Slashdot Mirror


The Death of an HTML5 Game Breeds an Open Source Project

colinneagle writes "German social gaming company Wooga has thrown in the towel on its HTML5 project after seeing little return on the increasing amount of effort put into its Magic Land Island game. Some early success convinced Wooga to devote additional resources to the game, which was launched in October of last year. However, 'As the project continued to progress, so did the industry. Whilst the benefits of an open platform future are clear for games developers, it became clear halfway through Magic Land Island's development cycle that the technology wasn't yet ready for mainstream exposure.' The announcement sheds some interesting light on HTML5, as Wooga hardly holds back on any of the details behind the game's failure. The biggest barriers to HTML5's entry to the mainstream include internet connectivity and limitations on sound. The consensus? The time for HTML5 will come; it's just not quite there yet. In the meantime, Wooga has made the game open source so other HTML5 developers can learn from it."

147 comments

  1. I'd settle for by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nethack 3D! 8^)

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:I'd settle for by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    2. Re:I'd settle for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diablo 3 is a realtime, always-online real money-spoiled Nethack 3D for dummies. It even has a hardcore mode, if you want death to be permanent.

    3. Re:I'd settle for by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Diablo 3 is nothign more than Diablo 2.

      Fuck that, nethack had a bit more fun to it.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    4. Re:I'd settle for by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Diablo 3 is nothign more than Diablo 2.

      If that were actually true, ActiBlizz would be drawing a lot less nerdrage over the game.

    5. Re:I'd settle for by Calydor · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, he's absolutely right.

      D3 is nothing more than D2. It is, however, a lot less.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    6. Re:I'd settle for by AssholeMcGee+ · · Score: 1

      You cannot continue to make the same game/genre, or copy a genre of a game and hope for success.. It is like watching a horror movie if you have seen one, you might as well forget about watching the others!! The plots, editing, sound effects become rhetorical.. You need to come up with something completely original to get anywhere, those games usually begin with a cult following, but sooner or later they become mainstream. You could take a game from back in the early 90's that a majority would not play, but after 2-3 series, it catches more and more steam...But you have to change it up every time you release a new series, in doing so you lose the faithful cult following, they do not like the changes or feel it was designed to be mainstreamed... Then you have companies that beat one game into the ground, they have the money to commercialize the game, but the game play itself sucks, or they cheap skated on graphics and wanted dumb story play. This is something that start-ups will be seeing very soon, I am all for those that want or demand a certain game and are willing to donate money to see it happen, but these start-ups will use the same model as the commercial game companies..

  2. But Flash is dead, right? by crazyjj · · Score: 4, Funny

    Didn't they get Steve Jobs' memo?

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Didn't they get Steve Jobs' memo?

      Despite it supposedly being dead, it continues to claw at us from the grave "Install Update Now?"

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lesson is you don't make games in HTML or Flash. You do it the correct way in C++.

    3. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by archont · · Score: 1, Troll

      Flash is dead, yes. It didn't run on all devices like HTML does and frankly for a web standard that is unacceptable. Good riddance.

      Fortunately now we've replaced Flash with the Apple AppStore and it's apps. Using apps ensures literally 100% compatibility with the target device and a much smoother experience than Flash could ever provide.

    4. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by adisakp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The lesson is you don't make games in HTML or Flash. You do it the correct way in C++.

      You can't run C++ from a browser using any sort of standards... and Flash is pretty much installed on enough machines to be considered a standard (heck it's even built-in to Chrome).

    5. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      ... and no portability to other operating systems or non-Apple devices.

      Yay?

    6. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Search for "Google Native Client".

    7. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by gaspyy · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hate to break it to you but many apps in the AppStore, including award-winning ones are built in Flash and packaged as apps.

      The whole crusade against flash is just the new generation rebelling the old one, not completely unlike the nosql movement.

    8. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can't run C++ from a browser

      That's the point. You shouldn't be making game and programs meant to run in a web browser.

    9. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Don't waste your breath on him. He will say he trolled you. but the truth is he knows crap when he types...this one here proves it...again. Flash is a good alternative but Stackless Python is another alternative too. It's not that user friendly if you compare it with flash but you get lots more control and power over it. A good example of Stackless Python is Eve-Online.

    10. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      wha ? wow ? Where should I begin with this ? Ok, first flash is a multimedia platform. The AppStore is a distribution platform. Both are very different. The appStore is composed of thousands of software that sometimes uses flash. Flash is a good technology that is still used today by lots of people. Some websites are dedicated to the use of flash like newgrounds. I don't know if this is a troll but I admit, you almost got me. Also, flash is here to stick around for some time and no it's not dead.

    11. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to break it to you but many apps in the AppStore, including award-winning ones are built in Flash and packaged as apps.

      And the ones that don't suck aren't.

    12. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, this isn't about Flash VS HTML5, it's about HTML5 on a phone compared to native apps. They said the biggest problem was load time and network connectivity, which is something that would affect Flash just as much as HTML5 (if not more).

      This isn't about HTML5 in the browser, it's about HTML5 as mobile app platform.

    13. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Yes but if you have ever done production game coding in flash you would understand it is nothing more than a shitty kludge hack.

