Torque 3D Web Publishing and InstantAction Technology Explained
by Brett Seyler · 01/22/2009 (3:31 pm) · 49 comments
Since we launched the new site, the InstantAction Technology page has gotten a lot of traffic, and that's a good thing. There does seem to be some confusion though, about the distinction between InstantAction Technology and web publishing for Torque 3D. I want to explain that here.
First off, here's what I'm talking about:
On the new GarageGames.com, we have some intra-company navigation that you'll find at the top center. There's GarageGames of course, InstantAction.com, and a new page for InstantAction Technology.
Clicking here...
Takes you here...
So what's this all about and what does IA Tech (my shorthand for now) have to do with Torque 3D Web Publishing? IA Tech is actually very different. It's entirely independent of Torque with a fully API and remote test harness we use with developers creating titles for InstantAction.com. In addition to browser rendering, it also provides a number of features abstracted from Torque (or whatever game technology is chosen). These include:
1. Abstracted networking support for lobbies, matchmaking, NAT traversal, encryption, and lots more.
2. Shareable, one-click URL game session joining.
3. Group lobby system enabling game-to-game switching while preserving the group or "party"
4. Active streaming...we chunk game assets and data and stream them down to the user as they are needed.
5. No download, no install.
6. Web / game hybridization. This means we have three-way communication between front-end web components (in html, ajax, flash, etc.), the game, and back-end web services or "cloud" features. This allows us to render menus and other stuff that has no business being done in a game engine using html. It also lets us record and store stats, enable in-game chat, and produce leaderboards or feeds that can simulcast out to anywhere on the web (player badges, Facebook apps, etc.)
There are literally dozens of these component features that extend the idea of "your game in a browser" well beyond what you can do with Flash, Unity, or any other web publishing technology.
So why the distinction? It doesn't make a lot of sense to offer IA Tech for mass productization / distribution. It's all powered by a super-lightweight plugin (~150kb in FireFox) that uses a signed certificate by InstantAction. That means we're on the hook for whatever happens on a client machine using this plugin tech. The only way we're comfortable doing this is if we know exactly what's going on there. That is, we need to know, for certain, what instructions are being sent to the client's machine and what is being downloaded. If we're operating a managed portfolio of games under our QA and review, we have certain knowledge that everything is above board and operating cleanly on the client machine.
There's no play for plugin ubiquity here. We're not trying to be Flash. With IA Tech, we're enabling partners to build their own "InstantAction-like" games destination with their own game or portfolio of games with their own, branded version of the plugin. This is a perfect solution for casual portals like Big Fish, Real, or Playfish. It also makes a lot of sense for games Like EA's Battlefield Heroes (though they only launch from the browser, rather than play from the browser).
Our goal with this technology was always to take the best of the web and the best of games, and make it a seamless experience. That's not currently possible with Flash or any other technology, so we built our own. The IA Tech options are not priced for mass distribution. They are targeted at developers with a budget specifically for web deployment. The technology is very unique, very expensive, and far past anything else available for web games today.
What about Torque 3D Web Publishing? With Torque 3D, you'll be able to publish your game directly to the web with just one click. This will use a different, but similarly effective web rendering technique that runs your game at native, desktop speeds right inside the browser. The end user for your game will go through a fast, simple install process, very similar to Flash and Unity, only again, we're not going for some kind of plugin ubiquity play. The plugin will reflect whatever brand you choose, whether it be "MyGame" to power a single game, or "MyGames" to operate a full portfolio of games. It will work across all major operating systems and browsers. If you are an indie developer, this is what you are looking for.
Torque 3D's web publishing is very Torque specific and will be very affordable. It may or may not be included in the base price for Torque 3D, that's yet to be determined. However, if you want to publish a rich, sophisticated 3D game to the web at minimal cost, there will be no better solution.
If you have any other questions about how all this stuff works, feel free to post them to this blog.
Thanks for reading!
First off, here's what I'm talking about:
On the new GarageGames.com, we have some intra-company navigation that you'll find at the top center. There's GarageGames of course, InstantAction.com, and a new page for InstantAction Technology.
