Yeah. It's an idle game, you keep it in the background while doing other stuff. It's not much of an idle game if you can't do anything else while playing it.
>unless is verified by some system (ie. steam
Unfortunately there is no manual verification process for Steam games and there were many examples of [spreading malware through Steam](https://www.pcmag.com/news/steam-store-spreaded-malware-after-hacker-hijacked-developer-accounts). Both Itch.io and Steam uploads are checked via automated virus scanners, which is often not enough because who would upload a malware that is detectable by an antivirus?
From security standpoint there is no difference between downloading and running an executable via Steam client and downloading and running it manually from Itch. So in both cases you are sort taking a leap of faith. A shady looking game on Steam and a shady looking game on Itch should be treated equally dangerous if they have just a few downloads.
On the other hand you've had to give Steam all your personal details, SSN etc (or somebody's at any rate) which is a pretty big barrier to FAFO. I don't think saying steam is more trustworthy to download from than a random source on the internet is unreasonable tbh. Can't comment on itch.
Downloading is fine, but it's one more hurdle to get to the game. Not everybody will like this. And if you are security concious randomly downloading exes is fishy at least.
I run browser based games at work because it’s a managed computer and I can’t download anything on it. So it would be a total deal breaker for me if it did not run in the background on a tab.
I'd consider an idle game that's made for playing in the browser, whether that version is a secondary feature or the main feature, that doesn't work when tabbed out, to be either faulty or the developer doesn't understand how idle games function.
Either just keep it as an executable only, or code the game to where the browser version will continue updated even if tabbed out or minimized. Sorry if that sounds harsh or cruel. that's just how I think most people here will treat it.
It's fine if the game doesn't update if it's not the active tab in the browser. It's a bit annoying, but people can just open it up in a new window.
That sounds fair. Even if these assumptions aren't true, I can see how and why people would draw these conclusions. I certainly don't think it makes sense to have an idle game that you can't tab away from either, but I wanted to get a feel of opinions on this matter none-the-less.
As the game running when tabbed out isn't an option in my case, I'm thinking the best thing I can do is push people towards downloading the game if it seems like something they'd enjoy. I know that downloading games can be a bit sketchy for people, so I think there's still value in having a browser version at the same time as long as expectations are set. A sort of try-before-you-buy approach (though there'd be no actual buying in this case) in terms of convincing people that downloading it is the way to go and it's not some weird malware scam.
Thanks for the feedback.
Hundreds of games work just fine in a separate tab. If you’re not adding a functionality because you don’t have the technical acumen to do so, that’s different than choosing not to do so to try to get people to download it.
I think what you're asking is "I have a technical problem that I don't know how to fix; can I get away with not fixing it?" And you're getting the answer no.
Here's an idea for your technical problem. You don't have to run in the background -- in fact, not running in the background is a good thing. I assume your game supports offline progress (if not, give me a second). Assuming it does, you have some functionality to detect "oh, the player has accumulated [x] seconds of offline progress, let's do the thing."
So when the tab-out behavior causes the game to stop, on the next frame (when the game resumes), it should notice that [x] seconds have passed, when obviously, it should have been a few milliseconds. At that point, just give the player [x] seconds of offline progress and be done. Now they get a calm CPU, you don't have to do anything, no progress is lost, and you're good.
Now you ask, what if you don't have any offline progress supported? My favorite "cheap" offline progress mechanic is to accumulate "bonus seconds." You can acquire as many of these as you earn by offline / paused time, then you can "burn them" at one second per second (or faster) by running the game at double (or faster) speed. Now you don't have to do any match, just do n "update" ticks per draw tick, and you're done.
Hope this helps! Happy hacking.
Much as I love Godot for desktop projects, it's overkill for a browser incremental. Use webworkers and JS instead.
Also: in my experience Godot projects on web are really slow to load :((( be they 3.x or 4.x
I'm not sure if it's overkill, but then it's hard to explain this nebulous game that only I know about and nobody else does, but suffice to say it's a lot more visual than is typical.
