tunepunk's Forum Posts

  • 99Instances2Go Nice test there. Confirmed my thoughts on what was causing some slowdowns. This is crucial for me especially since I'm developing for mobile. A lot of these small little resource hogs adds up to quite a lot in the end.

    So I'm gonna go over my events now and make sure I kill unnecessary stuff. All That don't need to run in the backround.

    killing lerps as soon as the get close enough, and not even moving things if I don't have to. I use a lot of lerps happening of screen, things fading in and out etc on the map. I Should try kill those kind of things also. Why do i need to smoothly animate stuff not on screen right?

  • variable canmove=1 object set position to lerp(newpositions)

    On timer set variable canmove to 0

    I'll try that too, I just need to stop all the subpixel movements going on.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • If something moves at x pixels per second then you can figure out how long it will take to get there if you know the distance there.

    Add a timer behavior to change a boolean variable.

    Nono, that's not really what I'm after. I just want to stop all the lerping running in the background when they are close enough to see if that's the thing causing some performance issues.

    Imagine like 40-50 different objects moving subpixel amounts all the time, because lerp never stops when you use. lerp(self.x, object.x, 0.03) object keeps moving but smaller and smaller subpixel movement every tick.

    It's both causing draw calls when everything is seemingly not moving, and ticking away in the background.

  • You can pick objects by a variable....

    Pick by comparison - Object.Variable = 10

    Then you can use pickedCount to determine how many were picked and compare it.

    Object.PickedCount is between values 1 & (#number you chose) ---- Or Object.PickedCount = 1 - if there's no upper limit.

    If 0 is picked will return false.

  • Pick the 'self' & that 'object'

    Compare 2 values .... distance(Pickedself.Y,Pickedself.Y,Object.X,Object.Y) ... > ... 2

    ______ lerp (dt corrected)

    I've tried that but that wasn't really an optimization (for a lot of objects) as it's constantly comparing distances every tick, which seemed to be heavier than just leaving it as it is. There must be a smarter way to limit the amount of decimals.... i don't want all those lerps running in the background all the time.

    maybe...

    round(self.x) ? round(object.x)

    round(self.y) ? round(object.y)

    So if both of their rounded X & Y positions are not equal, lerp can bring them closer until their rounded values match.

    Should be less heavy to check than distance hopefully. Have to try it out when i get back home from work.

  • Invisible means its is not rendered.

    They should have little performance impact as long as they are invisible, and not moving.

    You might get a drop when they are made visible however.

    Btw 0 opacity means nothing to cpu performance. It's the same as 100 opacity.

    Thanks, I'm trying to pinpoint something causing my draw calls to shoot high occasionally. Even when nothing is seemingly moving and nothing animated is on screen. Clean project doesn't have the problem, so I'm clueless of what it could be.

    Although

    I'm using a lerp quite a lot, both on objects and on the camera so maybe it could be some objects or the. Checking the Debug, i can see that they are counting down to infinitely smaller and smaller decimal points.

    Might be the cause, but how do i stop the lerp from counting?

    Example of lerps i'm using.

    lerp(Self.X,Object.X,0.03) to get a smooth eased movement...

    Maybe there is some better way to ease movements, that doesn't count to infinity?

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • Does anyone know if Sprites with Visibility hidden still renders, same as a sprite with 0 opacity.

    I'm trying to locate a slight performance drop, and wondering if it could be pretty large UI elements with Visibility hidden.

  • Crosswalk 23 is the last Crosswalk https://crosswalk-project.org/blog/cros ... lease.html. What is the future like for us? Webview does not work at all below Andoid 5.0 and the performance is horrible on Android 5.0+. How will we be able to create Android games?

    I wouldn't worry too much. Webview seems to work fine from what I've noticed. I don't even bother to target users with less than 5.0, since they probably have old slow phones with old OS. The user base below 5.0 is steadily declining, so for me it feels like it's not worth it to use crosswalk anyway.

    Rayek I get what you're saying but as they stated in the first announcement. Due to the nature of the software being online, how would you physically own it if you "bought" it? Then they would have to provide a downloadable copy you could run locally. And they have mentioned earlier that standalone versions are considered and likely to come, but I guess it's a bit of a hassle in version handling?

    I'm pretty sure standalone versions are coming, and if they do, hopefully more payment options...

    But then again if you payed once for a year of upgrades you would have to stick with the latest version you downloaded after service expire and not expect any upgrades or bug fixes while you're not paying.

    blurymind Here's some payment models you should try on your next game/software. LoL

    Example 1.

    Full Free version without export options, unless you pay. Develop a full game, spend at least a year on it then release it for free. And make it really hard to reach last boss. When the player reaches the last boss they get a notification. If you want to complete the game and kill last boss, pay 9$ per month, and you can continue play the game....And after release people are expecting support, bug fixes, updates and new features, characters, and weapons. Try that model and let me know how that worked out for you.

    Example 2.

    Pay Once... free upgrades and bug fixes & features, like current C2.

    Develop a full game release a free, limited version with 2 Purchase options. Normal mode, And Normal mode but a little more expensive with some bonus. In game description you mention free upgrades, bug fixes, new levels, features and support which you have to provide as long as there are players playing it... Let me know how that worked out for you.

    C2's current payment model isn't sustainable unless they keep getting new users all the time. If the can assure a steady flow of users they can keep developing, like example 2.

