HTML5 or Unity Player (again)

We get a new situation. Google Chrome stops supporting Unity Web Player, and it seems the Unity Web Player get security hole. Hence, it's obvious that there will be less and less people using Unity Web Player. However, Unity HTML5 export is not ready yet. It's still feel like alpha. Long time to export. Big size. Bad performance. I feel that both neither HTML5 or Unity Player is not good to use now.

So which one do you want the Unity dev team develop first? improve HTML5 to a usable level? develop a Unity Player? there is a great problem on Unity HTML5. Even if the performance is good to use, the web browser still have to load the whole library for every Unity games. Also, do you think if Unity dev team should make simplfied version of Unity HTML5? For other 3D library, it's good enough for web browser, even mobile. I don't want to learn other library, when I already have Unity. I sometimes wish they make a version that only keep most important feature, so that we can use it NOW

 

Web player will die on all browsers anyways so not much point investing heavily on it. If you haven't seen their posts on the forums or blog posts the WebGL support is also dependent of browsers which have their own pace to improve things. They can't magically get browser vendors to up webgl stuff in priorities. It's also been said that you will never get first generations of WebGL to be as good as the web player due several limitations and such.

 

Potential problems with NPAPI plugins, like the latest security hole demostrates, is exactly why you should focus on HTML5.

 

For presenting to other devs, I think that webplayer is the better choice because of the (currently) faster build times. For public releases, WebGL no question.

 

It is unfortunate that WebGL is not up to the job right now.
We're currently deciding what to do next without web player, and it looks like we're going to move away from web technology all together due to WebGL just not being good enough yet.
We require connection to an LMS for e-learning purposes but have recently found a way to do this in standalone builds so will likely be saying goodbye to WebGL, for now at least.

 

For a long term, WebGL is of course the main direction. But the problem is ... WebGL doesn't work well "right now". And it seems it will need more than 1 year for every browsers run it well (good performance, no weird behaviour for most feature).

 

I'd like to see full breakdown of all features supported currently by WebGL target vs. all features supported by webplayer. So I can see if I should wait with releasing web game or if features I need are already supported by webgl.

 

If your target audience is web consider whether you really need an engine as large and full featured as Unity in the first place.

If you want to make a 2d game - really take a look at it because you are bringing an awful lot of engine along for the ride which will have many more bugs than more native html5 engines or just pure javascript(not transpiled from giant engines).

If you write a native HTML5/WebGL app it does not have that many bugs - the Phaser framework or Pixi.js is a good example of that for 2d games. Tons of performance because it is lightweight and built specifically for HTML5 only. For UI you use CSS and the DOM, works great and far more flexible than any game engine UI you will find.

 

Hi, How we can include LMS with standalone builds? Could you please guide me on that.

 

Sent a PM