LÖVE

Nixola wrote:How could someone lose money due to a browser? It sent an order twice or something like that?

I had to spend several days working around its quirks. Those cost money.

kikito wrote:

Nixola wrote:How could someone lose money due to a browser? It sent an order twice or something like that?

I had to spend several days working around its quirks. Those cost money.

i wonder if we could sue them for this. Think about all the nerves and money just because of IE. But I guess in the end it's the big companies who never update their stuff who are responsible for prehistoric IE versions still being around so much. Still a funny thing to think about

kikito wrote:

coffee wrote:<Video>

I hate that video so much. I have actually lost money because of IE. And now they tell me that I don't like it because I'm mentally ill, and I just "love to hate it". It's offensive.

T-Bone wrote:You know what would have been awesome? If love.filesystem could write files to the server, instead of on the user's computer. That way, you could totally make an online game, with accounts and login and stuff, really easily.

Well, the "local" part could be done with localStorage. For the remote part you would need a server of some sort.

Of course you would need a server. What's the point of Love2D WebPlayer if you don't put it on a server and let people play your game by visiting a website? Or am I missing something here?

For WebPlayer, it doesn't have to be your own server. It could just serve the WebPlayer and the game and be done with it.

A problem with a server that allows write access like that, is that you have zero protection against Bad People, trying to fill the server's hard drive, for example.

T-Bone wrote:Of course you would need a server. What's the point of Love2D WebPlayer if you don't put it on a server and let people play your game by visiting a website? Or am I missing something here?

You are missing something here.

WebPlayers work client-side . This means that they still work if you download the appropriate files to your hard drive. For example, you can download an html page and the flash associated with it, and play it on your computer, with no internet connection. It's true that you don't normally do this; you usually just go to a server, and fire everything from there.

But the server can be quite "stupid" - it can just serve files and that's it. In practical terms, the server is behaving like a folder in your hard drive. You ask it for files, and it sends them to you. And that's it. Any web server out there will work, with little or no configuration.

On the other hand, for what you wrote, you can't use a "stupid" server. You need an intelligent one, who is able to "understand" orders like "save this data" or "give me this data back". And security, and validation, and a database. You need to involve server-side technologies, like PHP, or java, or ruby. It's a different problem altogether.

Exactly.

That's true. And online saving can still be achieved, if the Love2D WebPlayer has support for luasocket. That way, you can communicate with the server in the "usual" fashion, and build a server-side program that is "intelligent".

T-Bone wrote:That's true. And online saving can still be achieved, if the Love2D WebPlayer has support for luasocket. That way, you can communicate with the server in the "usual" fashion, and build a server-side program that is "intelligent".

Of course that could be done, but the server part should be out of the scope of the WebPlayer - a different project altogether.

kikito wrote:

T-Bone wrote:That's true. And online saving can still be achieved, if the Love2D WebPlayer has support for luasocket. That way, you can communicate with the server in the "usual" fashion, and build a server-side program that is "intelligent".

Of course that could be done, but the server part should be out of the scope of the WebPlayer - a different project altogether.

Yes, yes, of course.

update : huge performance improvement for me by removing a webgl error-check inside vertex-buffer update function.
i also increased the default maxfps limit from 40 to 60 (removing it completely might have bad effects on browser performance, i dunno)

two new demos : (both work fine in chrome but take ages to several minutes to load in firefox, beware)
http://ghoulsblade.schattenkind.net/lov ... r/maptest/ (tiled maploader)
http://ghoulsblade.schattenkind.net/lov ... are201204/ (slimeabug, our ludumdare jam entry in webplayer)

the firefox slowness is due to string-operations/luajs-translate on the 2mb map file, i'll try to precompile to js tomorrow.

also notable addition : imagedata partially implemented, notably loading images, using imagedata:paste to extract parts, and loading imagedata as image.