Each platform for Unity has another license associated with it (eg: $1500 for Android Pro, another $1500 for iOS Pro). Another web target would be another $1500 license for folks to buy annually, I imagine.
Maybe they'll give it away in the free version like with Web Player authoring. Well, I can hope :)
When they were doing the Flash version, it wasn't free. Still, one can hope!
That was imposed by adobe not unity.
Unity is a tools company. This is just another target platform for them, so they can sell more licenses for their software.
More sales, I imagine. If Unity can add chrome support then this could a pretty big deal for gaming on the web!
They have already proved (Lego Starwars demo IIRC) that they can target the NaCL runtime for Chrome (and ARM Chromebooks). But I'm not sure when/if they plan to release that publicly.
I think it makes more sense for them to aim towards some sort of unified platform. NaCL is cool and all, but it's very Google specific. WebGL is now even supported in the latest versions of IE.
As a company they surely do not care if something is Google specific or not. They only care if they can sell enough licenses for it to make the development costs make sense. In light of chrome's adoption curve it seems to be a not terrible idea to target nacl.
Or they could just target WebGL and asm.js, which already works in Chrome, and let's see how long Google sits around with Chrome being slower at a popular use case.
Exactly, and it was also driven by the fact that it was easy for the Unity guys to get their existing toolchain building on NaCls LLVM toolchain. Now with ASM.js maturing, its another great opportunity.
Also we saw Unity developed a target for the Flash runtime (now with Flash pretty much dead, thats being shelved). Gotta give props to Unity for trying.
Yeah. Target asm.js and WebGL and you'll get Internet Explorer 11, Chrome, Firefox, IE and probably eventually Safari. With NaCl you get Chrome only. The choice is simple.
The choice wasn't so simple when asm.js was only supported by Firefox, and Microsoft had no plans to support WebGL in IE. :)
asm.js is supported, inherently, by all modern browsers. It is just JavaScript, after all. However, only Firefox has a second compiler path especially for it. Chrome has some optimisations for asm.js-like code in V8.
Well, yes, but I find the WebGL port of the Unreal Engine demo (for example) unplayable without asm.js-specific optimizations. So by "supported" I really mean "optimized".
a subset of a language is not the language itself. asm.js is not javascript.
Wait a sec, are they saying the Unity5 webgl exporter will only work in firefox?
Unity has an Asset Store as well as a yearly subscription to their software's Pro version.
More users = more sales + more conversions to Pro