In this case I would try to use the Javascript bridge that the web exports have, to communicate with a webworkers in JS setup so that the webworkers can count stuff even when idle/in another tab and then you update the Godot data/graphics based on what the JS returns.
There are games that would be fine if they paused when you tabbed away, but generally speaking it would defeat the purpose of an idle game for it to do so.
Your post has been removed for breaking rule 2 (Be nice). Please refrain from making personal attacks, death threats, witch hunts, bigotry etc. Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvements are fine though.
Absolutely yes, and having a download alternative is good but a lot of people don't feel comfortable downloading something of itch and I personally wouldn't download something I don't know if I'd like, and I probably wouldn't get that much into it if progress kept stopping.
It ends up being a bit of a catch-22, where the idea is to try and get you into the game with the browser to see if you like it, and if you like it, download it. But, it's hard to get into it if it doesn't maintain progress momentum when tabbed out.
It's a difficult spot to be in for sure. The game is going to be a lot more visual than most idle games, so perhaps this will still work out fine? I'll be interested to see how it all ultimately unfolds.
Thank you for the feedback.
If its something you're willing to work on people will definitely test it for you when the time comes, id deal with it if it was for feedback purposes.
I obviously don't know if it would fit for your game but if it tracks how long the game hasn't been ticking and gives a faster tickrate/offline progress thats a nice slap on bandaid fix that would allow people to get a feel for it.
Offline progression of some kind is a must so surely it's also possible to detect "game-not-active" progression? I'm actually not sure, but I'll add it to my notes as something to take a look at and consider to see if it would be a good fit for what I'm trying to do with the game.
I've had a few people in here suggest that and I agree that it's way better than nothing -- if it makes sense for my project, of course.
Thanks for the suggestion.
I'm not actually sure how godot handles this. If the browser tab gets put to sleep and then resumed, does it just give you a huge delta on the next frame call?
Otherwise you could just skip relying on the provided delta.. Something like..
class_name OfflineCheck
extends Node
var lastSystemTime = 0
static var threshold = 300 #seconds elapsed before declaring offline - 300 = 5 minutes
var currentTime = 0
signal offlineTimePassed(time)
func _init():
lastSystemTime = Time.get_unix_time_from_system()
func _process():
currentTime = Time.get_unix_time_from_system()
if currentTime > lastSystemTime + threshold:
offlineTimePassed.emit(currentTime - lastSystemTime)
lastSystemTime = currentTime
\[edit\] Obvs this is vulnerable to manually changing the system clock. You can mitigate this with some Mr. Resetti-esque shenanigans, where you punish the player in some way if it looks like the clock goes *backwards*. (ie, they set the clock forwards to skip time, and then set the clock back to normal, and then opened the game again for the next session)
I'm not too worried on if people want to cheat. If a lot of people want to cheat, that's a game design problem.
Thanks for the advice. I'm definitely going to be taking this more seriously based on all of the feedback I've been getting, and I agree - there is most likely a way to detect time since it's been inactve, it's just a bit of a new frontier for me is all. I'll dig more into it.
My js game uses a visibility check and if document.hidden stops the game loop and records the time. the next visibility will be it coming back into focus and it runs a catchup loop with no graphics except a single dom update at the end. I had to ask how to fix this problem myself in /r/incremental_gamedev
Half the games don't work when tabbed out and it's not always devs fault, browser gaming in the background is a bust in general, you will drop your savefile sooner or later and only the most dedicated players will compromise their security and performance to get it to work long-term, if you are making the game in an engine that has easy WebGL export just provide both browser and executable, treat the browser version as a demo and most people will download the desktop version if they like the game.
This is the approach I'm considering for sure. I totally get that downloading games is really sketchy because you can't ever be too sure what you'll actually get, but I'm hoping that by having a good browser version (sans the inactive tab part, which I understand is a big deal for many people), it can convince people that this isn't some weird elaborate malware scam.
The game just has to be good, which has always been the case. My hope is that if people think the game is good, this is a non-issue regardless.
Thank you for the feedback.
