Nope they don't. It's based on http and CDNs now.
496 karma · joined May 18, 2016
It's actually quite subtle. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, depending on which page you are on, what you've already clicked, etc. All part of the fun of frontend web development, ain't it?
And yeah sure, you can always take a simple demo app with Declarative components and turn it into a few lines of imperative vanilla code and say it's simpler this way. But then what? How are you tackling scaling, organization, composability, and deployment? (these are the real things the deno team is trying to show here, are they not?) By the time you design everything out and put all these in place for your vanilla code, you'll end up spending just as much resources (if not more) as you'd have for using Declarative components with deno.
Imperative vanilla code vs Declarative components. Both should have their place.
I feel like in this day and age, you can be successful at anything if you put in enough hours. Key is probably in being active and critical instead of being mindless.
When money is of no concern to you, sure. But reality is many people can't even afford to buy organic foods.
During 2020 summer, we raised 4 peking ducks in our backyard. We gifted some of the processed meat to extended family members. And to this day, they still can't stop talking about how good the meat were.
ECS is really good for things that scale. Architecturally, it has both pros and cons to OOP. After working with ECS for a few years, I came to the conclusion that OOP is still the best for behavioral richness.
The current state of DOTS is just sad as it's affecting a lot of developments such as Tiny, unity.physics, dots audio, dots animation, etc...
Burst and Jobs are probably the best things that came out of Unity's initial push for DOTS.
I remember selling 1000g for $50 USD at some point. Then a month later the average price for 1000g dropped to $15. It seemed like the price would eventually match the absolute lowest of 3rd world labor cost (until WoW tokens were introduced). So that pretty much aligns with your point of management finally giving in to the new model.
> the curated app store model has shown business people how you can let third parties make stuff and then give them a platform to sell it and skim the profits.
After being involved in both kinds of work fields (content vs platform), I can say that it's really a grass-is-always-greener-on-the-other-side thing. When we were making in-house contents we would think how nice being a platform is (no creativity involved, just skim off other people's success). But when we made our own platform, we often felt the insecurity of not having our own contents and people jumping ships. Plus, licensing headaches and dealing with lawyers became a norm.
The only kind of platform that doesn't have this issue is one that is a near monopoly (cough App Store). Netflix, after realizing the rise of their competitors, went to town with in-house productions and declared "Content is King".
In order to support custom content creation and integration, the game needs to have a specific type of asset and tooling pipeline that can be community-driven, something that's more or less determined at the conception of the game.
I agree with you in that we do need more big studios stepping in this direction. It takes guts for these CEOs and CFOs to say to their investors "Yes we will have first-class mod support, LAN support, and give the players the tools necessary to alter the game with their creativities."