      --


      Got Code?
    14. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      That's way better than having the same thing happen with Steve himself. It might be the only way they can get some people to install Lion though.

    15. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Not that I am defending html5 because I am not it is a even bigger kludge hack with far less performance.

      --


      Got Code?
    16. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by crazyjj · · Score: 1

      Adobe has to be the most annoying updater in the software world. I think I see that update screen for Flash and Reader more than I do my login screen.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    17. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      And lets get back to being forced to use one OS for everything. Like in the good old 1990's
      The Key Reason for Microsoft Dominance is the fact that there is so much software that only runs Microsoft OS's
      When software makers make software they will choose the OS that most people use... So it makes that OS even more Dominate...

      Now HTML, Flash, Java, Javascript. Allowed for Code to run independent of the OS or even the browser (as they are getting more standard compliment every day) so we are actually more free to use what ever OS we feel like. Mac, Linux, Windows, Solaris, FreeBSD. You can use these OS's now without feeling limited on your interaction with the rest of the world in terms of software.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    18. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That isn't necessarily true. It is still in development but you can see it in action

    19. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      Adobe has to be the most annoying updater in the software world. I think I see that update screen for Flash and Reader more than I do my login screen.

      If only it didn't need an update every day...

    20. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Guess you've never played The Binding of Isaac.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    21. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the anti-OSS/anti-Linux movement.

    22. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Creepy · · Score: 2

      Not to mention Acrobat only checks for and updates after a reboot and often asks you to reboot again.

    23. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Hatta · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The whole crusade against flash is just the new generation rebelling the old one

      Sorry, but I've been waging a crusade against flash since the 90s. It has never been a good solution for anything.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    24. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by drkstr1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hate to break it to you but many apps in the AppStore, including award-winning ones are built in Flash and packaged as apps.

      And the ones that don't suck aren't.

      We have a Flex AIR app that compiles to iOS and Android (plus all the other usual suspects). It runs better than _any_ of our competitor's, especially the ones based on HTML5. Oh, and the HTML5 based apps look like crap, in addition to running like it.

      Now I realize that coding in pure native has the potential to be faster, but in practice, your developer is the limiting reagent. We greatly benefit from the cross platform capabilities and rapid development (scale-9 slicing + solid vector graphic framework+ countless other things I have been spoiled with over the years), and all without any noticeable degradation in performance.

      I hope more people are as closed minded as you, because that means more money for me.

      --
      Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
    25. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by tepples · · Score: 2

      [Adobe Flash] has never been a good solution for anything.

      In that case, I'd like your honest opinion: What solution for efficiently delivering vector animation to the viewer is better than SWF? Rendering to a cosine transform format like MPEG-4 AVC or WebM VP8 is less space-efficient than SWF by an order of magnitude. And what solution for authoring vector animation is better than Flash CS?

    26. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Flash is alive only in the same sense that a chicken which has had its head cut off is alive.

      Mike lived for 18 months after his beheading. How does that figure into your analogy?

      Adobe management decided it would be better to throw in the towel and shift resources to writing HTML5 authoring tools.

      Let me know when it becomes possible to make Homestar Runner or Weebl and Bob with those tools. Or to make an application that uses a device's camera or microphone because unlike Flash's media capture API, HTML5's has gone largely unimplemented. Without media capture, how would one make video chat or a barcode scanner app?

    27. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by drkstr1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Did you not read what I said? Our app runs better than all of our compition, even the ones written in Objective C! If I needed it to squeeze out every bit of performance, I would absolutely use Objective C. But if my app runs great already, why would I tie myself to that ONE platform? I suspect you are one to make decisions on ideology, rather than choosing the right tool for the job, so again, more money for me.

      --
      Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
    28. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by drkstr1 · · Score: 1

      Shhhh. You're going to upset the FOSSIES with all that reason and logic.

      --
      Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
    29. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Toonol · · Score: 2

      Flash is pretty kludgy, if you're using the drag-and-drop features, but if you drop all that and program in Actionscript, it's not bad at all. Actionscript is like a faster javascript with a lot more sensible features (typing, classes, package management) and a huge graphics api. FAR better than programming graphics in HTML5/Javascript with canvas. Of course, it's not an open standard.

    30. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Toonol · · Score: 2

      No, Flash isn't dead. It's dying. And by 'dying', it is dropping from vastly dominate to simply dominate. It is doomed, eventually, but right now it's only lost it's dominance in certain niches. It's only real competitor is HTML5/javascript, and right now that combination has nowhere near the power or performance of Flash.

      Flash has all sorts of sucky attributes, but don't kid yourself into thinking it's dead. It's dying like chubby fifty-year-old; it's going to happen, but it might be a long time.

    31. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by LoztInSpace · · Score: 1

      Why would you rate something based on what it is built with? A more honest and sensible approach would be to rate it based on how well it meets your needs. If it's of no actual interest to you, you are not qualified to rate it.
      I realise you a probably a troll, but sometimes the folks here need the odd reminder: Successful products are the ones that serve a need and are fit for purpose. The personal preference of a software developer with an unusally stong belief is neither anything that the end user is quite likely to be aware of, nor is it something they will care about.

