My boss says he will not be locked in proprietary editor/ hosting environment that will be forced upon us if we chose PlayCanvas over Babylon.
But I would like to use PlayCanvas for the Editor.
What’s my best argument?
If your boss is against the cloud, hence no Editor for you, then there is no difference. You can use Babylon, Threejs or any other webgl engine-only framework, including PlayCanvas. I would pick the one I am more familiar with to shorten the development time.
Edit:
I’m also not sure what is meant by “locking in”. You can download your project any time and self host it, if you wish, or go engine-only from the get go.
Hi @Frits - I’m happy to have a call with your boss (plus whoever else) about options here. Remember, even without the Editor, the PlayCanvas Engine provides you with a broadly analogous runtime to BJS. But, obviously, the vast majority of devs elect to use the Editor instead because it offers the ability to get things done far faster than a 100% code approach.
It’s probably also worth pointing out that the Editor isn’t exactly a flash in the pan. Here’s a project I created 12 years ago that still works happily now:
https://playcanvas.com/project/23/overview/doom3-gangnam-style
Over the years, we have gradually been open sourcing the Editor:
The next step is to open source the remainder of the Editor front-end. Essentially, we’re on an open source journey and we’ll continue with that philosophy. I suspect that, one day, it will be possible to run the Editor offline/locally. But lots of work to get there…
Something else I should quickly point out is that PlayCanvas is generally more popular amongst businesses versus individuals/hobbyists/etc. The reason is that we too are a business - you can have a call with us and you can get help from staff that have a responsibility to provide support. We are not just a GitHub repo where you have no reliable way of getting help. Businesses generally demand that sort of relationship with a technology provider.
1 Like