TIGSource Forums

So, it seems that the Unity guys and Google are working together so that Unity games and apps can run on Chrome without the need to download the Unity plugin client side, using a technology called Native Client.


Also:

http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/05/19/google-android-and-the-future-of-games-on-the-web/ (http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/05/19/google-android-and-the-future-of-games-on-the-web/)

So, it could do away with one of the biggest barriers to Unity browser games acceptance, which is the plugin-in download requirement.

This could be huge, right? I mean, Unity and Google working together.  :-*

I also recommend you give the comments thread under the article a peek, for bonus especulation.

I don't think Unity and Google are working together, it's just that the Unity guys are making use of Google's Native Client platform. It's open source, so everyone can write software for it. EDIT Uhhh so that link says something about a "collaboration", but there's no info about what exactly they're doing... I wonder what that refers to...

About NaCl itself, I'm still on the fence, it does sound cool for gaming, but possible security holes (and you know there are always security holes) could be disastrous... Also depends on how widespread it will be.

Yeah, it doesn't look like they're working together any more than a game developer using Game Maker is working with YoYoGames.

I really dislike the proprietary nature of Unity, but perhaps if they release a Linux port...

Considering the growing share in the browser market chrome has, and my recent start of a prototype on unity, I'm very happy with this.

If we take this in conjunction with the announcement of Google TV, it means that very soon it will be possible to develop GoogleTV-compliant games using Unity.

I'm thinking that Google might actually have a presence at E3 this year.

Given how much of a pain it can be to set up NaCl and how beta it is (I still haven't gotten Chrome's built-in plugin working under Linux completely), I imagine Google approached Unity a while back and asked them to hack something up for Google I/O.

I'm not a huge fan of the Unity creation tool only running on OS X and Windows, either. On the plus side, NaCl means we'll be able to run Unity powered games on Linux.

NaCl is basically perfect for Unity. Good for them for getting in on it on day one. Still, I doubt that they got a special prerelase from google.

Sorry, only Mac OSX and Windows??

Google + Unity = <3

I know everyone hates Google and their grand schemes to take over the internet, but if they continue do it by the offering of user-friendly and powerful interfaces as seen in gmail, sketchup, and google maps, then I say, "Viva la Revolution."  :handmoneyL::epileptic::handmoneyR:

Google recently abandoned their O3D (http://code.google.com/p/o3d/) platform in favor of WebGL (http://www.khronos.org/webgl/) ( HTML5 Canvas 3D ) .. which means all major browser vendors ( apart from Microsoft ) are now on-board ( Apple, Google, Mozilla, Opera ).

Yes, only OS X and Windows. Things shouldn't be considered suitably cross-platform unless they support at least the desktop trifecta.


WebGL has nothing to do with NaCl or Unity being ported to it (plus Google has always supported WebGL, it just happened to support O3D as well).

I'm sorry for Linux users, but I don't that Linux is a mandatory platform to claim that your product is cross-platform. Anyway, maybe it's because there's practically no games on Linux (so virtually no players). But then again, maybe it's because there's no good tools to make games? It's a loop.

It is important that people who play my games can do it on a completely open and free platform. This is coming from a guy who doesn't even regularly use Linux. Not everyone wants to have their computers totally at the whim of a corporation, and I admire that.

I suppose that this is more idealism than business sense. But on the business side of the matter, it is generally not difficult to make a Linux port of something when there already is an OS X and Windows port. I feel that the time spent making a Linux port is usually worth the 5% extra market, even when disregarding the idealism.

Am I missing something here?

If Unity games work in Chrome with NaCl, then won't they work in Linux? There is a [beta] Linux version of Chrome now.

Or are we just talking editor?
If that's the case, then I don't see a huge deal in it. Linux has huge driver issues at the moment, so I can see why most companies choose not to invest their higher-end applications into it. 

I initially thought that Ciro was talking about not bothering porting games to Linux and I replied with that in mind, but after re-reading his post I realized that this is not the case. My bad.

