Slashdot Mirror
Team Fortress 2 Running In a Web Browser Using WebGL
An anonymous reader writes "Unreal Engine now runs in Flash and Crytek is considering porting CryEngine to Flash, but perhaps the Source Engine could go a different route. A software developer who works for Motorola Mobility has managed to get the engine and a level from Team Fortress 2 running in a browser using WebGL. There are still a few features and effects missing, but he claims it achieves a solid 60fps and has a video to prove it. Hopefully this gives Valve ideas; it'd be cool if older Source games became playable in your favorite browser, or even directly in Steam."
That's the one thing major thing missing from HTML5 + WebGL - Audio control. Add sample level audio control and we're golden.
Loading...
I'm also pretty sure that the guy just got a TF2 level to render and didn't port Valve's Source engine to JS. So its also missing the entire Source engine.
Should add that I think its cool he did this, but the summary is misleading (redundant, I know).
Why would I want to play in a web browser instead of natively?
CryEngine on Flash!? I think we have a new benchmark, everyone!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
In flash, really ? Flash is so much ressource hungry, no? Hope you Web gamers have gamer machines...
Pix of hats or it didn't happen.
Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
What are you talking about? Are you suggesting generating and inserting HTML audio elements into the document to support the playback of a subset of samples? That's craziness. Why don't I just build the Sears Tower out of toothpicks for the next 1,000 years.
I would love to see an HTML 5 (or any JavaScript driven code for that matter) that could submit samples to audio playback that didn't lag or skip and didn't require a plugin.
I think HTML 5 is great, but missing that one thing to be a true 'killer platform.' Good audio control/synchronization (hell, I don't have to have sample level submission, but then let me know where in the playback it is...) would be amazing.
Loading...
Steam includes an integrated webkit browser overlay that lets you check sites without exiting your game. I assume that it meant you could use this browser to play the game.
Yeah, I still "LOL" at the frothing at the mouth of every WebGL demo that comes out because there is no quality audio in HTML5/4/whatever.
I have known about the Audio nodes API for almost two years (before it was published as the "Web Audio API.") I was hoping something like that would be part of HTML5, it isn't.
Who cares if it works in Chrome? It needs to work in Firefox, Chrome, and IE.
Loading...
I'd upvote you informative if I could.
I was going to comment that it doesn't appear to be running 60 FPS, but he claims it does when it is running alone (presumably without the video recording software).
I've done some stuff with WebGL and there is some great potential here. As was mentioned above, sound is one issue that needs some serious attention in the browser environment. The other is input.
The guy didn't port the TF2 engine to WebGL since he doesn't have the source code. What he did is make a map loader that can partially load a TF2 level and display it with WebGL, but you can't actually play in it.
Mada mada dane.
As the developer of the demo in question, can I request a change in the article title? I did NOT port the Source Engine to a browser, not even close. I've simply loaded some of the visual resources and demonstrated that they can be displayed at game-appropriate speeds. It's a long way to go from here to "Team Fortress In a Browser".
That's great, but FYI valve could vanish tomorrow, and there games would still be playable. I hate to inject facts into your hate..no I don't.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ah, the famous quantum claim. "It was working fine before everyone else started looking at it!" Usually preceded by a "Hey guys, check this out!"
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Only those already installed and completely updated. If you bought a game (even a physical version) which needs Steam to install, it'll tell you to fuck off if it can't connect to the server.
Backed up the game to a DVD due to lack of disk space and want to play it again? Ops. Bought a new rig and want to play your existing games there? Nope.
Dilbert RSS feed
That's great, but FYI valve could vanish tomorrow, and there games would still be playable.
Even after I get a new computer and can't contact their activation servers?
Advice: on VPS providers
the video looked more like it was going around 19fps, not 60.
Yeah, when I read that, my first thought was that I'm caught in a time warp and got sent back to April 1.
The Cry engines are already pretty much the most resource-intensive things out there, though they do look great. But I can't imagine how or why anyone with a functioning brain cell would want to "port" such an engine to something so woefully underpowered and feature-limited as Flash.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
So really what this guy did was take a level from Team Fortress 2 and render the basic geometry + some lightmapping.
I'm not really sure what the big deal is. Based on what the title and summary suggested, I expected a hell of a lot more than a map loader. He did not get TF2 running in a browser, not anything from the Source Engine. All he did was load and render a TF2 map. If this sort of thing wasn't possible in WebGL to begin with there would be no point in WebGL at all, so the fact that he's gotten this much to work isn't surprising. It's not as if TF2 is really pushing the envelope in terms of graphical prowess. Its popularity doesn't have so much to do with graphics as it does with gameplay.
You're right - I haven't had to deal with slow connections since I left home 10 years ago.
What are you doing with the "constant change of machines"? Why don't you copy the cache between machines on a USB drive if you're having problems with slow connections? I think there's even built-in functionality to backup and restore caches from what I remember from like 5 years ago. *checks google* Yes, you can definitely do that. So any complaints about your network speed causing issues are just you being too fuckwitted to buy or borrow a flash drive and transfer your game cache, or even transfer via a switch or WiFi if you have both machines in the same building.
I've actually been exclusively doing console gaming for the last 3 years or so. I haven't given any money to Valve outside of buying the Orange Box and Portal 2 for PS3. But it's not because I don't like Steam - it was just because I didn't want to use Windows any more, and there were too many issues with using the games I liked via WINE.
which is totally what she said
Nobody said you shouldn't use Steam, just that it depends on Valve's activation servers to work properly, and it does.
As for cracks, one could say the same about having to type product keys. And they don't exist for every game.
Besides, paying for games that depend on illegal stuff to work properly is just giving the wrong feedback to companies and hurting ourselves. I rather go without playing it than supporting such behavior.