So what's this all about and what does IA Tech (my shorthand for now) have to do with Torque 3D Web Publishing? IA Tech is actually very different. It's entirely independent of Torque with a fully API and remote test harness we use with developers creating titles for InstantAction.com. In addition to browser rendering, it also provides a number of features abstracted from Torque (or whatever game technology is chosen). These include:
1. Abstracted networking support for lobbies, matchmaking, NAT traversal, encryption, and lots more.
2. Shareable, one-click URL game session joining.
3. Group lobby system enabling game-to-game switching while preserving the group or "party"
4. Active streaming...we chunk game assets and data and stream them down to the user as they are needed.
5. No download, no install.
6. Web / game hybridization. This means we have three-way communication between front-end web components (in html, ajax, flash, etc.), the game, and back-end web services or "cloud" features. This allows us to render menus and other stuff that has no business being done in a game engine using html. It also lets us record and store stats, enable in-game chat, and produce leaderboards or feeds that can simulcast out to anywhere on the web (player badges, Facebook apps, etc.)
There are literally dozens of these component features that extend the idea of "your game in a browser" well beyond what you can do with Flash, Unity, or any other web publishing technology.
So why the distinction? It doesn't make a lot of sense to offer IA Tech for mass productization / distribution. It's all powered by a super-lightweight plugin (~150kb in FireFox) that uses a signed certificate by InstantAction. That means we're on the hook for whatever happens on a client machine using this plugin tech. The only way we're comfortable doing this is if we know exactly what's going on there. That is, we need to know, for certain, what instructions are being sent to the client's machine and what is being downloaded. If we're operating a managed portfolio of games under our QA and review, we have certain knowledge that everything is above board and operating cleanly on the client machine.
There's no play for plugin ubiquity here. We're not trying to be Flash. With IA Tech, we're enabling partners to build their own "InstantAction-like" games destination with their own game or portfolio of games with their own, branded version of the plugin. This is a perfect solution for casual portals like Big Fish, Real, or Playfish. It also makes a lot of sense for games Like EA's Battlefield Heroes (though they only launch from the browser, rather than play from the browser).
Our goal with this technology was always to take the best of the web and the best of games, and make it a seamless experience. That's not currently possible with Flash or any other technology, so we built our own. The IA Tech options are not priced for mass distribution. They are targeted at developers with a budget specifically for web deployment. The technology is very unique, very expensive, and far past anything else available for web games today.
What about Torque 3D Web Publishing? With Torque 3D, you'll be able to publish your game directly to the web with just one click. This will use a different, but similarly effective web rendering technique that runs your game at native, desktop speeds right inside the browser. The end user for your game will go through a fast, simple install process, very similar to Flash and Unity, only again, we're not going for some kind of plugin ubiquity play. The plugin will reflect whatever brand you choose, whether it be "MyGame" to power a single game, or "MyGames" to operate a full portfolio of games. It will work across all major operating systems and browsers. If you are an indie developer, this is what you are looking for.
Torque 3D's web publishing is very Torque specific and will be very affordable. It may or may not be included in the base price for Torque 3D, that's yet to be determined. However, if you want to publish a rich, sophisticated 3D game to the web at minimal cost, there will be no better solution.
If you have any other questions about how all this stuff works, feel free to post them to this blog.
Thanks for reading!
About the author
Since 2007, I've done my best to steer Torque's development and brand toward the best opportunities in games middleware.
#22
No, all that would be built the same way it is now with Torque, BUT you'd be able to provide information (status updates for example) to your gamers using front-end web components right in their field of view. This is much easier to do than build a similar experience inside a desktop game. I suspect Unity web publishing can do all this too by the way. Torque 3D web publishing operates in a very similar way.
01/23/2009 (2:08 am)
@Julian R:Quote:so are you saying that communication within a T3D game in the browser means more connectivity with web servers and backend databases to update the state of your game in a real or semi-real time environment?
No, all that would be built the same way it is now with Torque, BUT you'd be able to provide information (status updates for example) to your gamers using front-end web components right in their field of view. This is much easier to do than build a similar experience inside a desktop game. I suspect Unity web publishing can do all this too by the way. Torque 3D web publishing operates in a very similar way.