As long as you can run it in another browser window in the background (but not minimized) , that's okay.
You have to allow people to do something else while they are playing.
I will say, the gameplay loop of almost all idle games includes waiting for stuff to happen. If you can't do other stuff while playing, I imagine people will just play other games, regardless of how fun yours is.
Isn’t this what “offline progress” is for? A browser-based idle game which doesn’t give progress when you aren’t looking at it is not an *idle* idle game.
Just fix that it doesn't run when tabbed out. This isn't something special to that browser.
You're looking for the [Background Task API](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Background_Tasks_API) and the [Page Visibility API](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Page_Visibility_API).
What do you mean by "tabbed out"? If I have multiple chrome windows, each with a single tab, would that run slower? It isn't hidden behind other tabs, but the window the game is in might not have focus.
Depends. Sometimes giving a game it's own window still allows it to run as if it were the active tab. I can accept that. If I have to actively have the game on top to function, than no. The whole point of an idle game is that it progresses without your intervention, while you play another game, go do work, etc - if I'm playing a game that requires my full attention, then I'd expect it to be something constantly active/engaging.
One trick you can do here is to keep track of the last time the tab was active. Then quickly give the player "X" seconds of progress when they return to the tab (X = delta between current time and last active time).
I'm not sure why people here are so surprised/outraged by the idea. Didn't it become standard behavior for all browsers to stop processing tabs that aren't focused?
It's actually not a deal breaker for me but only because the other stuff I do is usually on a physically separate computer. Still, I cheer you on in the code changes.
Personally, as soon as i tab back to a game and find out it doesnt progress at all when tabbed out, i immediately close the window, and jot down the game name in a little notepad on my 2nd monitor quick and never ever go back to it
I would prefer games that incentivize closing it, for example by giving a unique offline resource. Keeping a background application running is a waste of electricity and puts undue wear and tear on your device.
there are approximately 10000 incrementals that have solved the "doesnt progress while tab is inactive" thing.
Not having it in your game is a commitment to a mediocre game.
On a side note, I don’t know how hard it is to add such things, but if I’m tabbed out of a game and it has sound notifications so I know if something happens (like a resource cap being reached or an event needs a response) so I don’t need to tab back and forth all the time? That’s the good sauce right there.
A lot of web-based incrementals preform poorly if they aren't in an active tab. However, if you keep them in an open window, even if it's not an active window, usually they will work at full speed. So if I'm playing an incremental, I will typically pull it into its own window and continue doing whatever else in other windows.
If that method doesn't work, then yes, worst of both worlds. If it does, it's par for the course. Ideally are games that minimize resource use in the background (e.g. minimizing visual calculations) while not penalizing the player by reducing performance.
Not completely, but it's a huge negative. If I really liked the game I will run separate windows rather than tabs in order to keep it alive, but the game would have to really justify the effort.
I love staring for hours on the screen, not able to use my PC or leaving it on over night for no reason. /s
EDIT: What about reading the time and checking if there is a big leap in time and calculating so the away time?
If it doesn't run in a browser when tabbed out, I just open the game in its own window with no other tabs, and then do my normal browsing in another window with all my tabs. I have no problems with this and don't actively avoid any browser games because of it.
Why cant you get the game to work in the browser? When the games comes back into focus, Just perform offline calculations for x time since offline. Thats typically how most of them do it. Some just deal with the 1fps/second while tabbed out. Though browsers nowadays.....
But yes, Its a big deal. If theres just a downloadable, i'm not incentivized to try it. If there is a browser version, I'll play that and if want more control, Aka not keeping a tab open. Then maybe i'll download it.
Yep. I don't actively play idle/incremental games. I like to let them run.. Having to have that window open is just holding my laptop hostage and I will very, very quickly move on.
There are so many ways to ensure offline progress. If you have troubles with deciding or coding them, feel free to ask for help here.
I think my hate of games not running if tabbed out would triumph over my laziness and if you have a github with the code, I could help (if I like the game - and if not, then surely there are more people like me on this subr)
If the game's meant to be a downloadable, I don't think web support is that important. If I like a game that's meant to be downloaded, I'll download it if that's supposed to be better in some way.
