WebGL is perfectly capable of rendering lots and lots of geometry as long as you draw it intelligently. So is Unity. Polygon counts are going to be a pretty moot issue, especially if your scene is static.
What you really want to consider more than rendering speed is factors like tool chains and user accessibility. WebGL has a quickly growing community but not much in the way of mature tools. If you need commercial support maybe Unity would be better. WebGL also lacks IE support as you pointed out, but even on browsers that support it you may not be able to access it if your video card is blacklisted. That said, if for whatever reason you are determined to avoid plugins then your choice is already made, isn't it?
WebGL has an undeniable "geeky cool" factor to it, but that may be completely lost on your target audience. It's also worth considering that Unity is going to be fairly gaming centric, which may or may not be a good thing given your needs. WebGL is more general but lower level.
As far as other alternatives, Flash 11 has Stage3D, which I've heard is very capable, and Silverlight has Molehill, which I've heard next to nothing about (sorry!). Obviously both are plugin-centric, but if you're on the fence they're probably worth at least looking at.
Unity will give you more out of the box, even in terms of performance, than WebGL. This is because Unity already has optimizations for drawing large scenes (culling, batching). In WebGL you may need to write much of this by hand at this point (unless there are some solid WebGL libraries I haven't seen) just to get the same performance. Getting compatible models & textures into Unity is also easier compared to WebGL right now (it's about the maturity of the tools).
Regarding the drawback of needing the Plugin, Unity is releasing at some point in the near future a Flash 11 exporter which will remove the need for the Unity plugin (depending on your scene).
Did you see Burster Plugin? It is open source, it works like unity, but it opens files from Blender - the best 3d editor :) here is website: http://geta3d.com
发布评论
评论（3）
WebGL 完全能够渲染批次和大量几何图形< /a> 只要你聪明地画它。统一也是如此。多边形计数将是一个相当有争议的问题，特别是如果您的场景是静态的。
除了渲染速度之外，您真正需要考虑的因素还有工具链和用户可访问性等因素。 WebGL 拥有一个快速发展的社区，但成熟的工具并不多。如果您需要商业支持，也许 Unity 会更好。正如您所指出的，WebGL 也缺乏 IE 支持，但即使在支持它的浏览器上，如果您的视频卡是 已列入黑名单。也就是说，如果出于某种原因您决定避免使用插件，那么您已经做出了选择，不是吗？
WebGL 具有不可否认的“极客酷”因素，但您的目标受众可能完全忽视了这一点。还值得考虑的是，Unity 将相当以游戏为中心，考虑到您的需求，这可能是好事，也可能不是好事。 WebGL 更通用，但级别较低。
至于其他替代方案，Flash 11 有 Stage3D，我听说它非常强大，而 Silverlight 有 Molehill，我几乎没有听说过（抱歉！）。显然，两者都是以插件为中心的，但如果您持观望态度，它们可能至少值得一看。
WebGL is perfectly capable of rendering lots and lots of geometry as long as you draw it intelligently. So is Unity. Polygon counts are going to be a pretty moot issue, especially if your scene is static.
What you really want to consider more than rendering speed is factors like tool chains and user accessibility. WebGL has a quickly growing community but not much in the way of mature tools. If you need commercial support maybe Unity would be better. WebGL also lacks IE support as you pointed out, but even on browsers that support it you may not be able to access it if your video card is blacklisted. That said, if for whatever reason you are determined to avoid plugins then your choice is already made, isn't it?
WebGL has an undeniable "geeky cool" factor to it, but that may be completely lost on your target audience. It's also worth considering that Unity is going to be fairly gaming centric, which may or may not be a good thing given your needs. WebGL is more general but lower level.
As far as other alternatives, Flash 11 has Stage3D, which I've heard is very capable, and Silverlight has Molehill, which I've heard next to nothing about (sorry!). Obviously both are plugin-centric, but if you're on the fence they're probably worth at least looking at.
即使在性能方面，Unity 也会比 WebGL 提供更多开箱即用的功能。这是因为 Unity 已经对绘制大型场景进行了优化（剔除、批处理）。在 WebGL 中，此时您可能需要手动编写大部分内容（除非有一些我还没有见过的可靠的 WebGL 库）才能获得相同的性能。获取兼容型号和与目前的 WebGL 相比，将纹理导入 Unity 也更容易（这与工具的成熟度有关）。
关于需要插件的缺点，Unity 将在不久的将来的某个时候发布 Flash 11 导出器 这将消除对 Unity 插件的需要（取决于您的场景）。
Unity will give you more out of the box, even in terms of performance, than WebGL. This is because Unity already has optimizations for drawing large scenes (culling, batching). In WebGL you may need to write much of this by hand at this point (unless there are some solid WebGL libraries I haven't seen) just to get the same performance. Getting compatible models & textures into Unity is also easier compared to WebGL right now (it's about the maturity of the tools).
Regarding the drawback of needing the Plugin, Unity is releasing at some point in the near future a Flash 11 exporter which will remove the need for the Unity plugin (depending on your scene).
你看到 Burster 插件了吗？它是开源的，它的工作方式类似于 Unity，但它从 Blender 打开文件 - 最好的 3D 编辑器:) 这里是网站： http:// geta3d.com
Did you see Burster Plugin? It is open source, it works like unity, but it opens files from Blender - the best 3d editor :) here is website: http://geta3d.com