I'm starting to feel like no-javascript-guy is some type of HN novelty account. Seriously man, not a single person here cares that you don't use javascript. Move on.
But again, it's only valid to complain about/mock javascript on non-interactive pages like blogs.
Which is a bit part of the point of this, it is an interactive page. Though again I'll disagree further and say it isn't valid at all to simply complain and mock. A reasonable discussion on usage of javascript, or browser-based applications would be worth having. Just saying "not gonna use it" isn't interesting.
You know, not everything that needs code needs to be run in a web browser.
Is it really so ridiculous of me to oppose opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and spying by the likes of GoogleAPI?
I'd be happy to run the game in any of the standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], and Inform7[3] out there that this particular game might have been written in. And I would have had no problem playing it then.
[1] - http://frotz.sourceforge.net/
[2] - http://www.logicalshift.co.uk/unix/zoom/
[3] - http://inform7.com/
Probably? This is purely speculative.
I'd be interested to see any actual exploits of Interactive Fiction engines. So far, they are a much less attractive target to malware authors than web browsers are. That alone makes me prefer them over web browsers, no matter what their theoretical vulnerabilities may be.
"incognito mode / using a separate browser profile / portable browser installs are all options to completely preserve privacy"
Users are often tracked by their IP addresses as well as OS and browser fingerprinting, which Javascript can facilitate. Try going to Panopticlick[1] with Javascript turned off and then with it turned on and see the difference.
"that are either as convenient or more convenient than installing an interactive fiction engine."
But I already have multiple Interactive Fiction engines installed, so using them is perfectly convenient for me. As for others, how many people do you think actually bother to use a separate browser profile or even "incognito mode"? Not a hell of a lot. And if they do, they might also do what I do and disable Javascript altogether.
I sympathise but find it quite contrary that you prefer to download standalone engines over something sandboxed in the browser. Although I believe there is some unknown percentage of users who won't turn on Javascript for this game, I can only imagine that a vanishingly small percentage of those might take a stance similar to yours.
The other obvious flip-side of your argument is: Javascript has a much bigger potential audience than IF engines these days. That alone makes Javascript preferable to develop for. The security and privacy issues do not make enough of a dent in Javascript's userbase to make this a serious consideration for developers.
In fact, I don't expect them to.
Most users are ignorant, technologically illiterate, blind to security issues, and lacking of any concern for their online privacy. Most developers aren't much better, and aim for the low-hanging fruit, without many scruples as far as respecting the privacy of their users goes.
No. Most of them aren't going to change. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly give in and start using Javascript myself. And though I be a lone voice crying in the wilderness, I'm going to stand up for what I know is right.
Obviously, you didn't live through the age of X11 popup adds or javascript exploits.
I love games ( I actually _pay_ for games I like ). I also run with my browser fairly locked down. If you've made a game like this and want me to take more than 10 seconds on the web page, at the bare minimum have it load _something_ without scripts and without requesting anything from another domain ( this means jquery, google apis etc )
This game is a great example of one I wouldn't look at because it loads nothing until a request to googleapis is enabled and scripting is turned on. Perhaps it is overly judgemental on my part, but I assume that failing to provide _any_ level of graceful degradation in a design indicates a poor effort. It takes 5 minutes to add this to your landing page and will save you a tiny percentage of bounces.
tldr: make sure your landing page loads something. anything. Ideally a short message telling users what awesome things enabling the site scripting does for us.
(I would agree with you if there is some significant flow of visitors that don't already know it's a game, but not until then.)
Have you ever heard of games that don't run within web browsers?
That's what I thought this particular game might be.
In fact, there is a slew of standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], and Inform7[3] out there that this particular game might have been written in. And I would have had no problem playing it then.
[1] - http://frotz.sourceforge.net/
[2] - http://www.logicalshift.co.uk/unix/zoom/
[3] - http://inform7.com/
Honestly, aside from not making a point in your initial comment you chose to make it in an unnecessarily snarky manner. Completely uninteresting and irrelevant to someone saying "hey check out my game". If you don't want to check it out, then don't, it isn't necessary to share that non-information with the rest of us.
I'm sure most of us (as I can see from the extended comments on this here) would have been more than happy to have a reasonable discussion on the pros and cons of browser based distribution of applications if you had started there instead of where you did.
First, I much prefer open-source games, where I can see the code. So I would avoid binaries. And whether an app I use needs to be recompiled for some operating system other than the one I use is really not my problem.
Second, I loathe the move to making everything accessible only through the web, usually through bloated, insecure web browsers and crappy web technologies. If 99.9% of the web died tomorrow, I would be overjoyed. This includes virtually everything done in Javascript (not to mention Flash).
Third, I've yet to hear of an exploit of a standalone Interactive Fiction engine, while Javascript browser exploits are a dime a dozen. I prefer not to make my browser more vulnerable by running untrusted, unnecessary Javascript code.
Fourth, I don't want to be tracked through spyware like GoogleAPI, thank you very much!
"Honestly, aside from not making a point in your initial comment you chose to make it in an unnecessarily snarky manner. Completely uninteresting and irrelevant to someone saying "hey check out my game"."
Except that developers did find it interesting. Like the following comment from sillysaurus[1]:
As a game developer, I care. Any sign that my potential audience is
cut by a technology choice I make is valuable information to me.
"If you don't want to check it out, then don't, it isn't necessary to share that non-information with the rest of us. I'm sure most of us (as I can see from the extended comments on this here) would have been more than happy to have a reasonable discussion on the pros and cons of browser based distribution of applications if you had started there instead of where you did."
I should have gone in to more detail as to why I am opposed to running Javascript in my browser, and why I prefer to run standalone apps rather than web-browser apps. And had I seen the gigantic backlash that my little comment generated, I would have -- had I not gone to sleep immediately after making my comment. So I'm replying now that I'm awake. I hope my current comment helps clear up why I made my initial (all too brief and snarky) comment.
Speed of execution, and independence regarding what you can do with a browser, compared to what C/C++ offers you, especially libraries and access to the metal.
I'm not saying those are better ways to make games, but if you want real time stuff, like physics or animating several units at the same time, real time inputs, networking, a browser is not going to cut it. A browser is not an OS in itself, it just makes apps easier to make.
The web has been developing a lot since v8, it's really a good thing for developers who want to make things quickly, with pretty good performance, but I doubt it enables dev to do all sorts of applications imaginable. Games are mostly always resource intensive.
This game is really great, but remember, it's free, doesn't seem to run well on smartphone (when in fact v8 aimed to do just that), and it's not like it will be the most played game in your life. You can't make people buy this or play it at a game show. This game is a pearl, it's well done and I had a very good time with it (although short, and I doubt I'll come play it again), but it does not mean all game should be made using this platform.
No thank you to opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and GoogleAPI tracking!
More to the point, if at least you didn't care, then why did you comment?
Why didn't you "just move on"?
Well, I'm annoyed by these other people's announcements of their minor decisions to play this game despite it being a threat to their security and privacy.
So, I don't agree with the mouthbreathing masses. It won't be the first nor the last time.
You know these same people would probably be exploited by some dancing baby app, punch the monkey game, or porn app which they fell all over themselves to install, and then announced to the world how great it is!
Yeah, I don't want to be hacked or tracked like the rest of these morons are. Sue me.
EDIT: Remember, your votes decide the type of discussion you'd like to be having in the future. So down vote me if you'd like to see more bullying on HN.