Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Mar 2013 01:42 UTC
3D News, GL, DirectX "Today, we are excited to unlock this technology for high-performance games, by teaming up with Epic Games. By leveraging this new JavaScript optimization technology, Mozilla has been able to bring Epic's Unreal Engine 3 to the Web. With this port, developers will soon be able to explore limitless possibilities when it comes to porting their popular gaming titles to the Web."
Order by: Score:
n/t
by windowshasyou on Thu 28th Mar 2013 02:59 UTC
windowshasyou
Member since:
2011-05-14

Isn't Epic the game company that said all computer users were pirates and they were going to develop only for consoles?

Edited 2013-03-28 03:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: n/t
by Elv13 on Thu 28th Mar 2013 04:33 UTC in reply to "n/t"
Elv13 Member since:
2006-06-12

The Web is a console in itself. Well implemented a asm.js game cannot be pirated, copied or replayed. While some of the asm.js code have to be downloaded, most of the heavy lifting and storage can stay server side.

At least JS is easier to reverse engineer than x86_64 machine code.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: n/t
by windowshasyou on Thu 28th Mar 2013 13:59 UTC in reply to "RE: n/t"
windowshasyou Member since:
2011-05-14

However you want to skin that cat, it doesn't matter to me. They could actually produce their UT3 for Linux client as they promised and I still won't touch their stuff. Like many others, I bought UT3 because it had the tux logo on the box and they had promised the client which never came. They never did reply to my many requests for a refund. Then they had their hissy fit and told the world all PC users are pirates. What they told me with that series of events is that they don't want my money nor do they want anyone else to buy or play their stuff.

Reply Score: 6

LOL
by WorknMan on Thu 28th Mar 2013 03:26 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

'Explore limitless possibilities' ...

Translation: 'More shitty first-person shooters'

Reply Score: 5

RE: LOL
by lucas_maximus on Thu 28th Mar 2013 03:48 UTC in reply to "LOL"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

That is a little unfair isn't it. There are quite a few game engines using the unreal 3 engine that aren't first person shooters.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: LOL
by No it isnt on Thu 28th Mar 2013 11:54 UTC in reply to "RE: LOL"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

XCOM: Enemy Unknown, for instance, a turn-based tactical strategy game.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: LOL
by lucas_maximus on Thu 28th Mar 2013 18:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: LOL"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

As someone else said lets not forget Gears of War.

Reply Score: 2

RE: LOL
by vivainio on Thu 28th Mar 2013 07:17 UTC in reply to "LOL"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Well, it's the most demanding genre. If you can do graphics intensive FPS's, everything else is a breeze.

Reply Score: 6

RE: LOL
by Wafflez on Thu 28th Mar 2013 17:08 UTC in reply to "LOL"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

Well UE3 is best known for Gears of War, which is third person shooter. ;)

Reply Score: 2

My question would be...
by deathshadow on Thu 28th Mar 2013 08:22 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

Does it still have the quarter to half second audio lag FF is notorious for with HTML 5 AUDIO that makes it semi-useless for anything realtime?

Reply Score: 2

RE: My question would be...
by lucas_maximus on Thu 28th Mar 2013 18:32 UTC in reply to "My question would be..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

There is a project that has addressed that. If you are interested.

Stack Overflow post here

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9553415/how-did-scirra-get-html5...

And the project itself.

https://www.scirra.com/construct2

The developer actually chimed in on stack overflow and talked about problems with getting it to run cross browser.

Since the Web Audio API is a non-standard Google invention so far, other browsers haven't implemented it. This means everywhere else you have to crowbar HTML5 audio in to something that might work for games. The way to do this is to recycle audio objects.

The player's laser in Space Blaster fires 10 times a second - and that's not including any other sound effects! As I mentioned earlier, Audio is kind of a heavyweight object, so if you're doing new Audio() 10+ times a second, lo and behold, the browser eventually dies and audio starts glitching up. However, you can drastically reduce the number of Audio objects created by recycling them.


So I am not really surprised this is the case. But you are completely right.

Edited 2013-03-28 18:35 UTC

Reply Score: 5

great video, but where is it?
by Lion on Thu 28th Mar 2013 09:23 UTC
Lion
Member since:
2007-03-22

Is this actually online anywhere that it can be tried?
The video mentions enscripten and hacks.mozilla, but neither site contains any information about this at all.

Reply Score: 1

RE: great video, but where is it?
by ssokolow on Thu 28th Mar 2013 10:20 UTC in reply to "great video, but where is it?"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

Did you click the link to this page?

https://blog.mozilla.org/luke/2013/03/21/asm-js-in-firefox-nightly/

You'll need Firefox 22 so, currently, a Nightly build from http://nightly.mozilla.org/

Once you've got that, you can either try one of their benchmarks:

http://kripken.github.com/misc-js-benchmarks/banana/benchmark.html

http://kripken.github.com/ammo.js/examples/new/ammo.html

(Note: BananaBench runs with a fixed time step to make JS execution deterministic, so game speed will run fast/slow, depending on your hardware/browser.)


