Quick poll - should we allow Unity games here?

[Azerion]

Unity not persé, but WebGL yes. As WebGL is increasingly getting popular under (mobile) casual games, i believe it should have its sub-section on the forum. Large Unity games of course do not fit entirely. But if Unity improves their mobile WebGL support, it should not be underestimated as a great tool for mobile WebGL creation. So, WebGL has my yes vote. 

[chg]

It's the HTML5 Developers Forum, and it's a showcase for the output from html5 developers. It's not an "html5 showcase". I personally feel there is an important distinction between the two.

 

I don't mind about the likes of Construct 2 because Scirra are probably the biggest single champion of html5 as a game platform of all the companies out there, so C2 deserves to be included. And for all its sins GameMaker is similar.

 

I firmly believe that Unity never wanted to release a WebGL port at all, they were forced to do so by Google killing off their plugin. I will put good money on them moving over entirely to Web Assembly as soon as it's common-place enough.

 

Even though the votes are definitely moving towards "don't allow Unity games" I wonder if that might be a bit too much of a 'blanket' ban. Instead perhaps I'll evaluate them on a case-by-case basis, and those that are blatantly just here to promote something and not contribute can bugger off. Those that actively take part, their games are welcome.

Maybe if you take a softer stance, then the consideration should be formalised to something like whether the game was developed with HTML5 in mind? (versus a game that was obviously made for the desktop and just exported, trying to figure out what this means beyond a feeling... maybe download size is a factor, but what else makes a game uniquely HTML5 over something that has been ported?)

Also, am confused about the comment re: Web Assembly, if they use Web Assembly it would still use WebGL and HTML5 technologies right? Are asm.js and (later down the track) WebAssembly games allowed here, and if not what about games using some asm.js/WebAssembly code? (I don't see why these technologies wouldn't be considered valid for HTML5 games... heck, we allow JavaScript "compiled" from Typescript and Closure, and maybe even Haxe?)

[Noid]

I think we just don't want the forums flooded with Unity games and we're struggling to find a set of criteria that will exclude the Unity folks we don't want without excluding the Typescript, Haxe, C2 and GameMaker folks we do want.

 

- If we exclude games not developed with the web in mind, we exclude all the mobile games made using phaser.

- If we exclude games that didn't require HTML5 coding skills we exclude what's created with C2, any drag and drop editor built on top of phaser and if we are too strict anything written in any language other than javascript.

 

The most honest answer would be that Unity is becoming a monoculture and already has tons of forums and that we're excluding it so it doesn't drown out other options. However, in that case, would a less popular engine with a similar worflow and a similar HTML5 export such as Godot or GDevelop be acceptable?

 

Otherwise I think It'll just look like we're trying to rationalize a prejudice against Unity users.

 

Edit: What about requiring a number of previous posts before being able to post on Game Showcase? I know it's possible with some forum software. It'll stop people who don't intend to use the forum for anything other than the chance of getting their game featured on http://phaser.io or @photonstorm. It's easier than evaluating on a case-by-case basis.

[DrZanuff]

Ok, i'm new here, but i would like to drop my thoughts.

 

 I think Unity is very popular, but now their focus is not the web, because their export option is bad. Maybe in the future they will change that. See my point, i like Unity and i am studying it too, but i think this forum it's a safe heaven for HTML5 developers.

 

 I intend to start studying Phaser, so that's why i came to this forum. I am a C2 user and i love it, I was in that boat long before the beta, in the first builds, when Construct Classic was a thing. And i remember Scirra's passion and belief in HTML5 when everybody said they were wrong and HTMl5 was not the future. So i suggest a part of this forum for C2 too.

 

Cheers.

[ozdy]

I voted No, even though I'm also not a barebone HTML5 dev, but Haxe-or. It's just Unity WebGL is crap at the moment, and WebGL is still not suitable for the popular sponsorship model that's discussed on this board.

[THAiSi]

I think the developers should at least have written some JS/HTML stuff to be a HTML5 game. 

[BenWiley4000]

as long as it runs in the browser without plugin (html5 webgl) it's fine or you keep out all the editors that have "html5 export" or the languages/tools that transpiles to html5 (typescript, haxe, etc). Plus the question will be tougher when webassembly is available

 

While I can't speak to Haxe, TypeScript is a poor example. It transpiles to JavaScript, not HTML, and It is JavaScript, with optional typing. The defining difference here is the display tool the source code is engineered for - in the case of typescript, that would still be WebGL/Canvas.