N v1.5 Poll: Platform

[ska]

...Unreality talked about getting NReality integrated into Facebook, which I would support fully. That would bring the two things I use most together. Like a wedding, but with technology.

This would be an amazing way to direct traffic and attention to this game! Being able to play N (and possibly get highscores too while on FB would be sick) Back in 2004, social networking sites were pratically brand new - This could be a game changer (literally) but definitely stand-alone. Either way, cheat protection is essential as is episode highscoring and episode integration for map makers too.

[otters]

While it is hard to decide, I'd say that the results are fairly conclusively in favor of standalone.

[RandomDigits]

In terms of popularity, I wonder if you'd want to have a preview browser-version that also links to the full freeware standalone program download. Is that kind of thing a dick move? I don't even remember any more. Between one and the other, like faemir said, standalone is definitely the better option I'm pretty sure.

Aww someone said that already!

Having had only dial-up until recently, I could not have played N as a browser /at all/. I also currently don't have internet at home but still enjoy playing through mappacks or mapping or working on beating the main game. Or doing something that'll be useful in the longer term... ;p

[Vyacheslav]

Holy crap, 67 votes

[danield9tqh]

if your serious about n at all you would take the 5 seconds and download it. But if it's online that might eliminate highscore cheating... i still prefer the stand alone app

[Raif]

Who voted for in-browser? :P

[Meta Ing]

Standalone application, especially because (as mentioned before): It makes it usable even if the internet is down, It makes it much easier (or possible) to transfer data from one computer to another, and it probably works better as it's own program than in a browser.

[Kablizzy]

A teaser would be nice - My only concern with the current browser-based versions is that they *suck*. They're six-and-a-half years old, they need to be replaced, if even only with a teaser.

[Vyacheslav]

It's small enough in file size and by now, N is a lightweight game since it should run on ANY computer made in the last 10 years or so... If 1.5 was ported to a browser, then you may run into problems with the N editor with the key combinations and browser shortcuts.

[AlliedEnvy]

I'm split. (And so, haven't voted. I wish at least there was a "Both" or "Other" option.)

Being standalone is great for having the feel of of a more serious game (also, you don't need to load a browser). But, there is a caveat. With 1.4, the standalone game had a built-in version of Flash which stayed the same, while Adobe kept on updating the Flash plugin. In Linux, this resulted in a situation where the standalone version was all but unplayable (at least for me), but if you were able to get a .swf of the game, it would run wonderfully smoothly in a browser, using the newest Flash plugin (with just a little HTML to glue it all together). So, I guess I'd prefer a browser version because it allows the game to run better as Flash improves.

It's basically the debate between static and dynamic linking, for you programmers out there.

If you could produce a standalone app for N which dynamically loads the locally-installed Flash, that would be the best option. I think I read somewhere (not sure) maybe Mechinarum does this? Something to look into.

Incidentally, I have come to really hate Adobe and Flash (my rant about this would be too long and too off-topic for this post). If you're doing a rewrite, perhaps consider a different platform. (PyGame? Maybe something else with SDL, or maybe even just OpenGL?) I don't know how different AS1 and AS3 are, but perhaps they're different enough it's not any more difficult to port to a completely different platform (or the extra difficulty is worth dropping Flash for).

[Meta Ing]

N is a lightweight game since it should run on ANY computer made in the last 10 years or so...

SHOULD. Apparently many computers with windows vista and, from what I hear, windows 7 never seemed to've gotten that message, though.

Unless you mean just run in general, because I meant run well.

[kkstrong]

When I still lived with my mom, she would punish me by taking out the internet, and I would play N. I would never have it any other way. It's how the fan base is, the majority of us still live with parents.

[im_bad_at_n]

What some might have said, if I need internet to play N, then I would have to leave NUMA. So stand alone. My vote just adds to the whole load of votes though, so I'm happy about that.

[lord_day]

N is a lightweight game since it should run on ANY computer made in the last 10 years or so...

SHOULD. Apparently many computers with windows vista and, from what I hear, windows 7 never seemed to've gotten that message, though.

Unless you mean just run in general, because I meant run well.

N runs on my windows 7 better than it did on my XP.

[squibbles]

N is a lightweight game since it should run on ANY computer made in the last 10 years or so...

SHOULD. Apparently many computers with windows vista and, from what I hear, windows 7 never seemed to've gotten that message, though.

Unless you mean just run in general, because I meant run well.

N runs on my windows 7 better than it did on my XP.

Yeah, same with me. On topic, I still have dial up, and I'd hate to be the only guy stuck using v1.4. :/

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I don't know what it is, squibbles, but my brain keeps inserting "black" into random parts of your posts these days.
I totally just read that as, "I'd hate to be the only black guy stuck using v1.4."

[Arachnid]

I'm surprised everyone is so dead-set on standalone.

