upvote
explain that to my webgl TypeScript browser game running at 180+ FPS while rendering a large RPG tiled world with infinite procedurally JIT generated biomes, with heavy processing delegated to webworkers.
reply
As you aren't posting code or stats I can't say much, but I'd bet a native app would still be smaller and more efficient, since you have to wrap what you're doing in an entire Chromium instance and deal with a web stack designed for documents, which is definitionally less efficient than a native alternative. Tiles aren't exactly cutting edge technology.

"Heavy processing delegated to webworkers?" That just sounds like threads but worse.

reply
yep, native is faster for sure.

but webgl + web workers is good enough these days.

I can't share code sorry, the project got big and I have commercial plans.

But you can tell Gemini 3.1, Opus 4.6 or GPT 5.4 High to generate a demo and they do a decent job most of the times.

that's how I got started, seeing how it was possible to have good game performance with multi threaded workloads on a browser.

reply
Nobody ever said in the thread that web is the most efficient platform, stop with your “designed for documents” trauma already.
reply
The first post in this subthread was literally a statement that "A web-based solution is usually better performing, despite all the bloatware necessary." And you literally joined in to support that assertion against "the Electron haters."

And it isn't trauma, it's literal fact. Electron isn't used because it's technically superior to native applications, it's used because web devs are a dime a dozen. It's popular for business reasons, not technical reasons. It works "well enough," but only because computers are really fast but there's only so much slack an OS can take up when even parts of it are Electron apps, and probably vibe-coded to boot.

reply
Meanwhile that same computer could probably run Counter Strike at 400 FPS.
reply