Android Game Development - Level progression methods - android

I am currently developing an Android game that is similar to a classic arcade space shooter. Thus far I have almost everything finished, but my code is not quite to my liking and I am trying to find out how to improve it.
The problem I am having is with enemies and other objects entering the screen.
Currently I am using a Runnable object that I pass to a thread, and in this Runnable is an array of all of the distances that will trigger new enemies to come in from the top or sides of the screen. In the run() method, I check the time and if the System.uptimeMillis() is greater than or equal to an element in my array, I fire another method that uses a switch statement to determine the event to run.
This is all becoming quite a hassle to manage and that is why I was wondering if anybody know of a more efficient and neater way to manager the queued enemies.
Also, my array I create is of 200-some objects and once they are off the screen I was nulling them. Obviously this was firing of the GC too often for a well-performing game. Is it best just to reuse enemies that are destroyed or go off screen? Or is there a better way for this as well? (I am just ensuring that my program is the best it can be before it ventures into the wilds of the Market)
Thank you in advance,
-Roflha

I suggest you look at this code for reference. It has a good way of dealing with objects, collisions and stuff.
And its written by a google employee which always sounds cool for some reason.

Related

Android Traceview - It holds the Answers to my Unresponsive App... I think

Yesterday, I spent 12 hours becoming a student of Traceview. I didn't even know it existed (hangs head in shame) previous to this.
Now that I've overcome the absolute shock of the data it produces, I find Traceview can be boiled down into a couple simple concepts:
Sort by "EXCL CPU TIME" to determine exactly how much usage each individual method is using in isolation.
Look at the frequency of calls and the cpu time/real time per call. Obviously higher calls should be looked into. In most of my experience, if you sort by #1 above, methods which are called too much and take too much time will also be at the top of the list (makes sense as they are also using the most CPU).
Anyway, doing these two steps above I find 3-4 methods which are always using 90% of my CPU and taking up most of the real time delays in my app. The only problem is, none of these methods are methods I wrote, they are system methods such as:
BitmapFactory methods
WebKit methods
And other system methods
This being said, is it a correct to assume that if the top resource hogs are system methods, then it must have something to do with my design of my layouts? I am at a loss as to how BitmapFactory could be so high, my layouts aren't extremely complicated, though in one Activity BitmapFactory is taking 95% of resources itself.
TL;DR - If I run a Traceview, and if I find the top hogs of resources are all system methods, does this mean it's a layout issue? Or, how else can I tell why the system method is so high as it doesn't relate directly to my custom methods.
Thank you very much,
Ryan
I find Traceview can be boiled down into a couple simple concepts:
Those concepts are not the best, IMHO.
Sort by "EXCL CPU TIME" to determine exactly how much usage each individual method is using in isolation
In particular, this concept is fairly lousy IMHO. Yes, this is useful data. However, you then need to work back up the call stack to try to figure out what is triggering this. Sometimes, it will directly be your code. Sometimes, it will be something else that you recognize that is part of the framework (e.g., onDraw() of a View). Just knowing that some random method is taking up a bunch of time does you no good until you identify what is triggering that method to be invoked in the first place.
If I run a Traceview, and if I find the top hogs of resources are all system methods, does this mean it's a layout issue?
No.
Or, how else can I tell why the system method is so high as it doesn't relate directly to my custom methods.
Work your way up the call stack to figure out who is calling these methods so frequently, or at inopportune times.
For example, in the BitmapFactory example, you will probably find that you (or a library that you are using) is calling BitmapFactory, and perhaps is doing so on the main application thread.
To work your way up the call stack, click the triangle on the left edge of the row representing some method of interest. You will then see two branches beneath that: "Parents" and "Children". The "Parents" represent the next level up the call stack from the method, and you can continue working your way up the chain of parents until you find something that you recognize.
That's why, IMHO, you are better served sorting by inclusive time, as your code (where it directly is the culprit) will tend to bubble towards the top.
Well, I found the problem and it's bitter sweet. It's sweet because it wasn't my code nor layout causing the problem, it was the admob AdView using the loadAdOnCreate="true" to create ads. It's bitter, because I now may have to switch sources of revenue if I can't remove the loading delay created by the AdView! That was a tough one to find, I should have anticipated this though!

Android: Why not make every method Synchronized?

Is there any downside to making every one of your methods synchronized in Android?
Yes - it will end up taking out locks when you don't really want them. It won't give you thread safety for free - it'll just slow down your code and make it more likely that you'll run into deadlocks due to taking out too many locks.
You need to think about thread safety and synchronization explicitly. I usually make most classes not thread-safe, and try to limit the number of places where I think about threading.
The "make everything synchronized" approach is a common one in what I think of as the four stages of threading awareness for developers:
Complete ignorance: no synchronization, no awareness of the potential problems
Some awareness, but a belief that universal synchronization cures all ills
The painful stage of knowing where there are problems, and taking a lot of care over getting things right
The mythical stage of getting everything right naturally
Most experienced developers are in stage 3 as far as I can tell - with different levels of ease within it, of course. Using immutability, higher-level abstractions instead of the low-level primitives etc helps a lot - but ultimately you're likely to have to think a fair amount whenever you've got multiple threads which need to share state.

