SnipG's Forum Posts

  • In general I think that kind of micro-management goes against the whole purpose of Construct, to make things simple and easy to use.

    I would disagree with this, but ofc i don't know complexity behaind it, if i knew i could agree with you. But simple, easy to use and awsome 2d engine, could still need some new extra option.

    But that's not guestion i wanted to ask. If i have shader effect which uses texture bias and i change downscaling quality then editor effect seems to work correctly, but runtime arent. Editor displays effect which are effected by mipmap correctly, but runtime the outcome is different and seems runtime the mipmaps are there even if downscaling is set to low!

  • This will add things to already big list of things that is nice to have. But anyway:

    How hard, if possible and does not have big impact - is to enable mipmap per object basis. This is clearly needed, like a lot of other cool things, but not every object is zoomed and object that need zoom are mostly together with ones that don't need it. Currect case is big middle ground! Maybe per layer basis? Ofc the end benefit might super minimal.

  • Conspiracy theorist Fortuneteller:

    More schools start to use C3, wild investor appears and scirra will sell 15% of company for 150m. Sazam, company is valued at 1b. Everything expensive must be bought by big companies, Alphabet Inc buys it at 1.5b, to make it even more valuable.

    C3 gets 100 man army to import software to all counthries and improve it. To make it much better and fix longstanding bugs, backward compatibility will be removed. Because profit does not come from devs.

    Prices will be remade and workaround that support some project will be removed.

    Scirra owners enjoy rich life and every feature request will be fullfilled in notime.

    Last but not least.

    You always pay Fortuneteller(1m).

    Happily ever after

  • It doesn't work on Tiled Backgrounds.

    Or layers.

    Or rotate the image. There are always limitations.

    Built-in blurs are made for quality, it could be possible to change for less quality but better perf, etc.

  • It didn't do anything noticable.

    Well you have to enter numbers from 1-10 first. :)

  • > Blur simple. Simple as it can get.

    > 1drv.ms/u/s!Ap-ffJJPoln1i3FcZMJE2RwbHmNt

    Um that's perhaps a bit too simple.

    You wrong on this one. It's so "simple" it literally gives performance and adds blur for bonus. When all other blurs add massive perf impact.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Blur simple. Simple as it can get.

    1drv.ms/u/s!Ap-ffJJPoln1i3FcZMJE2RwbHmNt

  • Even though it is already possible and we currently have:

    *For

    *For each

    *For each(ordered)

    *Condition met

    *Repeat

    *While

    Not sure if it's complex but, something like: For each(over time) : Loops over instances by specified time interval'tick'.

    So when user has 550 object

    For each object

    time: (7)

    So each tick loops over around ~79 instance

    This indeed could make some cases simpler to handle or create.

    So i can't agree this is confusing.

    Sure this will consume dev time, which is already possible.

    This is somewhat re-inventing the wheel, but to shift complexity over scirra side.

    This also sure will cause errors and bugs.

    Overall, would be nice to have, like a lot of other features suggested.

    My 2 cents (:

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • Not sure if this: It can sometimes happen, when browser caches something what it should'nt and when you open editor it started to load resources which depend on loading order, cached resources won't be loaded in correct order and breaks editor. There could be crash dialog commonly, but it could be hidden.

    Navigate: Click f12 -> elements -> search for dialog -> copy what it says.

    Possible fix, without deleting browser cookies, browser saves and everything:

    Navigate:

    editor.construct.net/r112

    editor.construct.net/r153

    editor.construct.net/r168

    -> latest release you use.

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • What are you even saying! Even reading your replys will cost me more time then i worked on your project and finding your core problems.

    My reply was: " After even 1 change, which i was able to find, it dropped on chrome to 30%(ofc it might not be solid fix, because I don't know why event logic is, like it is. So disabling some strange logic, could not be possible in reality, because you need this game mechanics! )."

    That was ~50% drop from 60-70% cpu use to ~30%. Ofc disabling something is no way to go, but that is major drop. So futher working on that object group logic/mechanic could net in huge cpu save.

    Your reply was: Wow! Thanks for the work! I'd love to know your advice, but before I pay, I have one other fellow who was investigating.

    And later 4-5 days you come, bring it into forum like noone could solve it, while claiming you found way to decrease peformance by 30% your own. The Only way you could get it, was reworked your disable/enable logic.

    What i think what happed, was after i reply you that 1 object group causes huge cpu use, you investigated it instead 4-5 days on your own and reworked it a bit, which gave you the performance gain.

    Sorry, if i did not read or reply your email messages anymore. Thinking about it and reading messages will keep costing me time. I replied with honest message last time. You claiming here like iam angry, i am not. I said, i will stop working on this and won't sink any more time. So you could find someone else or do it yourself like you said in mail, that you will continue to work on it yourself.

  • Thanks all for your support here, so far I haven't had any success, folks have been very eager and generous with their time, but no solutions have been found.

    I clearly figured most the issues out in first 2 hours when i saw the project! You put me onhold for 4-5 days, because you waited some other guy, to see if he can do it, so you could know which to hire.

    But you worked on it yourself meanwhile and now post that noone could figure it out?

    This seems strange!

  • "

    If we add an audio latency setting, for every person who uses it to fix a problem, someone else will configure it wrong, get glitched audio, and (because figuring out who to blame is actually really hard), some of them will blame you as the app developer, and some of those app developers will blame us.

    "

    This, some complex settings could cause a lot of problems, has been mentioned multiple times in the past.

    But now with Scripting, that looks really good place to put all thous options or not?

  • You do not have permission to view this post