5 ms·

in addition, I'm pretty sure the novelty is that while yes, this could be done in a standalone .exe, the barrier of entry for anyone already surfing the web (i.

in addition, I'm pretty sure the novelty is that while yes, this could be done in a standalone .exe, the barrier of entry for anyone already surfing the web (i.e. everyone) is ridiculously low.

smanek 18y ago
I would argue that getting someone to install a new browser plugin and restarting their browser (in my experience, people are very reluctant to restart their browser) is just as difficult as getting them to download a .exe.
- scott_s 18y ago
  I disagree. Browsers have their own package management. I click on the link for the plugin, say yes to a bunch of dialogs, the browser restarts, and now I have to play. With a standalone program, more decisions are involved. I have to decide where it installs, and how I want to access that installation.
  - zandorg 18y ago
    I recently packaged up a piece of software for distribution, and I would never have a ZIP file to unpack. It HAS to be a standalone setup.exe which installs to Program Files/program so nobody has to make a decision. Access is with an icon in the system menu. And there's an uninstall. It's made with NIS Edit, which is a great program.
    - scott_s 18y ago
      There's a default decision, but there's still a decision for me to make: do I override the default? Same with your system icon. With a browser plugin, there's no option to override, so there's no decision to make.
      - patio11 18y ago
        I sell a downloadable program over the Internet, and so am fairly familiar with the notion of writing installers. (Note that this is a B2C program for highly non-technical users.) Here's life: a) Users will click past any screen you put in an installer, even if it comes with pre-checked options for reformatting their C:\ drive and shooting their dog. b) Every additional screen in the installer costs successful installs, and hence conversions (if you're using free trials). Accordingly, I don't ask users where to install to. I ask the system where program files is and it goes in the default directory there. Period. I don't ask them what to name the shortcuts in the start menu -- its named after the product. Period. I don't ask whether to drop an icon on the desktop, I do it. If they want to delete it they can hit a delete key as easily as unchecking a box, but it saves 100% of users another screen to process. etc, etc
- maximilian 18y ago
  But in this case they are doing it to play a kickass game for free. People download game demos all the time to play a game. People go to great lengths to play games for free.
  - ido 18y ago
    Some people. Id is having a go at these people, plus all the others who can't be bothered to jump through any loop beyond clicking a link and ok-ing the browser plug-in installation.
- cubedice 18y ago
  oh, that is a valid point. I was more referring to post-install--e.g., once you install, you will be more likely to play an in-browser game than a standalone game, since you are (most likely) already surfing the web. And if games the caliber of Quake Live can be put into a browser, I say the future is here!
- pxlpshr 18y ago
  I agree with you for anyone that doesn't have an established name. However, from twitter: @quakelive We currently have 8,500 players online and over 290,000 registered accounts. (in a few short days)

in addition, I'm pretty sure the novelty is that while yes, this could be done in a standalone .exe, the barrier of entry for anyone already surfing the web (i.e. everyone) is ridiculously low.

smanek 18y ago

I would argue that getting someone to install a new browser plugin and restarting their browser (in my experience, people are very reluctant to restart their browser) is just as difficult as getting them to download a .exe.

scott_s 18y ago
I disagree. Browsers have their own package management. I click on the link for the plugin, say yes to a bunch of dialogs, the browser restarts, and now I have to play. With a standalone program, more decisions are involved. I have to decide where it installs, and how I want to access that installation.
- zandorg 18y ago
  I recently packaged up a piece of software for distribution, and I would never have a ZIP file to unpack. It HAS to be a standalone setup.exe which installs to Program Files/program so nobody has to make a decision. Access is with an icon in the system menu. And there's an uninstall. It's made with NIS Edit, which is a great program.
  - scott_s 18y ago
    There's a default decision, but there's still a decision for me to make: do I override the default? Same with your system icon. With a browser plugin, there's no option to override, so there's no decision to make.
    - patio11 18y ago
      I sell a downloadable program over the Internet, and so am fairly familiar with the notion of writing installers. (Note that this is a B2C program for highly non-technical users.) Here's life: a) Users will click past any screen you put in an installer, even if it comes with pre-checked options for reformatting their C:\ drive and shooting their dog. b) Every additional screen in the installer costs successful installs, and hence conversions (if you're using free trials). Accordingly, I don't ask users where to install to. I ask the system where program files is and it goes in the default directory there. Period. I don't ask them what to name the shortcuts in the start menu -- its named after the product. Period. I don't ask whether to drop an icon on the desktop, I do it. If they want to delete it they can hit a delete key as easily as unchecking a box, but it saves 100% of users another screen to process. etc, etc
maximilian 18y ago
But in this case they are doing it to play a kickass game for free. People download game demos all the time to play a game. People go to great lengths to play games for free.
- ido 18y ago
  Some people. Id is having a go at these people, plus all the others who can't be bothered to jump through any loop beyond clicking a link and ok-ing the browser plug-in installation.
cubedice 18y ago
oh, that is a valid point. I was more referring to post-install--e.g., once you install, you will be more likely to play an in-browser game than a standalone game, since you are (most likely) already surfing the web. And if games the caliber of Quake Live can be put into a browser, I say the future is here!
pxlpshr 18y ago
I agree with you for anyone that doesn't have an established name. However, from twitter: @quakelive We currently have 8,500 players online and over 290,000 registered accounts. (in a few short days)