A few serious problems that could use your votes/support!

2. Chrome runs like absolute rubbish below 60fps

For some reason, any time a C2 game dips below 60fps in Chrome, bad things start happening. 59fps is literally unplayable in a fast-paced action game like Airscape.

This may or may not be more of an issue on fillrate intensive games, more testing needs to be done here.

If this issue was fixed it would bring an 100% increase in effective performance in C2 games, as anything from 30-60fps should be perfectly playable.

I think this is relative to the computer. My game is getting quite large. It runs at 60 fps on my desktop. I have an unbound layout and uses a minimap. It keeps track of every object in the "game world". I have spawners constantly spawning objects. I have to cap the spawning at 500. If I run the game layout (not hitting F4) it skips loading my cap code. So in testing I always see my game get taxed and when the object count goes up over 800 the fps dips and 50 fps looks horrible. However, on my ($400 USD) laptop (i5 4GBram) running the normal game it runs at around 35-40 fps but totally plays fine.. you can tell it's not as "tight" as my desktop, but I had a play test at a small festival and no one noticed anything.

But I'd like to offer any support I can to put my vote in to support C2 for desktop games. I've been working on my game for almost 2 years and while I wish I was using Unity, I wouldn't be ANYWHERE as close as I am now to finishing this game. And I wouldn't have grown into gamedev without the success I've had with C2. I've used many game engines, Spring, Torque, Unity, Gamemaker, Unreal, Xcode, and even some engine that came with a book I bought in 1997 called the Black Art of Windows Game Programming. So I very much appreciate C2 and would love to see it support larger games.

I'll have to agree with the general sentiment. I'm sure we all feel screwed simply because we put our bet on this HTML5 tech. On one hand, HTML5's pretty awesome for general... HTML things, but as for gaming, I don't know. Scirra took a gamble HTML5, and so did we for purchasing the software.

My main concern is the publishing and monetization part. Since these are often done at the end of the creation and polishing game creation process, you don't want to realize you're screwed only after investing a lot of time and effort into doing something that will only give you (unworkable?) problems when it comes to showcasing it to the world and earning from it.

Well, does anyone here have experience with HaxeFlixel or Flambe? I'm looking at doing non-retro looking platformer and I see a lot of demos there - usually of the retro look so I'm hoping I'm not limited to doing that stuff at least when it comes to HaxeFlixel.

PS: Here's another thing I don't quite understand with HTML5 games: 60FPS for a game and depending on the jank spike, anything that dips below that becomes unplayable? Seriously? I know that it's 30FPS that's supposedly playable, minimum at a reasonable 24. So how did it come to this?

Nesteris

"As for veterans of the software, you yourself have been here 4 years, Aphrodite has been here 3 years, we have tons of other members who've been here since the beginning and there's still no showcase worthy games... Unless you count Darkbase 01. "

In my case, It was because I had other things to do and no money/budget, not a limitation of the engine itself (I did also tried game maker but could not do anything truly worth it with it in the past), you can say I am more here for the game concepts rather than doing finished game, I will agree that the focus of the community on small mobile games does not help (I even remember someone telling me he would not enjoy the games he did, but as long as they can be sold to a publisher, it is enough).

As for darkbase 01, clearly cannot be called a worthy game, nor a showcase of what C2 can do.

In the end, this squatting of other markets just showcase how much the majority of people do not want to use html5 at all and could do without, and this "marketing mistake" is what ends up being destructive (rather than doing full fledged quality browser games that could be shared easily with one link, with social integration, they try to do native games, but this one has a lot more of thing to consider, namely performances and wrapper quality, also the web evolves at a faster pace, which can be a bummer if you don't get yourself into it), as for browser don't care about games, it is true, not going to lie, but since they are currently trying to release OSes that are meant to use only the Web browser, we still have a hope.

michael, I'm with you 100%. I downloaded 20 hours of Unity videos 3 weeks ago because I think enough is enough. I've already started the slow transition, although I'm hoping that a c2 export becomes commercially viable while I am a Unity noob.

Like you say, though, a functioning export appears unlikely in the next 12 months - at least for fast paced games (which is one reason why Umbra is so slow, I just accepted the c2 limits when u started). I admire the work done on c2 but I am not sure I only want to spend time on making slow non-action puzzle games.

Back on thread - have Google acknowledged a limitation or made any progress with this yet?

2. Chrome runs like absolute rubbish below 60fps

For some reason, any time a C2 game dips below 60fps in Chrome, bad things start happening. 59fps is literally unplayable in a fast-paced action game like Airscape.

This may or may not be more of an issue on fillrate intensive games, more testing needs to be done here.

If this issue was fixed it would bring an 100% increase in effective performance in C2 games, as anything from 30-60fps should be perfectly playable.