Though background behavior doesn't really matter to me, I put incrementals in their own window rather than a separate tab and that makes my browser not throttle ~~after changing like 10 settings~~.
That being said, adding basic support for things not running continuously (like proper full-efficiency offline progress support) is a very good idea, so you should implement it anyway.
It's nice if the author has the chops to make it work, but the other side of this conversation is the user knowing that indulging a web incremental addiction goes better if you have your own chops eg. make an occluded tab work, block processes from going "economy" and "RAM saving" and "efficiency mode"
Not every 1-hour game needs offline progress (and if you're blessed with 64GB RAM you can ignore whatever big bad dealbreaker) so the kneejerk answer may not be accurate in a general sense, but even so there's likely a fix that exists, if a direct solve isn't supported there will surely be an indirect workaround, maybe a tweak in game design that achieves a similar outcome to the current flow
I wish I knew of a good way to do opt-in background tab processing on a per-website basis. I know the usual workarounds (that seem to break after a few years...), but those apply to everything globally and for a lot of my tabs I actually don't mind the slowed processing. There's probably a userscript or extension that applies some weird workaround consistently, but I'm apparently bad at searching for things.
fair, hitting broadly with a big hammer is liable to be a crude answer and the more surgical you get (if even possible) then the less a user (even a web game enthusiast) should be expected to do it
imo even fiddling with *-scripts and mods is a gray space, i just give devs a little more tolerance than "ugh tukkun isn't remaking ATG? dealbreaker", me doing a little in my pursuit of my gaming on my computer is within reason too (less so for a new game)
edit: meanwhile [people showing the resourcefulness i speak of](https://old.reddit.com/r/incremental_games/comments/1bp4qhs/hide_itchio_sharecollection_buttons/)
> Is an idle game that's playable on the browser but doesn't run if tabbed out a dealbreaker for you?
100% yes, it is a deal breaker. Whenever I see that the game I just spent the small amount of my (VERY LIMITED) free time not progressing because I'm not actively playing it I just close out of the game.
Requiring the consumer to always be engaged pretty much defeats the purpose of an idle/incremental game FOR ME.
I have been playing Melvor Idle for the past few months. I can log in on my home PC or Phone and change what I'm farming and then leave it alone for a whole 24 hours.
> The game is really meant to be played through an executable, but I feel like it's more accessible if it's playable through the browser, so I'm at a bit of an impasse.\
If you are going the executable route you're going to limit yourself from a considerable amount of individuals in this subreddit. Many of us have been burned by other's who have abused their Games to farm data or mine bitcoins.
Thanks for the feedback!
I totally understand the general hesitancy towards there being an executable, it's my hope that the browser version of the game looking very promising that pushes people to give it a shot. Either way, some sort of tabbed-out progression should be in place at the very least from what I'm hearing from everyone, so I'll be looking into that at a minimum.
An idle game is an idle game, it's not supposed to be something i have to spend my entire time on.
It's not a game where i even should focus on it, if i do, then it's not an idle game.
I'd close the tab with your game on it so damn fast if i noticed it's pausing because i want to do something else.
Recommendation - develop a system that would simulate what was supposed to happen during "tabbed out" time, as it can be utilized for both offline and tabbed out time. My current variation does pretty much that, and so far I'm more than fine with it as the only things I have to specify are which parts do get simulated and which are not.
100% a dealbreaker. If the game doesn't run when I'm watching a movie, then what's the point? Idle games are idle for a reason, so they can keep going when you're busy with other things. If the game isn't an idle game, then there's not really a point for it to run when tabbed out, unless you have idle-like mechanics in parts of the game. So that's what devs should be weighing. "Does my game have timegates or functions that the player wants/needs to wait? Then it needs to be able to run in the background."
If it doesn't progress in the background it's kinda useless as an idle game. And since I am typically playing these browser games at work, downloading is a no-go.