    32. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by LoztInSpace · · Score: 1

      Seems to work ok for me. I can watch videos, play simple games and other stuff at the click of a button. What's the issue?

    33. Re:But Flash is dead, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've tried building apps with adobe air. The performance was terrible.

  3. Standard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is HTML5 even a standard yet? I don't know why people are getting so caught up in it.

    1. Re:Standard? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      No, it's still in development. The reason why people are getting caught in it is because html5 is or will be able to run (I would say better) on low powered mobile device and has more syntax available and more neat stuff you can play with. Lets face it, html4 is hungry on mobile devices.

  4. Yep. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 2

    The time for HTML5 will come; it's just not quite there yet.

    I've been saying this for awhile now. HTML5 is neat, but it's still not anything more than that right now.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
    1. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It needs to be made more solid than it is just now. That is a definite given.

      JS needs to optimize some things that are commonly used in games. (random, especially, is so damn slow in my tests. I got rid of a constant random for 1000 objects for every frame, 7FPS increase.
      In no hardware acceleration, drawing with the canvas methods is far slower than loading images in to the canvas when you move them around. (things with outlines are especially slower)
      Speed those up and it can run a decent game easily.

      It can already run Quake 2 with WebGL, but 2D context is just far too slow for anything.
      And WebGL is still fairly early as well.
      Web Workers also need to be improved on. The passing of data to them is just obtuse at times.
      I can pass an object literal straight to it, but when I done the same through the new object method, nope. That stupid 25 error about duplication of data or some nonsense.

      So far with 1000 objects on a canvas all animating with various scalings of the same image object, I can get... around 45-50~ FPS.
      With canvas drawings instead of images, that drops to 23~.
      This is just pure animation falling from top to a random position in the Y and resetting itself.
      There is basically no other things running.
      I could likely throw the maths in to a web worker and get a little extra speed. I already separated all the processing from the graphics.
      I shall continue to see what other things can be done to save on resources.
      I already moved the background images to a separate canvas.
      I am thinking of removing it from canvas entirely and using the native browser image displaying to make a background.
      Then just scroll absolutely positioned images to see how that works.
      I think that should work better than the canvas. We shall see.

    2. Re:Yep. by geekd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have written one HTML5 game http://magigames.org/runestone_defense.html and I am working on another.

      HTML5 runs fine on a PC, but is too slow on my iPhone 4s and my iPad.

      I chose HTML5 because I wanted to brush up on my Javascript. If I wanted to make $, I'd have chosen Flash.

      Making sure everything works in various browsers / OS is not too bad. I test in IE9, Chrome and Firefox on Windows 7, Chrome, Firefox and Safari on Mac, and Chrome Firefox on Linux. It can be time consuming to try them all, but once I nailed down the differences (mouse events in IE, most notably) it wasn't too bad.

    3. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I predict that 2013 will be the year of the Linux desktop and HTML5.

    4. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please, I've been hearing that first prediction every year for as long as I can remember.
      I won't hold my breath.

    5. Re:Yep. by madth3 · · Score: 1

      That is a nice game sir. Just saved the link to it to, err, analyze it better over the weekend.

      Seriously, I once created a simple logic puzzle in Java and seeing what you did makes me want to port it to HTML5 to make it easier to be shared. And performance is not really an issue in that kind of game.

      Kudos!

    6. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is great for my iPad. I converted my videos on my computer over to x264 and in a format that my iPad will play and I have a nice little html5 code to play it. So I can access my collection wherever I can pull down 1mb/s (obviously 3G is too slow, but WiFi works great).

      Games on the other hand, I don't really care for right now.

    7. Re:Yep. by Creepy · · Score: 1

      The 2D context (canvas) is probably rendered in software, so it makes sense that it is slow - I'd use WebGL 2D for games. WebGL at least uses an established, if old API - OpenGL for Embedded Systems - it was 2.0 last I checked and if that still aligns with OpenGL 2.0 I'd hate to start developing on it because I'd dread the move to 3.0 (porting from OpenGL 2 to OpenGL 3 was a MAJOR pain because the GLSL language changed drastically - if you don't use GLSL, porting is a non-issue). For random numbers you could use a hardware accelerated noise function like this one: https://github.com/ashima/webgl-noise/wiki and then just access the texture procedurally. That may cause issues if the game is online though (hackers would read the memory and edit it on the fly if you copy it out of texture memory into main memory, which you may need to do for speed).

    8. Re:Yep. by mcl630 · · Score: 1

      Very nice game.

    9. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OpenGL 2->3 is similar to GLES 1->2, so GLES already dealt with that pain.

      Hardware-accelerated canvas2d has been in some browsers (on some platforms) for a while now. Limitations of the API are what make it easy for WebGL to outperform canvas2d for the purposes of most 2d games.

    10. Re:Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... The time is ALMOST here...

      There are some pretty cool games out there on HTML5..... Check out this recreation of Command and Conquer in HTML5 http://www.adityaravishankar.com/projects/games/command-and-conquer/

    11. Re:Yep. by geekd · · Score: 2

      Thanks.

      I found it easier than I expected to write. The jawsJS game lib does most of the heavy lifting as far as sprites, animation, etc: http://jawsjs.com/ it's LGPL. All my code for that game (Runestone Defense) is BSD licensed.

