Arima's Forum Posts

  • New event>system>compare values, enter sprite.count.

  • Joskin - please refrain from insulting people on the forum. We want to keep this place friendly for everybody, and posts like the one you made make the forum less friendly.

    That said, CraftedStudios - I don't think you realize what you're asking for. You're asking someone to do a bunch of work and then just hand it over to you, apparently, for free. Games seem easy and quick to make, but even polishing up the most bare bones game takes a lot more work than you might expect. As such, it comes off as rude, even if it's unintentional (which not everyone might realize).

    I recommend learning how to make the game you described yourself. You'll be able to make it play exactly as you want, have a sense of accomplishment for completing the task, and learn some useful skills in the process.

  • delgado - I might be misinterpreting your post, but as Ashley said you're doing redundant work. Read up on sub events: https://www.scirra.com/manual/128/sub-events

    Sub events remember the picked instances of the parent events, so you only need to do one collision check, and the sub events that compare a variable will continue to only check and act upon the picked instances of the parent event.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • This is an English speaking forum - please stick to English or provide a translation.

  • You can do that already.

    If sprite.count>0

    • do stuff

  • An inverted overlapping condition takes the same CPU as when it's not inverted.

  • zendorf - perhaps you missed the posts above where it was discovered that groups actually have almost no performance impact at all - it's only while debugging that it uses a lot of CPU time.

  • Oh, duh - of course the debugger hits the CPU in relation to groups, it's doing tons of performance tracking and such. Yeah, in preview but not in debug mode it's down to 0.2 with 1000 groups.

    jayderyu - try using the cpuutilization expression instead of the debugger.

  • 1000 inactive groups is the same as if they're active, about 18-28.

    I did another check - it makes sense that a group would use some CPU, as it's got to check if it's active or not. However, comparing against 1000 events checking if a global var=0:

    5-10

    It makes we wonder if they can in fact be optimized more - I don't understand much about C2 at the JavaScript level, though.

  • (Edit: disovered on the next page the groups high CPU usage was because of the debugger.)

    Usage as percent:

    No code

    0.1

    1000 blank base events

    0.8-3.5

    1 base event, 1000 blank sub events

    0.7-3

    1000 groups

    18-28

    1000 sub groups in a disabled group

    0-0.5

    1000 sub groups to an event that does not run

    0-0.5

    Weird and a bit disappointing that groups hit the performance like that. I wonder if they can be optimized somehow.

    jayderyu

    Regardless, they have a very insignificant performance impact if they are skipped because the parent event does not run. As such, you can optimize like so:

    If unit1.count > 0

    • event tree

    That will skip right over unit1's code and all groups contained therein if no instances of it exist.

  • SeekerSK - I've gotten that too. I haven't tried tracking down the reason yet, but I'm guessing node webkit is set to too low a priority and other processes sometimes 'shove it out of the way.'

    Even using what I suggested isn't a complete solution, anyway, as it won't work for people wanting to put a non-downloadable demo online, or make parts of a web page with html5.

    Just... ARGH

  • If it's actually enabled, yes it should be faster.

    If you're testing on chrome on an XP or vista computer, the chrome team decided to disable all hardware acceleration on those os's recently.

    You also might have a blacklisted card/driver.

    If either of those cases are true, you're getting software rendering instead, which is seriously slow.

    More info:

    http://www.khronos.org/webgl/wiki/Black ... Whitelists

    https://dl.google.com/dl/edgedl/chrome/ ... _list.json

    You can try going to chrome://flags and turn ignore-gpu-blacklist to enabled.

  • AUGH for crying out loud

    Upon looking into it further, I discovered that the chrome team has decided to disable hardware acceleration for all systems running XP or vista. Reasoning:

    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issu ... ?id=315199

    "...the short answer is that we don't have a good way to reliably

    ensure that these features work correctly on XP and Vista. We've had a

    number of bad bugs that went to stable users without anyone realizing (i.e.

    not in our testing nor from bug reports), and fixing those bugs is very

    difficult because reproducing the relatively exotic hardware configurations

    involved is next to impossible. Without that good testing / feedback loop,

    ensuring we don't break Chrome is difficult enough that we're playing it

    safe rather than risking it.

    It's also worth noting that many (though not all) WinXP and Vista machines

    are old enough that they don't really benefit from hardware acceleration

    features. WebGL and Stage3D do, mostly, but we use the GPU for all pages on

    Win7+ and all other Chrome platforms (well, except Linux, but that'll

    happen soon). If we moved to that model on XP and Vista, we take a major

    compatibility risk as explained above, for basically no gain -- on memory

    bandwidth constrained devices there isn't much win here. The model we're

    moving to architecturally requires that Chrome is in one bucket (all GPU

    feature enabled) or another (all software). Hence, this blacklisting change."

    Not just webgl, also flash, video decoding, whatever. All hardware acceleration is off on those OS's. >:(

    There are quite a few users still on those platforms, including me. I guess our only option is to either use an earlier version of node webkit or run the game with the blacklist disabled, but if including the argument in the package.json doesn't work, then the only option left is to try to ensure that the player doesn't run the exe by itself, and has to run it from a modified shortcut.

    Kinda frustrated.

  • I sent you a pm.