#23
But one can hope :D
01/23/2009 (2:21 am)
@Brett, 2 or 3 years is pretty optimistic for something they've been trying to figure out for the last 15. I think Microsoft will come up with something, but it will probably be oriented around managed apps in support of Azure rather than truly native apps. I just don't see that it's going to be possible to provide that type of service securely with native apps, at least not with current hardware and OSes and current browser paradigms. Maybe if they come up with something completely new on the web front like you suggested in your first response, but that's probably more than a couple years away.But one can hope :D
#24
01/23/2009 (3:06 am)
@Brett: so the plan for T3D web publishing is something like: here's the web plugin. When you license it, you brand it, sign it with your own certificate, and distribute it yourself. Because GG can't really know what's going on in everyone's code (they might have modified the source of the game to format the harddrive, or something), so the plugin won't be signed/distributed by GG at all. Is that correct? 
#25
Just because you have a plugin and put your game in it doesn't mean it's automagically hooked up web servers and services. Someone has to write that backend stuff you know. Does your Web Publishing plugin do that? Or are you cashing in your future community bail out expecting resources that plug this into various server technologies.
No streaming = pointless (for a game of size).
But, I do see why you wouldn't put streaming in.
Conflict of interest with AI and I can sort of respect that.
IE8 uses more resources than windows xp itself. Couple that with windows vista or windows 7 and I highly doubt you would get the same native desktop speed inside the browser. If I have to download the whole game (of size) just to play it in a browser would piss me off.
And casual gamers hate this type of thing.
They like to start a game, use one mouse button,
and not wait for anything.
To me it sounds like you guys are trying to half ass 2 things to compete with Unity and not step on IA toes at the same time.
It's a shame too because a streaming web plugin could put GG back on the map.
I guess that just leaves a chance for someone in the community to add that support and make some serious cash on a GG mistake.
01/23/2009 (5:26 am)
BrettQuote:
If not, there is no point in a web option (except maybe for a small casual game). With resource hogs like IE 1.8 about to hit the market in full force it would just eat up massive amounts of memory and resources that could be used for the game.
Just because you have a plugin and put your game in it doesn't mean it's automagically hooked up web servers and services. Someone has to write that backend stuff you know. Does your Web Publishing plugin do that? Or are you cashing in your future community bail out expecting resources that plug this into various server technologies.
No streaming = pointless (for a game of size).
But, I do see why you wouldn't put streaming in.
Conflict of interest with AI and I can sort of respect that.
Quote:
runs your game at native, desktop speeds right inside the browser.
IE8 uses more resources than windows xp itself. Couple that with windows vista or windows 7 and I highly doubt you would get the same native desktop speed inside the browser. If I have to download the whole game (of size) just to play it in a browser would piss me off.
And casual gamers hate this type of thing.
They like to start a game, use one mouse button,
and not wait for anything.
To me it sounds like you guys are trying to half ass 2 things to compete with Unity and not step on IA toes at the same time.
It's a shame too because a streaming web plugin could put GG back on the map.
I guess that just leaves a chance for someone in the community to add that support and make some serious cash on a GG mistake.
#26
Looking forward to more great updates Brett!
01/23/2009 (5:43 am)
I think this is a really great feature, I agree that hardcore gaming in a browser is the way of the future, for many game types. Glad GG is forward thinking in this regard, I was impressed by InstantAction and how you jump started it with a few good titles.Looking forward to more great updates Brett!
#27
01/23/2009 (6:04 am)
This is definitely something that is underserved on many levels. My recent experience with Shiva/Ston3D and its *extremely* easy to use deploy-to-web or deploy-to-iPhone at NO additional cost tell me that there is going to be some good competition here.
#28
I think Brett is doing a great job on talking about this... and I don't want to step on his toes. So, I'll just say:
If you want to target the most casual of casual gamers who have zero attention span, who can't download anything bigger than a few megs, who also generally don't PURCHASE your product, and have a really hard time running 3D games in the first place because they have no idea how to install DirectX and video/sound drivers... a 2D Flash game may be a better fit for you.
... though a lot of us are working on 3D games with larger sizes, dependencies that need to be installed, and where you really need a proper installer for the end user, which our web deployment technology will provide.
