Prominent's Forum Posts

  • No, I'm using a 9 year old laptop with core 2 duo. The asm version had some sagging, but it felt quickest (maybe it is less precise).

  • Does it help any if you recycle the sprites, brunopalermo ?

    Also have you disabled their collisions?

  • I tried the stress test to compare the 3, but didn't notice any major difference.

    All 3 peaked around 90% cpu and dipped to around 30 fps. I think the Asm was the smoothest/snappiest of the 3. Chipmunk seemed slowest but perhaps more sensitive due to more collision points being shown? So maybe it is performing more steps than the others?

    Anyways, it is nice to see another option available! I'll be interested in trying it out.

  • I have noticed that it improves performance for my games. I don't know exactly why. I'd be interested in finding out though.

  • What sort of game do you want to make?

  • The particle emitters aren't that flexible. They are more useful for generic sort of particles. If you want more specific behaviors for your particles, you'll need to spawn them yourself and control their movement with events. One thing I do in this case is recycle particles, so that I don't keep creating and destroying them. I only create more if there are none available or if I have set a limit on the number. Then whenever a particle finishes its motion/behavior I move it offscreen and disable it. When I need it again, I take them from that pool of particles that is offscreen. I also disable their collisions if it isn't necessary to help improve performance.

  • I wouldn't look at it as a instantaneous wishful sort of phenomenon. People aren't machines- even though everyone has become conditioned to hitting buttons and receiving instant responses in modern times..

    I'd suggest just slowing down a bit and do some studies of other games if you are interested in expanding your understanding of games. Try not to be so reliant on a single person's response, etc, because then that leads to bad habits (I'm trying to break some of my own).

  • You're only comparing the Chromium engine - have you tried Edge and Firefox? They have different v-sync engines. Edge was particularly good IIRC.

    Chromium is the only option we have if we export to pc.

  • I think html5/javascript is a good platform to invest in. I do feel at times that the more complex a construct game becomes, the more unstable it runs. There are various small things that have been noticed by users that effect a game's performance, such as function calls requiring more processing, multiple tilesets, etc. And all these things add up, especially if you aren't aware of how to avoid the problems. And who knows what else there is.. There have been many times where I implement something, and get a weird feeling that it should run better than it does- maybe because construct adds extra stuff to ensure a more universal possibility.

    I'm more interested in construct allowing more customization for users, so they can better control how their games can be developed and how they run, etc- there is still so much that can be improved, and construct is already a really great tool.

  • Alright- makes sense.

    I only need the bounding box type for my specific case, I was just confused at first but figured out I had to reset poly to bounding box (can't just drag the points to the corners).

    Chipmunk still is very great to use- one of my main reasons I use Construct2.

  • Okay, so.. here is some more info..

    Seems like if I modify the tile's collision poly, then Chipmunk separates it into another group or something. Moving the points back won't revert it, I had to right click and set the collision poly to bounding box for it to combine properly.

    Maybe there is a flag somewhere that is set if you set the poly to bounding box, and it is toggled when moving the points?

    Anyways.. kind of interesting.. Basically if a tile is considered a polygon(not bounding box), then it won't combine with tiles that are considered of bounding box type.

  • R0J0hound , I'm having an issue with tile collisions polygons. It seems like the polygons are generated fine when the tile is index of 0, but if it is a different index, like tile 1 or 2, etc, the polygons don't combine together.

    Is there a way for me to confirm if this is the case? How can I fix this if it is?

    ..maybe a bug in the tilemap object??

    edit: the tilemap's collision rects property value in debug remains the same when I replace tile type 1 with tile type 0, so maybe it's a chipmunk bug.

  • Prominent Really useful plugin. Thank you! Can you add a relative X and Y pinning option? Right now, when using the relative scale, objects changing their location.

    Thanks! So if I understand correctly, if an object is pinned to another object that changes scale(width/height), you want the pinned location to stretch with it?

    I'll see what I can do.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Yeah, but if you want a game to fill the screen without black borders, the only options are scale inner or scale outer. Those will keep the pixels somewhat square, however, those scale to the window width or height which usually isn't divisible by the original game window size- so you get some pixels that are squished and stretched.

    There could be more options that would round the screen size to the nearest value that is divisible by the original size. So an option that would round up and an option that would round down, and display whatever is extending out from that. That way everything remains square regardless of aspect ratio, and it would fill the entire screen/window.

  • Ashley , it would be great to have options for "Scale Outer Integer" and "Scale Inner Integer" modes. That way we can have games fill the screen and maintain square pixels without black borders regardless of window ratios.