Web Deployment...is it working yet?

#1 No, it's working correctly. The stock web deployment works by installing the plugin and the needed game files, then when you open the web page the game is played via the browser. This is different from the method used by the Instant Action tech.

#2 so it will be fixed or is this what the web deployment is? For this is not web deployment. All it is, is playing a downloaded game through a web browser instead of a normal client. The only thing web about it is the download :)

Does anyone know if this is fixed in next update for I do not have source. If this is what it will be then I am highly disappointed, my actual first disappointment so far. Surely they are not going to draw us in with false advertisement then make us buy instant action for a resolution? Naw that's just silly.

#3 As I said earlier, it's not broken and is working as intended. Instant Action is a distribution platform and uses different tech, no to mention it's a separate side of the house. Whether the two will ever cross pollinate somewhere down the road isn't known.

#4 that is not web publishing by any means. It is browser deployment and serves no purpose. This makes me very sad and angry. I would update the website as not to confuse people. Especially since they are marketing a product like instant action right on the same page.

Why play in your browser when you have to download the game anyways? Just play it in the client. Makes no sense. There must be something I am missing.

#5 I don't know if there are additional plans for content download or whatnot, but I'm rolling it on my own. It's much easier than making a browser plugin would be.

Basically, make my game download its assets/scripts/levels from some server (aka: a self updater) instead of shipping the full installer.

But this will never be IA or Unity out-of-the box. The intended experience is more akin to Quake Live or Battlefield Heroes.

#6

Quote:Why play in your browser when you have to download the game anyways? Just play it in the client. Makes no sense. There must be something I am missing.

What you're missing is that most people won't want to actually install your indie game just to try it out. Granted, the web deployment also requires them to install it, but it does it in a "hidden" manner, removing the need to actually download and run an installer, choose a folder, allow it to make start menu links, add itself to your "add/remove programs" list, etc. There are plenty of people who won't do all of that, but will click "ok" on a plugin install. Additionally, many people will see a downloadable installer EXE as suspicious, but will be willing to execute a browser plugin (makes no sense, but it's still true).

It definitely seems suited only to small projects, as once the "plugin" has become a long DL, you're losing any advantage you get with players who think, "eh, I'll try it if I don't have to bother installing something."

Basically, you're removing steps and increasing the chances someone will make it all the way to trying the game. Personally, I never assumed that the T3D web deployment implied any streamed content, and don't really see it as misleading.

For an example, take a look at Minecraft, which runs as a Java web plugin but forces you to download the entire (very small) game at startup. A large number of players try the game because clicking yes on a plugin install doesn't feel like a commitment.

#7 well being engines like Unity can do this out of the box and this is a well sought after feature it does make it misleading.

That's like a car company advertising heated seats and then when you buy the car realize the seats are not heated they tell you "When you turn on your heater your vents blow across the seats and heat them. What do you think we meant?"

You might not need this web feature but many others do and I suspected a engine that boasts next gen would have it and not some fake work around. That is truly what it is, they needed to compete with Unity so they put this in.

#8 I agree it's ill-advertised, but the web deployment will *never* work as Unity's. Unity works exactly like Flash: you have a huge, binary "player" that runs script code. A Unity game is just like a .SWF: a file that contains 2D/3D assets and scripts.

In Torque the source code *is* your game. So your game *is* the plugin. Again: see Quake Live, see Battlefield Heroes.

In a Torque context streaming content is very game-dependent, but I think there should be some built-in functions to facilitate it. At least functions for fetching files off an URL and saving them somewhere in the AppData, and ideally having the resource manager be able to fetch missing stuff from a developer-specified URL on demand (but that would be a problem without asynchronous resource loading).

#9 ah thanks for that explanation. Do not get me wrong, still wildly impressed with T3D so far. Just really let me down when I learned all this.

#10 Yeah, T3D web deployment is a tad different than advertised. It won't make your game a smaller download, or allow people to play it without downloading and installing anything. It merely allows your binary game to run inside a web page, but it's only a different way of launching the installed EXE.

IMO web deployment is only useful if you plan to take advantage of the game-browser integration, like tying your game to a web interface like Quake Live does: everything except actually playing Quake is done in web pages - login, finding matches, interacting with the community, etc.

#11 "That's like a car company advertising heated seats and then when you buy the car realize the seats are not heated they tell you "When you turn on your heater your vents blow across the seats and heat them. What do you think we meant?""
- heh, someone sees things the way that I do. Amazing.

Manoel, it's more than a "tad" different IMO. It's nearly a zebra disguised to be a clydesdale.

#12

Quote:It's nearly a zebra disguised to be a clydesdale.

...it's black and white, so what's the problem?