If you want the widest audience - and I presume you do - and the opportunity to take best advantage of the big but temporary influxes of traffic that social media sites bring, you should definitely make it in-browser.

Not to mention, having it embedded makes a whole lot of cool things possible. Imagine a NUMA where you can play levels without any cutting and pasting - just click 'play' - and where you can watch demo replays right in the browser.

There's no reason you couldn't offer a bundled version for download for those who are absolutely determined to have it standalone, either.

[EddyMataGallos]

I'm surprised everyone is so dead-set on standalone.

If you want the widest audience - and I presume you do - and the opportunity to take best advantage of the big but temporary influxes of traffic that social media sites bring, you should definitely make it in-browser.

Not to mention, having it embedded makes a whole lot of cool things possible. Imagine a NUMA where you can play levels without any cutting and pasting - just click 'play' - and where you can watch demo replays right in the browser.

There's no reason you couldn't offer a bundled version for download for those who are absolutely determined to have it standalone, either.

That NUMA idea is a cool idea, but have you thought about what happens when you temporary lose internet, or about the bandwidth, i think standalone would work faster and better, and probably making it in-browser could end on a new wave of illegal swf N propagation through thousands of websites again.

[squibbles]

Actually, yeah, I don't know why this didn't spring to mind earlier, but both is brilliant.

[epigone]

Definitely stand-alone.

[AlliedEnvy]

What I've been trying to say is, "What happens when Adobe hypothetically releases Flash 11, which is hypothetically much faster and makes use of the newest hardware features?" It's likely that the standalone N is stuck with Flash 10, while the browser N works with the latest plugin.

That hypothetical is analogous to what has already happened, with 1.4.

That is why I'm leaning towards wanting a browser N. There are other advantages, like being able to integrate with other websites while online, etc, but I don't do a lot of social media stuff so that's not as important to me. NUMA integration would be awesome, though.

To all the people saying "I want to be able to play N offline", you don't understand. To play a browser-based version offline, all you'd need to do is have the .swf file, and a little HTML file, both saved on your computer, and you'd easily be able to play the it offline, in your browser.

Additionally (for those of you with bandwidth concerns), if you've loaded N in your browser once, it should be saved in the cache, so it wouldn't be redownloaded, unless the cache gets invalidated or cleared or something. Or you could just save it for playing offline like I just mentioned, above.

[heatwave]

Why not both?

[raigan]

I guess this should have been more clear -- we're definitely making some sort of web-based version so that there's an official alternative to the hacked v1.2 swfs floating around, we just didn't know if we should focus on the stand-alone or the web version.

Personally we strongly prefer playing games "normally", not in a browser, however we're aware that we may be old crazy people who are stuck in our ways, because these days it seems like browser games are very popular. Thus, we asked, just in case we were the only people who felt this way and everyone else would be happy with just an in-browser version. It turns out that we're not alone, though :)

FYI, stand-alone/in-browser has nothing to do with N not being updated as Adobe releases new flashplayers; sadly there are many bugs which we can't track down that cause the game to break in the later flashplayers.. this is one of the many reasons we're doing a clean rewrite of the game for v1.5, so that when newer players are released we can just rebuild the game to support them.

Having both browser and standalone versions is the goal, however realistically there will have to be some compromises. For example: we can now access the filesystem so that the editor/progress/etc. can be file-based using text files in the game's directory, rather than SharedObjects hidden in the system folders. BUT, this only works for stand-alone.. browser-based versions would have to continue using SO and/or a database-driven storage system. So are we going to provide support for all three storage methods, or just cut one or more? Can users transfer progress between stand-alone and web-based versions, and if so how is that accomplished?

There are a lot of interrelated issues that need to be worked out! Thankfully you're giving us some direction to help inform our decisions :)

[heatwave]

we can now access the filesystem so that the editor/progress/etc. can be file-based using text files in the game's directory, rather than SharedObjects hidden in the system folders.

So, the editor will be able to save the current level to a .txt, and then read from it later? how about autosave?

[Arachnid]

Having both browser and standalone versions is the goal, however realistically there will have to be some compromises. For example: we can now access the filesystem so that the editor/progress/etc. can be file-based using text files in the game's directory, rather than SharedObjects hidden in the system folders. BUT, this only works for stand-alone.. browser-based versions would have to continue using SO and/or a database-driven storage system. So are we going to provide support for all three storage methods, or just cut one or more? Can users transfer progress between stand-alone and web-based versions, and if so how is that accomplished?

I would humbly suggest the following:

Have the game load and save data using a simple (for example, JSON based) API. When embedded in a webpage, have the page specify the server to communicate with as an input parameter. When running locally, have it communicate with the default N server.

This provides everything except offline access - which is an increasingly niche thing these days - makes it easier to integrate with sites, and makes it possible to integrate different servers with the game.