Java-Gaming.org Hi !
Featured games (83)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (539)
Games in Android Showcase (132)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (603)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: [1]
  ignore  |  Print  
  WebGL - Interesting development  (Read 6633 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline Cork

Junior Devvie




vote 6uN for OSX


« Posted 2010-01-02 08:42:48 »

So we agreed WebGL would be nice if it was Java vs JavaScript, well it seems we are not the only ones thinking this:

http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=2353
http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=2351

Now if only the API was JOGL based...   
or maybe both using EGL for the windowing interface. 
Or maybe we could target JOGL2 ES2 API to match one of the above?
Offline Cork

Junior Devvie




vote 6uN for OSX


« Reply #1 - Posted 2010-01-07 20:25:09 »

and another one for anyone keeping count:
http://code.google.com/p/gwtgl/
Offline Orangy Tang

JGO Kernel


Medals: 56
Projects: 11


Monkey for a head


« Reply #2 - Posted 2010-03-22 18:34:56 »

Related: http://blog.chromium.org/2010/03/introducing-angle-project.html

Basically, an implementation of OpenGL ES 2.0 written on top of DX9, written by Google (possibly the only people I'd trust to be able to pull this off well).

It even suggests that those writing ES2.0 desktop apps could still use it to get around buggy gl drivers as well, which would probably do nicely for a lot of people around here I think (myself included).

[ TriangularPixels.com - Play Growth Spurt, Rescue Squad and Snowman Village ] [ Rebirth - game resource library ]
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline kappa
« League of Dukes »

JGO Kernel


Medals: 81
Projects: 15


★★★★★


« Reply #3 - Posted 2010-03-22 19:15:46 »

looks cool, guess with a little extra effort they can support full OpenGL. Could be cool especially for the tons of graphics cards with poor opengl drivers but decent direct3d support.
Offline kaffiene
« Reply #4 - Posted 2010-03-22 20:03:06 »

So we agreed WebGL would be nice if it was Java vs JavaScript, well it seems we are not the only ones thinking this:

http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=2353
http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=2351

Now if only the API was JOGL based...   
or maybe both using EGL for the windowing interface. 
Or maybe we could target JOGL2 ES2 API to match one of the above?


What's worse is that I see Google have a project to wrap OGL in DX for WebGL for Windows.  Which means not only is it slow 'cause it's javascript, it's got a OGL->DX translation layer to run through too....

I suppose it may not be as crap as the OGL->DX translation library which is out there for Windows (I forget the name) because it only has to do a subset of OGL, but still....


EDIT: Oops! I see someone else already mentioned ANGLE.  WGL would be great with DIRECT access from Java.  Java->JavaScript is far from ideal.
Offline Orangy Tang

JGO Kernel


Medals: 56
Projects: 11


Monkey for a head


« Reply #5 - Posted 2010-03-22 21:55:06 »

looks cool, guess with a little extra effort they can support full OpenGL

I'm not too sure about that - supporting full GL (including legacy 1.1 with fixed function pipeline) on top of the shader-only DX9 would probably mean performance would go down the drain when it has to be standards compliant and cope with the various edge cases that don't map cleanly.

I'd rather they kept it minimal and close to the hardware. ES 2.0 fits that ideal pretty well - shader only, no fixed function but flexible and high performance. Most people don't *need* the quirks and oddities of pre-ES hardware, but they use it because of compatibility reasons. Their use-cases could be just as well served with a minimal wrapper over ES 2.0.

[ TriangularPixels.com - Play Growth Spurt, Rescue Squad and Snowman Village ] [ Rebirth - game resource library ]
Offline DzzD
« Reply #6 - Posted 2010-03-22 23:03:31 »

pff.... really until Internet Explorer decide to support it , it is a COMPLETLY USELESS and an UNUSABLE technologie in a proffesional project (except maybe in some geek companies that also convinced by some fanatics employees that firefox (and usng W3C) work better and is more compatible than Internet explorer : wich imediadly become fun when you just look on how many people use IE vs FF )

anyway and IMHO, this is just another stupid new idea as a lot of others that popup every month to justify the (still necessary) existence of such group and/or group part, this is not the role of browser to embed all possible plugin, this break concurency aswell as compatibility (mobile / other device / old device / different browser), really why not integrating a "Word like" canvas ? and a Video one ? and a flash one ? hey an PSP emulator one , cool no ? and finally why not a java one ? so funny to see those humble companies trying to won more markets place using exacly the same way that microsoft did and that they liked to critics in the past with an intention to appear "better" then microsoft.

vade retro satanas !!!

