10 ms·

Rocket Engine - plugin-free browser game development

70 points by pufuwozu 16y ago

jtagen 16y ago
I wonder how will this runs once you have a half dozen independent objects running around the screen. The extra layer provided by the browser (especially on mobile devices) must cause an enormous hit. From the movie, things look like they have serious lag. I'm hoping this works, could be a great teaching tool.
- bd 16y ago
  This technology is actually pretty fast. Drawing images is so fundamental for browsers that it tends to be heavily optimized. If your hardware runs well Google Maps, it will run well this engine (and also the other very similar one - Aves from Dextrose). Rendering wise, it's the same technology. Most of heavy lifting is done by compiled code of the browser, JavaScript just sets few parameters (as opposed to canvas, where you "micromanage" rendering in relatively slow scripting language). One screenful of map is about 80-100 images, though performance wise there is still quite a lot of breathing room. I did some stress tests and my notebook can easily handle many hundreds individual image sprites (done as absolutely positioned DOM elements). Now physics, this may be slow to do in JavaScript. But with a type of games that work well with image sprites (basically anything where building blocks are large), this will probably not make too big problems as you will not have that many interacting objects (at once together at screen) and also interaction will be optimizable. The "killer app" will probably be tile based strategies or role-playing games (see current top Facebook apps), so physics / pathfinding / AI would only need to deal with discrete grids, not some costly pixel precise collision detection.
  - teamonkey 16y ago
    JS physics library: http://box2d-js.sourceforge.net/index2.html http://box2d-js.sourceforge.net/index2.html
ciupicri 16y ago
Plugin-free, yet it looks like I need Flash to see the whole page. Also, I don't see any demo/game.
- jeza 16y ago
  Seems they embed a youtube video.
viraptor 16y ago
This actually reminds me of the old Klik&Play software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klik http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klik). I wonder if it's easy enough to use to create a community of its own.
- Jim_Neath 16y ago
  I used to love Games Factory and Klik&Play
  - dododo 16y ago
    the games factory is still underdevelopment, and you can download a demo of the current version: http://www.clickteam.com/eng/tgf2.php http://www.clickteam.com/eng/tgf2.php (i'm also a fan. an web games factory would be awesome.)
    - reitzensteinm 16y ago
      MMF (by the same people) exports to Flash, so it's a reality already.
  - ladon86 16y ago
    Me too. I loved it so much that when I was 14 I helped organise the first "Click convention" and held it in my local village. We got the developers over from France, and they still hold it in the UK every year, not far from my house.
windsurfer 16y ago
For an engine that's supposed to support mobile, it's sad how I can't submit the "interested" form on my N900. Also odd that I need flash when it's plugin-free.
- aakour 16y ago
  Thanks for letting us know. Will fix the N900 situation ASAP. Flash is for the embedded Youtube video, but I do appreciate the irony as well... -Jiri, Rocket Pack
  - woodall 16y ago
    If the user's browser agent is known to support HTML5 use <video>, else use <flash>.
    - moeffju 16y ago
      Use <video> with an <embed> / <object> fallback inside.
cmelbye 16y ago
Ah, a feature chart... The source to Unity3D is available, and it also has a very comprehensive iPhone deployment option. Apps made with Unity3D are still being approved. Unity also released version 2.1 a few months ago that added a ton of features for MMO games: http://unity3d.com/unity/whats-new/unity-2.1.html http://unity3d.com/unity/whats-new/unity-2.1.html
- nailer 16y ago
  Unity 3d is plugin based. It uses Silverlight or Moonlight or it's own plugin if they're installed and working. This doesn't have that dependency. OTOH, I suspect Unity3D's performance is much better, as most browsers don't have GPU accelerated graphics yet.
  - cmelbye 16y ago
    I'm not saying that Unity3D is necessarily better, I'm just saying that their feature chart is fairly inaccurate.
- Tommigun 16y ago
  Hi there. I'm Tommi from Rocket Pack and I thought I'd chime in here with a reply. Yes, games made with Unity are currently still accepted into the App Store but fact is that Unity does stand in violation with the TOS, and the plug COULD be pulled at any moment. If you, as an app developer/company, are ok with that risk then go right ahead! We clearly state that the status is uncertain, not that games are not currently accepted. About the MMO features in Unity - we are talking about server side things in the chart (should probably clarify that). Right now Unity only offers RPC calls between clients via P2P without a centralised server, which means you'd need to develop a backend for running an MMO. You would also not be able to run the same code on the server (and possibly not even the same language). So needless to say that a LOT of extra work would be needed in order to even start an MMO project with in Unity. Also the requirement of a plugin (if the game is a browser title) would severely hamper potential user base. I'd say that the comparison is definitely fair as we offer both RPCs, parameter reflection and have an entire backend solution that is specifically designed to run the server side of your game with minimal effort. It also offers analytics, social identity handling, leaderboards and a lot of other services out of the box. Don't get me wrong, I love Unity but its areas of utilization are kinda different from Rocket Engine's. We excel at browser games, MMOs and handheld web apps, whereas Unity is much more geared towards traditional 3d gaming. Nevertheless, thanks for the feedback, and I'm glad to see such an active discussion here! :) -Tommi Kiviniemi, Rocket Pack
jasonkester 16y ago
It's not a product. It's a landing page. Could we stop voting stuff like this onto the front page? I'm sure it'll be cool when they actually build it, but right now it's just an hour's worth of brainstorming and 20 minutes of somebody's time in photoshop. There's absolutely nothing to see, so it's not of any value to us now. I know that everybody considers this as a Minimum Viable Product, and that you're supposed to launch something like this for every idea you have. That's cool. And I know you're supposed to get as much exposure to it as you can. But please please please, don't spam up HackerNews with stuff like this. I want to think we're better than that. Can we make a policy of only submitting things that exist?
- catshirt 16y ago
  there is a 3 minute demo of the product on the front page. perhaps they put it up after your reply. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPVhPGOLe7c http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPVhPGOLe7c
  - jasonkester 16y ago
    Right. There's also screenshots, bulleted lists, and a feature chart. There's no product though. There's nothing to download, nothing to sign up for, no way to actually get the thing and try it out. Hopefully one day they'll get the product to the point where we can try it out and have a meaningful discussion about it. Until then, there's no reason for it to be here.
    - nailer 16y ago
      Er, the reason it's here is we can see the demo, discuss it, talk about competitors, decide if we think it's any good, etc. Please, just stop posting. It's rude to the guys who made this. They're not liars, they're just showing off a WIP.
    - dmoney 16y ago
      nothing to sign up for Not sure if they added this since you posted, but there is a form to give them your name and e-mail which, presumably, will result in them sending you a link to download the trial.
Keyframe 16y ago
I'd be happy to see a good canvas JS gamedev middleware. Only one I kind of like, that I've seen, is Akihabara. Do you guys know more libraries worth looking at?
JimmyH 16y ago
I wonder how they're going to handle sound effects and background music without any plugins?
swanson3 16y ago
It seems the Aves Engine is more powerful at this point. At least the Video of the dextrose guys shows a lot more stuff going on and it runs much smoother on ipad from the video. Anyways, both seem to be commercial only products.
aakour 16y ago
FYI, we updated http://rocketpack.fi/engine/ http://rocketpack.fi/engine/ to use YouTube's HTML5 embed code, which will hopefully make it easier for everyone to see the introduction video.