    12. Re:Yep. by geekd · · Score: 1

      Oh please, I've been hearing that first prediction every year for as long as I can remember.

      I think that's the point of his joke. :)

    13. Re:Yep. by militiaMan · · Score: 0

      I have some HTML5 games too: http://allbinarygames2.appspot.com/ Mine are plenty fast in the browser.

    14. Re:Yep. by xhrit · · Score: 1

      I made a browser game almost ~10 years ago when web 2.0 was still a fresh buzzword. Often times when I show it to people today they will ask if it is written in HTML5. Nope. It is old school AJAX dom manipulation.

      I have not seen anything in HTML 5 that couldn't be done using old school AJAX dom manipulation. All html5 is, is a standard to move forward on. Give it another 5 years, and it might be there.

    15. Re:Yep. by nzhavok · · Score: 1

      That's pretty cool, thanks for sharing!

      --

      He who defends everything, defends nothing. -- Fredrick The Great
  5. Some platforms can't run C++ by tepples · · Score: 0
    Anonymous Coward wrote:

    The lesson is you don't make games in HTML or Flash. You do it the correct way in C++.

    So in what language should one make a game for a platform that can't run C++, such as Windows Phone 7 or Xbox Live Indie Games on Xbox 360?

    1. Re:Some platforms can't run C++ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One should not make Indie Games for XBLA. Braid already did the 'angsty platformer' genre better.

    2. Re:Some platforms can't run C++ by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      WP8 has native code. WP7... just pretend it's never there. It's not like it's got numbers large enough to be bothered about it.

      For Xbox, I suspect there will be something to enable native code for indie developers later on to align it with Win8 and WP8 (both of which have converged on C++ and DirectX as the preferred framework for games).

    3. Re:Some platforms can't run C++ by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      Can't run C++?! What is this, 1983? If nobody ports compilers for the newest, hippest languages to your box anymore, maybe it's time to trade in your ZX81 for a shiny new PC AT running MS-DOS 3.1.

      I'm not familiar with two weird brands you mention (what are those, PET ST Archimedes Model 80 variants?) but I'm sure you'll find that C++ runs on all modern computers these days.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  6. Facebook? by slyrat · · Score: 2

    So there is the Facebook icon but it isn't mentioned in the summary at all. Is it a game that was targeting Facebook?

  7. Please, no sound by Hatta · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sound in web pages has been an abomination since the moment it was introduced. I never want to have to go searching through dozens of tabs looking for the one website that thinks its so important that it needs to blare audio at me. Anything that plays audio without the explicit consent of the user is incredibly impolite.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Please, no sound by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a game, not a webpage. It's perfectly reasonable and expected for it to play sound at you at random times.

      What is really needed is a clean separation into apps and pages. Google is pushing for that in Chrome, but other browsers haven't really picked it up yet.

    2. Re:Please, no sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A page whose sole picture is a guy holding his butt open for the camera is also incredibly impolite, but the correct course of action wouldn't be to remove the ability to render it by the browser.

    3. Re:Please, no sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFA explicitly points out that this is one of the problems with HTML 5 for gaming. Games -need- to be able to play sound.

    4. Re:Please, no sound by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      html5 is no good for games? not surprised, it hasn't matured at all yet. and everyone who wasn't a flash developer was so quick to abandon it, right as it gained popularity for use as middleware in pc/console games.

      http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/03/gameon.html

      to my knowledge there are no games being made with html5 that even approach the scope of these pc/console games using flash. and html5 is more inconsistent across platforms than javascript, almost as much as css. i thought we valued write-once-deploy-everywhere? html5 is a nice attempt, it's a nice thing to get started. but everyone jumped the flash ship wayyyy too quickly. only those who never worked in flash are scratching their heads at these html5 inadequacies. steve jobs was full of shit about flash. every point he made was either a misdirection, a warped fact, or outright lie.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    5. Re:Please, no sound by Hatta · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a great reason not to use HTML for games. Use HyperText Mark Up language to mark up hypertext. Use PyGame or something else if you want a cross platform game interpreter. Both your browsing experience and your gaming experience will be improved if you keep them seperate.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Please, no sound by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Games already exist for the browser. Have a go at it.

    7. Re:Please, no sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No because they all suck.

    8. Re:Please, no sound by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 1

      The problem here is really more about "autoplay" than "sound" (and I agree completely - autoplay is an abomination unto the Browser. Now if we could get Google to quit forcing the HTML5 "beta" videos to autoplay we might be getting somewhere...)

    9. Re:Please, no sound by badatnicknames · · Score: 0

      There should be a way to pause tabs till you actually switch to them?

    10. Re:Please, no sound by drkstr1 · · Score: 2

      It's a game, not a webpage. It's perfectly reasonable and expected for it to play sound at you at random times.

      What is really needed is a clean separation into apps and pages. Google is pushing for that in Chrome, but other browsers haven't really picked it up yet.

      (emphasis mine)

      That is an excellent point. What a lot of people seem to forget when jumping to the defense of HTML5 is, there's now more to the web than structured documents.