EDIT:  to better exlain my fears, browsers are our futur Operating System : microsoft have managed in the past to "lock" it, that's what they may try to do : "lock" the possibility for any other company to engage in the browsers market (one OS : Windows ; one search engine : Google ;  and ... what next ? )

EDIT2: and if anyone still think that using W3C is the way to go for compatibility ... just try to validate the top world most viewed web sites ... google... facebook... (both have more than 40 errors.. why ? because they want to be viewed by most browser)

EDIT3 : a last note : 10 years ago, internet explorer 4 was already supporting HW access from HTML : directanimation native access from javascript/vbscript inside HTML enabling 3D inside HTML

Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 434
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #7 - Posted 2010-03-23 09:49:00 »

DzzD is essentially right; WGL is next to useless. Whereas we have Java+OpenGL+applets working actually very well, today, only a bit slower than native.

Cas Smiley

Offline oNyx

JGO Coder


Medals: 2


pixels! :x


« Reply #8 - Posted 2010-03-26 03:52:07 »

JavaScript actually isn't as slow as you might think. Interacting with the DOM is slow - even more so if doing so causes reflows or redraws. However, if you do something with Canvas (2D/3D) you don't have to interact with the DOM. You only have to do that once at the beginning in order to get a reference to your Canvas element and that's it.

What's interesting about WebGL is that it also works on mobile phones and that you can do lots of shader stuff since the baseline requirements are sorta high.

Currently it comes with a very hefty price tag though. Your target frame buffer needs to be copied over into another buffer which resides in the DOM tree. This allows the usual compositing. I.e. there can be other HTML junk in front and even below. Needless to say that this makes things ridiculously slow.

This is basically like Flash's wmode set to "transparent". By default wmode is "window" which means that the plugin simply renders over that target rectangle without having to copy anything over. With WebGL there is no way to change this. They intend to address this issue, but I'm not sure if they will succeed. My suggestion to add a flag for bypassing the compositing was ignored so far.

弾幕 ☆ @mahonnaiseblog
Offline Cork

Junior Devvie




vote 6uN for OSX


« Reply #9 - Posted 2010-04-03 12:08:56 »

jake2/lwjgl and the start of a common es2.0 api between java and webGL?

http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/2010/04/look-ma-no-plugin.html
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline woogley
« Reply #10 - Posted 2010-04-03 15:35:30 »

jake2/lwjgl and the start of a common es2.0 api between java and webGL?

http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/2010/04/look-ma-no-plugin.html

Wow, that runs very well on Chrome. The only thing that actually limits the game is the lack of mouse capture.

For those who want to try it out, I'm hosting a build here:
http://74.207.233.86:8080/GwtQuake.html

You can reference this page for instructions on how to get a WebGL-enabled browser.
Offline oNyx

JGO Coder


Medals: 2


pixels! :x


« Reply #11 - Posted 2010-04-03 19:58:18 »

Runs at 30-50fps here if I make the window smaller.  Goes down to 20 at bigger sizes. I really hope they manage to get rid of that heavy copy operation. (My graphics card obviously isn't the bottleneck here.)

Edit: Also, I had to kill the Chrome process manually after closing the browser. It overwrote "Safe Browsing Bloom" and "Safe Browsing Bloom-journal" a zillion times a second and it didn't stop. This didn't happen with Chromium for example.

弾幕 ☆ @mahonnaiseblog
Offline VeaR

Junior Devvie





« Reply #12 - Posted 2010-04-03 21:33:44 »

All this is just because Java applets take long time to start.    Sad
Offline gouessej
« Reply #13 - Posted 2010-04-04 07:45:30 »

All this is just because Java applets take long time to start.    Sad
It has been improved with the plugin2 and HTML5 + JavaScript is still really slower than Java + JOGL  Grin

Offline Cork

Junior Devvie




vote 6uN for OSX


« Reply #14 - Posted 2010-04-04 18:28:43 »

Wow, that runs very well on Chrome. The only thing that actually limits the game is the lack of mouse capture.