Torque 3D Web Deployment is a GREAT fit for indie developers who want to get their game on the web. It does NOT have a complicated backend which we dictate by design. It does NOT require expensive YEARLY code signing certificates (or requiring game players to mess with their browser security settings OR accept your signed code through the web which is likely to get even more hairy in the next years).
It also allows seamless one click publish to web and desktop with standard install/uninstall (so you can handle dependencies, customize process, etc)... with the ability to choose the same patching technology for desktop and the web, because it isn't gunked up in the plugin (with associated security issues)... whew!
... and yup, similar to Flash, Unity, and id Software's Quake LIVE technology ... so, being in that company, I think we're doing something right :)
01/23/2009 (7:50 am)
@JeremyE: I am the guy working on the Torque 3D Web Deployment... and I try not to "half ass" anything. :)I think Brett is doing a great job on talking about this... and I don't want to step on his toes. So, I'll just say:
If you want to target the most casual of casual gamers who have zero attention span, who can't download anything bigger than a few megs, who also generally don't PURCHASE your product, and have a really hard time running 3D games in the first place because they have no idea how to install DirectX and video/sound drivers... a 2D Flash game may be a better fit for you.
... though a lot of us are working on 3D games with larger sizes, dependencies that need to be installed, and where you really need a proper installer for the end user, which our web deployment technology will provide.
Torque 3D Web Deployment is a GREAT fit for indie developers who want to get their game on the web. It does NOT have a complicated backend which we dictate by design. It does NOT require expensive YEARLY code signing certificates (or requiring game players to mess with their browser security settings OR accept your signed code through the web which is likely to get even more hairy in the next years).
It also allows seamless one click publish to web and desktop with standard install/uninstall (so you can handle dependencies, customize process, etc)... with the ability to choose the same patching technology for desktop and the web, because it isn't gunked up in the plugin (with associated security issues)... whew!
... and yup, similar to Flash, Unity, and id Software's Quake LIVE technology ... so, being in that company, I think we're doing something right :)
#29
Gimme it now!! Damn you - Stop replying here and get back in your cupboard and code, code code!!!
Honestly guys, it's looking like Torque 3D is going to be one beauty of a product.
01/23/2009 (8:08 am)
Quote:with the ability to choose the same patching technology for desktop and the web
Gimme it now!! Damn you - Stop replying here and get back in your cupboard and code, code code!!!
Honestly guys, it's looking like Torque 3D is going to be one beauty of a product.
#30
from a technology standpoint, IA and T3D's web plugins sound pretty similar. is there a reason not to have a single common technology there ?
01/23/2009 (10:13 am)
personally i have some skepticism about the desirability of non-casual games in the browser. yes, it's cool as the dickens, but i think the user interaction model with browsers is still very casual: there's no "penalty" for browsing away from a page. ie users are used to closing web pages much more casually than they close an application window. Chrome is a step towards a browser-as-application-platform model, but i think there's still a ways to go.from a technology standpoint, IA and T3D's web plugins sound pretty similar. is there a reason not to have a single common technology there ?
#31
01/23/2009 (11:03 am)
I don't really know much about Unity's stuff, but just about all Flash games, and Quake LIVE, are free games. In the case of Quake, it's going to be in support of huge online competitions. In the case of Flash games it's usually just low budget games to throw up and try to collect some ad revenues by pushing some ads through the game or around the game. 
#32
Are you looking for games to sell (publish), and that can be played using IA, or are you looking to sell licenses (like T3D) to the technology so developers can build their own?
Or a combination of both?
I spent so time playing on IA, and it was fun. It playing with real people and not AI bots that makes it fun.
01/23/2009 (11:10 am)
So lets talk about the business model side of this IA technology.Are you looking for games to sell (publish), and that can be played using IA, or are you looking to sell licenses (like T3D) to the technology so developers can build their own?
Or a combination of both?
I spent so time playing on IA, and it was fun. It playing with real people and not AI bots that makes it fun.
#33
01/23/2009 (1:23 pm)
Quote:Are you looking for games to sell (publish)Yes.
Quote:and that can be played using IAYes.
Quote:or are you looking to sell licenses (like T3D) to the technology so developers can build their own?Yes.