      As a consumer, I am annoyed by the many poor design decisions in Flash, and appreciate a push to open (and enforceably less annoying) web standards. As someone who has to answer to my enterprise customers, HTML 5 is sorely lacking. It was simply not designed for this purpose.

      I really love the idea of the Pepper API, and I hope it takes off as a standard.

      --
      Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
    11. Re:Please, no sound by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Aahhhhh. The bgsound meta tag, with something like Hawaii.mid set to loop -1.. zombocom!

      Nothing beats the friendly 90's rotating skull smiling at you

    12. Re:Please, no sound by xhrit · · Score: 1

      As a professional flash developer for the last 10 years, I can attest to the fact that Flash has some serious design Flaws. I'll spare you the specifics, but it was enough to make me want to develop my own open source 'flash-like' environment so that I would not be constrained by other people's mistakes...

    13. Re:Please, no sound by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      i've been working in flash for 12 years myself, 9 professionally. i know exactly what you're talking about. frameworks make debugging and introspection a lot easier though. i prefer flex, but there are lots of other ways to produce flash. a competitor product called Swish that no one seems to have heard about, and then there's OpenLaszlo of pandora radio fame. even php can create .swf files with the Ming extension (but that's really crude). despite its sometimes erratic behavior, i'd rather have the nice IDEs and deal with a buggy compiler than use the alternatives. i've gotten to know the compiler a bit, and i know what kinds of baby food it likes and what kinds it will spit up on me.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  8. Compile, make packages, offer download by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can't run C++ from a browser using any sort of standards

    You can if you code to SDL (the de facto standard for 2D games' I/O), compile it for Windows, Mac, X11/Linux, and Android, and then offer binary packages (msi, dmg, deb/tgz, apk) through standard HTTPS. The only browsers you won't hit with this method are Safari for iOS, IE for Windows Phone 7, IE for Windows RT, and browsers for game consoles.

    1. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      That's not "running from the browser", though. As in, not zero install, which is the whole point of the exercise.

    2. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why the hell is zero install so bleeping important? What's wrong with the iOS and Android games I buy today? Yes I read the articles. If I were a game developer I'd rather target my efforts at the -savvy- users who aren't so freakin' whiny that they can't install an app. And I don't consider the 30% fee all that bad considering what the developers get in return.

    3. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by crazyjj · · Score: 1

      And why the hell is zero install so bleeping important?

      Because it's what people expect now that they're used to Flash and Facebook games.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    4. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can if you code to SDL (the de facto standard for 2D games' I/O), compile it for Windows, Mac, X11/Linux, and Android, and then offer binary packages (msi, dmg, deb/tgz, apk) through standard HTTPS. The only browsers you won't hit with this method are Safari for iOS, IE for Windows Phone 7, IE for Windows RT, and browsers for game consoles.

      No. The browsers you won't hit with this method are those run by casual users (ie the majority of paying customers for web games).

    5. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Because of several common tragedies:
      1. Lock down computers
      2. People don't know how a file system or file structure work, aka it gets dumped where it can't be found
      3. Download IS really a hassle
      So basically if I can go to a webpage and just play, it will be a lot better.

    6. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's what people expect now that they're used to Flash and Facebook games.

      And our job as knowledgeable developers is to teach people that it's not a good idea.

    7. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Don't forget: playing from multiple computers!

    8. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by tepples · · Score: 1

      How exactly would a downloadable .msi or .exe installer fail to reach casual Windows users? If that were the case, home users would still be running IE even more than they are now, and IE tends to lag with respect to HTML5 anyway.

    9. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by drkstr1 · · Score: 1

      Don't ever go into business.

      --
      Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
    10. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4. Javascript running in a browser is as secure as you can get, probably one of the most thoroughly watched part of a desktop computer these days. A native executable on the other hand...

    11. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by kripkenstein · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can compile C++ to JS and run it on the web, using Emscripten. It supports SDL.

      Here is an example 2D game ported that way: http://www.syntensity.com/static/mams/mams.html

    12. Re:Compile, make packages, offer download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck fb games, who plays that, talk about Angry Birds. That requires an "install time" and is not considered "Zero Install". People won't mind spending a few minutes to install a good game.

  9. Media capture API by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    Flash is dead, yes. It didn't run on all devices like HTML does

    Flash's media capture API runs on a lot more devices than HTML5's. So do Flash vector animations, without having to bloat them by a factor of ten by rendering them to cosine-transform-based video.

    Using apps ensures literally 100% compatibility with the target device

    And 100% more headaches with the device manufacturer's screening process, as the article points out.

  10. Google Native Client is Chrome-only by tepples · · Score: 2

    I don't see Microsoft, Mozilla, or anyone other than Chromium rebranders implementing support for the Pepper API used by Google Native Client applets any time soon: "Mozilla is not interested in or working on Pepper at this time."

    1. Re:Google Native Client is Chrome-only by binarylarry · · Score: 0

      But Chrome took over the top browser spot from IE.

      So who gives a fuck what a bunch of wannabes think?

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  11. No autoplay on YouTube? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Anything that plays audio without the explicit consent of the user is incredibly impolite.

    So are you claiming that video description pages on sites such as YouTube must not autoplay their videos?