...or you can download emscripten and compile something of your own:

https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki/Tutorial

(Make sure you read the instructions on enabling asm.js mode in the optimization section of the emscripten tutorial)

James Long has also whipped up a fork of LLJS that'll compile to asm.js as he explains here:

http://jlongster.com/Compiling-LLJS-to-asm.js,-Now-Available-?hn

Edited 2013-03-28 10:32 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: great video, but where is it?
by Lion on Fri 29th Mar 2013 09:48 UTC in reply to "RE: great video, but where is it?"
Lion Member since:
2007-03-22

If I'm not mistaken, that links off to bananabread - which as far as I can tell uses its own engine. But I can't find anywhere that allows users to try the Unreal engine in-browser

Reply Score: 1

ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

If I'm not mistaken, that links off to bananabread - which as far as I can tell uses its own engine. But I can't find anywhere that allows users to try the Unreal engine in-browser


Oh, sorry. I thought you were asking about trying asm.js.

Reply Score: 2

Adobe already did this...
by henderson101 on Thu 28th Mar 2013 12:01 UTC
henderson101
Member since:
2006-05-30

The Flascc compiler was released late last year, this already included a port of the Unreal engine and Unity 3D as a target. The even ported SDL, and SDL Quake, to Flash using the compiler. I played with it (and submitted an article here, that never seems to have surfaced.) It is absolutely 100% rock solid and unfortunately probably a better overall technology than a Javascript/backend server solution.

Flascc is a straight up gcc front end with a Flash targeting back end, so almost all straight C code compiles and runs with a really small amount of work. It really is completely mind bendingly impressive. You do zero to your main body of code, the only real changes are to hook up the async callbacks to the Flash player to control the game loop and rendering.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Adobe already did this...
by Beta on Thu 28th Mar 2013 13:35 UTC in reply to "Adobe already did this..."
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

It is absolutely 100% rock solid and unfortunately probably a better overall technology than a Javascript/backend server solution.


http://i.imgur.com/IQfpxnW.png
0% rock solid. Captured this morning on the latest Chromium.

WebGL however hasn’t had any problems in Firefox or Chromium …

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Adobe already did this...
by henderson101 on Thu 28th Mar 2013 14:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Adobe already did this..."
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

Which Flash plug-in are you using? Because it requires an extremely recent one to work correctly. That is the major drawback. The multithreading doesn't work well without the correct plug-in, and the single threaded runtime is a lot slower.

I admit, this isn't for everyone. But, it works really well, well enough to run Quake 1 with SDL in an XP virtual machine on a Windows 7 laptop with no lag what so ever. And remember - this isn't a target you have to do a lot of extra work with - the majority of your C and C++ code should work out of the box, so long as you use SDL or one of the other supported frameworks for the graphics. No one is stopping you from porting another tool kit too. That beats javascript every time for me personally. Your mileage might vary.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Adobe already did this...
by sgtrock on Thu 28th Mar 2013 14:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Adobe already did this..."
sgtrock Member since:
2011-05-13

Quake 1? That's a really low bar considering that Q3Arena has been available on QuakeLive for several years. I should hope that they could make Q1 run well!

Reply Score: 2

henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

It was more as a demonstration of how the technology worked. The main "thing" was the fact that they had the Unreal engine compiling with Flascc and running natively in Flash *last* year.

Plus you get that this was running in a VM, right? So my laptop was running a VM with 2GB of RAM in VMWare running Flash running Quake 1 that I had just compiled from source using the Flascc compiler... that was what blew me away, not the fact that they had ported Quake 1. The performance in that fairly extreme test (emulating 32bit Windows in a VM under 64bit Windows 7) with really good results.

Edited 2013-03-28 14:42 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Adobe already did this...
by zima on Tue 2nd Apr 2013 16:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Adobe already did this..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know, virtualisation (not emulation) isn't that big of a deal with today's CPUs, gives near-native performance.

What will be impressive IMHO: Glide support in DOSbox, I hear it's coming.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Adobe already did this...
by Savior on Thu 28th Mar 2013 20:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Adobe already did this..."
Savior Member since:
2006-09-02

That beats javascript every time for me personally. Your mileage might vary.


Unfortunately, there are rather large groups of people, who cannot choose their own mileage: iOS users, Linux users, and I'm not even sure if Flash is supported on Android anymore. So HTLM5+JS may be worse, but that's the only platform-agnostic way that's left.

As for my mileage: I hate both; but I still can't wait until this makes it to Firefox stable.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Adobe already did this...
by 0brad0 on Fri 29th Mar 2013 01:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Adobe already did this..."
0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05


Unfortunately, there are rather large groups of people, who cannot choose their own mileage: iOS users, Linux users, and I'm not even sure if Flash is supported on Android anymore. So HTLM5+JS may be worse, but that's the only platform-agnostic way that's left.


