On last nights episode of TWIT they started talking about HTML5 and one of the panelists mentioned http://www.kesiev.com/akihabara/. It is a cool site that uses HTML5(and HTML5 alone) to recreate classic games we all know and love.
The cool thing about it isn't that they are pretty good reproductions of games we all loved as kids, but rather that they are done in pure HTML/JavaScript/CSS. This is BYOND level gaming performance in a native browser. They should work in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera(probably every modern browser which excludes IE of course). It even kinda worked on my phone. I couldn't get past the start screens on the games because my phones browser was not passing through the keyboard command requests and the touch interface didn't work right.
Anyone know of any other great HTML5 games? I know Google showed off Quake II running in HTML5.
ID:278326
 May 3 2010, 4:16 am
|
|
Don't worry, with web sockets you can still have server side processing that really limits the ability to cheat and steal source code.
Unfortunately web sockets and webGL are nwe HTML5 concepts that are still in active development and only the daily builds of Safari and Chromium support them. They are, however, technologies to watch. At that point you have about the same amount of transparency that Flash offers to game developers. It is trivial to decompile flash. | |
I did not realise HTML 5 is offering all this relatively advanced stuff. It is neat, but I don't understand why it is being done. HTML is not a programming language; it is, as its name suggests, a text-markup language. I don't see any benefit to including these things in HTML. In fact, I think it will end up being a bad thing as it could compromise security. It would suck if I had to browse through the source, to make sure it's not doing anything bad, of every site before I loaded it.
Hopefully browsers will begin to include a "Disable HTML 5" option just like they have options to disable Java and Javascript now. | |
Loduwijk wrote:
I did not realise HTML 5 is offering all this relatively advanced stuff. It is neat, but I don't understand why it is being done. My guesses are HTML is losing a lot more of favoritism to CSS now-a-days so it's a way to step up and throw some competition out to the table. | |
Random_Cookie wrote:
My guesses are HTML is losing a lot more of favoritism to CSS now-a-days so it's a way to step up and throw some competition out to the table. Yeah. Actually, C based languages are losing a lot due to people preferring Boolean protein strings. | |
HTML5 is an umbrella term. It includes CSS and javascript standards as well. It will be up to the browser makers to decide what you can turn off and on, but if implemented correctly it shouldn't have any more security risk than the current system. Chrome, for example, has really strong sandboxing for tabs. So if an exploit is found it must also some how jump out of the sandbox. Things like browsing history and form information are stored outside of the sandbox, so it should prevent most information leakage.
| |
Loduwijk wrote:
I did not realise HTML 5 is offering all this relatively advanced stuff. It is neat, but I don't understand why it is being done. Because current implementations suck. Flash and Silverlight are slow, clunky, require plugins, are extremely insecure, and run only on the CPU. HTML5 will support GPU hardware acceleration for video elements, allowing HTPCs to function a lot better on sites like Hulu, YouTube, and Netflix. They'll run with codecs, not crappy third party players, which will be much less vulnerable to attacks. HTML is not a programming language; it is, as its name suggests, a text-markup language. I don't see any benefit to including these things in HTML. In fact, I think it will end up being a bad thing as it could compromise security. You haven't read up much on Flash exploits, I take it? Adobe just can't seem to get things right. It would suck if I had to browse through the source, to make sure it's not doing anything bad, of every site before I loaded it. You have to do that now anyway. Who knows what's going on in javascript or flash. Good luck trying to read that obfuscated code anyway. HTML5 will provide no more methods to exploit browsers than currently exist, and in fact will limit it by getting rid of antiquated plugins. Hopefully browsers will begin to include a "Disable HTML 5" option just like they have options to disable Java and Javascript now. Sure, I suppose, though I don't know why anyone would want to considering it's a much better alternative to what's running right now. | |
Airjoe wrote:
Sure, I suppose, though I don't know why anyone would want to considering it's a much better alternative to what's running right now. I run a firefox at work with flashblock and noscript because I take security on my office computer very seriously. I can whitelist websites if I feel they are safe. I would want the same options for HTML5, especially including things like the client side info saving options(HTML5 goes way beyond cookies, and for good reason). Of course things like that will get worked out. There will always be options for people like me who are willing to cut functionality for security. | |
You're welcome to pull the ethernet from the wall, too. Like it or not, the number of websites requiring javascript is increasing, and there will come a point when people without javascript will just not be catered to, the same way we no longer care about anyone running an 800x600 resolution. Browsing smart is the solution, not feature crippling.
| |
I wasn't saying anyone should not use these technologies, I was saying I will deal with the pain at work and that is my choice. I'm the one who started this thread about how cool HTML5 is.
| |
Loduwijk wrote:
Hopefully browsers will begin to include a "Disable HTML 5" option just like they have options to disable Java and Javascript now. Don't worry IE has your back--just not on purpose. | |
In a lot of cases, HTML5 is not. HTML5 as a standard touches on these core technologies: HTML, XHTML and DOM Level 2 for HTML. Within these core technologies are some defined elements not seen in HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1:
The canvas element The audio and video elements Offline storage API Document editing (I still haven't read the working draft for this) Drag-and-drop requirements Cross-document messaging History requirements Uniform protocol handlers The bulk of the neat tricks people associate with HTML5 is actually covered by the WAWG http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/charter/ webapps-deliverables.html You'll notice drag-and-drop again, as WAWG is defining ancillary standards beyond that which HTML5 seeks to provide. Unlike the HTML5 standard, WAWGs deliverables may or may not be made standards or implemented by browser vendors. HTML5's big tricks would be the canvas, audio and video tags and a requirement for native SVG support (looking at you, IE). As these are all implemented in the browser (by the browser vendor) and not via (sometimes sandboxed) plugins, security should be better than existing closed plugin solutions. The security model for flash in IE for example is "Do whatever you like, just don't corrupt my screen and only write in a set directory plzzzz". Java in the browser is masochistic, but ironically bypassed through self-set policy. The security assumption is you trust your browser of choice to be secure, and plugins less so as they are 3rd party. Naturally making the browser responsible for canvas / video / audio should reinforce your confidence in your browsing experience, not weaken it. | |
It probably wouldn't do for any large commercial games, but small casual games that don't really matter should be interesting.