    1. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Metabolife · · Score: 3, Informative

      When you go to youtube, you're asking for video. When you search the web for information on bananas, you're not asking for "I'm a banana" repeating in the background as you read up on the cultivation and export of the fruit.

    2. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An exception can be made for sites that are only video, but yes, I would prefer that even Youtube videos did not start playing when I open them in the background. Media on a web page should be user-requested, rather than being there to annoy.

    3. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything that plays audio without the explicit consent of the user is incredibly impolite.

      So are you claiming that video description pages on sites such as YouTube must not autoplay their videos?

      Yes, I think that would be an improvement.

    4. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 0

      I think he wants to watch porn without video cause his mommy is in the next room. He probably wants to masturbate alone without getting caught lol

    5. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So are you claiming that video description pages on sites such as YouTube must not autoplay their videos?

      If you leave a YouTube tab open and start doing things in another tab, your browser may decide to refresh the page for some reason (session reload due to a system restart, restart for a plugin update, etc. etc.) so the video starts playing again with sound. Now that's annoying!

    6. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Hatta · · Score: 2

      Good god yes! Just because I click through to a video doesn't mean I want to watch it immediately. I often middle click through half a dozen links to open them in new tabs, and then watch them one after another.

      This is why I keep youtube blocked in noscript, to enforce click to play.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So are you claiming that video description pages on sites such as YouTube must not autoplay their videos?

      No, but they shouldn't autoplay. One thing I hate is when someone vaguely links to youtube but doesn't say what they're linking to. That's the writer's error (bad anchors are bad anchors, no matter how you slice it), but it snowballs from there.

      Since youtube videos always start playing, and since that is usually an annoying thing that as a user I don't want to have to endure, I simply don't follow the links. Usually. So nothing gets successfully communicated.

      If the browser were smarter about ignoring youtube's autoplay preference, then I'd follow the link and then at least read the description and look at the still-photo.

      But the browser can't be smarter about ignoring youtube's preference, because it's a plugin. (Though realistically, a youtube-specific fix would actually be possible, probably even with Greasemonkey.) And Adobe is user-hostile so they're never going to make an 'always ignore autoplay' plugin option. They're the ones who created an autplay option in the first place. So the problem never gets fixed.

      With HTML5 this crap can be fixed in the browser, and eventually I'll start following youtube links again.

    8. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by eddy+the+lip · · Score: 1

      I would prefer that. My second favourite use of flashblock is to keep videos from playing until I'm ready for them.

      --

      This is the voice of World Control. I bring you Peace.

    9. Re:No autoplay on YouTube? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      you're not asking for "I'm a banana" repeating in the background

      But an important question is, if I was searching for such, how would I do so?

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  12. Magic Land, a native Facebook app by tepples · · Score: 1

    From the article: "Pocket Island originally started life as Magic Land, a native Facebook app".

  13. Hyping my free software projects by Dennis+Sheil · · Score: 2

    I'm hyping my own projects here, but over the past weeks I've been porting free software games over to Android. Specifically, games that use the Simple DirectMedia Layer (SDL) library. Most of the games are written in C++, and the OpenGL (OpenGL ES in the case of Android) functionality is handled via the SDL library. I have had a good response so far for some of the games.

    I have the games as different branches from my tree on Github. My tree is a fork of Sergii "Pelya" Pylypenko's port of SDL 1.2 to Android. One branch is a (partial) port of the popular educational game Tux Math. Another branch is of the game Circus Linux, which I felt did not translate well to Android (at least as I did it) so I never published it to Google Play. I should be putting a few more branches up on Github soon - ports of Ri-li, Hex-a-hop, Ice Breaker and so forth. The Ri-li source will probably be the next one that I will put up.

  14. Props to Wooga by neros1x · · Score: 1

    Making it open source is a pretty awesome move. They could have just sat on it for a while, or let the work go to waste.

    --
    The penguin made me do it.
    1. Re:Props to Wooga by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Making it open source is a pretty awesome move. They could have just sat on it for a while, or let the work go to waste.

      One of the dirty secrets of open source giveaways is that often there are really good reasons why it was given away, like the quick fixes and workarounds for core problems have finally piled up so high that most changes for the remaining bugs brings the rest of the code down faster than a house of cards.

      It doesn't always have to be this way, but Mozilla was this way (prior to the from scratch rendering engine rewrite that took years), as have a few games (Jagged Alilance comes to mind). Eventually a few projects do work their way out of the quagmire, but many die while in process.

      On the other hand, some games are released in very good shape, so there is some hope. (I'm thinking of the Quake releases).

  15. Cross Platform Compatibility by erik+umenhofer · · Score: 1

    This is one the key features I think game developers were looking for when HTML5 came out. It promised the holy grail of "write once, run everywhere". It would allow you to write a game for a browser and have it work on iPhone, Android and WP7. The issue is still that every browser and hardware device act different. A touch on one device is a tap on another. Multitouch works here but not there. Some browsers don't support audio, some don't support WebGL acceleration. This also changes all the time.

    Deploying the apps is another issue as well. Once you have written a great game that looks wondering in chrome, you have to wrap it somehow to get it on devices. All of the options for wrapping right now are beta at best. There is still hacking that has to be done most of the time.

