Another Standard For Web 3D: Google's O3 Created 15 years ago2009-04-22 13:14:37 UTC by Tito

Google has released a plugin for all the major browsers and operative systems, that seems to be a rival for what Mozilla is doing with their "Khronos" ( www.khronos.org ).

Recently, Google made public a series of informations about a new project called "O3D". In the words of their developers, it is:

"...a new shader-based API for 3D graphics in the browser"

So this is something similar to Khronos, and seems there is some will or space to combine it with Mozilla's Canvas 3D. The O3D API will allow web developers to create 3D applications that want to reach the quality of game consoles. O3D is now available as a plugin for Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Safari, and for Windows, Mac and Linux: http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/

My personal comments: I already went ahead and installed the Google O3D browser plugin on my PC and gave this a try. What I saw was very interesting, a 3D virtual world with high res textures, hardware accelerated graphics and streamed in real time through the web browser. The scene that I tested was the one called "Beach scene". Now, I heard some people say that the graphics of O3D are on par with the PS3, but that's something to debate.

Now, there is also another thing about Google trying to push this new web-3d standard initiative that's in conflict with an already established web-3d technology standards put forward by the official web3d consortium ( http://www.web3d.org/ ), which happens to be a branch of the main World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). The already established Consortium standards for web-3d is the format X3D, along with it's older version VRML.

If there will ever be a standard which will be widely used then it have to be supported by the "big" web browsers without plugins.

Actually potatis_invalid, since you put it that way, I would have to agree with you on that one. But the problem with that idea is, all the different companies behind all those web browsers out there have an agenda of their own, they have their own vision on what "this and that" should be. I doubt very much they would all get together for a common cause, and it's all because of two big things: MONEY and POWER over the web.

So to get around this, a third non-profit party is needed to "administer" the standards, and this is where the various official consortiums come in to play. But once again, I do agree with your idea of "by the big web browsers without plugins".

OLDE! unity engine already supports not only 3d but way more advanced graphics, gameplay, lighting, physics, etc. in the browser.

try eet

Yes but unity is a plugin, and the development platform isn't free, and mac-exclusive.

3D in browsers is rubbish anyway.

3D in browsers is rubbish anyway.

Perhaps so, Penguinboy.....perhaps so.

But when you have two internet power houses like Google and Mozzilla dishing out untold resources and getting ready for a battle of standards, it will be for the world next to impossible to ignore this. Remember, is companies like these that more often than not, who dictate the way we use and conduct business online. And then there's Id Software as a good example with their Quake Live website, which is.......You guessed it, death matches (and a few other modes) through a web browser.

I know a lot of these attempts at 3D in browsers might not seem up to the quality level of stand alone PC games or consoles at first, but in time they will and who knows.......might even surpass them too. You just got to give it time just like everything else.

Browsers are meant to browse, not play games or do 3D stuff. It's a novelty and will never be more than that.

Okay.

Thank god that we all have the right to our own opinions. I mean, that's what public forums are for.....right?

Now, has anybody actually tested out Google's O3D? Any word on what you think on it's graphics capabilities? The reason I did test it out, it just was out of pure curiosity, that's all. Now, for my PC that I am using, O3D was resource intensive, it was like running a powerful game on a not so powerful system.

Personally, I think this new-fangled THREE DIMENSIONAL thing is going to seriously enhance the computer experience. Instead of just Poker, now we can finally have 3D Online Poker Deluxe Gold Edition.

AMEN!

Browsers are meant to browse, not play games or do 3D stuff. It's a novelty and will never be more than that.

That's what people said about the internet--it's just for ftp, email, and telnet . . . until the WWW arrived.

Boy! Then the possibilities started.

I think eventually in a few years from now, PC game companies will stop publishing their games on disks, and even stop posting downloadable executables, and completely switch over to a "pay to play" streaming service through a web browser. And without no published disks to rip n' burn or downloaded games to "crack", the world's software pirates will be in a bind. After all, can a streamed game through a browser be downloaded or copied? That's something to think about......

I and many, many, many others would never accept that. I want, where possible, a disc copy of every game I own.

You're also forgetting that internet speeds across the world are all over the damn place, having to stream everything would be absolute hell for some people. This new OnLive device more than likely isn't going to do so well for the very same reason. Not to mention there's quota concerns, too.

Our own government is trying to roll out a new high-speed internet service for 90% of the country and it has an 8 year development time, and you could probably add many more years to that until we have acceptable prices and plans.

The idea of streaming everything is just too damn ridiculous right now or in a decade. Just because it's streaming doesn't mean it can't be copied either, there are many programs designed to pick up streamed video or information, and it would only be a matter of time until new streaming methods get their own.

EDIT: on second thoughts, I better stay out of this.