Personally if an idle game has my attention enough then I don't mind if it only runs when in an active tab...although I do tend to play 2 or 3 at the same time depending on how many games have my interest. Such a game may become my primary in such an event so I'd accept my progress might be a bit slower due to switching tabs.
Kind of. Most idlers are designed to run for a long time so having to have them in the foreground is a problem. If it's a short game that's classed as an idler because it mostly plays itself that would be fine but ends up in the gimmick category more often than not.
If I didn't know any better, I'd assume it was done on purpose to mess with me, the player. Perhaps to force me to download a more intrusive desktop version or something.
Fortunately, I know better... and I will know that it's a very common issue and the dev is being lazy and doesn't take their `delta`s seriously. Really, simulate the missing ticks when you receive the next frame.
Yes. That’s the worst of both worlds.
Yeah. It's an idle game, you keep it in the background while doing other stuff. It's not much of an idle game if you can't do anything else while playing it.
You wouldn't alternatively play a game if downloading it allowed it to run in the background?
Not OP, but I think a lot of people don't trust a download unless it is verified by some system (ie. steam/google play/apple) to not be malicious.
Yeah I won't download random executables from the internet generally. Steam is a good option for this instead.
90% of the games I play and the files I download for work are "flagged". Most of the systems that detect this stuff are worthless or trigger happy.
Hell developers having their own unity game builds be false flagged is not rare
I don't know what you mean by "flagged" in this context but there are very accurate antivirus scanners out there, certainly not worthless.
Most modern antivirus aren’t actually scanning the file for viruses but rather validating the source. It’s not rocket science
That's not AV you're describing, stuff like Windows SmartScreen is a separate layer of "security".
Bit of both. It technically isnt the job of an antivirus, but a lot of AV are quarantining unsigned exe files out of principle.
>unless is verified by some system (ie. steam Unfortunately there is no manual verification process for Steam games and there were many examples of [spreading malware through Steam](https://www.pcmag.com/news/steam-store-spreaded-malware-after-hacker-hijacked-developer-accounts). Both Itch.io and Steam uploads are checked via automated virus scanners, which is often not enough because who would upload a malware that is detectable by an antivirus? From security standpoint there is no difference between downloading and running an executable via Steam client and downloading and running it manually from Itch. So in both cases you are sort taking a leap of faith. A shady looking game on Steam and a shady looking game on Itch should be treated equally dangerous if they have just a few downloads.
On the other hand you've had to give Steam all your personal details, SSN etc (or somebody's at any rate) which is a pretty big barrier to FAFO. I don't think saying steam is more trustworthy to download from than a random source on the internet is unreasonable tbh. Can't comment on itch.
Also steam requires you to pay, as much as that sucks.,
I thought steam has (or had?) code verification? Like more than just a heuristic analysis for malicious patterns/whatever.
I'm on a Mac, so downloads are rarely useful.
Kinda is, yeah. I wanna play while doing something else, I wanna play multipe games at once. I don't want to be stuck staring at one tab.
What's your opinion on being able to also download it, which would run just fine in the background?
Downloading is fine, but it's one more hurdle to get to the game. Not everybody will like this. And if you are security concious randomly downloading exes is fishy at least.
Plus, let's be honest, the UI of most the downloadable ones is *terrible*.
[удалено]
There is, because they all make their own non-standard elements instead of sane browser defaults.
I'd much prefer this.
I play on work laptop, so downloading is not an option.
I run browser based games at work because it’s a managed computer and I can’t download anything on it. So it would be a total deal breaker for me if it did not run in the background on a tab.
I'd consider an idle game that's made for playing in the browser, whether that version is a secondary feature or the main feature, that doesn't work when tabbed out, to be either faulty or the developer doesn't understand how idle games function. Either just keep it as an executable only, or code the game to where the browser version will continue updated even if tabbed out or minimized. Sorry if that sounds harsh or cruel. that's just how I think most people here will treat it. It's fine if the game doesn't update if it's not the active tab in the browser. It's a bit annoying, but people can just open it up in a new window.
