Comments on: 3d in Flash is getting better

By: Raph's Website » Where 3d browser stuff stands

Raph's Website » Where 3d browser stuff stands — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 03:50:30 +0000

[...] then there’s Molehill, which basically lets the 3d engines that already exist for Flash (which I have blogged about in the past) get access to hardware acceleration. What is the 3D functionality provided by the [...]

By: Matt Butts

Matt Butts — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:38:45 +0000

Excellent post. *stumbles*

By: Ola Fosheim Grøstad

Ola Fosheim Grøstad — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:31:32 +0000

@Tim: yeah, but then you would need something which has only one (GNU?) implementation to avoid the hell that the browsers are riddled with. I guess that is the advantage of Flash, which also is a disadvantage if they don’t support all platforms. If someone were willing to pay for the development of a capable GPL-only flash-nuker I’d certainly apply for a position… It should be based on OpenGL 3, I think.

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:06:37 +0000

I really hope silverlight doesn’t end up too dominant. Even if the mono team managed a framework of a linux port in 21 days it will still be tied into windows to some extent (ie all future direction), just like .net. I guess I’m rather wary and don’t really know that much about it, but I’d much rather an ‘open’ standard became the defacto standard.

I guess the most effective way to influence this would be to actually make something using open tech.

By: Gene Endrody

Gene Endrody — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:05:14 +0000

“You’ll never get grumpier bunch of developers and every few weeks it’s Shockwave vs. something else.” I mean this in the nicest possible way We get along great but communicate best when arguing on DirGames. Director Game Developers list Google Group

By: Gene Endrody

Gene Endrody — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:45:48 +0000

“Gene, what is the debate in the Shockwave community about specifically?”
You’ll never get grumpier bunch of developers and every few weeks it’s Shockwave vs. something else. There was an expectation that with the recent release of Director 11 would come 3D improvements to include some next-gen rendering features. (i.e. programmable pixel and vertex shaders – stuff like that) Backwards compatibility has slowed development and it looks like Adobe is looking to D12 for those type of features. The backlash has been enormous, with many developers threatening to go else where. That being said, 60% plug-in penetration is hard to argue with so we complain for a while and keep working in Director. We did get a new Aegeia Physics engine to replace the old Havok engine, Direct X9 support, new 2D image filterings and Unicode, however it was primarily intended as a compatibility release for Vista and Intel based Macs. The current 3D engine is traditional, solid, old school T&L with OpenGL and DirectX support and does the job quite adequately for Sherwood and Club Marian. Both games are doing well in areas of lower standard hardware specs like Poland and Brazil even though both games have relatively high poly counts. Next gen rendering hardware requirements can furthur narrow your potential audience beyond just having 3D and cause the game size to balloon. Remember a typical next gen shader can require texture, light map, normal maps, specularity maps etc. and that all has to fit in your instant-in play in a browser experience.

By: len

len — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:12:15 +0000

I wonder if the social/room space as the inner most layer of the map world space is what will pull interoperability in the small across the chasm. Raph is certainly right about distribution. It isn’t necessarily the case that all 3D systems need to ‘interoperate’. Navigationally and search-wise, they just need to act like they do.

Some clarity in the market layers stratifying along the map layers is needed. The communication services cluster along the rooms in the sense that the social relationships are buy drivers.

Interesting. If the market stratifies like that, the emerging whole world space becomes a rich combination of large world culture (eg, the ultra-reality of the mirror spaces) and the local room space that can be fantastic, strange, weird, boring, comfortable, dumb.

Motley like the real world but weirder.

By: Michael Chui

Michael Chui — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:00:12 +0000

it doesn’t mean we should use that as an excuse to ignore or actively dismiss other obviously superior technologies

You convince 60% of current Internet users to agree with you, and you have a deal. Most developers agree with you, babelchips. The problem is the users.

By: babelchips

babelchips — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:32:52 +0000

Gene, what is the debate in the Shockwave community about specifically? I understand I’ve oversimplified in my statment but I am interested in knowing what Shockwave’s perceived shortcomings are.

By: Ola Fosheim Grøstad

Ola Fosheim Grøstad — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:09:19 +0000

Thanks for the edit! Oh, I am not uncritical I’ve just found it easier to work with than X-Windows and Direct-X And I have a peculiar aesthetical taste. I just don’t think most ordinary plastic-textured 3D scenes look good in the artistic sense, so I am not crying for the lack of standard 3D support

I agree that rockin in 3D will be 2-3 releases away if not more, right now 2D is it. Another cool thing is that they’ve said that they will compile Hydra down to CPU instructions too if there is no capable GPU. With multi-core support that could enable granny-access to immersive worlds. And as it takes time to develop a full virtual world waiting another 2-4 years for an optimized renderengine is acceptable and by that time maybe CPUs will have 4-8 cores which most programmers can’t utilize properly anyway. Having a kit like flash doing the multi-core support is an OK strategy (if they actually put effort into it).

What’s neat about Flash is that there is a “complete” and portable package where you seldom have to write anything from scratch (3D being the exception). E.g.: Want a tool for your engine? Use Flex.