Shame so many webgl apps refuse to run properly on the 2011 13" mbp.
Same on 2011 MBA 13
WebGL X-Wing
41–50 of 56 posts
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Writing a game engine is quite different to writing a set of bindings (which is basically all WebGL is). There isn't much scope for optimization so I wouldn't hold out hope for WebGL apps running much faster in future browsers.
Hm, sorry, I was under the impression the WebGL implementations were being done rather differently than they apparently are. I hadn't thought the calls were getting passed through directly due to security concerns. Chrome, at least, appears to be a straight binding with extensive validation... That... kinda makes my nervous.
I think your nervousness is well founded, and that's why Microsoft won't implement WebGL [1], but Chrome's developers seem to think they can make things secure [2].
[1]: http://blogs.technet.com/b/srd/archive/2011/06/16/webgl-cons...
[2] : http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-...
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#43I can't play it. I've played too many FPS and Flight Simulators in my time. The controls need to be inverted so i can fly it like a real plane. Too bad.
I also had this problem. Whenever I'd need to respond quickly, I'd try to use inverted controls, then crash.. :(
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#44cant see shit.
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#45Tried on a Mac Air in both Chrome 14 / FF 8 and all you see is a giant blue haze with a white outline of the X-Wing.
I am having a similar problem with a current-gen Air in Safari 5.1 w/ WebGL enabled. I just get a half of the screen (by diagonal) of green dots, and some other stuff that I think is the X-Wing. (then I die)
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#46I love it. And all these people with MacBooks are really wishing they had something better. Haha.
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#47Impressive and fun. Dying to reverse the up and down on the arrow keys though!
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hm, sorry, I was under the impression the WebGL implementations were being done rather differently than they apparently are. I hadn't thought the calls were getting passed through directly due to security concerns. Chrome, at least, appears to be a straight binding with extensive validation... That... kinda makes my nervous.
I think your nervousness is well founded, and that's why Microsoft won't implement WebGL [1], but Chrome's developers seem to think they can make things secure [2]. [1]: http://blogs.technet.com/b/srd/archive/2011/06/16/webgl-cons... [2] : http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-...
I don't think nervousness about a particular implementation approach is a reason not to implement WebGL, just a reason not to do it in what I gather is Chrome's way.
On the other hand, Chrome's strategy might just be getting explained poorly. My nervousness comes partly because the way it's described sounds like a filtering strategy. If it's more like a whitelisting strategy, it could be considerably less scary, and more in line with what I was kind of expecting from browser vendors.
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#49Weirdly, for me, doesn't work on Chrome 14, but does work in Firefox 6.
Re: WebGL X-Wing
#50These posts remind me of the "put a bird on it" sketch. All you need to do is "put a 'web' on it" and suddenly it's amazing.
Color me unconvinced, but we're looking at graphics that are roughly on par with what we saw desktops games in 1999: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R2nCrsDHeA
I realize that this is just a small tech demo, but even still -- GL is only part of the equation. The kind of platform optimizations that are eeked out in the game industry are substantial and extend well beyond just the GPU.
The interest in web (flash) games was largely driven by the difficulty of distributing casual native games -- and that's quickly becoming a solved problem.