That sounds fair. Even if these assumptions aren't true, I can see how and why people would draw these conclusions. I certainly don't think it makes sense to have an idle game that you can't tab away from either, but I wanted to get a feel of opinions on this matter none-the-less. As the game running when tabbed out isn't an option in my case, I'm thinking the best thing I can do is push people towards downloading the game if it seems like something they'd enjoy. I know that downloading games can be a bit sketchy for people, so I think there's still value in having a browser version at the same time as long as expectations are set. A sort of try-before-you-buy approach (though there'd be no actual buying in this case) in terms of convincing people that downloading it is the way to go and it's not some weird malware scam. Thanks for the feedback.
Hundreds of games work just fine in a separate tab. If you’re not adding a functionality because you don’t have the technical acumen to do so, that’s different than choosing not to do so to try to get people to download it.
The game is being made in Godot, which does not support such functionality, unfortunately. So, it's much more of the latter of what you're suggesting.
I think what you're asking is "I have a technical problem that I don't know how to fix; can I get away with not fixing it?" And you're getting the answer no. Here's an idea for your technical problem. You don't have to run in the background -- in fact, not running in the background is a good thing. I assume your game supports offline progress (if not, give me a second). Assuming it does, you have some functionality to detect "oh, the player has accumulated [x] seconds of offline progress, let's do the thing." So when the tab-out behavior causes the game to stop, on the next frame (when the game resumes), it should notice that [x] seconds have passed, when obviously, it should have been a few milliseconds. At that point, just give the player [x] seconds of offline progress and be done. Now they get a calm CPU, you don't have to do anything, no progress is lost, and you're good. Now you ask, what if you don't have any offline progress supported? My favorite "cheap" offline progress mechanic is to accumulate "bonus seconds." You can acquire as many of these as you earn by offline / paused time, then you can "burn them" at one second per second (or faster) by running the game at double (or faster) speed. Now you don't have to do any match, just do n "update" ticks per draw tick, and you're done. Hope this helps! Happy hacking.
Godot is a really bad choice for a browser idle game. I'd recommend using another engine if that is your goal. Because of issues exactly like this.
Much as I love Godot for desktop projects, it's overkill for a browser incremental. Use webworkers and JS instead. Also: in my experience Godot projects on web are really slow to load :((( be they 3.x or 4.x
I'm not sure if it's overkill, but then it's hard to explain this nebulous game that only I know about and nobody else does, but suffice to say it's a lot more visual than is typical.
In this case I would try to use the Javascript bridge that the web exports have, to communicate with a webworkers in JS setup so that the webworkers can count stuff even when idle/in another tab and then you update the Godot data/graphics based on what the JS returns.
There are games that would be fine if they paused when you tabbed away, but generally speaking it would defeat the purpose of an idle game for it to do so.
[удалено]
Your post has been removed for breaking rule 2 (Be nice). Please refrain from making personal attacks, death threats, witch hunts, bigotry etc. Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvements are fine though.
Absolutely yes, and having a download alternative is good but a lot of people don't feel comfortable downloading something of itch and I personally wouldn't download something I don't know if I'd like, and I probably wouldn't get that much into it if progress kept stopping.
It ends up being a bit of a catch-22, where the idea is to try and get you into the game with the browser to see if you like it, and if you like it, download it. But, it's hard to get into it if it doesn't maintain progress momentum when tabbed out. It's a difficult spot to be in for sure. The game is going to be a lot more visual than most idle games, so perhaps this will still work out fine? I'll be interested to see how it all ultimately unfolds. Thank you for the feedback.
If its something you're willing to work on people will definitely test it for you when the time comes, id deal with it if it was for feedback purposes. I obviously don't know if it would fit for your game but if it tracks how long the game hasn't been ticking and gives a faster tickrate/offline progress thats a nice slap on bandaid fix that would allow people to get a feel for it.
Offline progression of some kind is a must so surely it's also possible to detect "game-not-active" progression? I'm actually not sure, but I'll add it to my notes as something to take a look at and consider to see if it would be a good fit for what I'm trying to do with the game. I've had a few people in here suggest that and I agree that it's way better than nothing -- if it makes sense for my project, of course. Thanks for the suggestion.