    Example 1 wouldn't work either unless people were really determined. Hobbyists would continue using free version, and you would still have to offer support, services, server costs, staff costs and upgrades for them without earning a cent...

    Current model proposed for C3 is the best way for scirra to ensure continued development and a steady income, given they took the bold decision to make their tool online which limits version handling. I'm guessing everyone using C3 will always be using the same build, since it's online. Then you have server costs, staff cost, service costs etc....

    Yes you could argue that they could have gone another route planning to release a major update every year after that to charge 99$ again, but then you have the problem after a while to continue supporting multiple software like, Classic, C2, C3, C4, C5 unless you officially dropped support for older versions, otherwise they would be stuck with same problem as Example 2.....

    If you don't like subscription model, just pretend you're buying a copy every year because you think the tool is awesome.

    I'm just waiting for someone to propose an AD based version of C3 now. Full version free but banners and commersial popups everywhere.. lol

    If they were to remove the restriction for using the editor, and wanted to keep it from being abused, I would suggest tracking how much time was spent using the editor.

    But, I wasn't aware there was a monthly option now.

    They said C3 will be working offline, so how are they checking license verification if you're offline? Maybe people could still abuse it buy always running offline version? blocking license server in hosts file, or any other way around it. I doubt they will use downloadable license file like C2, download then upload to activate your license, that would be weird lol.. How are they tracking multiple users on an offline version? You log in from 10 computers same account, then stay offline.... I really hope they thought about it. Or maybe they just trust the users and the community to pay.

    I know some place I've worked at that were using 1 adobe CC license for 10 designers. Millions in turnover but still so cheap they can't even provide their designers with licenses. We all shared one, single user CC license.

    If big corporations don't even wanna spend money on professional tools like adobe, I bet lots of starving gamedevs would also use a similar approach if they could. I'm sure a lot of people here would happily support scirra by paying for proper licenses, but looking at threads around this forum lately regarding license costs and subscription models there's certainly a lot of stingy people who want most or all features free, not paying anything at all.

    .... well maybe if they got lucky and made a somewhat successful/good game and earned some money...... maybe they would consider a personal/business license, but until then they want full software and free support.

    As an aspiring dev, to see other devs talk like this sickens me. If someone spend months years, heart blood and soul into making a game, software, or anything that I enjoy, or makes my life easier and use almost daily I'd be happy to pay for it.

    Free version could include more of the actual features and editing capabilities, but you shouldn't be able to export anything at all then, preview only... What if you then spent couple of months/a year creating something that u wanna share with the world or hopefully make some money on... you should pay for full licence.... but wait, then you can subscribe one month.... export.... unsub...and as Tom said you are still allowed to earn money without a subscription....

    u see, it doesn't add up... at least for scirra if they allowed this.

    Then you create your next game with full free software without export functions, subscribe one month again, export, then unsubscribe. People would actually do that.... People are stingy as hell, and scirra would be broke and bankrupt before you even had time to finish your game, because you only wanna pay for the software if you create a result worth releasing.... Seriously people what's wrong with you?

    >

    >

    > Tom said:

    > - You can continue to collect revenues from published games if your subscription ends, that's fine

    > - You will not be able to edit or publish games if your subscription has expired, but you can open in read only

    >

    Yeah I got that, and that with the changes to the personal licence seem fair.

    I just think that reducing the restriction a bit might be better in the long run, and allows for a revenue that might be left out.

    I think even if they wanted to, it would be hard from a technical point. And of course they need to protect their own investment and product from being exploited. Since it's online I'm guessing you're always using the latest version automatically, which will be cashed on your machine. If they removed some of the restrictions and someone bought 1 month of subscription, but could use the software for free forever (cashed offline version), to edit and use freely people would exploit it and Scirra would loose a lot of money.

    How would u like if someone exploited a game you put your heart and soul into, and they found a way to block ads, hack to get free IAP or off a torrent site and play your games completely free?

    The restrictions are fair, especially since they now have monthly option. Develop a few month's, unsub, take break, resub again when u need to change something, or update, unsub again when you're not using it. It doesn't get more fair than that.

    So projects can be opened, but cannot be edited (or exported). Stop paying and you are locked out of your own projects.

    Now, I just do not understand why anyone (outside larger studios) as a game dev would willingly ever shut themselves in like that. Scirra sort-of holds your projects hostage, in my opinion. Unless the rent is payed.

    I have a real hard time understanding how this is a 'good' thing for small developers.

    I don't understand how it's good for any game developer to stop supporting the company that provides the software they are using to make money. If you're a serious developer why would you even consider cutting small a yearly/montly fee to save a few bucks unless you're a real cheapskate... IF you're serious about your game development and decide to lock your self out from further development, and can't even spend 99 per year to keep your products up to date for your customers you should probably do something else than developing games.

    If you're a pure hobbyist and don't intend on making any money on your games, 99 per year is still a very cheap hobby... if you really enjoy it, and can't stand the limitations of a free version.

  • In another post in C3 section this was mentioned but i havn't tried it.

    > Most other game engines support spitting out a native APK that is not bundled with a web browser

    >

    Construct 2 already supports this as well. Just target Android 5.0+, and it won't bundle Crosswalk, which is what increases the file size. It's only there for Android 4.x support, which is steadily shrinking.

    Targeting Android 5.0+ might solve some issues?

    You can also try this tool from Google to make a webview app.

    https://developer.chrome.com/multidevic ... ingstarted