-
-
When you know are.
There are some posts at the Touch My Pixel blog about this exact question. The conclusion was that it was way better to use a sprite sheet rather than individual files, sprite sheets are faster and take up less memory.
Caching Animation Frames VS Spritesheets
-
ism
try gluit or any other sprite sheet making program. there are a lot of em.
in my opinion sprite sheets will considerably reduce the size of your .swf.
if image size is your concern then just use multiple sheets.
Graphics Attract, Motion Engages, Gameplay Addicts
XP Pro | P4 2.8Ghz | 2Gb | 80Gb,40Gb | 128Mb DDR ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
-
Funkalicious
http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?t=780658
Conclusion
A bitmapdata contains the actual picture and some extra methods and properties. I get the impression that this overhead is actually bigger then the picture it can contain, but I haven't tested that. This means that less bitmapdata's containing bigger pictures take less memory then a lot of bitmapdata's containing smaller pictures. In other words: spritesheets win.
Btw, FP10 hasn't really got a memory limit on cached bitmapdata's as fas as I can tell. I even tried pushing up to 700mb into it.
@Son of Bryce
They really are faster too? Both use copypixel() to draw, so I can't imagine that a copypixel on a "bigger" bitmapdata is faster than one on a "smaller" bitmapdata.
-
Senior Member
@TOdorus, I think that Son of Bryce was referring to the runtime speed of the files. One large bitmapData can scroll very fast, which is faster than swapping actual bitmapData's.
WIP-ZOMBIES
I love vegetarians! More meat for the rest of us!
-
Funkalicious
We're talking about bitmaps and the scrollrect method? I prefer to have one bitmap which bitmapdata I update through fillrect() and copypixels(), so I couldn't see any difference in speed. As I understand: less objects to draw means less times to update the screen.
-
Senior Member
Ah! I just snapped on! I now get the graphical pipeline we're talking about...I was thinking about using the default Sprites/Bitmaps etc. stuff.
In that case, there really isn't a speed increase, unless the amount of memory the .swf is taking up becomes a problem...
P.
WIP-ZOMBIES
I love vegetarians! More meat for the rest of us!
-
-
Funkalicious
 Originally Posted by Discipol
I know that a bitmapdata contains more information than just the pixel matrix color but ram memory isn't really a problem for computers anymore...its cheap and affordable now 
There are some buts there though. XP can only use up to 1gb of ram, so using a lot of it for just a browsergame can hog the system. Another thing is, that people won't trust it, if they see their memory usage skyrocket. This all doesn't really matter if you're just making the game for the sake of the game, but if you're making this game to be played by a lot of people, you might take that into consideration.
I'm also interested what proportion of memory usage by spritesheets you'll find and what the actual limit for bitmapdata of fp10 is.
-
-
Funkalicious
Didn't know it worked like that in 10, nice to know. I was actually talking about the limit on memory usage of all bitmapdata's, not the size limit of one bitmapdata. fp9 wouldn't let you create new bitmapdata's if it exceeded a certain limit.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|