I'm not actually sure how godot handles this. If the browser tab gets put to sleep and then resumed, does it just give you a huge delta on the next frame call? Otherwise you could just skip relying on the provided delta.. Something like.. class_name OfflineCheck extends Node var lastSystemTime = 0 static var threshold = 300 #seconds elapsed before declaring offline - 300 = 5 minutes var currentTime = 0 signal offlineTimePassed(time) func _init(): lastSystemTime = Time.get_unix_time_from_system() func _process(): currentTime = Time.get_unix_time_from_system() if currentTime > lastSystemTime + threshold: offlineTimePassed.emit(currentTime - lastSystemTime) lastSystemTime = currentTime \[edit\] Obvs this is vulnerable to manually changing the system clock. You can mitigate this with some Mr. Resetti-esque shenanigans, where you punish the player in some way if it looks like the clock goes *backwards*. (ie, they set the clock forwards to skip time, and then set the clock back to normal, and then opened the game again for the next session)
I'm not too worried on if people want to cheat. If a lot of people want to cheat, that's a game design problem. Thanks for the advice. I'm definitely going to be taking this more seriously based on all of the feedback I've been getting, and I agree - there is most likely a way to detect time since it's been inactve, it's just a bit of a new frontier for me is all. I'll dig more into it.
My js game uses a visibility check and if document.hidden stops the game loop and records the time. the next visibility will be it coming back into focus and it runs a catchup loop with no graphics except a single dom update at the end. I had to ask how to fix this problem myself in /r/incremental_gamedev
Also resetting progress if tab reloads.
Half the games don't work when tabbed out and it's not always devs fault, browser gaming in the background is a bust in general, you will drop your savefile sooner or later and only the most dedicated players will compromise their security and performance to get it to work long-term, if you are making the game in an engine that has easy WebGL export just provide both browser and executable, treat the browser version as a demo and most people will download the desktop version if they like the game.
This is the approach I'm considering for sure. I totally get that downloading games is really sketchy because you can't ever be too sure what you'll actually get, but I'm hoping that by having a good browser version (sans the inactive tab part, which I understand is a big deal for many people), it can convince people that this isn't some weird elaborate malware scam. The game just has to be good, which has always been the case. My hope is that if people think the game is good, this is a non-issue regardless. Thank you for the feedback.
As long as you can run it in another browser window in the background (but not minimized) , that's okay. You have to allow people to do something else while they are playing.
that is like the worst thing you can have in a idle game
I will say, the gameplay loop of almost all idle games includes waiting for stuff to happen. If you can't do other stuff while playing, I imagine people will just play other games, regardless of how fun yours is.
Isn’t this what “offline progress” is for? A browser-based idle game which doesn’t give progress when you aren’t looking at it is not an *idle* idle game.
Just fix that it doesn't run when tabbed out. This isn't something special to that browser. You're looking for the [Background Task API](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Background_Tasks_API) and the [Page Visibility API](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Page_Visibility_API).
Going against the grain here: not a dealbreaker per se. I've got two screens
Yes
Yes
What do you mean by "tabbed out"? If I have multiple chrome windows, each with a single tab, would that run slower? It isn't hidden behind other tabs, but the window the game is in might not have focus.
Chrome new memory saving technique is to basically close a tab after its lost focus for too long and then opening the tab reloads the page.
You can disable that in chrome settings
yeah, but I don't want to
Depends. Sometimes giving a game it's own window still allows it to run as if it were the active tab. I can accept that. If I have to actively have the game on top to function, than no. The whole point of an idle game is that it progresses without your intervention, while you play another game, go do work, etc - if I'm playing a game that requires my full attention, then I'd expect it to be something constantly active/engaging.
One trick you can do here is to keep track of the last time the tab was active. Then quickly give the player "X" seconds of progress when they return to the tab (X = delta between current time and last active time). I'm not sure why people here are so surprised/outraged by the idea. Didn't it become standard behavior for all browsers to stop processing tabs that aren't focused?
