I'm implementing a game on cocos2d-x.
Now I implemented a "Replay of My Game" feature (Game shows from start)
But I want to replay my game at the speed of 1x , 2x , 3x , 4x. When changing speed to 2x all actions (move and rotate etc.) should work with respect to new changed variable.
How can I do that by changing the general speed of CCAction?
I want a general solution. I know the solution with variables or scheduler,
but I want a general solution.
You can use following code to slow or fast all scheduler and action:-
float val = 2.0; // to fast
val = 0.5; // to slow
Director->getInstance()->setTimeScale(val);
Default value is 1.0;
Write a class like CCEaseIn by yourself.
Rewrite update(float time).
m_pInner->update(powf(time, m_fRate)); // this is what update() like in CCEaseIn
The code may be changed like this:
m_pInner->update(func(time));
func(float time) is the function to change the time. like time/2 which means to 0.5x, time*2 means 2x. You may save some param to make the function more adaptable.
Related
This is not a duplicate of this question because I need a way to speed up my world without changing deltaTime and have everything happen faster. Why can't I use deltaTime or change it? I'm using the velocity Verlet sympletic integration for the simulation of orbital mechanics and deltaTime is required to be as low as possible for increased precision. Therefore I have it set to Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime() * 0.001f. I am using LibGDX in Java and if it is necessary, I am using the Game class to have my screens structured.
What have I tried or thought of?
Using higher order sympletic integrators will not require a smaller deltaTime but are difficult to implement and are my plan B for if this is not possible.
The question which you said is not duplicate is actually most likely your solution.
Your goal is to have small time-step of Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime() * 0.001f. When we use framerate 60fps then it can be writen as 1f / 60f * 0.001f. So your current time-step is about 0.000017. This is the value which you want to use for Constants.TIME_STEP.
Then you will just need to replace WorldManager.world.step with call to your physics function. And the delta time which you pass as parameter will be Constants.TIME_STEP.
But due to your small time-step there will be large amount of calls to the physics function, which means it will have to be fast or you will have to find a way to reduce the time-step anyway.
I'm doing a simulation program in Scala and I'm trying to render the simulation in a JPanel by overriding the paintComponent:
override def paintComponent(g: Graphics2D) = {
g.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON);
super.paintComponent(g)
tx1 = g.getTransform()
g.setColor(new Color(0,0,0))
simulator.getVehicles foreach{vehc =>
g.translate(vehc.getPos.x,vehc.getPos.y)
g.draw(new Ellipse2D.Double(-Vehicle.rad, -Vehicle.rad, Vehicle.diam, Vehicle.diam))
g.drawLine(0,0,(Vehicle.rad*vehc.getDir.x).toInt,(Vehicle.rad*vehc.getDir.y).toInt)
g.setTransform(tx1)
}
}
I have the simulation itself running on a different thread:
def run{
//logic loop
time = System.currentTimeMillis();
dt = 1000/60
while(loop)
{
getVehicles.foreach{
_.move
}
collider.solvecollisions()
Thread.sleep(dt- (time - System.currentTimeMillis()))
time = System.currentTimeMillis();
}}
GetVehicles returns a Buffer[Vehicle] of all simulated vehicles.
My problem is that there is jittering in the rendering. What I mean is that sometimes some of the vehicles are rendered a timestep later than others.
I presume this happens because the simulation loop updates the positions at the same time the render loop fetches the positions, and there is some overlap. i.e. when rendering begins in timestep n,half of the vehicles are rendered and then timestep n+1 happens and the rest of the vehicles are rendered a timestep further. First I thought this was a problem to be solved with double buffering, but since paintComponent already does that, I dont think thats the case.
Any ideas how to fix this? I tried simply rendering getVehicles.clone but that didn't help because the references to the vehicles are still the same.
Thanks!
It appears that your vehicle models are mutable things (_.move). Then if simulation and painting run in different threads, it is no surprise that you don't get a consistent world view in Swing.
I can see the following solutions, depending on your requirements:
run the simulation updates on the event-dispatch-thread. Advantage: no need to change your code at all. Disadvantage: may render the GUI sluggish if simulation is heavy
create one global "world" lock to which you synchronize. Advantage: requires very little change to the code. Disadvantage: Unless GUI updates are at low rate, both simulation and rendering block each other. Might be useful if GUI updates are a fraction of simulation rate.
adopt an immutable model, and your simulation will then create one consistent updated world in each step. Advantage: rendering and simulations will automatically be consistent. Probably the fastest solution. Disadvantage: You need to rewrite your simulation. Probably the best solution.