70 points by pufuwozu 16y ago

I wonder how will this runs once you have a half dozen independent objects running around the screen. The extra layer provided by the browser (especially on mobile devices) must cause an enormous hit. From the movie, things look like they have serious lag. I'm hoping this works, could be a great teaching tool.

bd 16y ago
This technology is actually pretty fast. Drawing images is so fundamental for browsers that it tends to be heavily optimized. If your hardware runs well Google Maps, it will run well this engine (and also the other very similar one - Aves from Dextrose). Rendering wise, it's the same technology. Most of heavy lifting is done by compiled code of the browser, JavaScript just sets few parameters (as opposed to canvas, where you "micromanage" rendering in relatively slow scripting language). One screenful of map is about 80-100 images, though performance wise there is still quite a lot of breathing room. I did some stress tests and my notebook can easily handle many hundreds individual image sprites (done as absolutely positioned DOM elements). Now physics, this may be slow to do in JavaScript. But with a type of games that work well with image sprites (basically anything where building blocks are large), this will probably not make too big problems as you will not have that many interacting objects (at once together at screen) and also interaction will be optimizable. The "killer app" will probably be tile based strategies or role-playing games (see current top Facebook apps), so physics / pathfinding / AI would only need to deal with discrete grids, not some costly pixel precise collision detection.
- teamonkey 16y ago
  JS physics library: http://box2d-js.sourceforge.net/index2.html http://box2d-js.sourceforge.net/index2.html

ciupicri 16y ago

Plugin-free, yet it looks like I need Flash to see the whole page. Also, I don't see any demo/game.

jeza 16y ago
Seems they embed a youtube video.

viraptor 16y ago

This actually reminds me of the old Klik&Play software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klik http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klik). I wonder if it's easy enough to use to create a community of its own.

