6 ms·

Unity is not a free standard with multiple implementations. Unity doesn't support a plurality of programming languages, while it's the goal of the garbage colle

Unity is not a free standard with multiple implementations. Unity doesn't support a plurality of programming languages, while it's the goal of the garbage collected WASM. Unity is higher level in the stack, and could be executed on top of WASM and WebGPU. The work of making GCd WASM (which could interface with browser APIs without an overhead) and WebGPU fast is ongoing.

pjmlp 5y ago
There are plenty of other middleware options, Unity is not the only game in town. What all of them have, is being able to take advantage of 2022 hardware in 2022, with 2022 3D APIs.
- nullifidian 5y ago
  Not all games need "to take advantage of 2022 hardware in 2022, with 2022 3D API". A good plenty would look fine with a middling level of graphical fidelity or "latestness" of employed GPU features. Using the web platform you also free yourself of gatekeeping, cut taking middlemen. So there is a niche for both WASM and WebGPU.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Sure, I also like to revisit my Playstation and Amiga 500 games.
    - nullifidian 5y ago
      So in your world there are only games employing the latest features, and "retro" games from the 80s and the 90ies, and nothing else? Ok. As far as I know WebGPU doesn't lack any significant features beside raytracing (They are prioritizing the MVP, and raytracing could come later). Some of the newest features like mesh shaders are not yet supported by the native engines either, because there isn't a sufficient hardware base. Intel for example will support mesh shaders only in the yet to be released Alechemist GPU.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        What can I say, that is the quality of most WebGL games anyway. 10 years later there still isn't something at the same level of Infinity Blade.
        nchi3 5y ago
        I think one big difference with WebGL and WebGPU is that WebGL was never really a target that you'd use for native applications. I've never heard of WebGL running outside of a browser (you'd use OpenGL ES for that), whereas I think native WebGPU has the potential to end up being the OpenGL replacement people have been asking for for years. It definitely won't kill Unity or Unreal, but I have hopes that it will make developing without a ready-made engine a bit more attractive at least!
        pjmlp 5y ago
        I don't see any benefit in using a castrated 3D API outside the browser. Want Vulkan/DX12/Metal without boilerplate? Just use Ogre or Godot, among endless other options. Even Qt is better than what WebGPU is capable of.
        nchi3 5y ago
        >I don't see any benefit in using a castrated 3D API outside the browser. Castrated how? A single digit performance loss compared to the most extremely complex graphics APIs which aren't properly cross-platform? >Want Vulkan/DX12/Metal without boilerplate? >Just use Ogre or Godot, among endless other options. "I want a graphics API!" - "Use this game engine or this old and outdated graphics library instead" >Even Qt is better than what WebGPU is capable of. Ah, is it? Do you have any example of implementing forward+ rendering in pure Qt? No? What about GPU compute? Not that either?
        pjmlp 5y ago
        Castrated by the security constraints of being a MVP 1.0 API to fit into the security sandbox of a Web browser. By its nature cannot be more than that what browser do. In case you missed the train, Qt now makes direct use of Metal, Vulkan, and DirectX 12. I guess you were too busy keeping up with WGSL changes to notice that.
    - coldtea 5y ago
      There's a multi-billion market for hyper casual games, and double so if we include slightly less casual games. And since you need to be Epic or a multi-million funded team with big scale to do an AAA game, but everybody could do a casual (and even more a hyper casual game), I'd say the latter is smarter than sneering on simpler games... You might not care for those, but billions do. Heck, Wordle could make 10 times the money an average FAANG made in their whole career if it chose so...
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        Sure, and everyone on that market moved to mobile, because it actually provides the proper tooling.

pjmlp 5y ago

There are plenty of other middleware options, Unity is not the only game in town. What all of them have, is being able to take advantage of 2022 hardware in 2022, with 2022 3D APIs.

nullifidian 5y ago
Not all games need "to take advantage of 2022 hardware in 2022, with 2022 3D API". A good plenty would look fine with a middling level of graphical fidelity or "latestness" of employed GPU features. Using the web platform you also free yourself of gatekeeping, cut taking middlemen. So there is a niche for both WASM and WebGPU.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Sure, I also like to revisit my Playstation and Amiga 500 games.
  - nullifidian 5y ago
    So in your world there are only games employing the latest features, and "retro" games from the 80s and the 90ies, and nothing else? Ok. As far as I know WebGPU doesn't lack any significant features beside raytracing (They are prioritizing the MVP, and raytracing could come later). Some of the newest features like mesh shaders are not yet supported by the native engines either, because there isn't a sufficient hardware base. Intel for example will support mesh shaders only in the yet to be released Alechemist GPU.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      What can I say, that is the quality of most WebGL games anyway. 10 years later there still isn't something at the same level of Infinity Blade.
      - nchi3 5y ago
        I think one big difference with WebGL and WebGPU is that WebGL was never really a target that you'd use for native applications. I've never heard of WebGL running outside of a browser (you'd use OpenGL ES for that), whereas I think native WebGPU has the potential to end up being the OpenGL replacement people have been asking for for years. It definitely won't kill Unity or Unreal, but I have hopes that it will make developing without a ready-made engine a bit more attractive at least!
        pjmlp 5y ago
        I don't see any benefit in using a castrated 3D API outside the browser. Want Vulkan/DX12/Metal without boilerplate? Just use Ogre or Godot, among endless other options. Even Qt is better than what WebGPU is capable of.
        nchi3 5y ago
        >I don't see any benefit in using a castrated 3D API outside the browser. Castrated how? A single digit performance loss compared to the most extremely complex graphics APIs which aren't properly cross-platform? >Want Vulkan/DX12/Metal without boilerplate? >Just use Ogre or Godot, among endless other options. "I want a graphics API!" - "Use this game engine or this old and outdated graphics library instead" >Even Qt is better than what WebGPU is capable of. Ah, is it? Do you have any example of implementing forward+ rendering in pure Qt? No? What about GPU compute? Not that either?
        pjmlp 5y ago
        Castrated by the security constraints of being a MVP 1.0 API to fit into the security sandbox of a Web browser. By its nature cannot be more than that what browser do. In case you missed the train, Qt now makes direct use of Metal, Vulkan, and DirectX 12. I guess you were too busy keeping up with WGSL changes to notice that.
  - coldtea 5y ago
    There's a multi-billion market for hyper casual games, and double so if we include slightly less casual games. And since you need to be Epic or a multi-million funded team with big scale to do an AAA game, but everybody could do a casual (and even more a hyper casual game), I'd say the latter is smarter than sneering on simpler games... You might not care for those, but billions do. Heck, Wordle could make 10 times the money an average FAANG made in their whole career if it chose so...
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Sure, and everyone on that market moved to mobile, because it actually provides the proper tooling.