oOoh like can I like make gta in flash now?
like tell me tell me!!
Printable View
oOoh like can I like make gta in flash now?
like tell me tell me!!
sure such comments will come,they always come. Its nothing specific to flash though,visit some developer forums for other langauages and its the same there. There´s always (in case of propper ondevelopment) more things people can do with a new version of a language/dev environment and still after a while people hit the limits of that and want to be able to do even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squize
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMD
sorry,maybe i don´t know "my flash" well enough then,please show me the mode7 type engine done in flash5 (and running smooth on an average box).
Sure,with trickery one could do quite fancy stuff in way older flash versions,too.
The rpgs (besides some more recent finished ones) attempted in flash which impressed me most in the old days were a demo by tonypa done in flash4 and one by edmack done in flash6 if i remember right. It wasn´t about them being technically that impressive,it was more about them doing it in a time when most flash stuff around was way more basic.
Still there are some kind of games which of course benefit a lot of new capabilities like dynamic masking (introduced in mx),dynamic drawing (also mx),beeing able to get/set pixels/create bitmaps in runtime (f8) or performance increase (a bit in several areas in several releases).
From a technical view angle to me the trickery involved in making the mario kart engine run in f6 (using almost dirty seeming hacks like tons of masks) was way more impressive (just getting the idea,the execution is easy,too) than doing it with the bitmapdata api in way more easy way (and more similar to how its done in other langauge) in f8,
but yeah,the person playing it won´t care a tad about how something was done normally;
if he sees the well coded f6 solution running choppy in small window with ugly map resolution he won´t care if you did it with 20 masks and you couldn´t use 30 because then it wouldn´t run on even speedy boxes.
He won´t give you a techncial merit award because you got something like that running at all in f6.
He will see the wellmade f8 version running way smoother in bigger window while looking better at the same time.
If you couldn´t do "snes quality" games with older flash versions (regarding gameplay of snes games),f9 won´t make you automatically able to kick it.
What it can do is execute code faster and if coded to its strengths that can make certain things run smoother on the same system than it would run after optimising the same thing with more trickery and time involved for dev on release for an older player.
As its a codeside performance improvement,not a performance improvement for the graphic renderer code intensive things like physics calculations will benefit way more than graphic intensive things.
If you have tons of vector shapes moving around,it will still be slow for example,because the performance heaps doesn´t come from the code execution but from what flash can/can´t render speedy.
You can think that´s enough or not or it has bee released too early or not (regarding you´re ready/up for learning a new version),to me it just don´t makes sense to downtalk everything while one hasn´t even propperly tried it,just as much as it doesn´t make sense to state "we can make all great stuff we ever wanted with it" and then be disappointed.
I´d love it if they finally added full blown open gl acceleration for all plattforms/player versions so the renderer side would finally get speedy,too,but yeah,there is prgress,one can do more stuff with it,take it or leave it.
Try it,experiment with it for a while and we´ll all see what we can do with it and what not.
Regarding the comparison examples posted:
what about posting the flas/AS.files for both versions so we can see how its coded?
To me it doesn´t make sense for a code update to see exported examples where its not sure if and how one actually worked to the strenghs of the new/old version.
Nothing against you tonypa,but you seem disappointed and well,i can´t argue you´re right in beeing disappointed neither can i say "hm,let´s try to change that and see if it runs better" without seeing the source.
Huh?
Version 8,0,24,0 installed successfully
Any other ways of installing? :)
No problem, have attached both balls source flas (Flash8 of course). Like I said I am only testing AS3 and probably made them completely wrong way :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tomsamson
I'll proberbly be wrong here, but doesn't this mean that the swf should run as fast as any other executable on the machine would?Quote:
Flash Player 9 achieves up to 10 times faster performance through ActionScript 3.0 and a new ActionScript Virtual Machine (AVM), which features a Just In Time (JIT) compiler that translates ActionScript bytecode to native machine code for maximum execution speed.
for IE install i had to press "allow activex element being installed" (thanks to nice microsoft oppressing us with their pseudo security since service pack2 ;) ) before the install side actually had any effect; for firefox i had to close all browser windows running flash after install and then would see the install in effect when opening a new browser window.Quote:
Originally Posted by SaphuA
Maybe its one fo those for you,too?
sweet,thanks :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tonypa
I´ve got some client talk mumbo jumbo to do now,will experiment with it then :)
curious to see if and how we can unleash the theoretical power,too ;)
JIT compiling in best case means code runs a speedy as in JAVA or other languages/environments that have a similar concept (code exported to bytecode and then beeing intepreted at runtime) and have JIT compiling,too.Quote:
Originally Posted by SaphuA
JAVA;Flash and any other language exporting to bytecode and beeing interpreted at runtime will never run as fast as for example C++ which is right away compiled to machine close code.
