Pixel perfick's Forum Posts

  • lennaert Both systems are Dual core, The XP system has better performance, with virtually same spec as the windows 7 PC...

    256 video ram is small agreed, My point is, it should be enough to run a game that would probably embarrass a 16 bit SNES, with it's massive 64 kB video RAM...

    Edit, both video cards support WebGL

  • Over the last few updates, there have been a good few topics regarding C2 performance issues, most have ended up looking like a "how do I" thread with anyone questioning C2 performance as not doing something right, and it's their lack of knowledge that's at fault...

    So after the warning shot of Ashley's "upgrade from XP" blog entry, I started using My windows 7 PC to develop on, looking forward to all it's goodness...

    You guessed right, worse performance, now I'm the first to admit that my PC's are not exactly new, but come on less than 200 sprites and a few backdrops with 4 gig ram and 256 graphics card!

    We are constantly told it's gonna get better on mobile that is true, but 2D performance on PC won't be sky rocking anytime soon, video cards are marketed and developed to pushing more polygons, not more 2D sprites.

    I think most devs on here are blind to the real capabilities of C2 as they are running fast gaming spec PC's, many still struggle to push 60 FPS in a game that a Sega mega drive could breeze...

    After moving from Construct Classic, I have still to see a game that really shows the capabilities of C2

    Maybe Java script is just not upto the job, or maybe we are just making excuses...

    Fire away...

  • I sure wish that would stop em...

  • Sure, google search a picture of a medieval boy, slap it onto the flappy bird template...

    bang it on google play with all the other shovelware...

    sorted...

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I think it's great that performance is high on C2 priorities, and I really appreciate any development in that area, but for some projects the trade off is too much...

    The problem is, the pivot point for this performance "trade off" is difficult to define, a global on off for collision cells would ensure all projects can use the optimal collision engine...

  • So You sorted it?...<scratches head>

  • In the image editor, there is an animation bar on the right, here you can add, duplicate and rename animations...

    Edit it may be hidden behind some other window...

  • Nice,well done...

    Performance ranges from 47-41 FPS, for each level size, feels smooth enough

    Dated system too! 2.4 GHZ intel dual core, 2 gig ram, running XP , Ati radeon 512 meg video card, here's the even better news, my card is blacklisted in the chromium 32 webkit build, so I think this is running in canvas 2D, as the memory usage was stated zero.

  • Hate when that happens...

  • First ensure all your movements are set to different animations

    You can either add the "set animation" events to your control input events...

    key left is down> move player left

                      "set animation" to "walk"

    Or another way, is use an instance variable to set the animations...

    name your animations as so

    move0

    move1

    move2 ect ect

    key left is down> move player

                      set variable to 1

    key right is down> move player

                      set variable to 2

    then a separate event

    (every tick) set animation to "move"&<player variable>

    should work...

  • I don't think it's your method that's in question, probably the amount...

    300 pieces before you start creating the level is a lot of objects...

    In my experience, usually there's a drop in performance above 500 objects, that can start to chug as you approach 1000 objects, but it will depend on what these are doing exactly obviously.

    I'd aim for 25-50 background "parts" per level...

  • I realise I'm in the minority here, but personally think the race for multiplayer by the forum masses is ill thought out, if its at the cost of general C2 stability, overall performance and future features...

    Once adopted I can see a great deal of time being dedicated to the updates and bug fixes on the multiplayer side, leaving other more important features left basking on the to-do list...

    Show me a game more than one person wants to play first...

  • looks better than ever!, seems like a long while ago (and a couple of avatar changes) <img src="smileys/smiley17.gif" border="0" align="middle" /> you first pitched this, well done for persevering with development all this time...

  • I agree, touch controls are generally awful for any game that derives from a joystick / joypad set up...

    Touch is for mouse trackball games, even then your finger over an eighth of the screen kinda kills it...

    long live the arcade stick!, oh and big red, noisy buttons...

  • STARTECHSTUDIOS Due to the R160 bug that's emerged I have not yet installed, I was going to ask you the same question, did it fix your problem?

    Will let you know when the next beta arrives...