I doubt Steam is going down without plenty of warning any more than Amazon would just disappear overnight.
Well, I guess it depends on the people. Considering I still play 10+ year old games regularly, the fact that they won't disappear "overnight" is rather irrelevant.
Dilbert RSS feed
Agreed, though progress is being made. Both Mozilla and Google have submitted proposals to the W3C, and already have some support in their browsers. Firefox uses the Audio Data API, and Chrome the Web Audio API. Obviously it'll be a while before one gets standardized (given the W3's track record, could be a very long time) and support becomes universal across browsers, but it's a start.
Replying to myself; I see below you're already aware of these. From two years ago. And it's still at the proposal stage.
It begs the question, what exactly is it the W3C does all day? Do they just spend all their time surfing the internet? And if so, wouldn't they want to approve this stuff faster so they'll have more ways to goof off?
Please don't let them put anything else "in Flash". It isn't necessary (WebGL). It isn't secure (ever). It isn't needed (full stop).
It's been hard enough to play video streams "through" flash on Linux, don't push the next gaming craze down the same toilet.
Moore's law is not a law. Theory, yes; Predictable trend, certainly; Law, no.
Well, the only cracks I used to download were NoCD cracks. Steam meant that I no longer had to do that, so it was a bonus for me. I was just pointing out that if it did go down for good, tools would be made available - whether officially or unofficially - for playing your games offline*. I certainly don't think that the illegal route is positive in any way, and I also generally abhor the concept and basically the necessity** for DRM. But I wish that more companies would introduce Steam like DRM which actually provides many benefits, rather than DRM that only has all the negative sides.
* assuming you had them cached of course - otherwise it's to the torrent trackers with you!
** "keeping honest people honest" type of thing. Maybe just "keeping stupid people honest". It's bizarre the number of people on YouTube who think that saying "I do not own this, I do not intend Copyright infringement" don't realise that it's still copyright infringement whether you say it is or not (though of course intent matters to an extent).
which is totally what she said
If the Amiga can do it in 7mhz and in 1985-2000, then get with it dudes , get some elite old school coders to do it . And hurry up slow ass.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
"Haters gonna hate".
Have you heard about SoylentNews?
That really didn't look like 60 fps to me. I don't know if it was just the way it was recorded, or the guy's mouse but that didn't really look like it was achieved 'a solid 60 fps'.
Well, screen grabbing software is processing and IO intensive, I can easily see a screen grabbing app bottleneck the (already highly utilized) CPU resulting in a 50-80% preformance loss. Don't forget that in order for webGL to offload data to the GPU, browser javascript has to do a lot of computation. So yes that claim is much more plausible than saying the same thing for a (flash) binary.
-- no sig today
The W3C has a lot of fronts to manage every time they progress some proposal. I have been following a handful of discussions (mostly on sockets and applications) and the amount of data and discussions that are monitored and moved around is very big. The W3C moves slow because the web can't break. So every new functionality or modified behavior has to be very well thought out.
BTW: I don't know if it was the version (aurora 9), or that i was on fedora, but the last time I visited the mozilla sound experiments nothing worked.
-- no sig today
Oh, sure, I realize it's a very complex task they have, I was speaking mostly in jest. I know I'm not alone in my frustration of their slower-than-molasses processes, but while I sometimes think they move too slow, I know they're still far more qualified for the job than I am. As you say, you can't break the old stuff with updates, and the new stuff you want to make sure you get right the first time.
As for Mozilla, I tried out some of their sound demos earlier today. They technically worked, but on my reasonably fast system I got slowdown, scratching, and lag. Meanwhile, the Chrome demos worked perfectly, even with a WebGL visualizer running on the page and 20 other tabs open. If this is the best Mozilla has to offer, I tend the think the Web Audio API is going to win this battle. That is, when the W3C eventually accepts it to the point other browsers begin implementing it, which if we're lucky will happen before HTML6 becomes the next big thing.
You misunderstand the process and many do.
Here is a rundown of what it looks like:
Step 1: someone has an idea
Step 2: a possible API is discussed on the w3c mailinglist
Step 3: an API is drafted
Step 4: 1 or 2 browsermakers implement it in their browser, do use a 'vendor' prefix
Step 5: people look at how well it works, discuss it on the w3c mailinglist.
Step 6: Webpage authors are encouraged to try it out (and use it in production) with the vendor prefix.
Step 7: proposals for a standard are made
Step 8: I think people vote on it
Step 9: standards are approved and it is a standard. An actually "industry standard" too. Because pretty much everyone agrees on the standard.
Step 10: browser vendors change their browsers and people can use it without the browser-prefix
I'm sure sometimes step 2 and/or step 3 are skipped.
You can see a video of a coneference which explains it in detail:
http://vimeo.com/16326857 from 20:36 till 32:00
Summary: browsers implement what they want and when everyone agrees about the API it .
While the process looks kind of weird from the outside. But the idea is that what becomes the standard should be stable, so it can be set in stone and works like everyone wants.
New things are always on the horizon
It's been something like 7 years now, and you still don't know that Steam can play games offline?
which is totally what she said
Of course, I know there's a lot of work involved; like I said to justforgetme above, I was (mostly) joking about how long it seems to take. I realize it takes a lot of time to get everything right, and you need to do it right the first time or else everyone will support your broken version until the earth crashes into the sun. I'm just impatient and want my WebAudio NOW, dammit! :-)
If you really, really do want it.
You can help write the draft, it costs nothing to join the w3c mailinglists.
New things are always on the horizon
Already exists, and already supported by Webkit. Firefox has a similar, but proprietary, interface.