Jase00's Recent Forum Activity

- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 8 Feb, 2016
- Quote
Yeah just to chime in, I also get this. Sometimes it eats up my RAM to a point that windows gets angry and starts giving me a message to close things before the RAM is filled up. Can be about 10-20 NW.JS instances in task manager.
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 7 Jan, 2016
- Quote
Ashley
Perfect! Working in the beta2. Thank you, much appreciated!
Try Construct 3

Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.
Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 3 Jan, 2016
- Quote
I can really understand your frustration, it's hard to get a point across when you are standing on your own, as nobody else really cares about filesize on NW.JS. It sort of seems as though you may need to give a reason why you think that information should be provided, I mean I'm sure there's certain cases, maybe someone might want to distribute to an area where they have extremely limited bandwidth or something extreme and specific. Although it might be a bad idea to explain your own personal reason because it might become a backwards and forwards conversation with people that go "Well why not do this instead?" "No I can't do that" "Well what about this?", even if you know 100% that filesize matters in your situation. Maybe it's a tricky thing for Scirra to decide what information to put out because they will always miss something, maybe in the future a similar situation is going to occur where someone buys the software and realises something specific about one of the full versions features (can't think of a random example but I hope I make sense).

Although one things for sure, it'd help a lot to have the free version give a limited export option. At least you can then retrieve all the information you want, knowing that when you buy the full version, the watermark goes and time limits go and everything is exactly as you'd expect.
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 2 Jan, 2016
- Quote
I think the filesize stuff may have been forgotten about and not mentioned in any FAQ because as Ashley said, it's such a rare thing for people wanting to export to desktop ask wonder about, and yeah perhaps Scirra may have just never thought about adding it until now. On mobile, that gets asked a lot because of the limitations some stores have that limit the maximum size to like 50MB sometimes, whereas other places such as Steam, or even physical media such as a DVD, as far as I know, the filesize limits are waaaay higher. You are probably the first person to ask about .EXE filesizes.

I do agree with the whole extremely limited testing with NW.JS.

This also does get me thinking of a probably really bad idea, what if Scirra developed a sort of export where it expects the end-user to have a browser installed, and this export contains the runtime and media of your game as well as a .exe file, which upon opening, it does whatever C2 does to commence "Preview-On-Wifi" (ofcourse only locally because you can't expect the end-user to handle all the port forwarding and firewall stuff that needs to be configured), and then it automatically opens up a link on the Browser and plays. Personally I don't know if I would use this as I prefer what NW.JS provides, but at least the filesize would drop immensely. Hmmmmm...
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 30 Dec, 2015
- Quote
Yeah I get this too. At least I'm not alone! I made a bug report a week or so ago:
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 25 Dec, 2015
jayderyu
I couldn't agree more.

Even if it was minimal, just a screenshot here and there, maybe stupidly early development stuff, anything to get me hyped. I WANT to be hyped
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 19 Dec, 2015
- Quote
Hey Ashley, hope all is well for you.

Problem Description

When using the NWjs plugin, and using the "Show Open Dialog" action, and then selecting something, then checking the "ChosenPath" expression, it always shows the incorrect path as "C:\fakepath\" followed by the file's name that you picked in the Open dialog window. This means you cannot get the path of any files at all.

Attach a Capx

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/776 ... enBug.capx

Description of Capx

This is a quick capx containing a button and a text box. The button triggers the open dialog window and the textbox shows the ChosenPath.

Steps to Reproduce Bug
- 1. Run this in NodeWebkit.
- 2. Click the button and select any file in any location.
- 3. The Text object will return the path detected.
Observed Result

You will see the Text object always begins with "C:\fakepath\" and does not contain your file's path at all.

Here's a screenshot. I selected a file in the Open dialog window named "a.png", located at "I:\Images\a.png". This is what is returned.

Expected Result

Should return the path of the file.

Affected Browsers

Node Webkit only.

