The future of the net

[Humodour]

If you own shares in Adobe, sell them now: http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/asteroids/

 

Between Javascript, HTML5, OpenGL 2 support, and 3D acceleration in web browsers, the future looks pretty interactive. And it looks like a future without Flash.

 

Hopefully it's also a future without proprietary video codecs. ****ing H.264.

[Humodour]

IMHO, Native Client (NaCl... mmm salt) is even more interesting than HTML5: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20003527-264.html

[Morgoth]

Guess Steve Jobs was onto something...

[HoonDing]

[Moose]

Although Flash has users outside the internet. In particular the way it integrates well into game engines. The whole Crysis GUI was built using Flash.

[Blarghagh]

Aww, crud. Looks like I'm going to have to learn html.

[Nightshape]

Although Flash has users outside the internet. In particular the way it integrates well into game engines. The whole Crysis GUI was built using Flash.

 

Using Flash for game GUI's is stupid.

[Moose]

You can do the artwork and script the GUI without having to know anything about the underlying game engine, or be a C++ programmer. If you look at modding the Crytek engine it's actually quite intelligent the way they've made development more modular using ActionScript.

 

Seems irrational to simply state Flash is stupid.

[Humodour]

You can do the artwork and script the GUI without having to know anything about the underlying game engine, or be a C++ programmer. If you look at modding the Crytek engine it's actually quite intelligent the way they've made development more modular using ActionScript.

 

Seems irrational to simply state Flash is stupid.

 

Interesting. I guess the same concept could be applied to Python or LUA. Neat idea.

[Nightshape]

You can do the artwork and script the GUI without having to know anything about the underlying game engine, or be a C++ programmer. If you look at modding the Crytek engine it's actually quite intelligent the way they've made development more modular using ActionScript.

 

Seems irrational to simply state Flash is stupid.

 

It's stupid because it has a huge memory footprint, sure it works for Crysis, but it actually became a trend for a while in the industry. So you'd find PS3 and X360 games with flash GUI's.

 

GUI's shouldn't have a footprint of 10meg's+.

 

On PC this isn't so much of an issue.

Edited May 5, 2010 by Nightshape

[Nightshape]

You can do the artwork and script the GUI without having to know anything about the underlying game engine, or be a C++ programmer. If you look at modding the Crytek engine it's actually quite intelligent the way they've made development more modular using ActionScript.

 

Seems irrational to simply state Flash is stupid.

 

Interesting. I guess the same concept could be applied to Python or LUA. Neat idea.

 

Sure but using python or lua won't come with same kind of footprint cost.

[Moose]

The new version of Crysis is going to be released on X-Box 360 and PS3. If you've seen Crysis you'll know it cutting edge (for a computer game).

 

So if it runs fine on PS3 and XBox 360, and indeed on PC, I can't see the foot print being that much of an issue. After all, let's not forget the GUI is actually pretty crucial part of some games and probably deserves some memory.

Edited May 5, 2010 by Moose

[LadyCrimson]

The future of the internet keeps making me run further away from the internet. ;D

 

Kidding...kind of. I sometimes wish, as a user, that I didn't need to keep up with/need so many different 'thingies' in order to just use/view what's available on the net. I prefer simple & standardized and it seems to become more complicated and bloated all the time.

 

I like Flash for 'net video stuff, since that's what so many use. But I have no particular loyalty to it, if something comes along that might work better. We'll see.

[Humodour]

Kidding...kind of. I sometimes wish, as a user, that I didn't need to keep up with/need so many different 'thingies' in order to just use/view what's available on the net. I prefer simple & standardized and it seems to become more complicated and bloated all the time.

 

No. And let me qualify that:

 

HTML5 is the future of the current HTML standard which ALL web browsers are adopting (including IE). In fact web browsing has never been more standardised than it is now - you can pick any browser and not have to worry if you chose the right one, generally.

 

The stuff in this thread (aside from HTML5) won't be stuff end-users need to worry about. Once one of these things becomes dominant and mainstream your browser will do the typical "you are missing a plugin, click here to install" thing assuming it doesn't come integrated into future browser versions.

[Amentep]

But will IE finally implement HTML standards right...?

[Humodour]

That's up to Redmond. I suspect that for the most part they will this time. They can't afford not to.

[LadyCrimson]

HTML5 is the future of the current HTML standard which ALL web browsers are adopting (including IE). In fact web browsing has never been more standardized than it is now - you can pick any browser and not have to worry if you chose the right one, generally.

 

The stuff in this thread (aside from HTML5) won't be stuff end-users need to worry about. Once one of these things becomes dominant and mainstream your browser will do the typical "you are missing a plugin, click here to install" thing assuming it doesn't come integrated into future browser versions.

Meh. People have been writing/saying that about internet/browsers etc. for the past 12+ years. Every new thing is going to revolutionize/standardize blah blah. Truth is, for browsing the average news/blog website, I've been able to use any browser to view them for ages...I've had browser preferences, but for me at least, it had little to do with viewing.

 

On a certain level, the "web browsing has never been more standardized than it is now" repetitive mantra is true & is always true when it's spoken. But it doesn't mean we're closer to actually being standardized. Every new tech, every new use people want to use the net for, changes what the standards have to be, and that changes so fast it'll be a while before it settles down enough to make anything feel solidly standard for an extended length of time.

 

I'm not saying that it should be different...it's a never ending process...I was just saying that sometimes, I wish it was so...or that the periods between changes were much longer, like they used to be. :D

[Nightshape]

The new version of Crysis is going to be released on X-Box 360 and PS3.

 

Can't comment on the X360 and PS3 SKU's for Crysis 2. I don't know what solution they're using.

 

If you've seen Crysis you'll know it cutting edge (for a computer game).

