On the other hand, When enabling WebGL and accelerated hardware in Opera, the WebGL Test return a pretty 18200 objects BUT nothing can be seen !?

The rendering area stay white.

Same things with any Scirra games, I can hear sound, things are "working" but nothing is rendered. I guess it's because of the experimental nature of Opera...

Armitage1982 - according to tulamide's evidence, it's possible for HTML5 to come close to native rendering speeds. I think sometimes a slow computer is just slow... or maybe it's falling back to software rendering for some reason? Have you tried updating your drivers?

That's what I first thought and why I try several things like turning off the GPU Blacklist for software rendering thanks to about:flags inside Chrome. Or doing something similar with Firefox, but it's not working.

I also tried to run the same test over Mac OS X Lion just to see if my Bootcamp windows do something nasty, but got the same results.

I got the latest drivers and even tried without any plugins of background software but again same deal.

Great if it's just a compatibility problems that lock down near native performances, but bad if they can't or don't fix that for the next iteration of WebGL Support <img src="smileys/smiley5.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

About 58000 objects, pretty stable.

Which is even more strange cause I reach 54000 objects with MacBook Air dual-core 2.0GHz Intel Core i7, Intel(r) HD 3000.

Which is nothing compare to the Scirra Monster 85290 score, but like you said I'm on a laptop not on a desktop.

Even your worst result, 570 - how many games have over 500 sprites on-screen at once? Probably a minority. So your results are still pretty good! You're just not reaching the same standard as my extremely expensive, high-power development machine :)

My last game was rendering 3 layers of animated rotable 32x32 tilemap, textured polygons with ribbon of bordering grass, a few parallax and groups of objects, GUI overlay, many particles effects and since you were able to play up to 4 players in split-screen mode, up to 5 regions could be rendered each frame. That's quite a lot.

The problem is not so much being able to reach 30FPS but rather what's left on the CPU side to update the whole logic of the game with Javascript. I really need to crush my CPU usage which is quite new for me. I'm already avoiding using Box2D in that direction and think about design to reduce the number of drawing call.

I'm also experiencing some stuttering on some examples like the particles fountain while they are correctly interpolated. Since garbage collection should be neutralized, maybe it's coming from the WebGL in a browser going from GPU-CPU-GPU for rendering all the context ? It's pretty fluid and faster if I get rid of the browser thanks to Awesomium.

Hi

I'm asking this question because the HTML5 WebGL performances on my machine is terrible. My recent MacBook Air Intel i7 (Intel(r) HD 3000) is given me slow rendering performances in WebGL.

While I can decently play heavy things like Crysis, Borderlands 2, etc. trying under an up-to-date Chrome / Firefox the 2 examples available at this scirra link: https://www.scirra.com/blog/77/internet-explorer-10-fast-and-native-has-gone-to-other-browsers

only gives me 2700 in Canvas 2D and around 5400 in WebGL... This is 3 times less than what I can see on the reported graphics !?

So I tried on the MSI cr600 of my girlfriend featuring an NVIDIA GeForce 8200M G, while she's having some difficulties to play the same games as me on my MacBook Air, the result were a little bit better (4000 in Canvas 2D and around 8200 in WebGL) but still quite under my expectation.

So I run this benchmark on my low-end test machine (Aspire One Atom) and get around 350 in Canvas 2D and 570 in WebGL.

Another test on an old Desktop machine (AMD Athlon 64x2 Dual Core 3800+ 2.01Ghz

2Go RAM - NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GS) answers are 1800 in Canvas 2D and 5200 in WebGL.

All those values are so different but mostly low that I'm still wondering if HTML5 & WebGL is fast enough for mid-range machines.

I did a few try by running the particles examples at different screen resolution, with or without scale, low/medium/high number of particles (and again, no more than 1000 for the high which is not so high...) and overall on my MacBook Air everything stuttering heavily while working great on my girlfriend machine :(

The Problem here is not Construct 2, it's a WebGL performance issue, cause I saw the same things on many others WebGL test.

Sometimes 2D Canvas work even better than WebGL !?

My graphic drivers are updated, I have nothing running in background and this happen whatever the OS (Mac OS X Lion or Windows 7 under bootcamp). I know I won't reach compiled rendering performances, but at least a solid & smooth 30FPS (or better 60FPS) at 1024x768 would be great and unless I'm simplifying most things in my games, I probably won't reach that.