    On that note, it is getting better every day, eventually you will be able to push your code to nearly every OS. But that day is not today.

    1. Re:Cross Platform Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      eventually you will be able to push your code to nearly every OS

      Nope. For-profit corporations competing for everything will insure that that day never comes. If you are not convinced, consider that corporations will even deliberately break their own backward compatibility for strategic reasons. Development efforts that understand and roll with that have an easier time than those that chase the ideal that will never be.

    2. Re:Cross Platform Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On that note, it is getting better every day, eventually you will be able to push your code to nearly every OS.

      So we will be doomed to use crappy, jack of all trades master of none, programs and games because developers are too lazy do things the correct way and write your code native to each platform.

    3. Re:Cross Platform Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Write Once, Debug Everywhere.

    4. Re:Cross Platform Compatibility by LoztInSpace · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. You are doomed to use programs that are cost effective to develop. You want to use it on a specific platform? Either fund that development or show evidence that there's a market there. Nobody owes it to you to develop stuff you want.

  16. Re:HTML5 illuminati HDTV rush to project blue beam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello Mr. Davis. This is Jesus! I command you to add virtual memory and openGL support to LoseThos.

  17. once i got it to run.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it crashes or hangs constantly. had to reload like 10 times just to get up to unlocking the first area.

    holy suck balls. no wonder no one plays this... err, i mean no wonder it's only a fb/ipad game.....

  18. We're Sorry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all just "We're sorry! You need to download a plugin to view this content!" to me, which always translates to hitting the Back button. I laugh when I see the "We're Sorry!" message in a box where an ad would appear though.

    HTTP is for HTML. Not Java, not Fadoop, not Punch The Monkey, not Tree Loot, nor any of that other nonsense.

    1. Re:We're Sorry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now get off my lawn!

  19. Sound clips pages by phorm · · Score: 1

    Obviously it can (and has been) mis-used, but I've seen various good uses for sound on webpages.
    For example, on a monitoring system, it might be good to have it play an audible alert along with a visible one when a system has failed or is experiencing issues.

    On a site with sound or music files, playing samples without needing an external plugin/player is useful. A lot of sites use embedded flash plugins for this which don't necessarily would on portable devices.

    For sites which are more interactive (e.g. an ajax'ish UI with progress bars, etc), an audible warning on completion could also be useful.Again, it is doable on current systems but generally requires a plugin/player.

    With all the above, it would be equally nice to have an option to TURN IT OFF, of course. If sound is integrated into the browser, then an easy way to do this would be to have a whitelist of sites allowed to play sound (perhaps it asks the first time a site tries) and/or a global enable/disable checkbox.

    1. Re:Sound clips pages by Hatta · · Score: 0

      On a site with sound or music files, playing samples without needing an external plugin/player is useful.

      Why doesn't the OS provide an audio player? What's wrong with using it?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Sound clips pages by phorm · · Score: 1

      Fine if you want to listen to a whole item, there's no reason you can't download+play it. For clips or segments, etc, that would be a huge PITA.

  20. is the git repository down? by youn · · Score: 1

    I tried git ' clone git@github.com:wooga/Pocket-Island.git ' and it said permission denied

    --
    Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
    1. Re:is the git repository down? by MtHuurne · · Score: 1

      Works fine for me (without the quotes).

  21. They can, but only for hand-picked devs by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    Technically C++ runs on those devices, but the ability to execute native code is cryptographically locked down so that only a few developers selected by Microsoft can code in C++. Everyone else has to use C# or another statically typed, verifiably type-safe CLR language. DLR languages such as IronPython require Emit, which is not present in the .NET Compact Framework, and P/Invoke raises a security exception.

  22. Videos unavailable in HTML5 by tepples · · Score: 1

    With HTML5 this crap can be fixed in the browser

    But with HTML5 the publisher can't as easily enforce the display of advertisements or the non-retention of more than a minute of buffered video. That's one reason why a lot of videos are unavailable on mobile.

  23. Did you even look? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the Mozilla marketplace opening soon for desktop web apps and App Tabs visibly separate in Firefox for over a year, it appears you haven't really picked up any info on other browsers yet.

    1. Re:Did you even look? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Yes, I admit that my knowledge of Firefox capabilities in that regard was not up to date. Thanks for correcting that.

      However, do they actually apply different permissions and such when you pin a site as an app tab? Or is it just a visual marker and a change with respect to how links are handled?

  24. How to monetize your crappy HTML5 game? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ironically...easy app store monetization may be another factor holding HTML5 gaming back. So you want yur game in a browser? How you gonna get paid?

    1. Re:How to monetize your crappy HTML5 game? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Ironically...easy app store monetization may be another factor holding HTML5 gaming back. So you want yur game in a browser? How you gonna get paid?

      Monthly, please... Like in "No fee this month and your game won't be able to pull some needed scripts from my site".

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:How to monetize your crappy HTML5 game? by cboslin · · Score: 1

      Monthly, please... Like in "No fee this month and your game won't be able to pull some needed scripts from my site".

      Full Disclosure, I would have never purchased your product/service in the first place for this reason alone. Better give me some other payment option other than monthly or forget it.

