2 ms·
Yeah, but many of us game developers don't want to use any of that either. At the end of the day, those tools don't ensure that we obtain the same level of qual
by andrewmcwatters 10y ago
Yeah, but many of us game developers don't want to use any of that either. At the end of the day, those tools don't ensure that we obtain the same level of quality out the other end.
Framerates aren't the same, memory usage isn't the same, and you can't easily tweak these things once they've come out the other end. The web _isn't_ just a runtime. It's abstracted like that, but browsers are glorified HTML renders with JavaScript bindings, event handling, and sound and video playback to game developers.
HN has a subset of the community constantly raving about these things for game developers, but where are the game developers actually praising these things? I don't know of any, personally. We're all too busy with desktop games.
- bobajeff 10y agoI don't think I'm understanding you. What tools ensure you get the same level of quality on the user's setup? Things are always different on the user's hardware/system.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoI assume they mean same quality in the browser versus on the desktop. The difference is noticeable. Yes, there's differences between machines, but if you're offering only the browser version, the people with the least powerful machines could get a bad experience.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoMyself, I'm currently working on a game that targets both the web and the desktop. I like the accessibility of the former (just go to the site and play, nearly frictionless), but the latter has better FPS by an order of magnitude[0] for the same C codebase, so I'd rather keep my options open. [0] Mind you, said order of magnitude applies to uncapped framerate.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago*Sorry, it's quite a bit smaller than an order of magnitude. It's a non-trivial difference though.