UPDATE - I had a friend test an HTML upload; interestingly, he said it chugged pretty hard in chrome (not webkit), but on IE it ran smooth as glass. He has the same laptop I have, as well. When he did a test for cpu and memory (in game), he said CPU was at 99% and memoryimageutil was at 0 (which seems odd to say the least).

There has to be some sort of solution here...

Colludium - interestingly enough, integrated graphics from the intel chip run ~45-55 (every once in a while even hitting 60). I have no idea what that means...if my graphics card was blacklisted by chrome, wouldn't it not be good in chrome as WELL as nw?

tunepunk - I've tried deleting all of the offending sprites with layer fx on them to no avail. The layout is only a couple of small rooms, too. It's not nearly as massive as anything else will end up being (or already is!)

ErekT - I'm actually using the tilemap object as my solid behavior. That should be fine, though. It would, in theory, cause more collision checks in the debugger of that were the case, and in theory that would spike CPU.

Thanks for all the responses!

faulknermano - The only "effect" I'm really using on this particular layout is forcing own texture with a giant black tile over it (for darkness) and maybe 10-20 sprites that have destination out on them for a light source. I also have maybe 20 sprites with the additive effect.

oosyrag - total system memory use of nwjs is ~15mb. I've tried it on 1 other machine but I'm not counting it because it's nearly twice as powerful as this and runs at 60fps .

I DO however have a ton of layers that are invisible (I have a ton of menu systems so I created them on a "start" layout and set the layers to global - then toggle them invis/vis when being used). It's probably around 400-500 objects, but the code isn't being touched until they're out (and even when so, I have everything in functions that applies to button presses).

nemo - I've just disabled ALL of my code and my fps is 20-30.

ErekT - I don't really have any effects on static objects aside from the destination out and additive blend fx. I've tried low quality but it actually does look a bit worse and doesn't help any.

NetOne - I thought it was collision checks but I had another layout that (embarrassingly) had around 4000 collision checks per tick....and that ran just as poorly (if not BETTER)

I am spawning rain fx, but its getting destroyed (the object count never goes above a certain number). And trust me, I've stressed test construct like crazy, I need THOUSANDS of collision checks on a loop to start seeing any fps droppage on most games.

To answer you questions:

1. on edge I actually get 60 fps (strangely enough the edge isn't using my graphics card....it's using intel chip)

2. same; ~30 fps on both exported and preview

3. the only one I've tried gets 60 but like I stated few people have machines with that kind of power.

I have also just recently updated my graphics card, too (as in yesterday), so I don't THINK it's that...

So here are my guesses?

1. Capx file is corrupt and I need to rebuild it

2. I have 3 sets of tilemaps on top of each other; maybe there's some kind of rendering issue when you do that?

I've developed quite a few titles using C2, and I love it as an editor, but for some reason on my current game I'm at a bit of loss as to why my fps is so low.

I'm currently trying this on my laptop; it's a pixel platformer. At 100% size (640, 360), I'm using ~11mbs of video ram, and the cpu is anywhere from 10-20% usage (~70mb at fullscreen size of vram). I have around 1000 objects in the layout, but only a a few of them visible on screen at a time (most are UI elements that are on a global layer and hidden). My collision checks are relatively high (~60-70 per tick), but that seems to be about as low as you can get using the platform behavior.

My laptop is a surface book with an NVIDIA GTX 965m; TWO gig of vram and a high end i7 processor.

Now, that being said I do have a lot of relatively complex code, (camera functions, player movement, lots of weird overlap checks etc.), but even disabling most of the code doesn't seem to change my fps. It starts around 40-45 fps for the first 15-20 seconds and then randomly drops to ~20-30 consistantly (only occurs when maximized to full screen). If I scale back to 100% (640, 360), I obviously get 60 fps no problem (just can't see anything since my resolution is 3000 x 2000).

I'm using node-webkit (latest april version, but it appeared on early versions as well). However, if I try using in chrome, I'm able to achieve around 50-60 fps but with ~80% cpu usage. This will be a steam release, which means I NEED to use node-webkit since there is no other available wrapper.

Any suggestions? Thoughts? Words of encouragement?

newt - yeah as usual that's a better idea . I'll give it a try. Thanks!

newt - the for each is due to multiple instances of the same enemy type. The UID check is to find out if that enemy exists in the layout.

What would you suggest?

MPPlantOfficial - no there are only ~3-4 active enemies per layout, and those are still only pulling 0.2-0.3% each. I'm beginning to think it's not actually disabling the group for some reason. It's calling the enable / disable group at the start of layout only, too.

My hierarchy is "if enemyspawn.UID exists, For each enemyspawn, create enemy"

Else

Disable group

I have code that disables enemy groups that aren't being used (I'm checking if the SpawnEnemy.UID exists for each enemy, and then if it does NOT, it disables the group). However when I look at the debugger, it's still taking up ~0.2% cpu. I know that doesn't sound like a lot, but I have probably ~30 enemies and will likely have 30 more soon, so it's starting to add up. Is there a better way I should be doing this?

IJCT - I will try that; thank you!

AllanR - Could you technically not just put text of what you want searchable as some sort of "invisible" text? (or better yet, maybe a texbox object that is selectable behind the unselectable text?) Or does it not even matter what object-type it is? What I'm doing is incredibly simple and shouldn't have too much overhead.

drzanuff - That's an interesting idea - what did you save the buttons and banners as, exactly?

I'm wondering if anyone has had any success using C2 for building a simple website? I've done a mockup of one that I really like, but the problem is I can't seem to get it to work in the middle of the screen and make the scrollbar on the right side work right.

Any insight?

Pulstar - Ahh, I suppose that makes sense. Thank you!!