The JIT compiler brings the bytecode close to machine code during runtime and therefore leads to performance increase as that´s still way speedier than just interpreting bytecode
So the JIT compiling makes it faster,but still that´s done in runtime,not ahead during export,so it still can´t reach C++ speed.
That´s the downside,the upside (and reason why java and flash etc use that bytecode<->vm interpreting concept at all ) is of course it can be ported to other environments easier,all one needs is a player (/VM)
which can interpret the bytecode at runtime.
Having fun with sound spectrum (FP9 needed):
http://www.hot.ee/tonypa/spectrum.html
There is some thought that this wont be the case forever. JIT compilers can take advantage of runtime metrics to determine optimization routines and streamline the code as it's running. Java does this now and they enhance it with every release. Static compilers (C++ for instance) don't do this. They have to make it as fast as they can when it compiles. For this reason, its possible a JIT could achieve the same performance as a C++ app if the JIT was good enough. The problem is that none of em are good enough yet :)Quote:
any other language exporting to bytecode and beeing interpreted at runtime will never run as fast as for example C++ which is right away compiled to machine close code.
haha,ok :)
see,and there you have the first thing one wants from the next flash ;) :D
btw,nice example tonypa,good to see other uses for f9/AS3 feature set than just the ever ongoing performance discussion :)
I wasn't refering to Flash at all, just JIT in general. I won't complain about Flash enhancements until I've played with em all.
yup,nice,good thinking :)
My comment also wasn´t meant that serious,it was more a joke in reply to the jokes made earlier in the thread on the point if and when people will start moaning they wait for this and that feature in the next flash version to do this and that game with it :)
Thats weird. I see the diffrence, on mine (FF, WinXp, FP 9,0,16,0) The Framerate goes 41-48 while on my other comp (FF, WinXp, FP 8,0,22,0 I think) The FrameRate goes 26-31
I am getting interesting error messages from Flash player. For example when trying to play this movie:
http://www.vectorjunkie.co.uk/experi...allBouncer.htm
The Flash player pops up several error windows saying AS is faulty. I wonder if those are somehow programmed into movie or will every Flash9/AS3 swf generate them in case of error. Also if those can be turned off.
I´ve experienced similar things for AS3 examples done with earlier flex betasQuote:
Originally Posted by tonypa
(where AS3 wasn´t final yet and has been changed since then).
I haven´t seen such results for "full version" f9 (or older flash version content) yet though.
I know some of you are getting sick about the perfomance talk, but I will return again to 100 balls example. When you run both movies in browser, there is hardly any speed difference, however try running them in stand-alone FP9. The AS2 version drops to almost same speed as in browser, while AS3 version performs much better in standalone player.
Tonypa,
It's nice to see people playing around with F9/AS3 and trying to determine the best ways to achieve the highest performance. I downloaded your example and just wanted to post something quick here that will give you a frame rate around 48+.
Comment out your 3 lines of code that add the timer listener. Add this instead:
And in the 'timerHandler' function, type the paramter as Event.Code:stage.addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, timerHandler);
This will give you closer to the target frame rate!
Have you tryed running that example at about 70 or 80 in FP8? and then in 9? It might just be because your computer is speedy enough to run it in flash 8. and then 9 is no differance cose its already running fine. Its just a surgestion, sorry if it was already brought upQuote:
Just trying to see the perfomance increase promised:
Flash Player 9 achieves up to 10 times faster performance through ActionScript 3.0 and a new ActionScript Virtual Machine (AVM), which features a Just In Time (JIT) compiler that translates ActionScript bytecode to native machine code for maximum execution speed.
Maybe I am just not seeing it correctly.
EDIT: I cant find my flash 9 standalone player, where does the installer install it to? It doesnt say.
Thanks, Jobe, I tried that now, but honestly cant see much improvement. When you say fps48+, do you get it in standalone player or in browser embedded with html?Quote:
Originally Posted by jobemjobem
Maybe I missed the idea of Timer event, but if fps is set to 50 and timer delay is 20 then in reality as fps always drops a little the timer event should run also at each frame.
In my WinXp itsQuote:
Originally Posted by Gloo pot
C:\Program Files\Adobe\Flash 9 Public Alpha\Players
Not sure about Macs.
Tonypa,
I tried it in Test Movie mode in the IDE. I spent all of 5 minutes on it so I can't comment on why the timer event was faltering. The only thing that I can think of without doing experimentation is that the timer event is the same as, or similar to, setItnerval. setInterval in most cases will not ever match the frame rate.
[edit] - just fixed a typo
The spectrum stuff seems really exciting to me. Imagine making a game play to the beat of a song the player can choose? A wicked inclusion.