LÖVE

because: i'm interested in webgl, i'm NOT interested in implementing it in html5/canvas, flash, NaCl or whatever.
If someone else wants to implement it in those, go ahead, but make a new thread please.
If you want x, and i already chose a different way, you'll just have to do it yourself or find someone else to do it for you rather than trying to convince me to do it.
IE and unsupported gfx-cards: that problem might solve itself by simply waiting, or people getting better hardware and browser.
Webplayer won't be "perfect" anyway, (lua-parser bugs&limitations, browser support for binary networking protocols, fullscreen etc...)
but that doesn't mean it's pointless.

ghoulsblade wrote:because: i'm interested in webgl, i'm NOT interested in implementing it in html5/canvas, flash, NaCl or whatever.

It's a bit strange read this since webgl uses html5 canvas component.

I dont fully understand why you would make this dependand on webgl, since IE and drivers.

Maybe because webgl is a standard implemented/used by every modern browser accepts and reckon? Of course IE as always had to screw standards in something. I quite more suprised why loveweb is too much chrome oriented and fail for example in Safari.

Also you can try install Chrome Frame to make your IE webgl compatible.
EDITED You can also try http://www.iewebgl.com/. (didn't knew this one sorry).

I don't use IE anyways. Just wondered why he chose to use WebGL (which he didn't explain apparently), especially since it is made for 3d and Löve is a 2d framework. Nevermind, keep up the good work I will follow this project closely.

clickrush wrote:I don't use IE anyways. Just wondered why he chose to use WebGL (which he didn't explain apparently), especially since it is made for 3d and Löve is a 2d framework. Nevermind, keep up the good work I will follow this project closely.

Well a Ferrari can also roll very slow in city as well modern oriented 3d videocards (or chips) can instead do simple 2d or raster operations. Don't worry about it. WebGL is a natural choice and almost an universal cross-browser/platform solution.

Asking why he chose webGL is just as fruitful as asking why LOVE chose Lua. (not fruitful)

sounds good I'am very sorry for my incompetent question, just all those layers are too confusing for my brain to understand. from my amateur point of view this looks like a huge sandwich made of multiple sandwiches, which kinda sounds delicious though

löve uses opengl internally, so the apis fit well together, and i have a bunch of experience with opengl on pc, opengl ES on android-java and webgl already, so it's easier and more comfortable for me when programming =)

sounds very reasonable thx for your answer. could you also argue for this being faster, because it uses the gfxcard as a resource? Or is it mainly for convenience/compatibility?

clickrush wrote:sounds very reasonable thx for your answer. could you also argue for this being faster, because it uses the gfxcard as a resource? Or is it mainly for convenience/compatibility?

At the moment, WebGL it is definitely faster.

(Gullen, 2012)

thx cat

those numbers are amazing because they show how powerful WebGL is and disappointing because they show how stubbornly annoying IE still is, after everything we went through...

I'am even more yippie for this project now though