|
|
|
increpare
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2011, 12:47:26 AM » |
|
It's great how they don't have any playable examples online.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Klaim
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2011, 01:45:03 AM » |
|
Very good point. I am greatly suspicious too. Too bad I don't have time to setup all this an try.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mikademus
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2011, 02:05:41 AM » |
|
PlayN is Java so no iOS except through HTML5. Not strange, since Google  Apple == false. It also will not compile to PC so for PCs and Macs one would have to use build Flash or HTML5 releases. Also this: PlayN doesn't come with an asset toolchain, an effects / animation system, or abstractions for game logic; it doesn't make assumptions about whether you're creating a platformer or a word game.
PlayN's mission is to provide the fundamental technology to support cross-compiling code for broadly-generalizable game operations such as an update / render loop, handling user input, and fetching or serializing resources. This keeps the size of the core library down and avoids bloating your source code with functionality irrelevant to your specific game. Nice words for trying to justify that what they call a game making framework isn't much of a game making framework. Why would my code be bloated by an animation class if that class wasn't used? I also always feel there is a risk investing in new Google ideas since there is a great risk they will be discontinued, like f.i. Wave. That said, if they add some genre frameworks it might be interesting in the future. I just don't see why to use it when I can get PC, Mac and Android already with C++ and Android NDK. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\"There\\\'s a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person,\\\" says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex. --IGN<br />My compilation of game engines for indies
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2011, 03:42:27 AM » |
|
Sooo.... it's just another one-language-many-backends web game engine (and very limited, while at it)? Why this and not flash? Why this and not anything that compiles to HTML5?
Looks like another half-assed attempt by some google employee, but may be too soon to judge...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Klaim
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2011, 04:51:52 AM » |
|
So when they say it generate "native" code for the target platform, they're lying?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
moi
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2011, 05:20:01 AM » |
|
On the basis of it being from google, I'm going to assume it's some overcomplicated shit that will require you to create ten manifest files before you can write some text to the screen and some nerds will probably make it their new religion  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
subsystems subsystems subsystems
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2011, 05:24:33 AM » |
|
So when they say it generate "native" code for the target platform, they're lying?
If you mean "native" as "the one language that the platform owner declared to be the most important" no, they're not lying, as it translates to Java for Android, to JS for the web etc. If for native you mean "that runs with machine code", yeah, it's far from real And from what I understood it only works "natively" on Android, and any other platform is "supported through browser", that's a cool way to say it's not supported by them  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Klaim
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2011, 06:23:09 AM » |
|
What I first thought was they generated Objective-C code for IOS and AS3 for Flash...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Player 3
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2011, 06:28:25 AM » |
|
Albeit it won't be quite native, PlayN appears to be a HaXe-like, with a cross-system export. It only seems to be for Android, HTML5, and Flash, in this case.
Giving this a shot.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mikademus
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2011, 07:22:03 AM » |
|
What I first thought was they generated Objective-C code for IOS and AS3 for Flash...
Might generate AC3, but there's no support for OSX/iOS. Did you think there would be? That's a bit fishy, too, since they in the video explicitly mention iOS as a platform you have to port code for (Android, iOS, Flash, HTML5), but it only deploys to Android, Flash and HTML5. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\\"There\\\'s a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person,\\\" says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex. --IGN<br />My compilation of game engines for indies
|
|
|
|
mcc
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2011, 08:44:19 AM » |
|
So is this based on GWT? I remember hearing about some super alpha-y "games to both flash and html5 using GWT" prototype awhile back. That said, if they add some genre frameworks it might be interesting in the future. I just don't see why to use it when I can get PC, Mac and Android already with C++ and Android NDK. I am curious about this although I've already got the C++-on-all-platforms thing down because (1) C++ can make certain simple things much more complicated than they need to be (2) for simple games it would be nice to target browsers instead of making everyone download a large executable (3) I never want to interact with Android NDK again. And I think I'd prefer Java to Actionscript all things considered. If it's open source, one assumes iPhone or possibly even native targets could be added by non-Google developers (I do not expect Google to add iPhone support to their game library). This could happen, we've got people porting XNA to iPhone and such. The main thing that worries me here is whether Google themselves will actually support this if a community doesn't take it over, Google seems to like releasing then abandoning game technologies (so what's the status of NaCL...?) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2011, 08:52:24 AM » |
|
Google seems to like releasing then abandoning game technologies (so what's the status of NaCL...?)
Looks like NaCL's bottom line is to give some usefulness to ChromeOS (and the cloud model) by enabling port of C/C++ apps to Chrome, so I hope that Google supports the thing for longer than their usual. So far it is going ok, recently Ogre3D has been ported to it, so it has a pretty solid support of C++. it would really be a game changer if other browsers ever decided to support it, but it doesn't seem the case  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mcc
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2011, 08:53:19 AM » |
|
Google seems to like releasing then abandoning game technologies (so what's the status of NaCL...?)
NaCL is more than a game technology, its bottom line is to give some usefulness to ChromeOS by enabling port of C/C++ apps to Chrome. But does ChromeOS support it? Last I heard it didn't [yet?], nor did Android |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2011, 08:55:34 AM » |
|
Dunno, in Chrome 14 (stable) it should be enabled by default, so it's there... ChromeOS maybe is lagging behind, Android could get it with Ice Cream Sandwich when it gets a Chrome port.
But Android is ARM, so to be anywhere useful you would need PNaCL to for the machine code compatiblity!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mcc
|
|
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2011, 08:57:22 AM » |
|
Dunno, in Chrome 14 (stable) it should be enabled by default, so it's there... ChromeOS maybe is lagging behind, Android could get it with Ice Cream Sandwich when it gets a Chrome port.
But Android is ARM, so to be anywhere useful you would need PNaCL to for the machine code compatiblity!
Ouch, hadn't thought of that. I know NaCL's graphics run to OpenGL ES restrictions... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2011, 09:05:03 AM » |
|
Yeah, NaCL should run WebGL 2.0, which is a straight port of OpenGL ES 2.0, so forget to port your favourite AAA there  OT: Anyway, I see the NaCL concept flawed - what I want from the browser is not to run natively each conceivable fu*** language, I want it to be a low level virtual machine (hint intended) that can run any program, just compiling what I write in its bytecode. So, how much we do have to wait until someone high up decides to create a "Web Machine Architecture" that I can target with GCC? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Lach
|
|
« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2011, 10:09:01 AM » |
|
I'll check it out in 6 months if it's still around.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
st33d
Guest
|
|
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2011, 10:55:34 AM » |
|
What is it with Google and bloody Java? They seem to have this one-size-fits-all obsession with it, assuming that everyone is desperate to program in Java and that it's waaaaaay more fun than, oh, say, all other fucking languages. Not least of all that Javascript, AS3 and Java have completely different optimisation bottlenecks. They are not the fucking same! Also - I'm pretty sure I saw that lady on the Google Wave team. GWT and PlayN are not the same. My guess is that PlayN is the bastard offspring of GWT looking for wider adoption. So, how much we do have to wait until someone high up decides to create a "Web Machine Architecture" that I can target with GCC? Did you try Adobe Alchemy for Flash? Alchemy is a weird one. There's a famous tech demo someone posted using alchemy, boasting how it could handle loads of particles. Then someone else remade it, faster, in AS3 without alchemy. Alchemy's drawback is that it creates a magic box that is fast when you're in it, but cost cpu to get inside. You're probably better off writing shaders for Flash Player 11. They'll at least run through the graphics card. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 12, 2011, 11:01:34 AM by st33d »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Developer