Change your var mutable state to STM reference cells. Might work nicely if GUI rate is low compared to simulation rate, because then this "optimistic" approach might work with relatively few rollbacks. I'm not sure how this works out with Scala-STM and the renderer doing only read access. Perhaps you need a full multi-versioned STM to avoid rollbacks.
To outline the immutable variant:
trait Vehicle {
def move: Vehicle // return updated model
}
trait Collisions {
def solve(in: Seq[Vehicle]): Seq[Vehicle] // return corrected models
}
trait World {
def vehicles: Seq[Vehicle]
}
trait Simulator {
protected def coll: Collisions
// create updated world
def run(prev: World): World = new World {
val vehicles = coll.solve(prev.vehicles.map(_.move))
}
}
I'm using AS3, but general programming wisdom unspecific to AS3 is great too!
I am creating my first game, a top-down dungeon crawler with tile-based navigation, and I am deciding how to store my maps. I need to be able to access a specific tile at any point in time. My only thought so far is to use nested Vectors or Arrays with the first level being the row and the second being the column, something like this:
private var map:Array = new Array(Array(0,1,0,0,1,1,0),Array(0,1,0,1,0,1,0));
private var row2col3:uint = map[1][2];
/*map would display as such:*/
#|##||#
#|#|#|#
Ultimately, the idea is to build a Map class that will be easily extensible and, again, allow free access to any specific tile. I am looking for help in determining an effective/efficient design architecture for that Map class.
Thanks!
As stated in the comments I would upload and give my source code for a 12 hour challenge project to create a tile based level editor. The source code can be found at: GitHub BKYeates
This level editor focuses on textures being a power of 2, and uses blitting for drawing on all the textures. It can read, write, and store partial tiles. There is also some functionality to erase and draw on collision boxes.
Now in regards to how the storage should be setup, it is really up to you. If you are going to be storing lots of information I recommend using Vectors. Vectors perform faster than most other container types except for ByteArray (if used correctly). In my level editor I used a Vector with a particular setup.
The Vector I used named _map in a class called tilemodel. tilemodel is responsible for updating all the storage information when a change is made. The _map variable is setup like so:
_map = new Vector.<Vector.<Vector.<Object>>>();
This is a pretty heavily nested Vector and in the end stores, can you believe it, an Object! Which admittedly really chunks out the performance gains you get from using Vector when you are indexing the furthest nested elements.
But ignore that because the indexing gain from this setup is really key. The reason it is setup this way is because I can reference a layer, a row, and a column to grab a specific tile object. For example, I have a tile on layer 2 in row 12 column 13 that I want to access:
var tileObject:Object = _map[2][12][13];
That works perfectly for pretty much any scenario I could use in my tile based game, and the speed is comparatively better than that of a Object or Dictionary when this is being accessed multiple times (i.e. - in a loop which happens often).
The level editor is designed to use all blitting and leave onus to my management classes for storage. The speed gain from doing this is very high, and the way it is currently setup the tilemodel can store partial bitmaps making it slightly more flexible than your standard rigidness of a power of 2 texture reader.
Feel free to look through the source code. But here is a summary of what some of the classes do:
tilecontroller - Issues state changes and updates to tilemanager and tilemodel
tilemanager - Responsible for texture drawing and removal.
tilemodel - Stores and updates the current map on state changes.
r_loader - Loads all assets from assetList.txt (paths set to images
there).
hudcontroller - Currently this was the last thing I was working on, lets you draw on collision boxes that are stored in a separate file alongside the map.
g_global & g_keys - Global constants and static methods use
ubiquitously
LevelEditor - Main class, also designed as "View" class ( see MVC pattern: MVC Pattern )
Also as I've mentioned it can read back all the storage. The class used for that I did not upload to GitHub, but figured I would show the important method here:
//#param assets needs to be the list of loaded bitmap images
public function generateMap( assets:* ):void {
var bmd:BitmapData = new BitmapData( g_global.stageWidth, g_global.stageHeight, true, 0 );
_canvas = new Bitmap( bmd, "auto", true );
_mapLayer.addChild( _canvas );
_canvas.bitmapData.unlock();
g_global.echo( "generating map" );
var i:int, j:int, m:int;
for ( m = 0; m < _tiles.length; m++ ) {
for ( i = 0; i < _tiles[m].length; i++ ) {
for ( j = 0; j < _tiles[m][i].length; j++ ) {
//wondering why im type casting in this evaluation? _tiles[i][j].tile == int( _tiles[i][j].tile )
//the level editor stores tiles that are larger than the grid size at indices containing values that are a percent of the tile size
var tile:Object = _tiles[m][i][j];
if ( tile != null && int( tile.tile ) == tile.tile ) {
addTile( g_global.GRIDSIZE * tile.column, g_global.GRIDSIZE * tile.row, { index:tile.tile, bitmap:assets[ tile.tile ] }, tile.rotation );
}
}
}
}
_canvas.bitmapData.lock();
}
Anyway I hope this information finds you well. Good luck!
