Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Half-Life 2 in a Browser

hl2.slqnt.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 283 posts

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#241

Post by LoganDark »

doodpants wrote: post #163
notsentient wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also Ultima Online in the browser (sanctioned by the official servers). I'm one of the maintainers. https://retail.classicuo.org/

I visited this page in Firefox and was presented with a message that essentialy said (paraphrasing): "this site best viewed with browser X". Now, I'm not a professional web developer, and maybe there are legitimate reasons why this app is depending on new cutting edge browser features that aren't yet supported by Firefox, but it seems to me that this just shouldn't be a thing anymore.

> new cutting edge browser features

Mozilla hates the FS api, it's existed for years but seemingly isn't going to happen in Firefox.

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#242

Post by tencentshill »

utopiah wrote: post #56

That's also the kind of Website, beside the impressive technical result, that reminds me nothing can be blocked. It's not about bypassing VPN or deep pack inspection, rather it's about how once anything, including a very complex video game (like here) to an entire OS with a host machine (like QEMU on WASM, or a random InternetArchive link about emulation) is "just" a Web page that can be hosted... on anything (includ…

People have hosted banned book libraries in Minecraft.

https://www.uncensoredlibrary.com/en

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#243

Post by Wowfunhappy »

doublerabbit wrote: post #91
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your timeline doesn't make sense. Steam launched in 2003. Scully was forced out of Apple in 1993.

So, your right. But the still holds true, that seed was what was sown not to encourage games for the Mac. If you watch the YT video they go in to depth that they attempted to port the game and was axed by apple.

Apple runs a gaming subscription service which goes so far as to pay developers for timed exclusivity to Apple platforms. It may be true that in the early days of the Mac, Apple decided games were bad for their brand. This clearly is not true today.

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#244

Post by throwup238 »

hecifato wrote: post #239
MrDOS wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 2004, sure, but Valve didn't (publicly) ship Mac OS X software before 2010.

I hear what you're saying, but keep in mind that Bethesda shipped Skyrim as 32-bit in 2011. It wasn't until the Special Edition release in 2016 that it was updated to 64. Now, obviously, we could chalk that up to it just being Bethesda.

That’s because the 64bit upgrade to Creation Engine happened with the Fallout 4 development cycle when 64bit was widespread. Skyrim was also targeting Xbox 360 and PS3 which were still 32bit. FO4 is when the calculus changed for all the target platforms so thats when the engine was upgraded.

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#245

Post by branon »

modeless wrote: post #9

And Quake 3: https://thelongestyard.link/q3a-demo/ And Unreal Tournament: https://dos.zone/mp/?lobby=ut There's also https://noclip.website/ which, while not playable, has hundreds of levels from dozens of older games that you can explore freely. Including Half-Life 2, with more accurate rendering than this web port (which seems to be missing many shaders including character eyes).

Here's RuneScape 2 in a browser: https://2004.lostcity.rs/client?world=2&detail=high&method=0

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#246

Post by 6SixTy »

zamadatix wrote: post #200
bjord wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they're not saying it's fair to consumers, they're saying "it's not just apple, microsoft does it too", i.e. that judgement on apple should be made in the context of how its competitors behaved

I think they are saying the fair comparison should be what another 1st party GPU maker supports in their 1st party drivers, not whether or not Windows provides 1st party Vulkan implementation for 3rd party hardware.

Microsoft has the OpenCL, OpenGL, Vulkan compatibility pack. Major issue is that it's just Mesa compiled to a D3D12 GPU backend, so if you have anything but Snapdragon it's basically useless.

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#247

Post by whaleofatw2022 »

MrDOS wrote: post #173
jmmv wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only the very first few models of Intel Macs had strictly 32-bit processors (the 2006 iMac and Mac minis with Core Solo/Core Duo processors), and none of them were realistically capable of playing Half-Life 2. What? First, those chips were plenty powerful to run HL2 (the game predates them). And second, all x86_64 chips can run older x86 32-bit code unmodified. The reason macOS stopped supporting 32-bit code has no…

The CPUs were powerful enough, sure. The GPUs (Intel GMA950) absolutely weren't. Even on Windows with better drivers, Half-Life 2 is a slideshow on that class of hardware.

Depends a LOT on the res.

E.x. notebookcheck indicates that FEAR (released a yearish later) could get 20-30ish FPS at 640x480 but chokes at 1024x768 (at numbers matching the HL2 lost coast demo slideshow at 1024x768).

Gotta remember a lot of mac people were just happy to play something more modern than Marathon or Giants CK

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#248

Post by whaleofatw2022 »

functionmouse wrote: post #110
gonzalohm wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that possible? 32 bits should be compatible with a 64 bit machine. You can always use less bits for your memory addresses. Are there any other architecture changes that are preventing 32 bits binaries from running? Does that also mean that old software no longer runs unless there is a 64 bit version? In windows you can run x32 and x64 executables in a 64 bits machine

Apple goes way out of their way every few years to ensure old games stop working

Lest we forget how they snubbed Bungie...

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#249

Post by dctoedt »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #78
londons_explore wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is up for the copyright owner to enforce or not to enforce. Until they decide, we can't know if it's illegal or not - who knows, this site might have a license.

A crime is a crime even before a judge rules over it. Sure, innocent until proven guilty, but most people know when they're doing something wrong and then don't do it. Of course, this is a lot more grey area for copyright violations etc because it's a civil matter.

> innocent until proven guilty

Pithy but untrue. The verbose-but-correct statement is about procedural prerequisites: Government officials are forbidden to imprison or fine you until your guilt is proved, to an impartial and properly-instructed jury in a fair trial, beyond a reasonable doubt. (The Scots have the better formulation for criminal cases: Guilty, or not proved.)

Illustration: OJ Simpson was found not guilty [sic] in his criminal trial. So he couldn't be imprisoned. But then a different jury found — under the lower, preponderance of the evidence standard — that Simpson did indeed murder his ex-wife and the other guy. The latter case was the civil action for wrongful death, brought by the survivors of his victims. The survivors won a $33.5M verdict. Simpson's assets were seized, and sold at a court-ordered auction, to pay the judgment — including his Heisman Trophy.

Re: Half-Life 2 in a Browser

#250

Post by dctoedt »

zygentoma wrote: post #127
__alexs wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

"Innocent until proven guilty" concerns whether someone did a crime, not whether something is a crime. An action can clearly be a crime, but it might be unclear if you did that action.

> "Innocent until proven guilty" concerns whether someone did a crime

See my upthread comment: "Innocent until proven guilty" is catchy but false.

Post reply on HN