      The first time your company used a forced auto-upgrade or auto-update process to attach my bank account (via credit card) or require a phone number (with no way to opt out) to your bottom line (whether by phone number, credit card, paypal, etc..) I would churn from your product forever..so fast your head would spin. Loved PaintShop Pro, however their attempt to force me to use Windows Vista back in the day, resulted in me churning from them forever...and I loved their product.

      And they were not trying to get access to my bank account, credit card or phone number.

      P.S. I used a friend's Windows Vista installed laptop, installed the new version of PaintShop Pro (that I purchased) to a USB Micro SD card. Yes they tried to stop me, Sys Admin skills came in handy. It ran just fine on Windows 2000 after that from the micro SD thumb drive, what a joke. Granted I am sure there are some specific features of the product that would go out and re-check for the latest/greatest version of Windows software, but I did not use those features. However the writing was on the wall, time to churn to Gimp and never look back. After learning Gimp's menus there is nothing I can't do that I needed to do with PaintShop Pro, c'est la vie. Basically the same learning curve that comes with each new version of the Windows operating system...

      LMAO, a monthly fee, no thank you unless its very, and I mean extremely engaging...come to think of it, can not think of anything that is that engaging....

      True freedom comes from minimizing re-occurring payments of any kind. If your ONLY method of monetizing is to force your customer into a monthly fee and deny them access if that fee does not come, you have already failed. You just don't know it yet.

      I buy it, I own it, I do with it what I want.

      There is a much more customer friendly and intelligent method of earning your customers hard earned money (in addition to building your brand) than forcing them to pay you again, and again and again and again.... usually without offering them anything of value.

      1) You simply offer your game for sale. One payment, they own the game. They can play it as much as they want. If its good they will buy more of your products.

      2) Than you offer modules (add-ons that enhance the gaming experience) for an additional price.

      Finally, If you build a decent MMORPG and can entice your customers to join and pay a monthly fee...in addition to the cost of the game Then you have the holy grail and supposedly are giving your customers something they are willing to get locked into a monthly fee to get. Of course fail to innovate and engage your customers each month and risk losing them, as it should be.

      As to us cord cutters, if you want to entice us back, offer a quarterly or yearly fee. Do not require a phone number or updated credit card

      Skype attempts to do this, for the first time in 6 years this year ~ 2012 ~ though when you ignore them not providing the required credit card information, the money will come out of your Skype account as you intended, though they will tell you that your service will be canceled without giving them the credit card. Guess writing is on the wall here as well, anyone know of a Linux VoIP solution that will allow phone calls to/from North American telephone and cell phones? Still its a FEAR porn a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt" alt="Fear, uncertainty and doubt">FUD tactic in a vain attempt at securing your personal information, in this case a current credit card number (never mind that

  25. Not surprised, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Im not surprised, HTML5 or even c++ would not have made the game any better, the graphics are nice but its just a poor game, with a lack of animation, does not fit in the players window so you have to scroll the play area and not enough game play.

    Even the game idea is nothing new, so as i said i am not surprised the players left.

     

  26. HTML5 Games: http://allbinarygames2.appspot.com by militiaMan · · Score: 0

    I have some HTML5 games too: http://allbinarygames2.appspot.com/ Mine are plenty fast in the browser.

  27. Chrome has plurality but devs want supermajority by tepples · · Score: 2

    But Chrome took over the top browser spot from IE.

    That's a plurality, not yet a majority.

    So who gives a fuck what a bunch of wannabes think?

    Any web developer that wants to reach a three-fourths supermajority of PC users, for one. At this point, Google Native Client runs on as many distinct browser engines as ActiveX. Or how do you expect to get people to install Chrome just to run one web application?

  28. Give the app its own user account by tepples · · Score: 2

    Theoretically a native executable can be just as secure as a JavaScript engine: run it in its own user account. The trouble is that home PC operating systems provide no one-click way to make a dedicated user account for a single application.

  29. Open Screen Project by tepples · · Score: 1

    Of course, [Flash and ActionScript are] not an open standard.

    I thought that changed years ago when Adobe relicensed the SWF specification as part of the Open Screen Project. Why haven't free reimplementations of Flash Player popped up since then?

  30. our HTML5 game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everybody knows Adobe Flash is on the way out and it sucks. Yet people are right to note that HTML5 support for sound and the latest versions of WebSocket are not there yet on all browsers. However, it is still the future.

    At Jagged Software, we are building a fun multi-player web game with JavaScript/HTML5, CSS, PHP and WebSocket. This is kind of a demonstration and proof of concept that you don't need Flash at all (though we're still using it for sound until that situation improves). Come try it out at http://jaggedsoft.net

  31. THE DIET SOLUTION by madelyndanford · · Score: 1

    THE DIET SOLUTION Stop Dieting...Start Eating...and Start Living 3 Principles 1. Know the exact foods that cause accelerated fat burning in your body 2. Know the particular foods that are preventing fat burning 3. Put the right foods together in a certain way to create the FAT BURNING EFFECT Don’t Worry, this is NOT * Another crash diet * Another crazy diet scam * Another sales pitch for weight loss pills * Another starvation diet BUT this is REAL information you can use RIGHT NOW!! http://ow.ly/bJN9o