For websites, I think is not a good idea to enable WebGL at all, just because maybe do not everybody got WebGL support. ( not counting the loading time at all)
For browser games, WebGL will be the future. But not only Unity is doing WebGL, there are a lot of middle-ware doing that or focused only on that. Take a look at Turbulenz Engine (totally free and opensource) for example, they do pure javascript with typescript support, asm.js is just a file, probable you talk about emscripten, and thats other story. Emscripten generates javascript from C/C++. (there are other tools also who can generate javascript from various languages)
Remember the last time you saw a website made entirely in Flash? It was awful, right? This is what happens when you try to make websites with multimedia tools.
You get no SEO out of the deal. Believe me, in this world, you need SEO
It will only work on the absolute latest browsers. Want to reach ~30% of the world still using some version of Internet Explorer? Or whatever ungodly percentage are looking at your site on a mobile device? Forget about WebGL.
Sticking with one tool in all situations simply because already you know it is generally a bad idea, because thereās almost always a better tool available. Real programmers use the best tool for the job, even if they have to learn it first!
As for the potential advantages you mention, they are completely possible in the normal HTML/CSS/JavaScript stack without trying to stretch a game engine to build a website:
Thereās lots of tools that will translate C# into JavaScript: Script#, JSIL, and SharpKit are just a few. In addition, thereās TypeScript, which is sort of the lovechild of C# and JavaScript.
The modern Web workflow is actually significantly better than Unityās. If you set it up right, you can see immediately your changes in the browser as youāre typing, or at least every time you save. I wish Visual Studioās debugger was more like Chromeās. If you really still want to use Visual Studio, though, the TypeScript plugin for Visual Studio will let you debug there as well.
As for the question if using Unity to design your web page makes sense, people have given some valid reasons against it, though i guess the answer depends on what your web page is. If your web page is ājustā a game, then it is a no brainer.
Anyways, Iād chime in on this one:
10 MB is probably a bit on the high side. The exact size of the code depends on your project and your scripts, but hereās some code sizes from stuff weāve tried (sizes are for gzip compressed js):
If you donāt want organic search traffic and you can get traffic other ways (e.g. video, article sites, social sharing etc) then it may be okay to not worry about the organic part.
With enough effort, Unity can make pretty much anything. But then again, with enough effort, I can use a screwdriver to pound in a nail. Learn to use the right tool for the right job.
The WebGL export will be fantastic for highly interactive 3D content in the browser. Imagine youāre on an ecommerce site, and instead of an image of a product, you see a full rotating 3D model. Although maybe Unity would be a bit overkill for that? A basic understanding of Three.js (which is open source by the way) would get you the same result. Iām just rambling now, sorry, Iām gonna go away.
I would say the āusing a screwdriver to pound a nailā analogy is a false one. After all, I was making the argument that Unity could be the āright toolā for that job.
ācouldā, anyway⦠Iām not saying that it would be the best tool for any website type out there, of course. Iām just saying that just because itās a āgameā engine doesnāt mean it canāt be used for other things.
What about making a web page VR ready, so if someone logs onto your site using a VR headset they enter a Virtual Space? Wouldnāt this take a game engine level toolset to produce a good effect?
Note with WebGL and VR HMD detection this is just around the corner, if someone has not already done it.
Once Unity WebGL is out, would a website made with WebGL still be as awesome? I wonder if it will start popping up everywhere⦠a few months ago I was looking into WebGL for a website but never got in to it much, but Iād do it in Unity (Just cause then thereās no learning curve)
There are a number of WebGL game engines popping up but what I found more interesting was the need for a 3D web standard. For example it takes a lot of code to get a simple cube to appear, what if you could just write a line of standard 3DHTML to display a 3D cube or object?
You can bet your bottom dollar that I will be making websites with unity. Such an amazing competitive advantage to integrate your game and designs with .net web services and database connections all wrapped in an unlimited 3d interfaceā¦This is the future.
Just as a portfolio piece it would be worthwhile doing. However, most large website design companies made full flash websites to show what they could do and to enter awards. An award would bring in business, a good flash site showcasing design skills etc would help as well. The fact that once a customer had signed up most professional web companies would then recommend against using flash and talk about clean design principals does not negate the obvious selling potential of flash for these service companies.