Babylon Spector is a fully functional WebGL debugger, it is an extension in Chrome which makes 3D development on the web so much easier, works with Three.js too!
Many of the WebGL demos I try in Safari just don't work, but the demo doesn't provide any kind of error message other than in the console. I have two wishes:
- Apple would get their act together with WebGL support
I'll add my experience with the "PBR Glossy" demo:
Windows 8.1
Chrome: 144fps
Firefox: 144fps
IE11: 72fps
Not sure why IE11 is getting exactly half the framerate of the other two, which are maxing at my monitor's refresh rate. At least none of them hanged or crashed.
Only slightly on topic question, but are there a lot of webgl games out there, or only demos? Any games I find are either toys or incredibly poorly performing.
Purely speculation here, but I would think that devs would want to invest their time in established gaming platforms with established customer bases. Native applications with large amounts of engine / tooling built around them.
Again shooting from the hip here, but given the restricted environment of the web browser, it would seem difficult to believe that you could make a high performing full game given that you need to download THE ENTIRE GAME essentially every single time you play, no? So that restricts the size / complexity I would wager.
Babylon.js is an amazing framework. The 3d concepts are ingrained into the API and framework. The ability to read 3d model data from Blender and things just work is awesome.
I switched my current project from Three to Babylon about two years ago. At first it was just to experiment, and because I found Babylon's API way more intuitive.
But the main reason I've stuck with it is that Babylon has a compact, active set of devs (I've made bug reports and seen the fix in the next nightly build multiple times). So it's been really easy to get help and get bugs fixed. Three has way more people working on/with it, but the flip side of that is that it's way harder to find help, unless you know a good forum where some experts hang out, or similar.
The other big difference is that Babylon is more of a "game engine" than a "3D engine" - it has built-in subsystems for stuff like bone animations, audio triggers, etc. I imagine Three has similar stuff, but I believe they'd be plugins or modules that you'd need to manage separately. I don't actually use any of these Babylon subsystems though, so I can't say if they're useful or not.
three.js seems to be more well known/established than babylon and I had initially picked that for playing around. However, I got to go to a session on babylon at a microsoft conference and it was given by one of the authors and was pretty impressed. I had a freelance contract that needed some webgl and went with babylon and i'm glad i did. It better performance and the object names and concepts seemed easier to follow and a little less obtuse. IIRC, the presenter said that they are extremely diligent about working through bugs and issues on github and that three.js had quite the backlog. It helps that babylon is essentially being underwritten/subsidized by MS, where as three.js is more your typical open source project.
If you've invested tons of time working in three.js, then it may not be worth switching over. But if you're dabbling, it is definitely worth checking out.
However, all of this was about 2 years ago, and you never know what has changed.
FWIW (probably not much) I've looked at both briefly, to build a tool with a 3d component. I know nothing about graphics (basically flunked it at uni) but Babylon seemed much more approachable than three for basic stuff (a box and a camera). However there is a lot more written about three than Babylon.
Not-so-on-topic question: although I see that Babylon is more of a 3D-engine (like three.js) than a game engine, I see it has game-engine features too... How would it compare with a clear web-game-engine like playcanvas?
Are people building webgl games actually using babylon?
I would actually say it is more of a game engine, especially when compared to three.js. Babylon.js supports physics plug-ins and collisions. They also have an action manager and other useful built in methods. Their tutorials are a really good place to start: https://doc.babylonjs.com/tutorials
Since babylon.js is more of a library, though, it doesn't have quite the tools to that something like Unity has, but they have great documentation and community support, and have a nice playground for testing small snippets. If you find an issue and post a question in the forum, I've gotten a fix in a matter of hours.
[+] [-] mohamedmansour|8 years ago|reply
Babylon Spector is a fully functional WebGL debugger, it is an extension in Chrome which makes 3D development on the web so much easier, works with Three.js too!
[+] [-] kevinb7|8 years ago|reply
- Chrome ~60fps
- Firefox ~25fps + fans spinning up
- Safari (hangs on loading screen)
Many of the WebGL demos I try in Safari just don't work, but the demo doesn't provide any kind of error message other than in the console. I have two wishes:
- Apple would get their act together with WebGL support
- demos would handle WebGL errors more gracefully
[+] [-] chuckdries|8 years ago|reply
Which version of MacOS are you on?
[+] [-] graedus|8 years ago|reply
Windows 8.1
Chrome: 144fps
Firefox: 144fps
IE11: 72fps
Not sure why IE11 is getting exactly half the framerate of the other two, which are maxing at my monitor's refresh rate. At least none of them hanged or crashed.
[+] [-] pfranz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] abritinthebay|8 years ago|reply
Safari - 60fps, no fans.
Chrome - 59fps, no fans but notably hotter and more CPU usage.
Seems like Apple has their act together and the errors are somehow on your end?
[+] [-] seehafer|8 years ago|reply
On a brand new MBP, though. Maybe that has an effect.
[+] [-] p0ppe|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] phatbyte|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] micael_dias|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tshannon|8 years ago|reply
WebGL seems to mainly be used for demos.
[+] [-] chairmanwow|8 years ago|reply
Again shooting from the hip here, but given the restricted environment of the web browser, it would seem difficult to believe that you could make a high performing full game given that you need to download THE ENTIRE GAME essentially every single time you play, no? So that restricts the size / complexity I would wager.
[+] [-] ConfucianNardin|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ww520|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] arnioxux|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fenomas|8 years ago|reply
But the main reason I've stuck with it is that Babylon has a compact, active set of devs (I've made bug reports and seen the fix in the next nightly build multiple times). So it's been really easy to get help and get bugs fixed. Three has way more people working on/with it, but the flip side of that is that it's way harder to find help, unless you know a good forum where some experts hang out, or similar.
The other big difference is that Babylon is more of a "game engine" than a "3D engine" - it has built-in subsystems for stuff like bone animations, audio triggers, etc. I imagine Three has similar stuff, but I believe they'd be plugins or modules that you'd need to manage separately. I don't actually use any of these Babylon subsystems though, so I can't say if they're useful or not.
[+] [-] viggity|8 years ago|reply
If you've invested tons of time working in three.js, then it may not be worth switching over. But if you're dabbling, it is definitely worth checking out.
However, all of this was about 2 years ago, and you never know what has changed.
[+] [-] vosper|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nnq|8 years ago|reply
Are people building webgl games actually using babylon?
[+] [-] anmorgan|8 years ago|reply
Since babylon.js is more of a library, though, it doesn't have quite the tools to that something like Unity has, but they have great documentation and community support, and have a nice playground for testing small snippets. If you find an issue and post a question in the forum, I've gotten a fix in a matter of hours.
Note: User of babylon.js
[+] [-] meddlepal|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] evanwolf|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] whatnotests|8 years ago|reply
I hope this opens some doors...