Unity used to support "Javascript" (really a fake typed bastardization of Javascript). I think the smallest possible project clocks in at 1MB (but I would have to test this) If you have a WebGL only bug it could be pretty damn difficult to track down (no source maps, etc). They are pretty good with updating the engine to support new features as they come out (WebGL2, shaders, etc)ĭoes not run well on mobile devices (yet) SIMMER.ioĪmazing game engine and development pipeline - used commercially for thousands of commercial products such as Super Mario Run, Cuphead, Deus X, etc etc etc.
Sooooo, I run a site which is all about hosting WebGL games (specifically, we just do Unity right now). I'm not really a big fan of putting together 20 half-baked libraries. Then tried Phaser, but it felt like Unity without the editor and a worse language Then tried Pixi, which felt like Node.js style development of "bring your own library for everything". I tried GameMaker and really disliked GML, also tried Construct 2 and it felt even worse. That's probably the biggest reason why I'm using it.
I love how you can play the game and then pause, switch to the editor and inspects the objects live without any downside. The reason I stuck with Unity is mainly because of the editor. I do have experience with 3d graphics programming and general graphics algorithms and opengl, but as a solo gamedev it always feels like exponential increase in complexity for not that much gain, at least not for me since I'm not planning on making big fancy games. I don't have any interest in WebGL, or 3D for that matter. Unity has it pros and cons, but if your looking for a powerful lightweight webGL lib check out the above.Īctually quite the opposite hehe.
0 kommentar(er)
