4 ms·

Unfortunately, the packed WebGL file size for a scene with nothing in it comes at ~80mbs which is still way too big to be a reasonable alternative to three.js-b

Unfortunately, the packed WebGL file size for a scene with nothing in it comes at ~80mbs which is still way too big to be a reasonable alternative to three.js-based libs. I hope they'll be able to trim it down in the future because I'd really like to use unity to deploy to WebGL. It just doesn't seem to be something that they can do, for whatever reason. Edit: The benchmark seems to have a minimalist packed size of just under 10mbs. Cool that they achieved that. I haven't been able to with my project.

golergka 11y ago
Right now making a mature Unity3d project that was developed for mobile platforms run on WebGL takes 2-4 weeks of developer time to reach feature-complete, semi-stable state. And still, it runs abysmally slow, and hogging at least 1Gb of memory. After Unity browser plugin was retired a year ago with the whole Netscape plugin architecture, teams that use Unity just better accept the fact that they can't realistically deploy their projects in the browser anymore.
- throwaway13337 11y ago
  I just spent the last 20 minutes compiling my unity project with 5.3 webgl. It's a voxel game so it's quite small, asset-wise and fits into under 20mbs! This is a huge leap. The upstart performance feels a bit like a java applet (freezes for a second... not great) but once it gets started, it's performant for my use case. In my brief test, I only notice one weird thing (the input sometimes got screwy). This is a huge improvement. Give it another try?
  - golergka 11y ago
    Uhm, is your game a commercial project, with a lot of art, complicated requirements involving SDKs from social networks as well as marketing, analytical and bug report tools, commits and random code from incompetent developers who were fired a year ago, urgent gufixes that were put in as "temporary" and stayed forever? Because of course it would work nicely with a small hobby project ran by a single programmer of adequate level.
    - throwaway13337 11y ago
      Of course this project doesn't have those nasty hooks and a very small art asset collection. I'd worked on a similar project to yours years ago and we ended up building a separate application for mobile after the web project. They are different form factors even if everything behind the scenes 'just worked'. I think we agree :) I was just amazed at the progress unity's webgl target has made. You see with my original post that I was pretty dismissive of it until I gave it another try.

golergka 11y ago

Right now making a mature Unity3d project that was developed for mobile platforms run on WebGL takes 2-4 weeks of developer time to reach feature-complete, semi-stable state. And still, it runs abysmally slow, and hogging at least 1Gb of memory. After Unity browser plugin was retired a year ago with the whole Netscape plugin architecture, teams that use Unity just better accept the fact that they can't realistically deploy their projects in the browser anymore.

throwaway13337 11y ago
I just spent the last 20 minutes compiling my unity project with 5.3 webgl. It's a voxel game so it's quite small, asset-wise and fits into under 20mbs! This is a huge leap. The upstart performance feels a bit like a java applet (freezes for a second... not great) but once it gets started, it's performant for my use case. In my brief test, I only notice one weird thing (the input sometimes got screwy). This is a huge improvement. Give it another try?
- golergka 11y ago
  Uhm, is your game a commercial project, with a lot of art, complicated requirements involving SDKs from social networks as well as marketing, analytical and bug report tools, commits and random code from incompetent developers who were fired a year ago, urgent gufixes that were put in as "temporary" and stayed forever? Because of course it would work nicely with a small hobby project ran by a single programmer of adequate level.
  - throwaway13337 11y ago
    Of course this project doesn't have those nasty hooks and a very small art asset collection. I'd worked on a similar project to yours years ago and we ended up building a separate application for mobile after the web project. They are different form factors even if everything behind the scenes 'just worked'. I think we agree :) I was just amazed at the progress unity's webgl target has made. You see with my original post that I was pretty dismissive of it until I gave it another try.