I asked a similar question a while back: https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/60433/is-it-more-efficient-to-store-my-tile-grid-as-a-dictionary-or-an-array. I'm not sure that it would really matter whether it's an Array or a Vector (the differences in efficiency seem to differ between FP versions, etc.).
But, yeah, you probably want to use one or the other (not a Dictionary or anything), and you probably want to index it like [y * width + x], not [x][y]. Reasons: Efficiency and not having overly complicated data structures.
Also if you need to be able to regularly access the Array or Vector outside of that class, just make the variable internal or public or whatever; making it private and wrapping over it with functions, while being more prim-and-proper class design, would still be overkill.
One method I am using right now for my own thing is that I'm storing my tiles in a black and white pixel bitmap (and wrote a wrapper around that). I'm not sure how efficient this is overall as I've never benchmarked it and just wrote it quickly to create a map for testing purposes, but I am finding that it does offer an advantage in that I can draw my maps in an image editor and view them easily while still allowing random pixel/tile access.
Looking at your sample code, I'm guessing you have only two types of tiles right now, so you could just use black and white pixels as well if you want to try it.
I've done the 2d array method as well (using it still actually for other parts) which works fine too, but perhaps can be harder to visualise at larger sizes. Looking forward to Bennett's answer.
I'm having a bit of trouble making sense of some of the tutorials for this online, thus why I'm asking here. (Using ActionScript 3, Adobe AIR, and Flash Professional CS5.5)
I have a very heavy function in my AS3 document class that I need to run asynchronously, so it doesn't stop the code on the MovieClip itself (don't ask me why, it just needs to be that way.)
So, simply put, how do I run this document class function (StartNow) asynchronously? The code can be placed in the document class or on the movieclip, I don't care where. It seems to be a relatively simple and common practice, but all my research is digging up nothing.
Thanks!
If your target is Flash player 11.4, there are Worker objects which can be assigned such a heavy function. I had no FP11, and eventually made a procedural generator that lasted more than 300 seconds per iteration in total. I had to use a state-based approach, paired with an enter frame listener. In my c ase, the entire complex generation process was split into logical chunks that were small enough to be completed within a reasonable timespan, and had a variable tracking the current generation phase. So, when another frame called the generation function, it read last completed step from that variable, performed one extra step with its set of data, stored the new value and exited for the frame. This, as is, is not a pure asynchronous process, but a pseudo-multitasking approach, this can suit you if your function that makes your SWF lag is splittable.
In Flash there is no such thing as run a function asynchronously, you have to do it yourself, unless you want to use Workers (like Vesper said). Workers gives you a separate process. Otherwise, you have to break your calculation into parts. This is how you do it:
Imaging 'trace' is a very heavy operation. It's not, but just to illustrate. This simple for-loop is runned on a frame, and causes a lower framerate, since it's all calculated before the frame actually renders.
for(var i:int = 0; i < 1000; i ++)
{
trace(i); // heavy calculation here
}
So you have to break the calculation into parts, and break it to be able to run the calculation over time.
To do that, you have to create a function which just takes a part of the loop every time:
calculatePart(0, 1000, 20);
function calculatePart(startIndex:int, endIndex:int, amountPerRun:int)
{
for(var i:int = startIndex; (i < startIndex + amountPerRun) || (i < endIndex); i ++)
{
trace(i); // heavy calculation here
}
if (i < endIndex)
{
calculatePart(i, endIndex, amountPerRun);
}
}
This is actually the same function as the simple for-loop in the first code, it also outputs 1000 traces. It is prepared to run in parts, but this isn't async yet. We can now change the function easily, so the function operates over time.
I use the setTimeout for this. You can also use a ENTER_FRAME event-listener or the Timer class for this, but for the sake of this example I try to keep it clear.
calculatePart(0, 1000, 20, 100);
function calculatePart(startIndex:int, endIndex:int, amountPerRun:int, timeBeforeNextRun:Number)
{
for(var i:int = startIndex; (i < startIndex + amountPerRun) && (i < endIndex); i ++)
{
trace(i); // heavy calculation here
}
if (i < endIndex)
{
setTimeout(calculatePart, timeBeforeNextRun, i, endIndex, amountPerRun, timeBeforeNextRun);
}
}
As you can see, I've added a timeBeforeNextRun parameter. If you run the example, you can see it takes 100 milliseconds before 20 traces are outputted.