 

I'm not going to debate on that with you. Crysis, was a PC only release, at release it needed a monster PC. Crysis 2 will have console SKU's I'll wager they cut back on certain things as a result, but I'm not going to say that what I've seen of the Crysis 2 engine is in any way cuttingedge, not from my perspective. That doesn't mean they're not doing some nice things with their tech, but I see similar and better things everyday.

 

So if it runs fine on PS3 and XBox 360, and indeed on PC, I can't see the foot print being that much of an issue. After all, let's not forget the GUI is actually pretty crucial part of some games and probably deserves some memory.

 

Does the GUI deserve memory? Yes.

 

Does the GUI system need to run using flash? No.

 

So to clarify when I'm speaking about running a GUI with flash I'm not including images/fonts/textures etc... I'm speaking about the system alone.

 

I don't know what the Crysis guys are doing with the new cryengine in regards to their GUI solution, but that doesn't mean I haven't come across exceedingly expensive GUI systems based on flash, with excessive memory footprints.

 

A good GUI system, for an FPS can run in around 500k to 1meg + some texture budget, which is naturally dependent upon the project itself.

 

Blowing around 10 meg is just stupid.

 

I'm just speaking from experience here, from a PC modding perspective flash seems neat, from a console perspective its a pretty dumb call in my opinion.

[Humodour]

HTML5 is the future of the current HTML standard which ALL web browsers are adopting (including IE). In fact web browsing has never been more standardized than it is now - you can pick any browser and not have to worry if you chose the right one, generally.

 

The stuff in this thread (aside from HTML5) won't be stuff end-users need to worry about. Once one of these things becomes dominant and mainstream your browser will do the typical "you are missing a plugin, click here to install" thing assuming it doesn't come integrated into future browser versions.

Meh. People have been writing/saying that about internet/browsers etc. for the past 12+ years. Every new thing is going to revolutionize/standardize blah blah. Truth is, for browsing the average news/blog website, I've been able to use any browser to view them for ages...I've had browser preferences, but for me at least, it had little to do with viewing.

 

Do you know WHY that is? Because all the browsers STANDARDISED (with minor deviations) on HTML4. And then JavaScript. And then CSS. And then XHTML. OK that might not be chronological order. But people have been saying this stuff for ages because it's true and happens, you just don't notice.

 

These changes aren't revolutionary. They are evolutionary. YouTube couldn't have existed 10 years ago.

 

On a certain level, the "web browsing has never been more standardized than it is now" repetitive mantra is true & is always true when it's spoken. But it doesn't mean we're closer to actually being standardized. Every new tech, every new use people want to use the net for, changes what the standards have to be, and that changes so fast it'll be a while before it settles down enough to make anything feel solidly standard for an extended length of time.

 

I'm not saying that it should be different...it's a never ending process...I was just saying that sometimes, I wish it was so...or that the periods between changes were much longer, like they used to be. :D

 

Fair enough.

[Gorth]

I miss the Lynx days

[LadyCrimson]

Do you know WHY that is?

Er, I was making webpages with HTML 2 and then 3.2, and then 4, so yes, yes I do know.

I don't keep up with the stuff/trends lately (I know enough css to fiddle with style but that's it, and so on.) but yeah....I remember the evolution - I was part of it, in a consumer way

 

P.S. YouTube wouldn't have worked 10 years ago regardless. Imagine watching all those videos on a 14k-58k modem.

PPS And I just remembered how excited new versions of Netscape used to make me. I loved Netscape Gold! Oh memories. heheh

Edited May 6, 2010 by LadyCrimson

[Moose]

A good GUI system, for an FPS can run in around 500k to 1meg + some texture budget, which is naturally dependent upon the project itself.

 

Blowing around 10 meg is just stupid.

 

It includes vector graphics, movies and animation. All the development is independent of the final implementation, in the same way that modelling, sound, motion capture, and texture are. All for a mere 10 meg, when modern PCs run on average 2gigs+ (looking at the latest steam survey).

[Nightshape]

A good GUI system, for an FPS can run in around 500k to 1meg + some texture budget, which is naturally dependent upon the project itself.

 

Blowing around 10 meg is just stupid.

 

It includes vector graphics, movies and animation. All the development is independent of the final implementation, in the same way that modelling, sound, motion capture, and texture are. All for a mere 10 meg, when modern PCs run on average 2gigs+ (looking at the latest steam survey).

 

I'm not talking about PC. From the perspective of the PC this is an utterly irrelevent arguement, PC code is notorious for its sloppy memory management, you have so much memory that it isn't an issue, as you've stated.

 

I'm also not including assets in that figure, I'm speaking specifically about the system without data.

 

I reiterate using flash for GUI's on consoles is STUPID! It's a waste of resources.

[Moose]

Well no it's not irelevant because if as you say memory management does not matter on a PC (he says trying to keep a straight face), then the 10meg footprint you're talking of is worse case scenario and they would have engineered a lighter version for the console. Indeed PCs have greater overheads due to OS requirements - for example Adobe released a lite version of flash for mobiles. It's in their interest to continue developing in this direction due to the surge of tablet computers.

 

Then there's the benifit of cutting development costs if you can employ someone that merely knows actionscript to do the GUI this is obviously going to be considerably cheaper than employing a C++ developer.

 

As I've said, the new Crytek engine, which runs on console, uses Flash. It runs without problem - so I hear your argument but I'm merely pointing you toward the real world.

Edited May 6, 2010 by Moose

[Blarghagh]

Yeah, I'm not sure what the problem is either, other than "games traditionally just don't use more memory than this even though they could so there's no reason to change it". Might not be what Nightshape means, but it's pretty much what I'm getting from it.