UE5 & HTML project result
Even after successfully rendering a 360-degree video using UE5, I encountered a new, unexpected problem: I couldn’t integrate it into a working, user-friendly webpage the way I had originally planned.
Problem 1: Embedding Multiple 360 Videos in HTML
My concept involved navigating through several different 360-degree scenes—essentially switching between videos based on user interaction. But when I tried to do this in HTML:
-
Standard
<video>elements only supported basic playback. They didn’t offer the 360-degree interactive view I needed. -
<a-video>from A-Frame failed to display the video correctly or couldn’t load large files. -
JavaScript-based 360 viewers like panolens.js and video.js either crashed under large file sizes or introduced strange visual artifacts.
Each 360 video was too large, especially with high resolution, and browsers struggled to load or buffer them efficiently. On mobile, things were even worse—some videos wouldn’t load at all.
Problem 2: No Real Interactivity
Even if I managed to play one video successfully, I realized the entire concept was non-interactive. Unlike a real 3D scene where users can move, trigger events, or explore freely, 360-degree video is fundamentally passive.
-
You can look around, but you can’t move.
-
You can’t click on objects or interact with the environment.
-
Transitions between scenes felt abrupt and artificial, breaking immersion.
This meant that both playability and visual experience were severely limited, especially compared to what I initially imagined for my project. It felt more like a slideshow than an immersive experience.
Problem 3: Workflow Overhead
The overall development process with UE5 was slow and heavy:
-
Every scene change required re-rendering a new 360 video, which could take hours.
-
Every minor change in lighting, animation, or model had to be re-exported.
-
Trying to debug issues in the browser was impossible because the problem often stemmed from the video itself.
This created a rigid and inefficient pipeline that stifled creativity and iteration.
Conclusion
While Unreal Engine 5 is undeniably powerful, it was not the right fit for my web-based, student-level project. The performance requirements, the complexity of 360 video production, and the lack of real interactivity made the entire experience frustrating and inefficient.
I came away from this experiment with two major takeaways:
-
Just because a tool is powerful doesn’t mean it’s suitable for every context.
-
Web-based interactivity requires real-time rendering and lightweight frameworks—not pre-rendered video.
Looking forward, I plan to move to Unity, which offers a middle ground: better performance than A-Frame, more manageable than UE5, and native support for both real-time interactivity and VR features. I’m hopeful it will finally allow me to build the immersive, interactive exhibition I envisioned from the beginning.
Comments
Post a Comment