Operating System and Service Pack

Windows 7 64-bit

Construct 2 Version ID

R219
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 16 Dec, 2015
- Quote
Just wanna throw this out there:

I love the fact that Multiplayer was added. It gave me more drive to think of creative game ideas that would utilise Multiplayer. I did make a game and put it on Newgrounds that uses Multiplayer. I made a pairing system that would match 2 players up automatically and make them have to battle, then they can move to the next player.(Although the trouble is, is that I didn't know how to get my games known so it didn't get much attention.). Regardless, It was a blast to develop and I learnt a lot from that project and will continue to experiment with implementing it into my current/future projects.

It would have been horrifically tricky if I had to rely on the WebSocket stuff or whatever there was before multiplayer.

So, from a non-business and more personal perspective: thank you adding Multiplayer, Ashley. I reckon it increased the value of C2 and it certainly makes a lot of people happy, even if they don't say it or even post on these forums.

With that said, I'd certainly be interested if there was to be another poll or something.
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 27 Nov, 2015
- Quote
Same here
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 3 Sep, 2015
- Quote
I missed out on the last meet up in the pub (iirc that was the one and only time a meet up happened), seemed like it would have been an interesting experience. Will that sort of event happen again? I'd be up for it!
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 27 Jul, 2015
- Quote
Hooray! I remember seeing you posting this months back on the SFGHQ forums, was hoping you'd come by here and share. This behaviour feels very polished and tight! Nice work.

I have been developing a Sonic engine using just events, and it's turned out pretty well and the performance is great, although there's certainly parts that could be improved but can't be improved easily due to some very specific limitations of C2's picking system (although there are awkward workarounds).

As complicated as Sonic stuff can be, it's good to see a behaviour that does it all for you automatically
- Jase00
- - Joined 5 Jan, 2012
  - 111 topics • 1,051 posts
- 1
- 1 Jul, 2015
- Quote
lennaert
Yeah, very similar experience to me. This sort of thing is still vital even in something like MMF2 which runs natively, I managed to ruin my framerate due to bad programming and too many collisions per tick (which at the time, I thought I was doing just fine and blamed MMF2). Ironically, that's one of the reasons I ended up finding Construct 2, because I got fed up with MMF2, even though it wasn't MMF2's fault (except for the annoying workarounds in MMF2 of getting more Alterable Values, spreading a number so you can pick them, etc., C2 is a lot more straight forward and removes limitations which is awesome).

droxon
I know what you mean, the jolty look when a frame is dropped is very noticeable and unacceptable, I seem to get it with Chrome but not NW.JS. Not exactly sure why, considering NW.JS practically is Chrome...hmm...

Yes, I get performance issues, but I mean it's not C2's fault, it was my own fault because I was an idiot and made some dumb choices in the way I chose to program that I seriously believed wouldn't impact performance. It's important to remember that if you are making a large game or a complicated game, then, in order to have this large complicated game stay smooth, you have to accept that you need to keep a close eye on performance and be very cautious, no matter what engine or software you use. (Personally, I find it fun to program and try and squeeze performance out of things, it's satisfying when you discover what causes the problem and then fix it. It's part of the whole "Game Creating" experience.)

Perhaps, one engine might handle collisions much better whilst being worse at having more sprites on-screen, whereas another engine might handle object picking very well but struggle with collisions in comparison. Things can always be improved on by the software developers, though.

Honestly, a handful of months back, I had tested on weaker systems, like an old laptop with an intergrated chip thingy, and a weak dualcore. It performed TERRIBLY, until I discovered that shrinking the window so it is tiny, made the FPS reach 60. Then realising you can shrink the canvas in events and then zoom into the layout to get the same performance boost. THEN eventually Ashley added that "Low quality" mode in the project properties, THAT was exactly what was needed. The dualcore wasn't the bottleneck even though there was a lot of CPU stuff to do, like iterating through tonnes of sprites and positioning + angling each of them, but it was the GPU that caused problems (mainly because it didn't exactly have a GPU lol)