I am aware of alternative technologies -- WebGL, Flash with Stage3D -- which won't prompt me for additional installations and thus showing such a message is a major usability breach. It's like stating: "I won't go to the local bakery for some bread, I'll travel 50 km instead to get absolutely the same thing". It's why people use browsers in the first place, they make things easier. If I want to see an installer I won't play a browser, but a normal desktop game. I repeat again I'm well aware of the advantages the plugin provides.

Quote

that follows the line of thinking, whatever the developer of the browser decides. Im alright with it

This has nothing to do with the discussion. I don't agree or use everything the browser provides, but some things are rather useful.

[touch_the_sky]

Unity Web Player apparently supports NaCl (Chrome Native Client), so it works in Chrome right away, without the need to install anything: http://unity3d.com/u...ltiplatform/web

I'm sorted then, since the only browser I use for 'personal purposes' is Chrome;)


Also, the question "Would you download LordOfFarts Plugin (something unheard of previously, etc. blah) just to play this game"?
I think a lot of non-techie, game consumers would answer something like this:
1) If the game in question is a superhyped StarCraft 34: Black Ops Of Zerg Duty, with millions of people just aching to get their hands on it, than YES
2) If the game in question is "Good shit I made last weekend" posted by Jimmy on niche-forum.com, UNLIKELY (without some serious marketing / hype / ad effort)