Comment by echelon

Comment by echelon 5 days ago

10 replies

View on Hacker News

BabylonJS and the OP's own Aframe [1] seem to have similar licenses, similar number of Github stars and forks, although Aframe seems newer and more game / VR focused.

How do Babylon, Aframe, Three.js, and PlayCanvas [2] compare from those that have used them?

IIUC, PlayCanvas is the most mature, featureful, and performant, but it's commercial. Babylon is the featureful 3D engine, whereas Three.js is fairly raw. Though it has some nice stuff for animation, textures, etc., you're really building your own kit.

Any good experiences (or bad) with any of these?

OP, your demo is rock solid! What's the pitch for Aframe?

How do you see the "gaussian splat" future panning out? Will these be useful for more than visualizations and "digital twins" (in the industrial setting)? Will we be editing them and animating them at any point in the near future? Or to rephrase, when (or will) they be useful for the creative and gaming fields?

[1] https://github.com/aframevr/aframe

[2] https://playcanvas.com/

dmarcos 5 days ago

A-Frame is an entity component system on top of THREE.js that uses the DOM as a declarative layer for the scene graph. It can be manipulated using the standard APIs and tools that Web developers are used to. Initial target was onboarding Web devs into 3D but found success beyond. The super low barrier of entry (hello world below) without sacrificing functionality made it very popular for people learning programming / 3D (part of the curriculum in many schools / universities) and in advanced scenarios (moonrider.xyz ~100k MAUs (300k MAUs at peak) most popular WebXR content to date is made with A-Frame)

One of the Spark goals is exploring applications of 3D Gaussian Splatting. I don't have all the answers yet but already compelling use cases quickly developing. e.g photogrammetry / scanning where splats represent high frequency detail in an appealing and relatively compact way as you can see in one of the demos (https://sparkjs.dev/examples/interactivity/index.html). There are great examples of video capture already (https://www.4dv.ai/). Looking forward to seeing new applications as we figure out better compression, streaming, relighting, generative models, LOD...

A-Frame hello world

<html> <head> <script src="https://aframe.io/releases/1.7.1/aframe.min.js"></script> </head> <body> <a-scene> <a-box position="-1 0.5 -3" rotation="0 45 0" color="#4CC3D9"></a-box> </a-scene> </body> </html>

Reply View 1 reply
ovenchips 5 days ago

When you say that PlayCanvas is commercial, that's a little misleading. The PlayCanvas Engine (analogous to Three.js and Babylon.js) is free and open source (MIT). The PlayCanvas Engine is where you'll find all the cool 3DGS tech. There are two further frameworks that wrap the Engine (for those that prefer to use a declarative interface): PlayCanvas Web Components and PlayCanvas React. Again, both of these are free and open source (MIT). Only the PlayCanvas Editor (analogous to a browser-based Unity) has optional payment plans (for those that want to create private projects).

PlayCanvas Engine: https://github.com/playcanvas/engine

PlayCanvas Web Components: https://github.com/playcanvas/web-components

PlayCanvas React: https://github.com/playcanvas/react

Reply View 0 replies
Joel_Mckay 5 days ago

Did a test study in BabylonJS, and generally the subset of compatible features is browser specific.

The good:

1. Blender plugin for baked mesh animation export to stream asset is cool

2. the procedural texture tricks combined with displacement maps mean making reasonable looking in game ocean/water possible with some tweaking

3. adding 2D sprite swap out for distant objects is trivial (think Paper Mario style)

The bad:

1. burns gpu vram far faster than normal engines (dynamic paint bloats up fast when duplicating aliases etc. )

2. JS burns CPU cycles, but the wasm support is reasonable for physics/collision

3. all resources are exposed to end users (expect unsophisticated cheaters/cloners)

The ugly:

1. mobile gpu support on 90% of devices is patchwork

2. baked lighting ymmv (we tinted the gpu smoke VFX to cheat volumetric scattering)

3. in browser games essentially combine the worst aspects of browser memory waste, and security sandbox issues (audio sync is always bad in browser games)

Anecdotally, I would only recommend the engine for server hosted transactional games (i.e. cards or board games could be a good fit.)

Otherwise, if people want something that is performant, and doesn't look awful.... Than just use the Unreal engine, and hire someone that mastered efficient shader tricks. =3

Reply View 6 replies
  • tmilard 5 days ago

    Personaly I have been using babylonJs for five years. And I just love it. For me it's so easy to program ( cleanest API I have ever seen) and my 3D runtime is so light, my demos work fine even on my android phone.

    Reply View 4 replies
    • Joel_Mckay 4 days ago

      Web browsers add a lot of unnecessary overhead, and require dancing with quarterly changes in policies.

      In general, most iOS devices are forced to use/link their proprietary JS vm API implementation. While Babylon makes it easier, it often had features NERF'd by both Apple iOS, and Alphabet Android. In the former case it is driven by a business App walled garden, and in the latter it is device design fragmentation.

      I like Babylon in many ways too, but we have to acknowledge the limitations in deployment impacting end users. People often end up patching every update Mozilla/Apple/Microsoft pushes.

      Thus, difficult to deploy something unaffected by platform specific codecs, media syncing, and interface hook shenanigans.

      This coverage issue is trivial to handle in Unity, GoDot, and Unreal.

      The App store people always want their cut, and will find convenient excuses to nudge that policy. It is the price of admission on mobile... YMMV =3

      Reply View 3 replies