Best tech for web-game
Best tech for web-game
What's the best client-side technology for implementing a game that runs inside the web browser today?
I want to draw some 2d graphics, maybe play a sound or two and communicate with the game server. I have looked briefly at FLASH but I don't think that is the way to go. Currently I am thinking of Java applets. Is there a better alternative? The reason I want the game to run in the browser is that I want people to be able to start playing instantly. So the technology must not come with a huge install package because that would defeat the whole purpose.
I think my target audience is probably running IE6 with default settings on Windows Me or XP Home. What options does that give me?
I want to draw some 2d graphics, maybe play a sound or two and communicate with the game server. I have looked briefly at FLASH but I don't think that is the way to go. Currently I am thinking of Java applets. Is there a better alternative? The reason I want the game to run in the browser is that I want people to be able to start playing instantly. So the technology must not come with a huge install package because that would defeat the whole purpose.
I think my target audience is probably running IE6 with default settings on Windows Me or XP Home. What options does that give me?
Re: Best tech for web-game
ActiveX(he ducks), they use it were I work and they have a very quick turn around to get the games out. All C++.Daniel wrote:What's the best client-side technology for implementing a game that runs inside the web browser today?
I think my target audience is probably running IE6 with default settings on Windows Me or XP Home. What options does that give me?
I know with vista coming I think activex maybe be locked down a lot more.
On our site we have flash, java & activex.
Flash, just doesn't seem to me to make good games
Java seems to produce the least problems for our customers. We do get problems with users and either MS/Suns virtual machine, and we get less problem with MS. If my memory is good.
Activex, as I said above very quick to get a game out and you can do what every you want and a very good speed.
hope it helps.
jippie
Re: Best tech for web-game
Yes, thanks.jippie wrote: hope it helps.
- the2bears
- Baaaaaa!

- Posts: 3686
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:30 pm 0
- Location: The City by the Bay
- Contact:
Braindead maybeteamonkey wrote:...Flash is dead good at communicating with a server ...
But for ubiquity on browsers and simple networking you really can't go wrong with Flash.
Bill
the2bears - the indie shmup blog
- ~D4T45H4T~
- Baaaaaa!

- Posts: 4695
- Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 4:56 pm 0
- Location: UK
Re: Best tech for web-game
Not true, there are millions of flash games, and probably 90% of them are utter shite, doesn't mean yours has to be. Also, you can safely assume 95% of visitors will already have flashplayer.jippie wrote:Flash, just doesn't seem to me to make good games
Here are some examples of non-shite flash games:
http://www.teagames.com/games/tgmotocross/play.php
http://www.xgenstudios.com/play/motherload/
http://www.harveycartel.org/metanet/downloads.html (not in a browser but quite impressive)
http://www.globz.com/demo/buggy/
http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/flowing/black.html
Yar, I've mucked about with Flash, and it has a lot going for it. It's more ubiquitous than Java browser applets these days. It *has* networking... yeah, that's about all I can say about that
If you're feeling uber-nerdy, you can use Motion-Twin (mtasc.org), Ming (?), HAXE (http://haxe.org), or even OpenLaszlo to create SWF files. Those are about preferable to the alternative of paying for Macromedia Studio or... SwiSH (*shudder*). Of course, that's because I'm cheap 
In general, a small flash game is a piece of piss to make. A complex flash game will be probably be difficult. I'm no Java guy, so I won't compare the two at an ease of use level.
Also, N used to have a browser version (essentially a leaked version IIRC), but it was deprecated as it didn't really represent the gameplay as well as the standalone inna third-party projector version.
In general, a small flash game is a piece of piss to make. A complex flash game will be probably be difficult. I'm no Java guy, so I won't compare the two at an ease of use level.
Also, N used to have a browser version (essentially a leaked version IIRC), but it was deprecated as it didn't really represent the gameplay as well as the standalone inna third-party projector version.
More functional is what I expected from Java, but the rest of your statement contradicts what I thought I knew. Please, elaborate? Are you saying Java is faster than Flash? Do you have any metrics that confirms this? And why can only a small fraction use Java? Is that because the JVM supplied with IE is not good enough?teamonkey wrote:Java for speed and a more functional game that only a small fraction of people can use.
The JVM installed with windows always was (although I haven't touched things recently) complete and utter cock. There may not even be a JVM installed by default these days, I dunno. JVMs differ between platforms. Java really is "write once, debug everywhere".Daniel wrote:More functional is what I expected from Java, but the rest of your statement contradicts what I thought I knew. Please, elaborate? Are you saying Java is faster than Flash? Do you have any metrics that confirms this? And why can only a small fraction use Java? Is that because the JVM supplied with IE is not good enough?teamonkey wrote:Java for speed and a more functional game that only a small fraction of people can use.
What I can say is that Flash is already installed on 99% of machines, is pretty much "standard", is almost guaranteed to work on any machine that will hit your site, loads instantly rather than having to wait for JVM startup, isn't a massive memory hog, ummm - yeah. Go for Flash.
Simon
"massive retard™", "full of shit™", "tiny bitch™", "retarted™", "a bit of a one trick pony™", "petty™", "simple minded idealistic twat™", "miserable humourless fucker™"
- teamonkey
- Sheepie Whore

