By Ian Hollidae, 2025/06/05

There are moments when I wonder why 3D on the web remains a niche. Whether youre using X3D, WebGL or three.js, one would think that a technology that can provide so much isnt more accepted. The common answer as to why 3D isn't used more is that it simply lacks a use case. But I think it's too easy to say theres no use without offering some reason as to why. So I'll share a thought I've been wrestling with recently. Just some thinking out loud really.

If you look at how we use the web today, it's basically a content delivery system. It serves up text, images, audio and video for a variety of purposes. In order to fit in, 3D content needs to work along side the established content mediums. But if you give some thought to what 3D does, you could say it's also a content delivery system, serving up rendered meshes composed of shapes and images. If the delivery purpose of 3D is the same as the web, then 3D doesn't suffer from lack of use cases, it's simply redundant. and clearly, redundancy isn't needed.

I think this is where 3D on the web breaks down. The use of 3d content highlights an odd dynamic: a technology that can deliver much more than standard web media but can't find much of a place on the web itself.

Of course, a lot of 3D developers will point out the purpose of what 3D delivers is to display immersive worlds or some sort of interactive presentation. But the question of how 3D fits in still remains fuzzy.

I don't think there's a single answer that will solve the issue. I'm sure it'll come down to designers and developers as it always does in the case of web technologies. For now, the nicheness of 3D is still a step above being unused and ignored.

Tags: Web 3D