I played your Public_Performance_Test on my crappy laptop (i5 1.7Ghz, HD Graphics 4400) using Chrome 42.0.23. The fps was 35-45 (never going above 45) and I had absolutely no jank. I could tell it wasn't 60fps, but the game ran smooth. Have you not had this result?

EDIT: let the game test run for 20 mins... FPS 35-38, dt diff:19-38, Max dt: 36-51, dt:27-37 (hard to see), Min dt: 25-29

Nesteris

"But why stick with hope when there's fully functioning engines overlooking the bench we're all sitting on that's slowly breaking?"

For the same reason I would rather do complete full fledged browser games rather than native ones if I had the time, if you do not see said reason, that is ok, however the topic talked about issues with chrome, and so wrapper are related to an extend but not the main thing (which should have been shown as such with C2 in general).

Nesteris

Just out of curiosity, have you created/finished/published a game ? (construct, game maker etc, or code ....)

PS: Here's another thing I don't quite understand with HTML5 games: 60FPS for a game and depending on the jank spike, anything that dips below that becomes unplayable? Seriously? I know that it's 30FPS that's supposedly playable, minimum at a reasonable 24. So how did it come to this?

I have a couple games running ~30 and up on various devices, and game play is good enough.

Perhaps some peoples expectations exceed their own capabilities.

[quote:42u79yyd]lennaert

I did two test games in GameMaker Studio while following a couple tutorials, one throw away game in C2 and I'm currently doing my action platformer in C2 which is about 90% done but I had to start again from scratch due to both messy code (but it still works perfectly) and major C2 bugs which a lot of the features (e.g. enemies are doing double to triple damage for absolutely no reason, even in the debugger, there's one instance of each so it's not multiple enemies occupying the same space, and their damage variables are the proper amount, not the amount that's being deducted from player's health).

Nesteris

I asked because you have quite some critique about various aspects of construct 2 work flow to produce a game, while in fact, you have about zilch experience.

Even in your post above ... you refer to "major c2 bugs" while in fact I would take on a bet , that:

enemies are doing double to triple damage for absolutely no reason, even in the debugger, there's one instance of each so it's not multiple enemies occupying the same space, and their damage variables are the proper amount, not the amount that's being deducted from player's health).

Are your own game logic's problems ...... which you created ....

I see you outing a lot of criticism on construct 2, and mentioning how you would make a move to another game creation tool and what not ... but I' will take on a second wager that that ship will strand with the same problems ....

Which for me boils down to biting of more then you can chew ....

I feel like a few vocal inexperienced users keep derailing threads bringing a lot of negativity to the forums. This thread should be about making NW\Chrome better.

Nesteris

After all your insults .... the only thing I like to add is:

You are just angry because you fail ....

PS: Here's another thing I don't quite understand with HTML5 games: 60FPS for a game and depending on the jank spike, anything that dips below that becomes unplayable? Seriously? I know that it's 30FPS that's supposedly playable, minimum at a reasonable 24. So how did it come to this?

I'd like to know what people are talking about when they're using that word- Do they mean things go wrong with the gameplay that make the games literally impossible to play properly, or do they just mean they really don't like the way the janking looks and they don't want to release full games with that sort of issue?

Quicksand I think it is both, at 60 fps, the current chrome just does not render properly (the jank) and it is really annoying to look at it.

And below, on some circumstances, the controls become too unresponsive and so, the game becomes unfaIr.

Both issues are relative to chrome I think, but I could be mistaking.

Quicksand I think it is both, at 60 fps, the current chrome just does not render properly (the jank) and it is really annoying to look at it.

And below, on some circumstances, the controls become too unresponsive and so, the game becomes unfaIr.

Both issues are relative to chrome I think, but I could be mistaking.

Thanks for replying.

Maybe I'm just used to jank because my computer is really, really old but I haven't really noticed it in my game to the point that it made anything unplayable or even that ugly (and again, that's on a super old and slow machine).

I can see how a really fast-paced game would really suffer from random stutters, though.

>

> PS: Here's another thing I don't quite understand with HTML5 games: 60FPS for a game and depending on the jank spike, anything that dips below that becomes unplayable? Seriously? I know that it's 30FPS that's supposedly playable, minimum at a reasonable 24. So how did it come to this?

>

I'd like to know what people are talking about when they're using that word- Do they mean things go wrong with the gameplay that make the games literally impossible to play properly, or do they just mean they really don't like the way the janking looks and they don't want to release full games with that sort of issue?

Like Aphrodite said, it's both. The lag spikes look bad *and* they affect gameplay. Collision checks fail, platform behaviours behave inconsistently etc.

Starred btw.

Oh I see ErekT, I've had a couple issues like that when playing at a double-scaled resolution. I saw someone else saying the same in another thread the other day. For the other people having similar issues could screen-scaling be a common factor?