Jim_Neath 16y ago
I used to love Games Factory and Klik&Play
- dododo 16y ago
  the games factory is still underdevelopment, and you can download a demo of the current version: http://www.clickteam.com/eng/tgf2.php http://www.clickteam.com/eng/tgf2.php (i'm also a fan. an web games factory would be awesome.)
  - reitzensteinm 16y ago
    MMF (by the same people) exports to Flash, so it's a reality already.
- ladon86 16y ago
  Me too. I loved it so much that when I was 14 I helped organise the first "Click convention" and held it in my local village. We got the developers over from France, and they still hold it in the UK every year, not far from my house.

windsurfer 16y ago

For an engine that's supposed to support mobile, it's sad how I can't submit the "interested" form on my N900. Also odd that I need flash when it's plugin-free.

aakour 16y ago
Thanks for letting us know. Will fix the N900 situation ASAP. Flash is for the embedded Youtube video, but I do appreciate the irony as well... -Jiri, Rocket Pack
- woodall 16y ago
  If the user's browser agent is known to support HTML5 use <video>, else use <flash>.
  - moeffju 16y ago
    Use <video> with an <embed> / <object> fallback inside.

cmelbye 16y ago

Ah, a feature chart... The source to Unity3D is available, and it also has a very comprehensive iPhone deployment option. Apps made with Unity3D are still being approved. Unity also released version 2.1 a few months ago that added a ton of features for MMO games: http://unity3d.com/unity/whats-new/unity-2.1.html http://unity3d.com/unity/whats-new/unity-2.1.html

nailer 16y ago
Unity 3d is plugin based. It uses Silverlight or Moonlight or it's own plugin if they're installed and working. This doesn't have that dependency. OTOH, I suspect Unity3D's performance is much better, as most browsers don't have GPU accelerated graphics yet.
- cmelbye 16y ago
  I'm not saying that Unity3D is necessarily better, I'm just saying that their feature chart is fairly inaccurate.
Tommigun 16y ago
Hi there. I'm Tommi from Rocket Pack and I thought I'd chime in here with a reply. Yes, games made with Unity are currently still accepted into the App Store but fact is that Unity does stand in violation with the TOS, and the plug COULD be pulled at any moment. If you, as an app developer/company, are ok with that risk then go right ahead! We clearly state that the status is uncertain, not that games are not currently accepted. About the MMO features in Unity - we are talking about server side things in the chart (should probably clarify that). Right now Unity only offers RPC calls between clients via P2P without a centralised server, which means you'd need to develop a backend for running an MMO. You would also not be able to run the same code on the server (and possibly not even the same language). So needless to say that a LOT of extra work would be needed in order to even start an MMO project with in Unity. Also the requirement of a plugin (if the game is a browser title) would severely hamper potential user base. I'd say that the comparison is definitely fair as we offer both RPCs, parameter reflection and have an entire backend solution that is specifically designed to run the server side of your game with minimal effort. It also offers analytics, social identity handling, leaderboards and a lot of other services out of the box. Don't get me wrong, I love Unity but its areas of utilization are kinda different from Rocket Engine's. We excel at browser games, MMOs and handheld web apps, whereas Unity is much more geared towards traditional 3d gaming. Nevertheless, thanks for the feedback, and I'm glad to see such an active discussion here! :) -Tommi Kiviniemi, Rocket Pack

jasonkester 16y ago

It's not a product. It's a landing page. Could we stop voting stuff like this onto the front page? I'm sure it'll be cool when they actually build it, but right now it's just an hour's worth of brainstorming and 20 minutes of somebody's time in photoshop. There's absolutely nothing to see, so it's not of any value to us now. I know that everybody considers this as a Minimum Viable Product, and that you're supposed to launch something like this for every idea you have. That's cool. And I know you're supposed to get as much exposure to it as you can. But please please please, don't spam up HackerNews with stuff like this. I want to think we're better than that. Can we make a policy of only submitting things that exist?

catshirt 16y ago
there is a 3 minute demo of the product on the front page. perhaps they put it up after your reply. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPVhPGOLe7c http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPVhPGOLe7c
- jasonkester 16y ago
  Right. There's also screenshots, bulleted lists, and a feature chart. There's no product though. There's nothing to download, nothing to sign up for, no way to actually get the thing and try it out. Hopefully one day they'll get the product to the point where we can try it out and have a meaningful discussion about it. Until then, there's no reason for it to be here.
  - nailer 16y ago
    Er, the reason it's here is we can see the demo, discuss it, talk about competitors, decide if we think it's any good, etc. Please, just stop posting. It's rude to the guys who made this. They're not liars, they're just showing off a WIP.
  - dmoney 16y ago
    nothing to sign up for Not sure if they added this since you posted, but there is a form to give them your name and e-mail which, presumably, will result in them sending you a link to download the trial.

Keyframe 16y ago

I'd be happy to see a good canvas JS gamedev middleware. Only one I kind of like, that I've seen, is Akihabara. Do you guys know more libraries worth looking at?

JimmyH 16y ago

I wonder how they're going to handle sound effects and background music without any plugins?

swanson3 16y ago

It seems the Aves Engine is more powerful at this point. At least the Video of the dextrose guys shows a lot more stuff going on and it runs much smoother on ipad from the video. Anyways, both seem to be commercial only products.

aakour 16y ago

FYI, we updated http://rocketpack.fi/engine/ http://rocketpack.fi/engine/ to use YouTube's HTML5 embed code, which will hopefully make it easier for everyone to see the introduction video.