Game Object Thread?

I'm trying to develop a game. It's a simple whack-a-mole type of game where something pops-up the screen and you click on it to kill it. I was thinking of giving the "moles" their own thread so that they can do their own animation, event handling, etc. in their own lifecycle until eventually killing themselves.
Will this kind of "each object has its own thread" implementation be good for an Android game?
Definitely not. Do not give each mole its own thread. This would be too much use of threads while it is needless to say that in this type of game you do not need such a number of threads. Just keep everything in the main thread and use some listeners to kill moles. (=make invisible)
Yes, it is a performance issue and a matter of developer's decision. Why should you create a thread for each mole? This is the right question because doing so is a far more unrealistic decision. Will each mole access a database? communicate with a server? I don't think so.
Anyway, since it is a mole on the screen, you will only need one instance of it that you can render/move it around/disable/etc in the main thread.
This could work, if there aren't a ton of objects, and a ton of activity for each object.
I would suggest thread pooling. Pull out inactive objects out of threads and put in active threads.
Stay single threaded until you actual need to change - especially for a simple game, you won't have the kinds of performance problems that need threading.
At any rate the general approach is not to thread out individual entities, but entire steps of algorithms performed across 100s or 1000s, or even entire systems (e.g. audio, physics etc.) - and perhaps the most extreme but common case is to split your rendering submission into its own thread for all rendering, with animation, physics, gameplay logic etc on another thread, in exchange for single frame latency on everything.
Not to mention that the overhead of having very many threads often becomes limiting - if you have 2 or 3 moles it might be fine, but if you have many more you will quickly reach the point of diminishing returns - not to mention the difficulties inherent in keeping many threads in sync and avoiding deadlocks, race conditions etc.

Android -- is there anything wrong with doing the user interface almost entirely in OpenGL?

What considerations should one be mindful of when constructing a GLSurfaceView-centric UI?
This is for a game and the bulk of the UI will be an intro screen (start, options, about, exit) and a level selector screen. I've put a lot of time into the rendering/animation for the game using OpenGL, and I'm no graphic artist, so taking the OGL UI route seems to make sense to me. But I'm an Android novice and need some outside input. Thanks for reading.
There is nothing wrong with that, especially for a game. The only problem is that you will have to do everything yourself. Most games seem to be doing this.
Due to the ease from which one activity can start another, I would say it is worthwhile to abstract your options and level selection from the game itself. If you're unfamiliar with starting activities and/or passing information between activities, there are plently of good tutorials and examples to help. You could try the ubiquitous Notepad tutorial if you haven't already ( http://developer.android.com/resources/tutorials/notepad/index.html ).
The advantages of this method would be to leave your OpenGL/game Activity less cluttered, and that you would be able to use tried-and-true Android UI elements instead of building your own from scratch.

AppWidget: How to retain static objects between updates?

I am creating a AppWidget that consists of a ImageView that gets filled with a custom rendered bitmap. This widget is refreshed every minute (using the AlarmManager).
All the rendering and storage is done in the AppWidgetProvider.
Being a good citizen I wanted to minimize CPU usage etc, so I had my Paint objects and other pre-calculated values stored in static fields in the AppWidgetProvider.
However, it turns out that my AppWidget process is very eager to die on me when it's hanging around with the cool kids doing nothing. I understand this is standard behaviour. However, with it's tragic death, it also takes my precious statically stored objects with it into the grave, never to be seen again, which is a lot less convenient.
My mourning doesn't solve anything, so I wonder: is there a way to deal with this? Or is there just no way to do that, and should I fall back to reinitializing everything on every redraw?
Not a real solution, but I solved it by not caching all the stuff.
I am doing something similar -- creating a clock widget -- and have discovered that it's even worse than you think. Android isn't merely killing the AppWidgetProvider when it gets tired of having it around. It's killing it IMMEDIATELY and recreating it for EVERY update (as print statements in the constructor demonstrate).
This is a problem if you, like me, are doing something memory-intensive like drawing a rather heavy object to a rather heavy offscreen bitmap.
The best solution I can offer you is to try handling the maintenance and storage of your objects in something more persistent -- say, the configuration activity, or maybe a service. Seems like overkill for Paint objects, though.
I'm not sure what sort of precalculation you are doing, or what sort of data is being saved, but Android will tell you when it is about to kill your AppWidget. You can use that as an opportunity to some sort of persistent store. You would still have some processing in serializing/deserializing the data, but it could be faster than recomputing.

Categories

Resources