- Posts: 12082
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:07 am 0
- XBL Gamertag: itsthetaste
- PSN: teamonkey_ca
- Contact:
Yes, in almost every conceivable way.Daniel wrote:Are you saying Java is faster than Flash?
Yes, it's very old, slow and buggy. It's based on JSE 1.1 IIRC, whereas it Java's now at v1.5 and every point release has added major features and had big speed improvements. If you want to develop for everyone you have to target that platform, and it's not worth it to be honest.Is that because the JVM supplied with IE is not good enough?
Sounds good. But...tufty wrote: What I can say is that Flash is already installed on 99% of machines, is pretty much "standard", is almost guaranteed to work on any machine that will hit your site, loads instantly rather than having to wait for JVM startup, isn't a massive memory hog, ummm - yeah. Go for Flash.
How about different versions of Flash? Is that an issue I have to think about? And what about that network support? Can I setup a TCP or UDP connection to any IP? Or must the game server and the web server be the same machine?
The game I have in mind is a multiplayer strategy game, so I absolutely need to communicate with a server. The server side will probably be a standalone Java or C++ application.
The JVM is no longer supplied with IE and windows, and when it was it was the old 1.1.7 version, so people still had to upgrade to get new stuff to run...
There is light on the horizon though, with Sun changing the licence for Java, it is looking like it will come pre-installed on most if not all Linux distros and they are working with the OEMs to get Java 6 pre-installed on windows...
And there is an effort being made to produce a "browser version" of the JVM which is under 5Mb and loads the extra stuff it needs if and when required... But I wouldn't hold my breath on that
There is light on the horizon though, with Sun changing the licence for Java, it is looking like it will come pre-installed on most if not all Linux distros and they are working with the OEMs to get Java 6 pre-installed on windows...
And there is an effort being made to produce a "browser version" of the JVM which is under 5Mb and loads the extra stuff it needs if and when required... But I wouldn't hold my breath on that
"What's there to lose?" said the general, selling our dead meat by the pound...
These are questions that are best answered by doing some reading. http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/Daniel wrote:And what about that network support? Can I setup a TCP or UDP connection to any IP? Or must the game server and the web server be the same machine?
You may find that flash is not the answer, but in that case Java is not the answer either, due to version mismatches and all the crap that goes with. In which case you may have to modify either your goals or your criteria for success.
Simon
"massive retard™", "full of shit™", "tiny bitch™", "retarted™", "a bit of a one trick pony™", "petty™", "simple minded idealistic twat™", "miserable humourless fucker™"
>Are you saying Java is faster than Flash?
ActionScript is pretty much the slowest language on the planet. Wheras java outperforms the cheap C++ compilers today (and its still getting faster). Its about 1:100 I would say.
Well, for many simple games you dont need many calculations per frame, but flash ramps up the system requirements quickly regardless. Even simple match 3 games require at least 1ghz, because the drawing is slow, too.
If there is some action involved the requirements go straight through the roof. Eg for something like a 640x480 snes contra you would need at least 2ghz and clever coding.
>I think my target audience is probably running IE6 with default settings on
>Windows Me or XP Home. What options does that give me?
Javascript. Well, dont bother with that. Its the shit (as in a pile of steaming shit).
If you target java 1.0/1.1 the compatiblitiy will be higher than 1.4, but the difference is small, because only old PCs have a 1.0/1.1 vm (since ms stopped shipping it, which is - as it turned out - the best thing ever, because more people use a up to date vm now).
Flash will give you a higher compatibility, because everyone and his dog have installed it. If you're fine with the system requirements, go for it. Otherwise take a look at java (and webstart).
ActionScript is pretty much the slowest language on the planet. Wheras java outperforms the cheap C++ compilers today (and its still getting faster). Its about 1:100 I would say.
Well, for many simple games you dont need many calculations per frame, but flash ramps up the system requirements quickly regardless. Even simple match 3 games require at least 1ghz, because the drawing is slow, too.
If there is some action involved the requirements go straight through the roof. Eg for something like a 640x480 snes contra you would need at least 2ghz and clever coding.
>I think my target audience is probably running IE6 with default settings on
>Windows Me or XP Home. What options does that give me?
Javascript. Well, dont bother with that. Its the shit (as in a pile of steaming shit).
If you target java 1.0/1.1 the compatiblitiy will be higher than 1.4, but the difference is small, because only old PCs have a 1.0/1.1 vm (since ms stopped shipping it, which is - as it turned out - the best thing ever, because more people use a up to date vm now).
Flash will give you a higher compatibility, because everyone and his dog have installed it. If you're fine with the system requirements, go for it. Otherwise take a look at java (and webstart).
弾幕 ☆ eee games ☆ smart ass no jutsu!


