You could try

min = 0;

max = 1;

value = 3.5;

x = (value % max) + min

But i'm not %100 on this. I tried this a few times with different result. Higher than max seems to have no troubles.

I have to admit. If this works it would seem that a cycle function would be kind of a silly idea; since this is a pretty minimal expression. We don't really use function such a multiply(var1, var2). Unless of course there is some serious optimization.

To make it more clear.

At this time CJS is a canvas render. Which is only open space of pixel manipulate.

The text object that shouldn't be used in games so please use spritefont; is infact a DOM object of HTML5 dom rendered.... which isn't part of the canvas rendering.

So you can't mix DOM and Canvas... actually in fact the last time this question was asked I informed that TextObject because it works on the DOM layer adds a seperate rendering level on top of Canvas. This will hit your performance and games should never use DOM objects.

I love programming with C2. I like it so much that I started created a C2 NodeWebkit app. The app design is to compile C2 games with XWalk localling rather than XDK cloud based system. It's got a nasty overhead, but what the hell right. That's how much I like programming in C2 that I'm going to make app in it

I'm more curious as to what's causing the hit on XWalk. Sounds like the renderer is slower, but that's ok to an extent. The real importance is stability at a given FPS. My question is to the OP. What's the FPS if you want 4 of those images on different layers animating in different directions. Doesn't matter if you can seem them all.

I was following up with just some theoretical designs on that could be achieved; not specifically arguing against you

They are using dt, but it's been reported a handful of times that there is a problem with lower FPS. I don't know why this problem hasn't been solved, but I recall this since r110.

The Platformer behavior uses the movement of X Speed per second. So it shouldn't matter. but that doesn't seem to be the case.

If you find a solution please let me know

This is an easy answer.

YOU CAN"T USE BOTH. Your not alone on asking any question in regards to one of the Platformer Behaviours and the Physics Behaviour. But I will inform you of the cardinal rule in C2.

NEVER EVER MIX Physics with any other form platform behaviours. The reason for this is because Physics is based on Box2D and entirely runs it's own world simulation that does not work Platformer/Bullet/Solid/Jumthru. They are just not meant to be used together.

Either make your game using the Platformer set(Platformer, bullet,solid, jumpthru, Custom, 8 Direction) or Physics. But Physics must stand alone.

So the answer is. If your Player is a physics object and plays in a physic world. Then you should only use Physics Imoveable. If your player uses Platformer then use Solid.

Joannak

Well I remember this game. However this was Sony's baby. So

A. Sony can afford powerful computers

B. I only gave a sample that 1 Map/zone is 1 computer. in fact you can divide a map into server nodes. This would require that the player connect to more than the current section server and also connect to the nearby sections. As players transition from one section to another they connect and disconnect. This will give the illusion of persistent connection and stability.

C. Sony can afford mega bandwidth. I'm pretty sure that MAG wasn't a PS3 client hosted game even if the player could create rooms.

So for MAG in theory they could have structure each battle to be composed of 3 computers.

2 computers to handle 1 per side(possible 2 computers a side). These computers would then coordinate there actions on a map server.

There are many many many ways to get around all sorts of numerical limitations. It all comes down to the points I made above.

bandwidth

structure

hardware

in pretty much that order

Large images will break CJS. CJS in theory handles 2048x2048, but your better off capping at 1024x1024.

My big game is 120mb and will not run on CJS at all . I have no idea what it is unpacked.

Hello C2 community. As things are I am planning to do a kickstarter project by the end of March(demo permitting). I have had a game in design for a while now, but was put on hold because of effort from not being ready to do the multiplayer server infrastructure.

However now that the magnificent Ashley is doing Multiplayer infrastructure by handling all the difficult parts. I'm reconsidering of taking my MP game off hold and actually kicking it into development. I would though like to get the wonderful C2 communities opionion of which Kickstarter game I should go with.

Game One

I have been developing tools in unit testing design for the last couple of months to gear up for this project. The game idea is a compilation of mini-games handled by a resource based game. To add more details it's a single player meant for mobile devices and FB. Players run an organization that has agents as resources. Agents have a small set of skills. The player sends agents towards locations that have time generated missions. More agents on any given mission usually determine a number failurs the player is allowed. Agents skills can enhance efforts in the mini game(ie Parkour will offer a jump bonus in a canabalt like game, Research offers bonuses towards a Match3 game, Fighting offers damage bonus towards a Punch Out/Infinity blade like game). As players win or succeed they gain small amounts of cash, but also determine a "monthly" funding. Players with more money can hire more agents or get equipment to better agent skills. There are a few social features, but that's the premise of the game. This game was on the books to create a sample demo in March.

But as I was saying now with viable Multiplayer features and a beta likely out in 2ish weeks. It's time to reconsider. So on we go to

Game Two

Players play in a 1 to 5 player "dungeon delving" game(actually it's in space). Players play 1 character part of a team(minimum of 1) that goes to scavenge/salvage/loot derelict space ships, stations, mining asteroids... Let me add some details to carry some of the experience i'm looking for. Players play can develop there characters skill, buy or find gear. The game will use Spriter so that gear will have appearance changes.

Gameplay or more specifically game mechanics use a more table top model. Dice range from d4,6,8,10,12. Dice have more than just numerical values they also have resources. These resources are used to boost effectiveness, trigger special abilities and such. The dice used for any given action is dependent on action. Skill offers 1 die based on skill level(1 to 5), and gear offers 1 die based on gear quality(1 to 5), and 1 die from from the characters Rank(1 to 5). Dice come in a few resource types. Dice are earned by much harder and rarer means(ie special achievements, special quests). As an example a Green die could be considered a energy die which could reduce weapon power usage or possible create a surplus, a red die type would increase performance out(ie damage or increase defense), a blue die would produce better odds to trigger special abilities of someone on the team. Players stack there dice before they go into the "dungeon". Once in the dungeon they need to stick with the results of their choices.

The game mostly revolves around searching dungeons/Derelicts. Lastly the last part of all of this is what I feel makes the difference. Players and their friends can form Derelict Diving teams. A team can pool their money to purchase a expensive space fairing ship. The ship is customizable and represents a team shared collaborative game place. When players own there own ship the game opens up. Players can freely travel the galaxy, players can come across random encounters, take on designed monthly scenarios.

The ship as mentioned in a previous section is important to the game. Random games run off the idea that ship is "rented". rented ships have less storage space for salvaged items from derelicts. rented ships never have random encounters and players pay higher fee's to search for salvage derelicts.

this game is going to be created with C2

Yes and it for the most part has been answered. Sorry, but MP doesn't really work as a question of "how many players". It's all relative to the design of the game server architecture.

If you want a hard numerical cap I suppose I could give you some form of answer, but it's not an answer you could effectively use to answer your question for effective game play. but WebRTC on Chrome has a cap of 256 for the listen() function.

Unless you going to do a turn based game. I doubt anyone is going to manage 256 players.

Looks excellent. It's amazing what good art can do to a game