For those who want to try it out, I'm hosting a build here:
http://74.207.233.86:8080/GwtQuake.html

around 20-30fps on 3 year old MacBookPro with Safari, more than playable! apart from the controls Smiley

thanks for hosting!
Offline gouessej
« Reply #15 - Posted 2010-04-05 10:03:08 »

around 20-30fps on 3 year old MacBookPro with Safari, more than playable! apart from the controls Smiley

thanks for hosting!
What about Jake2? Admit it is faster.

Offline aldacron

Senior Devvie


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #16 - Posted 2010-04-05 11:32:58 »

What about Jake2? Admit it is faster.

It doesn't matter a bit which one is faster. This is all about distribution and platforms. WebGL requires no additional plugins. As long as games are playable at an acceptable framerate, then it becomes a much more attractive option than either Java or Flash. Particularly considering that with a relatively small amount of effort you can get the same WebGL game playing across multiple platforms, including iPhone/Android. Given time for wide adoption and stable implementations, this is going to become an extremely viable option for many types of games.

There are already some game engines being developed on top of WebGL, such as Copperlicht. Anyone with a capable browser installed who wants to play around with it and see what it can do, that's a good place to start.
Offline oNyx

JGO Coder


Medals: 2


pixels! :x


« Reply #17 - Posted 2010-04-05 12:27:40 »

What about Jake2? Admit it is faster.

Of course it's faster. WebGL without compositing would be about 3-4 times faster. Anything which uses h/w acceleration (for 3d, that is) and without that heavy copy operation is going to be a lot faster.

The lwjgl applet ran more than 5 times faster for example. And that was with my old onboard GPU. I did hit the fill rate limit there.

弾幕 ☆ @mahonnaiseblog
Offline gouessej
« Reply #18 - Posted 2010-04-05 16:16:48 »

It doesn't matter a bit which one is faster.
I disagree with you because the difference of frame rate is important and lots of people have laptops with crappy integrated graphics chips which is already a big limitation. If you add another limitation by choosing WebGL, you increase the probability that lots of players won't be able to play with your games comfortably.

This is all about distribution and platforms. WebGL requires no additional plugins. As long as games are playable at an acceptable framerate, then it becomes a much more attractive option than either Java or Flash.
It is more difficult to get an acceptable frame rate with WebGL than with JOGL but if you succeed, the users will find WebGL more attractive because there is no security popup.

Particularly considering that with a relatively small amount of effort you can get the same WebGL game playing across multiple platforms, including iPhone/Android. Given time for wide adoption and stable implementations, this is going to become an extremely viable option for many types of games.
Apple will never authorize anyone to deal games without using the AppStore.

Offline DzzD
« Reply #19 - Posted 2010-04-05 22:44:40 »

Quote
WebGL requires no additional plugins.

you are right, it does not requiere a  plugin as :  virtools / java+opengl / unity / wrml / shocwave / O3D / 3DVIA / turntool / and many many more ...  but .... for now it requiere something a lot more complexe to setup... it requiere a full software installation (understand => a capable browser).

Offline kappa
« League of Dukes »

JGO Kernel


Medals: 81
Projects: 15


★★★★★


« Reply #20 - Posted 2010-04-05 22:57:44 »

No doubt WebGL looks like a really nice tech, however the situation is looking very similar to what happen with SVG on the web. Great tech, lots of initial hype, supported by everyone except IE. Due to IE not supporting it everyone was forced to avoid it. Are MS going to allow a  tech that brings OpenGL ES to the masses and risks them loosing their Directx strangle hold? Unlikley IMO.
Offline aldacron

Senior Devvie


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #21 - Posted 2010-04-06 05:59:48 »

I disagree with you because the difference of frame rate is important and lots of people have laptops with crappy integrated graphics chips which is already a big limitation. If you add another limitation by choosing WebGL, you increase the probability that lots of players won't be able to play with your games comfortably.

And that's a developer's choice. If you can get consistent, playable framerates with WebGL, then it doesn't matter if JOGL or LWJGL would be 5 times faster.
Quote

Apple will never authorize anyone to deal games without using the AppStore.

This has nothing to do with Apple. People will access your web page through the browser, Safari on the iPhone. Apple is already pushing HTML 5 for video on iPhone and iPad.
Offline gouessej
« Reply #22 - Posted 2010-04-06 12:59:11 »

This has nothing to do with Apple. People will access your web page through the browser, Safari on the iPhone. Apple is already pushing HTML 5 for video on iPhone and iPad.
There is still no official support of Flash & Java on IPhone and for the same reason, Apple won't support WebGL. Apple is pushing HTML 5 for video in order to avoid relying on Flash. Don't be blind. As kapta said, WebGL is a problem for Microsoft too... I hope that the war of web browsers will force them to support WebGL and contribute to improve the OpenGL drivers on computers.

