Why did they use Unreal Engine 4 for PUBG when really it should be web browser based? Asking for a friend.
7 Likes
Good post Gerrie. Forget the Damned_Yankee guy, he is hopelessly stubborn and he will argue anybody for the rest of his life.
1 Like
Because ain’t nobody going to be sitting around waiting for half a gigabyte or more of game assets to download every single time they want to go for a ride on Zwift. Or they want to swap worlds.
You know how people complain about Zwift’s forced updates ruining their schedules and missing the start of their ride? Just imagine that on every single ride but worse.
1 Like
While I agree with the majority here this isn’t the case because browsers have cache. So even if it was browser based it would have to download only once and/or changes.
You are missing the point. That particular comment was not directly about Web applications, rather, it was about how blurry protocol stacks are.
The fact that “telnet” allows you to “cross” into another protocol is the point, and basically disproves that http(s) defines what is or isn’t a web application.
Ok, so Zwift will function in “single user mode”, but, clearly nobody uses it that way. And in fact its popularity is largely because it is multi-user “game”.
In the normal multi user mode it requires an active internet connection and relies upon a variety of web protocols. Thus it is a web application.
I think most people would define a Web-based application as one that runs in a(ny) Web browser with a Web server at the back end. At the back end or even in the front end some other protocols might come into play, sure. My script or CGI application/DLL etc. might open a standard socket and do anything; but the script itself is invoked over HTTP/S using a connection to Apache/nginx etc. Or I could open a WebSocket from some client JS, sure,
But I think it’s a leap (and an invalid one at that) to describe a program as “Web-based” just because it uses some protocols associated with the WWW. The Web is accepted to have been invented in 1989/90. What about all the Internet-based applications that existed before that date? Are they Web-based? IRC for example. Or other client-server games that don’t use a Web server, like Quake.
Maybe you’re using a specific definition of “Web-based” that makes sense in your context, or is specific to your area. But it’s not the one most commonly understood.
4 Likes
You should update the Wikipedia page for “Web application”. 
I get your point, but it’s still not what Zwift is, as far as I know. Zwift might use HTTPS for some aspects, but isn’t the the main networking raw TCP/IP and UDP socket-based IO using a proprietary protocol? With a proprietary game engine.
The idea that it could all be done in a UA without a huge amount of effort seems unlikely to me.
To be fair, there is precedent for it. id Software did it with Quake III Arena when they created QuakeLive for example. But even then it was a plugin based on NPAPI IIRC, and it’s no longer playable in a browser (it’s a standalone client installed via Steam). And of course there were plenty of Flash games that could be played in a browser.
Yep, I got what you meant by “game streaming” in this context. And really I think it’s possibly the best way to ensure that everything is properly timed and what we see is “real”. There are many instances where what we see on a (YouTube or Twitch) stream doesn’t match the official results. The worst thing for eRacing as a spectator sport is for us all to watch Racer_A win the race only to be told later than Racer_B actually won it. Sure, it kinda happens in meatspace with photo finishes sometimes, but it needn’t happen with Zwift.
.
As a software developer I find this thread highly entertaining and hilarious. To input my 2 cents, Zwift is not a web application. But I’m happy to sit back with popcorn and watch the debate.
12 Likes
Looking at the launcher executable on MacOS; what it links with, strings, and its logs it’s pretty obvious it uses WebGL for rendering and hence probably also JS for scripting. But it’s also clearly a threaded native program, not a web app in any way.
1 Like
My antediluvian understanding of “WWW” is that it comprises basically anything you can point to with an URL, not just HTTP(S)-based services. Then again, I think most current “web” browsers don’t even support Gopher anymore. O tempora o mores.
RFC 1630 uses the phrase “as used in the World-Wide Web”, which to my mind could be read two ways. The fact that I could refer to ftp.cdrom.com as ftp://ftp.cdrom.com doesn’t to me imply the cdrom.com FTP server is a “web application”, since I could just as well open ftp/WS_FTP or something else and connect directly to it.
Similarly, Gopher was, as far as I recall, an alternative to the WWW, yet gopher is named as a scheme in that RFC.
So is file; and I would argue that file:///D:/Projects/junk.txt isn’t a Web file, nor is my local filesystem a Web-based application.
Maybe this is what Yankee is referring to though.
Not really sure what all of you are going on and on about and don’t really want to. All I care is that I can ride on Zwift as I have done for nearly 3 years without issues, and for what I pay it’s a very good deal for less than 50p a day! Most of the alternatives are pretty boring so we should occasionally thank the Zwift team for at least trying to keep us riding without interuptions , it’s been a godsend during this dammed pandemic!
6 Likes
I thank them every month by giving them some money.
10 Likes
Well said Marc.
The whole topic has me lost, I’m not sure what the intention of the OP was.
For me it’s not really that productive and isn’t really what this forum is for.
“It’s not web-based at all, and doesn’t run in a browser.”
It consists of two parts. The first one, responsible for login and updates, called Zwiftlogin, if I remember correctly, actually does run in Internet Explorer (at least, on a PC). But the key part, the game itself, indeed does not run in a browser.
2 Likes
Yep, sorry to have sparked such a heated discussion. I think if people took the trouble to read my posts carefully, most would discover that we’re arguing semantics over a very vaguely defined phrase, “Web Application”. And, really that wasn’t supposed to be my main point.
I am loving Zwift, at least most of the experience. And the price is acceptable.
I just think it’s sometimes important to be brutal and honest about some of the shortcomings, especially the UI navigation. But, also that I can’t just run it in a compatible browser - which would then let me use a lower spec computer (since windows sucks so much resources for mostly useless crap I have to use one of my newest machines, and since I don’t want to be constantly moving it, and plugging in the hdmi and ant adapter, it’s dedicated to this one task)
But, anyway, thank to all who joined the melee, I must say, I didn’t realize how strictly many people were using the simple phrase “web app”.
1 Like
If it would be possible to run Zwift in a browser (which it isn’t, but for the sake of argument, let’s say it is), why do you think it would need less resources then when running as a native application?
The 3d world still has to be rendered, which would need 3d resources on your local machine, just like any other 3d browser game.
There are cloud based services (Google Stadia for instance) that can run and render games in the cloud, and only send you screen updates, but that would require some trickery as to connect your ANT+/BT sensors to it. That would also induce extra lag which wouldn’t be really nice with ERG mode (Titans Grove would be the horror).
4 Likes