I'm still amazed how small the Godot editor is (last time I checked it was ~25MB). Just how are they able to pack this much functionality into such little space?
By not having massive dependencies?
Godot Editor running in a web browser
61–70 of 128 posts
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#62Godot is such an amazing/polished game engine. I like it a lot more than Unity (at least for 2D).
One thing that I think would hugely shift godot's market share is a standardized asset format, similar to what Unity and Unreal have, so asset developers could offer assets in Godot-compatible format. It would be even more amazing if there was an easy way to import Unity resources. Maybe I just needed to do more research, but last time I tried, I had to pull out individual files, mess around with them in Blender, the…
Maybe, but let me question that. What standardized asset bundles also do is create a market for asset bundles, which is good for the company they support. They also let new people buy a package of assets. Those aren't big issues for me, but I have never tried to make a commercial scale game in Godot.
Versioning is the nightmare of Unity. So many assets and plug ins only work with certain versions.
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Chromium package on Arch Linux is around 68MB. The Electron runtime is a surprisingly reasonable size. Interestingly, the Go package is over 110MB. Rust is larger.
The Chromium package on Arch Linux is actually just a bit under 200MB when installed. Are you looking at the download size?
Yep, you're right, I'm looking at the compressed archive for both. Go must be huge then if the compressed package is 100MB.
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean by native browser app? Like JS + WebGL?
JS is usually not the bottleneck in web apps. The bottleneck is most of the time rendering. Rewriting the app in JS would make it faster then the Webassembly version. It's a common misconception that Webassembly is faster then JS. Although theoretically possible, the compiler wouldn't be able to beat a skilled JS developer's hand written JS specific for the web platform. A turtle is faster then a rabbit - in water.
Is this true? I was under the impression that webassembly was capable of faster performance than JS, and thinking about learning a compiled languages to make my web applications faster. Would that be a waste of time?
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#65I get a black screen and the JS error "Atomics is not defined." Did we overload it?
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the installed size of the metapackage containing no emacs executable, no elisp files, and no documentation. On my system the emacs executable is 39M and the entire installed package is 128M. (Additionally, my Doom Emacs folder takes up another 840M.)
> Additionally, my Doom Emacs folder takes up another 840M. HOW?
[deleted]
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean by native browser app? Like JS + WebGL?
JS is usually not the bottleneck in web apps. The bottleneck is most of the time rendering. Rewriting the app in JS would make it faster then the Webassembly version. It's a common misconception that Webassembly is faster then JS. Although theoretically possible, the compiler wouldn't be able to beat a skilled JS developer's hand written JS specific for the web platform. A turtle is faster then a rabbit - in water.
> JS is usually not the bottleneck in web apps. The bottleneck is most of the time rendering.
By rendering, do you mean the layout and painting steps? If so, this conflicts with any profiling I've done of heavy websites and webapps.
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
JS is usually not the bottleneck in web apps. The bottleneck is most of the time rendering. Rewriting the app in JS would make it faster then the Webassembly version. It's a common misconception that Webassembly is faster then JS. Although theoretically possible, the compiler wouldn't be able to beat a skilled JS developer's hand written JS specific for the web platform. A turtle is faster then a rabbit - in water.
Is this true? I was under the impression that webassembly was capable of faster performance than JS, and thinking about learning a compiled languages to make my web applications faster. Would that be a waste of time?
[deleted]
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#69It's amazing that a native Windows/Mac app can be compiled to run in a web browser. However Web-assembly does not mean better performance. A native browser app would most likely be faster.
> a native Windows/Mac app
Not to mention (GNU/)Linux, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD ;) https://godotengine.org/features
Re: Godot Editor running in a web browser
#70Godot is truly real competitor to unity in OSS world, good job, I'll waiting this feature until it's not buggy.