If you set it very low, the calculation will be tried to be done very fast, however you cannot gain extra speed just by trying to do more in less time of course. You have to play with the time and amount variables, you can test which one actually gives better performance (or less lag).
// more time between a run, less calculations per run
calculatePart(0, 1000, 30, 10);
// more calculations per run, more time between a run
calculatePart(0, 1000, 100, 30);
Hope this helps.
If you want to use a smarter calculation of the time, I found this utility class very helpful, which measures how much time the calculation actually took, and alter the time itself.
I'm creating a collecting game, and I want to create a time slow/speed up powerup.
Any ideas on how to do that in Flash/AS3?
One way I thought of was simply changing the frame rate. I can slow down the frame rate. But when I try to increase the frame rate beyond 60, Flash caps it at 60.
Thank you in advance for your help.
I like to do time-based movement instead of frame-based movement for better consistency. The general concept is to check the amount of time passed between frames and base movement on that instead of frames which can alternate (e.g. you can have 60FPS for a bit and then it slows down to 30FPS). You can do a simple calculation based on time passed for movement, for instance player.x += player.speed * timeDiff but that can result in odd situations if the time passed between frames happens to be really large (for instance, the player can end up missing lots of collisions since you are moving him in one large movement). Instead, I like to use a game loop to move the player X times based on the amount of time that has passed between frames, ensuring that collisions and any other game loop events will be properly checked.
This also has the advantage that it is easy to adjust the speed.
Here is the basic concept:
private var speedMultiplier:int = 100;//100 normal speed, 0 paused
private var currRealTime:int = getTimer();
private var currGameTime:int = currRealTime;
private var globalLastTime:int = currRealTime;
private var totalTimeDiffRemainder:int = 0;
private var loopTime:int = 20;//every 20 ms run our actions
public function getGameTimer():int
{
return currGameTime;
}
private function updateGameTime():void
{
var realTime:int = getTimer();
currGameTime = currGameTime + speedMultiplier/100*(realTime - currRealTime);
currRealTime = realTime;
}
private function runEvents(event:Event):void
{//ENTER_FRAME event
var totalTimeDiff:int = getGameTimer() - globalLastTime + totalTimeDiffRemainder;
globalLastTime = getGameTimer();
while (totalTimeDiff > loopTime)
{//every 20 ms run all our actions
totalTimeDiff -= loopTime;
//run all your game loop events here, such as collision checks
}
totalTimeDiffRemainder = totalTimeDiff;
updateGameTime();
}
So every time an ENTER_FRAME event fires, we will check the time passed since the last ENTER_FRAME event and then run our actions once for each 20ms that has elapsed and pass the remainder over to the next ENTER_FRAME event. For instance, if it's been 47 ms since the last ENTER_FRAME, we will run our actions twice and pass over 7 remaining ms to the next ENTER_FRAME event.
In order to pause, slow down, or speed up the game, all you have to do is modify speedMultiplier. Changing speedMultiplier to 0 will pause the game, 50 is half speed 100 is normal speed, 200 double speed, etc.
I believe the general way to do this would be to use an MVC like setup where your model holds all the data for the game elements (character position/orientation, enemies, dynamic map elements) then the controller is modifying the model. With the controller modifying the model this way you could add a multiplier to the model, and use the multiplier when having the controller update the model for "physics" or other modifying dynamic elements in the game.
Roughly:
Model
public var speedMultiplier:Number=1;
public var playerXSpeed:Number;
public var playerYSpeed:Number;
Controller (I'm assuming you make a controller class and pass the view to the constructor and are listening for events from the view in the controller).
private function enterFrame_handler(event:Event):void
{
var playerSprite:Sprite = mainView.playerSprite;
playerSprite.x += playerXSpeed*speedMultiplier; //only problem I can see here is your player skipping past certain elements, to avoid this you could use a loop to make each motion and do checks but it's more CPU intensive
//var enemySprites:Vector<EnemySprite>;
//other game physics here, reduce speed due to drag, fix any invalid values etc.
}
Edit
Actually in thinking this through some more, although I do generally like using an MVC setup myself since it allows one to have a single sprite that does all the drawing; you could also use the same concept of a speedMultiplier shown here without necessarily changing around any software patterns. If you end up needing to do it with a loop because you need it to do checks for every spot it would hit as an object moves along, you may need to have your default speedMultiplier be something like 10 so you could set it down to 1 to get 1/10th speed with all the same checks as it would get at 10 being normal speed (again only issue here being it has to do whatever calculations 10 times for every update, in this case you may want to use a timer instead of the frame rate to control the overall calculation speed).