Flash was never even close to being platform-agnostic. Unless you're running Windows then Flash run-time availability is completely hit or miss and tends to be quite a buggy experience even on the "supported" OS's never mind the issue of not being available at all or not up to date.

Edited 2013-03-29 01:35 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Adobe already did this...
by RshPL on Thu 28th Mar 2013 17:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Adobe already did this..."
RshPL Member since:
2009-03-13

Same result. I am sure I am using latest Chrome and it should have latest flash. I am using binary NVIDIA drivers so there should be all OpenGL capabilities needed.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Adobe already did this...
by 0brad0 on Thu 28th Mar 2013 18:32 UTC in reply to "Adobe already did this..."
0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

Except it is using Flash.. no thanks.

Reply Score: 3

Google PNaCl
by geleto on Thu 28th Mar 2013 15:31 UTC
geleto
Member since:
2005-07-06

The big news (at least for me) is asm.js
This is the Mozilla answer to Google native client. But the two technologies are not mutually exclusive.
The Google portable native client - PNaCl uses LLVM bitcode.
And arm.js uses code generated by Emscripten from ... LLVM bitcode.
So developers can easily target both PNaCl and arm.js

Edited 2013-03-28 15:36 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Content
by telns on Thu 28th Mar 2013 17:58 UTC
telns
Member since:
2009-06-18

The trick long term will be serving up all the necessary game data (sounds, textures, &c.) in a smooth way online. Big games require lots of data. Getting that out to clients "JIT" would be a huge advance. If you have to load it ahead of time, you might as well have just downloaded the game and installed it.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Content
by zlynx on Thu 28th Mar 2013 19:46 UTC in reply to "Content"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

That sounds like the streaming downloads many game clients already use.

MMO clients like DDO allow you to start playing before the game is fully downloaded. I believe Diablo III did the same thing.

The client just needs to organize the download list so that the starting game levels and their associated art and sounds are put first.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by twitterfire
by twitterfire on Thu 28th Mar 2013 20:02 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

Shiva3d and Unity 3d for the web are available for years.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by twitterfire
by twitterfire on Fri 29th Mar 2013 09:34 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

I'd rather play the games on my PC instead of cloud. I have to reasons for this.

#1 no matter how much NaCl or javascript engines are optimized, performance will always better for a game compiled to native code, running on your desktop. Lag and delay might be a concern, too.

#2 I want to own my software and my games. I don't want to rent them and run them from the cloud or over the web.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by twitterfire
by moondevil on Fri 29th Mar 2013 21:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by twitterfire"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

+1 (Cannot vote)

Reply Score: 1

Comment by twitterfire
by twitterfire on Fri 29th Mar 2013 09:45 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

I don't see games like WOW coming too soon to the web, due to the huge game world and large numbers of players.

Even if downloading data while you play would be possible, the server cost to serve game data to all players will so high that will make it higly impractical.

I can see this being useful to small coop FPS type of games, though.

Reply Score: 1

Firefox benchmarks
by twitterfire on Fri 29th Mar 2013 09:58 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

I'd like to see Firefox with the new Javascript engine benchmarked against Chrome. If performance is anyway near Chrome, I will happily return to FF after few years since I began to dislike Chrome tracking users and collecting personal information.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Firefox benchmarks
by twitterfire on Fri 29th Mar 2013 11:20 UTC in reply to "Firefox benchmarks"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

I'd like to see Firefox with the new Javascript engine benchmarked against Chrome. If performance is anyway near Chrome, I will happily return to FF after few years since I began to dislike Chrome tracking users and collecting personal information.


Chrome still the fastest browser but Firefox nightly is close: http://arewefastyet.com/

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Firefox benchmarks
by twitterfire on Fri 29th Mar 2013 12:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Firefox benchmarks"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

Did some quick benchmarks:


Lower is better

sunspider-0.9.1

FF Nightly: 312
Chrome 26: 266
IE 10: 198

kraken-1.1

FF Nightly: 3617
Chrome 25: 3053
IE 10: 8794

Higher is better

V8 Benchmark Suite - version 7

FF Nightly: 8207
Chrome 26: 9178
IE 10: 4357

Octane v1

FF Nightly: 7421
Chrome26: 9567
IE 10: 3570


It seems that apart from asm.js which is fast, javascript engine in FF still lags behind V8 in Chrome.

I would be happier if Mozilla focuses on general JS performance than on adding support for asm.js which won't see much use in the near future.

Edited 2013-03-29 12:36 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Downloading Assests
by supercompman on Fri 29th Mar 2013 19:32 UTC
supercompman
Member since:
2008-09-14

People keep mentioning the issue of downloading all of the assets for a game every time you start it up... I thought this was meant to address situations like that:
http://diveintohtml5.info/offline.html

Reply Score: 1