And that's a developer's choice. If you can get consistent, playable framerates with WebGL, then it doesn't matter if JOGL or LWJGL would be 5 times faster.
Lots of people use crappy integrated chips. Who will accept developing games for a very reduced audience because of the bad performances of WebGL and the bad drivers for these chips?

Offline Cork

Junior Devvie




vote 6uN for OSX


« Reply #23 - Posted 2010-04-06 17:54:48 »

What about Jake2? Admit it is faster.

Actually I found the startup times to be far slower... Wink

I did try the webstart version of jake2, and it actually failed with an error about self signed certificates.  No idea why since i use a self signed certificate for my own webstart jogl.  I just updated OSX to latest patch, so maybe something to do with that.

Anyway, I'm not convinced that the performance benefit of JOGL is enough to fight off WebGL.  Lets wait for browsers to support WebGL in a production build, and then see where we stand against the upcomming JOGL2.

For me the benefit I see with WebGL is already demonstrated by the jake2 port, and that's the startup speed and simplicity.  If we really can have a common API between JOGL2 ES2 and WebGL ES2, then I'll use the WebGL front end to 'sell' the game and offer a webstart option for those looking for a bit more performance.

Offline oNyx

JGO Coder


Medals: 2


pixels! :x


« Reply #24 - Posted 2010-04-08 19:58:12 »

No doubt WebGL looks like a really nice tech, however the situation is looking very similar to what happen with SVG on the web. Great tech, lots of initial hype, supported by everyone except IE. Due to IE not supporting it everyone was forced to avoid it. Are MS going to allow a  tech that brings OpenGL ES to the masses and risks them loosing their Directx strangle hold? Unlikley IMO.

IE9 supports SVG. GLES is a different thing though indeed.

[...] Apple won't support WebGL. [...]

Webkit (Apple's browser engine) supports WebGL since the very beginning.

Edit: Apple is also part of the WebGL working group (just like Mozilla, Opera, and Google).

弾幕 ☆ @mahonnaiseblog
Offline kappa
« League of Dukes »

JGO Kernel


Medals: 81
Projects: 15


★★★★★


« Reply #25 - Posted 2010-04-08 21:06:01 »

IE9 supports SVG.

bit late won't you say? we're still looking at another 2-3 years before IE9 is even relevant and even then the non SVG IE's will have significant market share.

By the time its any use, you'd probably be able to do all the stuff in something like pure javascript or html5.

Its nice PR to make it look like they are helping standards, yet they just derailed and delayed it until its obsolete.
Offline oNyx

JGO Coder


Medals: 2


pixels! :x


« Reply #26 - Posted 2010-04-08 22:03:09 »

Nah... some vector image format is absolutely needed. Of course there is some sort of overlap with canvas, but the use cases actually don't overlap.

And PR... well, they are just desperately trying to catch up, which means more competitions, which means more progress. Google's V8 for example radically changed the JavaScript landscape. Without it there would have been less of a reason to improve. And if modern browsers aren't that much better than IE (of all things!) anymore, there will be lots of pressure to do things better/faster.

弾幕 ☆ @mahonnaiseblog
Pages: [1]
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 
You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

rwatson462 (30 views)
2014-12-15 09:26:44

Mr.CodeIt (20 views)
2014-12-14 19:50:38

BurntPizza (42 views)
2014-12-09 22:41:13

BurntPizza (76 views)
2014-12-08 04:46:31

JscottyBieshaar (37 views)
2014-12-05 12:39:02

SHC (51 views)
2014-12-03 16:27:13

CopyableCougar4 (49 views)
2014-11-29 21:32:03

toopeicgaming1999 (115 views)
2014-11-26 15:22:04

toopeicgaming1999 (105 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:36

toopeicgaming1999 (31 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:08
Resources for WIP games
by kpars
2014-12-18 10:26:14

Understanding relations between setOrigin, setScale and setPosition in libGdx
by mbabuskov
2014-10-09 22:35:00

Definite guide to supporting multiple device resolutions on Android (2014)
by mbabuskov
2014-10-02 22:36:02

List of Learning Resources
by Longor1996
2014-08-16 10:40:00

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-08-05 19:33:27

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:20:17

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:19:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:29:50
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!