(And the Linux version of Chrome got out of beta today. :))

No harm done.  :handthumbsupL:

Also, has anyone noticed NaCl is the molecule for table salt?(sodium chloride)
Just saying. I wonder if the abbreviation was coincidence, or if Google has some strange inside joke based on it. Who knows?

I honestly don't think Google has plans to take over the world. Only Papa Psyduck is justified in thinking that.  :durr:
What's obvious is that Google wants the web to be the sole method of computer use-- That's why they're supporting Unity. If you think about it, Unity is a powerful game engine that already supported the web. One big thing missing on the web is robust games powered natively. Google sponsored Unity to port it to NaCl to make web games that much more accessible. Voila.

Hint hint, Unity also has an iPhone version with touch screen capabilities. If Google is making a web tablet, I have a feeling that was only one more reason why they adopted Unity.

It all comes together.  :shrug2:
Personally, I'm all for this movement. The web is a great platform that most easily supplies a cross-platform experience. With NaCl, you lose a lot of the perfo-drops that're common in web applications.
If the web keeps evolving like this, then I see no reason not to justify a Google Chrome tablet/netbook.

There are a few major driver issues here and there, but they're rapidly becoming less and less of an issue. At this point if a piece of hardware doesn't work properly, it's generally because the manufacturer has turned down offers from the open source community to write drivers for free and the community is reverse engineering it. Or because the proprietary drivers are crap. (Or both! :wtf:)

But yeah, there are plenty of reasons why the Unity folk would be hesitant to invest resources in a editor port to Linux. Likewise, I've got plenty of reasons to avoid using game creation tools that won't run on my primary operating system. :)

@Jakman:
I don't think the NaCl reference is a coincidence... we're talking about Google!!

Considering that NaCl is a chemical compound and that Chromium is an element (₂₄Cr) it's not really that obtuse of a reference to chemistry.

Anyway, what does this have to do with android?

salty

Because in the to be released Unity 3.0 they plan to add support for Android platforms (in addition to Playstation 3 and the iPad).

From EDGE Magazine


http://www.edge-online.com/news/unity-30-adds-ps3-android-and-ipad-support (http://www.edge-online.com/news/unity-30-adds-ps3-android-and-ipad-support)

It might be wise to jump on the Unity bandwagon. The future looks bright.

And if the Chrome browser pluginless support pans out Linux users might have their wish finally granted.

I think it has quite a lot to do with the future of Google software.  A Unity NaCl port automatically includes Linux support, because Google is doing the last mile work to local APIs.  Unity had completely ruled out a Linux port previous to this because of the API fragmentation problems.  Now Unity works anywhere Google cares to make NaCl happen.  How long until Android tablets, and eventually Android phones, support NaCl?  It can't be more than a few years away.

By the way, "now" is Chrome v6 at the earliest, and probably later for Unity support.

In the abstract, Native Client is all about fully utilizing your local hardware on the web, which is going to be a pretty broad spectrum of devices (phones, tablets, laptops, etc).  It will seem weird in a few years if websites can't take full advantage of your hardware, in the same way that 3D in the browser still seems a little strange today.

Am I the only one that senses an imminent move from iPad-like application brewing, to a fully-fledged, "controller + touchscreen + flipout keyboard, wireless-internet-based gaming/interaction platform?" Complete with video chat, even?  ;D

Am I the only one who wants a Pandora?  :panda:

Grahh, looking at wired's "webmonkey" blog, it seems that the problem with web gaming is always gonna be the same: its on the web, and the people writing it can do what they want:

http://www.webmonkey.com/2010/06/compelling-reasons-to-upgrade-to-safari-5-right-now/
http://www.webmonkey.com/2010/06/apples-html5-showcase-less-about-web-standards-more-about-apple/

And people writing downloadable games can't do what they want?

NativeClient games won't have the same issues as the typical Javascript/HTML5/CSS3 website. Developers don't need to worry about browsers either not supporting or only partially supporting various standards. Either there's NativeClient (version X or greater) or there isn't.

Sorry, I meant the purely html5 games.