| > A-Frame and React VR represent different styles They both use HTML-like markup to declare scene graphs. I think the only difference is that procedural content is easier to generate with React VR. But then again, if I need to generate objects programmatically, why not just use Three.js directly? It's a very easy library to use. > React VR integrates with the entire history of React tooling and libraries That doesn't strike me as a good thing. Once developers start writing VR scenes in React, it's only a matter of time before they pull in abstractions like Redux. This means using a state library to drive React to drive Three.js to drive WebGL. This seems unnecessary and inefficient in an environment where framerate is king (because as I'm sure you know, dropping frames in VR causes motion sickness). Given ReactVR is just a thin wrapper over Three, I think most developers would be better equipped just to learn that. They're going to have to at some point, because last I looked ReactVR had a pretty limited set of inbuilt entities. > Our goal is to take all web developers who know React and enable them to become VR developers as well. My goal is to remind JavaScript developers that there is a world outside React, just like there was a world outside Angular and even jQuery before that. I believe the sooner they engage with the fundaments and free themselves of proprietary abstractions the more powerful they become. To that end, I think the React monoculture is holding us back, and perhaps that's why I have mixed feelings about your project. |