#34
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/19/2321230&from=rss
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/09/google_native_desktop/
I'm an optimist :)
re: free games online...I think it's just the start. IA had no problem monetizing it's games, even very early on, but there's always the growth curve to consider. If I had to pick a model for the kind of games and games services that makes the most sense online, I'd point to Nexon.
01/23/2009 (1:27 pm)
@Gerald: I agree that 2-3 years to see the browser go away is optimistic...I'm not thinking that...just that the kind of tech needed to make it happen will be around then. http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/19/2321230&from=rss
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/09/google_native_desktop/
I'm an optimist :)
re: free games online...I think it's just the start. IA had no problem monetizing it's games, even very early on, but there's always the growth curve to consider. If I had to pick a model for the kind of games and games services that makes the most sense online, I'd point to Nexon.
#35
01/23/2009 (1:28 pm)
@Orion: Yeah, Chrome is a nice first step w/ separate processes per tab and some light sandboxing...I think there's a lot more to see in the next couple years though.
#36
Um...no. That would be a legit concern if we were doing it the way you describe, but it's a bit different. There's no signing necessary.
01/23/2009 (1:56 pm)
@Aras:Quote:so the plan for T3D web publishing is something like: here's the web plugin. When you license it, you brand it, sign it with your own certificate, and distribute it yourself. Because GG can't really know what's going on in everyone's code (they might have modified the source of the game to format the harddrive, or something), so the plugin won't be signed/distributed by GG at all. Is that correct?
Um...no. That would be a legit concern if we were doing it the way you describe, but it's a bit different. There's no signing necessary.
#37
If I was I wouldn't be worried about streaming.
But GarageGames sure can dictate what you can do
and what you can release.
I'm just trying to figure out what makes this different from a zip file on a ftp site. Besides being able to play in a web browser.
-Do I have to make a package per web browser per platform.
-When the game is installing does it prevent the user from
opening a new tab and surfing the internet?
-Is it just a progress bar when the game is downloading/installing or do we have the ability to insert screenshots and story line snippets to keep the player interested and not have them wonder off to another web page and end up forgetting about the game.
-What happens to the game when the browser is closed.
-Where are my config files and save games stored?
More questions coming as soon as I can think of them. ;)
01/23/2009 (3:08 pm)
I'm not targeting casual gamers.If I was I wouldn't be worried about streaming.
Quote:I've seen your work, so I know this :)
I am the guy working on the Torque 3D Web Deployment... and I try not to "half ass" anything. :)
But GarageGames sure can dictate what you can do
and what you can release.
I'm just trying to figure out what makes this different from a zip file on a ftp site. Besides being able to play in a web browser.
-Do I have to make a package per web browser per platform.
-When the game is installing does it prevent the user from
opening a new tab and surfing the internet?
-Is it just a progress bar when the game is downloading/installing or do we have the ability to insert screenshots and story line snippets to keep the player interested and not have them wonder off to another web page and end up forgetting about the game.
-What happens to the game when the browser is closed.
-Where are my config files and save games stored?
More questions coming as soon as I can think of them. ;)
#38
I completely agree with you about Nexon's being the best model for online games, though.
01/23/2009 (3:53 pm)
@Brett, yeah I had a look at Native Client. It basically uses the same type of security model as the "protected mode" in Vista, forcing unprivileged modules to access system resources through privileged brokers, and will probably impose similar limitations and have similar vulnerabilities. But we'll see. I hope they can pull it off, but I've been disappointed too many times in this area to share in your optimism :PI completely agree with you about Nexon's being the best model for online games, though.
#39
I've tried contacting you twice by email, and so I'll try here, too.
1) Does your Torque 3D plugin for GG indies work with TGB?
If so, 2) Is it ready now?
01/28/2009 (4:08 pm)
@Brett,I've tried contacting you twice by email, and so I'll try here, too.
1) Does your Torque 3D plugin for GG indies work with TGB?
If so, 2) Is it ready now?
#40
02/09/2009 (11:21 am)
What's the price. 
Torque 3D Owner Brett Seyler
Default Studio Name
No apology necessary :) I don't have an answer for you right now though. Your request for it is noted though!