I agree with you Hallsofvallhalla. Looks like I have a different point of view as well when it comes to these marketing statements.

#13 haha exactly!

Quote:IMO web deployment is only useful if you plan to take advantage of the game-browser integration, like tying your game to a web interface like Quake Live does: everything except actually playing Quake is done in web pages - login, finding matches, interacting with the community, etc.

while i also like that type of integration, the ability to stream a game through a browser far exceeds it. That is where the future is. Especially with HTML5 and WebGL on the horizon, or technically here. I would much rather play a game through a client if I have to download it. You are actually shrinking the size of screen, adding useless buttons and menus(home, refresh ect..) and increasing the ram usage of the game.
They have basically taken all the worst parts of web integration and packaged it up as a selling point. Its everything we hate about playing games through the browser and nothing we love. Who was sitting in the marketing or development conference room and thought this idea up? Better yet who agreed with him?

#14 Hallsofvallhalla, can you explain the issue to me. I think I understand, but not fully. Are you talking about having a game deployed as a server and then having web-browser clients connect to it and download on the resources needed at any given time?

#15 well have the game deploy to a package that you can place on your webserver/host that when a player connects to the link, say mygame.com/thisgame.html, and then the player can play the game right on the website, the media is streamed right through the browser, no download, no install. Just like Unity, O3D, and instant action.

#16 I was talking about the way web deployment works now, not about other plugins.

Also, the user has to install something at some point unless you code your game in javascript. The Flash Player and the Unity Player must be installed before flash/unity content can be displayed. But of course, since those are pervasive there are good odds the user already have them installed before reaching your site.

Instant Action is a bit different in that each IA game is actually a binary executable, but there's only one plugin. However that is only possible because IA games go through contracts and certification to prevent them from doing Bad Things™ (they're binary executables and this have a massive amount of freedom on the user's system after all). I also believe they are encrypted, so 3rd parties cannot abuse the IA plugin to execute unsigned code.

A standard, VeriSign-cerfitied T3D plugin that executed all T3D games would end up in malware blacklists pretty quickly, since it would allow any Torque licensee (or pirate) to drop binary code onto unsuspecting users.

But using the libcurl resource, it's pretty straightforward to make your game download its content from the web, so you only need to ship a minimal installer with only the executable and some start up scripts/GUIs.

#17 and thats what I am looking at doing. If GG is working towards a better solution then hey I am all for waiting and backing them up till they get it done. From the reply above though it does not sound like it. The only thing that gets me is they have the tech yet they pretend like they don't and they advertise web deployment and it is not. Yet they hang instant action over our heads. I just hope they make IA reasonable to T3D owners and do not try to gouge us. There are too many open source projects doing the exact same thing that are free that are getting closer to working the way IA does.

Like I said before I like T3D, Glad I bought it, going to use the TMMOKIT and work on something again so no biggie but seriously fix the advertisement. Hell I have even recommended T3D to a few friends and they bought it.

#18 Torque and InstantAction are completely separate products. We have never advertised or promoted them as the same technology. We have always been very clear on this, both here and abroad. I am sorry if there was confusion about the technology, but I also cannot see anywhere that it is inferred that the tech is the same.

#19 @HallsofVallhalla, the advertising here has improved over the past 2 years!!! ..there used to be blatant advertising lies during the days of TGEA. ..many of us had to make alot of noise to partially mold the current T3D advertising...and as you've noticed, it's not perfect. They won't allow it to not be a "twisting of perceptions to create greater marketability".

If anyone thinks I am a jerk for saying this;
I blame my family for serving ethics with Sunday dinners while I was growing up. :p

BTW, this was all said with a smile. ;)

#20 @eb - Smiles always help portray intent, makes sure the right tone is set =)

@Hallosvallhalla - So here is what we say in our product page:

Quote:
Web Publishing - Deploy any Torque 3D project from the World Editor to a web browser in seconds with our web publishing option. Torque 3D supports all major browsers and operating systems, including IE7, FF3, OS X and Chrome.

I can see a couple of things we should fix, so I will immediately pass that along to the people in charge of the product page. As David said we do not advertise our Torque 3D plugin as having the same functionality as our IA plugin. We do not advertise data-chunking or asset streaming. With the exception of browser compatibility statement, the description does not falsely advertise. We simply state Web Publishing.

Now, if people are unhappy with how our web publishing solution performs then we need to consider that when planning updates. Right now all our efforts are focused on bringing our documentation up to par, but I can bring it up in our next meeting. As eb stated, we have been working on fixing blatantly inaccurate product page features others put up in the past. We will make another pass on Torque 3D next week to compare what 1.1 will have.