4 ms·

We have plenty of challenges to overcome but it's nothing that can't be fixed. We're fully aware of some of the frame-rate issues on the really low-end devices

We have plenty of challenges to overcome but it's nothing that can't be fixed. We're fully aware of some of the frame-rate issues on the really low-end devices (like in the video) and are actively working on improving that (it's a main priority to get 60FPS).

coffeeaddicted 14y ago
Constant framerate is the thing that matters most to games. 60 fps or just 30 fps doesn't matter as much as that it's constant. You can even play a racer for example at 15 fps, but you fly out the curve the moment a 60 FPS game has a 250ms freeze at the wrong moment. Just mentioning this as it's something a lot of people not doing games are missing (and maybe one of the main reasons why c/c++ still are dominant in game programming - I mean what's the point of coding in Java when the only way to get a constant FPS is to work throughout with static variables for example?). So if you want games - makes sure you have realtime guarantees.
- robhawkes 14y ago
  Yup, you're completely right… it's the constant frame-rate of a game that's important. And even if it's not truly 'constant', it should always stay above 30FPS. You probably shouldn't code a game to be tied to the frame-rate though. This is exactly what my job is at the moment, testing games and monitoring FPS across these games on various devices and platforms. I'm confident that JavaScript is more than capable to have games running fast on mobile, we just need to work with the game developers more (to optimise) as well as improve the platform.
  - coffeeaddicted 14y ago
    Hm, yeah - my point is that FPS isn't as important as the longest frame. You can have 100 FPS when 99 of them are really fast while the last one is stuck for nearly a second :-) Or said otherwise - for a game measuring average over a second is already a too long time-frame. It's nice as a simple feedback number for users, but it's not sufficient for smooth gameplay.
MatthewPhillips 14y ago
> We have plenty of challenges to overcome but it's nothing that can't be fixed. We're fully aware of some of the frame-rate issues on the really low-end devices (like in the video) and are actively working on improving that (it's a main priority to get 60FPS). This is the real boom to the web community. The fact that Mozilla has to make these things work. I get frustrated when I do a translate3d(-100%,0,0) on Chrome for Android and it's not buttery smooth. Or I use onscroll to achieve an infinite scroll list and it causes scrolling to be laggy. I'm sure the Chrome (and Safari) teams are aware of these issues and working on them, but to Mozilla they are absolutely essential. This will put pressure of Apple and Google to put a stronger emphasis on web app performance.

coffeeaddicted 14y ago

Constant framerate is the thing that matters most to games. 60 fps or just 30 fps doesn't matter as much as that it's constant. You can even play a racer for example at 15 fps, but you fly out the curve the moment a 60 FPS game has a 250ms freeze at the wrong moment. Just mentioning this as it's something a lot of people not doing games are missing (and maybe one of the main reasons why c/c++ still are dominant in game programming - I mean what's the point of coding in Java when the only way to get a constant FPS is to work throughout with static variables for example?). So if you want games - makes sure you have realtime guarantees.

robhawkes 14y ago
Yup, you're completely right… it's the constant frame-rate of a game that's important. And even if it's not truly 'constant', it should always stay above 30FPS. You probably shouldn't code a game to be tied to the frame-rate though. This is exactly what my job is at the moment, testing games and monitoring FPS across these games on various devices and platforms. I'm confident that JavaScript is more than capable to have games running fast on mobile, we just need to work with the game developers more (to optimise) as well as improve the platform.
- coffeeaddicted 14y ago
  Hm, yeah - my point is that FPS isn't as important as the longest frame. You can have 100 FPS when 99 of them are really fast while the last one is stuck for nearly a second :-) Or said otherwise - for a game measuring average over a second is already a too long time-frame. It's nice as a simple feedback number for users, but it's not sufficient for smooth gameplay.

MatthewPhillips 14y ago

> We have plenty of challenges to overcome but it's nothing that can't be fixed. We're fully aware of some of the frame-rate issues on the really low-end devices (like in the video) and are actively working on improving that (it's a main priority to get 60FPS). This is the real boom to the web community. The fact that Mozilla has to make these things work. I get frustrated when I do a translate3d(-100%,0,0) on Chrome for Android and it's not buttery smooth. Or I use onscroll to achieve an infinite scroll list and it causes scrolling to be laggy. I'm sure the Chrome (and Safari) teams are aware of these issues and working on them, but to Mozilla they are absolutely essential. This will put pressure of Apple and Google to put a stronger emphasis on web app performance.