Any clues ?

Woaw !

So much new threads in just one day. I had to dig 3 new pages before finding back my topic <img src="smileys/smiley36.gif" border="0" align="middle" />. I never saw a game creation forum so solicited.

Maybe it's not the right place for that question after all? I'm not even sure Construct 2 really support that feature anyway.

I'm so used to Box2D... Maybe it's not that necessary OR best fit a HTML5 games (cause it's pretty slow under most HTML5 game engine at decent number of bodies and interactions).

I guess I need to learn the SDK to find an answer to this.

I was searching all over the manual yesterday but cannot find a single word about that very nice feature of Box2D.

Double sided Edge Chain allow you to create any kind of convex or concave shapes by simply drawing connected lines. It's faster and lighter than shape decomposition and allow a greater freedom in your level design.

<img src="http://m2.img.libdd.com/farm3/214/77CE21557F2DA9A8379FDBDC9DD394D6_427_231.PNG" border="0" />

How can you achieve this with Construct 2 ?

Thanks

Hi Ashley

Will it be possible to use the whole Awesomium API?

Features like HTML UI (http://awesomium.com/wp-content/uploads/screenshot_overgrowth_ui.jpg) and in-game custom Web Browser interest me a lot.

Thanks

Not sure it's already available out of the box, you can certainly achieve this manually in all engine, but I would love to see a Class for polygon tessellation, advanced textured polygons rendering (strip, border, fill Local/absolute, etc.), fast polygons Math (culling, averages, trigo, etc.), directly linked to box2d edge chain.

Well you got the idea: A completePolygons Class

(not simply tris, quad or concave).

Also : a native exporter like in construct 1 for speed reasons :)

It really depends on the context of the contact point.

Let's make the distinction between the maximum collision pairs Box2d can handle and the maximum proxies (objects) you can spawn in a single world.

By default the only 8 limit number I remember to see in Box2d was the maximum number of polygon vertices a shape could have... Which is probably enough considering you can build complex object from many shapes.

If I do recall correctly the maximum default number of object you can spawn in box2d was 1024 but you can easily push this up to 2048 without any slowdown. That's what I did in my engine because I'm using the edge shapes that generate a lot of proxies. Actually if the physical engine is a key feature of your game you will easily reach that given limitation but since Box2d is only about processing data, it's not a real problem (you would probably have to focus way more on the rendering part).

The pair number is 8 * proxies by default. If you go over this default number, Box2D throw an exception (that I guess Construct 2 handle to avoid any crash ?).

Maybe the suggestion of 8 collisions point per objects comes from this factor ? That would simply mean that 1024 object can have safely up to 8 collisions points at the same times. Hopefully this will probably never happen !

The contact point is something you handle on your own, personally I store them in a pool and use them to process specific collision.

But trust me, there is many situation where an object will generate more than 8 collisions at time (for example 10 balls on the ground :).

So except if the Construct 2 Team did some weird optimizations in that area (why ?) you probably don't have to "count" the number of contact point your game will have to handle at max but rather know how many object can be displayed at the same times, if you really need that much and finally if you can group them in various Bit Mask to avoid as much as collision and awaken object in your simulation.

I will !

Thanks for the replies.

I guess it all depends on the project. But if Construct 2 deliver his promesses then it will be a nice tool for fast prototyping and handy to quickly publish/update research on a game.

The physics demo you send me Kyatric is working smoothly too so who knows...

Box2d only compute things, actually you can use it without the need of any rendering stuff, so it will go as fast as the javascript engine goes. But it's always possible to create a huge array of games without relying on physics engine, so like you are saying it's not waisted money at all (and certainly not for that price). I can also probably learn a few things from C2 plugins source code too :)

As far as you keep a little room for the developer side of game making and avoid locking everything with too much UI tools, you can only enlarge your experienced users base (not that I am experienced at all but many have a rude approach of game maker tools. They think they can do everything... Yes but in 4 years ^^).

Thanks again, keep up good work ;)

Well I did not get answers to these questions but since HTML5 is still a promise, I bet on scirra and construct 2 as my first tool in that new area. Time will tell me if I was right <img src="smileys/smiley2.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

In any cases I can still use it to build web stuff or simple things.