Friday January 12th, 2001
David Boswell writes in:
Thursday January 18th, 2001 9:18 AM
You are replying to this message
>> "I don't think anybody is going to create a worthwhile, popular online game that requires Mozilla. Why? It would make more sense to either create a kind of 'full' online game (which requires its own native-code client, has full graphics etc.) or to create a web-game which can run in all browsers."
well, and i still think mozilla would be great for online games. a "full" online game is really hard to produce and you need to make native clients for EVERY platform. that costs a lot of money and work. a browser compatible webgame OTOH would be much more restricted and even harder to produce (unless all browsers do exactly what they are supposed to do).
>> "In any case I don't want to see 'Mozilla-only' sites, just as I don't like to see 'IE-only' sites. That would kind of defeat the point of supporting Web standards..."
of course, but games are not simple sites. people pay money to play those games or at least they have to download a special client or a plugin. so why shouldn't they just download the 5 megs of mozilla and the game component? this wouldn't be a simple browser plugin but a whole new game system that sits on top of the mozilla base, has almost no restrictions and runs on every plattform, mozilla runs on. the only downside would be performance. to make state-of-the-art 3d-graphics online shooter or whatever you would of course have to write a native client. but online rpg's for example, don't need those highend graphics. that's where i see the power of mozilla.
> As for usage increasing...
well, i'm almost certain that mozilla WILL get some of those killer features, aol WILL adopt mozilla and non-windows plattforms (not just windows) WILL become more and more popular. maybe it will be a very long way to roll, but you can't stop the rock! ;)