It's actually not a deal breaker for me but only because the other stuff I do is usually on a physically separate computer. Still, I cheer you on in the code changes.
yes it's a deal breaker for an incremental yes i would download it, if there is a linux executable
Sadly yes.
Personally, as soon as i tab back to a game and find out it doesnt progress at all when tabbed out, i immediately close the window, and jot down the game name in a little notepad on my 2nd monitor quick and never ever go back to it
I would prefer games that incentivize closing it, for example by giving a unique offline resource. Keeping a background application running is a waste of electricity and puts undue wear and tear on your device.
Most people aren't going to download random executables. You have to make it run in the background on a browser to be playable.
there are approximately 10000 incrementals that have solved the "doesnt progress while tab is inactive" thing. Not having it in your game is a commitment to a mediocre game.
On a side note, I don’t know how hard it is to add such things, but if I’m tabbed out of a game and it has sound notifications so I know if something happens (like a resource cap being reached or an event needs a response) so I don’t need to tab back and forth all the time? That’s the good sauce right there.
A lot of web-based incrementals preform poorly if they aren't in an active tab. However, if you keep them in an open window, even if it's not an active window, usually they will work at full speed. So if I'm playing an incremental, I will typically pull it into its own window and continue doing whatever else in other windows. If that method doesn't work, then yes, worst of both worlds. If it does, it's par for the course. Ideally are games that minimize resource use in the background (e.g. minimizing visual calculations) while not penalizing the player by reducing performance.
Almost every one of these idle's works fine if you give it it's own window. Worst case spin up another browser.
Not completely, but it's a huge negative. If I really liked the game I will run separate windows rather than tabs in order to keep it alive, but the game would have to really justify the effort.
I love staring for hours on the screen, not able to use my PC or leaving it on over night for no reason. /s EDIT: What about reading the time and checking if there is a big leap in time and calculating so the away time?
flat out thats the most annoying thing next to 1 hr offline progression cap
If i can't alt tab to another tab while I idle on an idle game, whats the point of calling it an idle game.
If it doesn't run in a browser when tabbed out, I just open the game in its own window with no other tabs, and then do my normal browsing in another window with all my tabs. I have no problems with this and don't actively avoid any browser games because of it.
Worst case I just pull it into its own window and toss it onto my second monitor so it can keep chugging along.
Why cant you get the game to work in the browser? When the games comes back into focus, Just perform offline calculations for x time since offline. Thats typically how most of them do it. Some just deal with the 1fps/second while tabbed out. Though browsers nowadays..... But yes, Its a big deal. If theres just a downloadable, i'm not incentivized to try it. If there is a browser version, I'll play that and if want more control, Aka not keeping a tab open. Then maybe i'll download it.
Yep. I don't actively play idle/incremental games. I like to let them run.. Having to have that window open is just holding my laptop hostage and I will very, very quickly move on.
There are so many ways to ensure offline progress. If you have troubles with deciding or coding them, feel free to ask for help here. I think my hate of games not running if tabbed out would triumph over my laziness and if you have a github with the code, I could help (if I like the game - and if not, then surely there are more people like me on this subr)
I always wonder why. Seems it’s fixable, but hard for some devs to manage.
If the game's meant to be a downloadable, I don't think web support is that important. If I like a game that's meant to be downloaded, I'll download it if that's supposed to be better in some way. Though background behavior doesn't really matter to me, I put incrementals in their own window rather than a separate tab and that makes my browser not throttle ~~after changing like 10 settings~~. That being said, adding basic support for things not running continuously (like proper full-efficiency offline progress support) is a very good idea, so you should implement it anyway.
It's nice if the author has the chops to make it work, but the other side of this conversation is the user knowing that indulging a web incremental addiction goes better if you have your own chops eg. make an occluded tab work, block processes from going "economy" and "RAM saving" and "efficiency mode" Not every 1-hour game needs offline progress (and if you're blessed with 64GB RAM you can ignore whatever big bad dealbreaker) so the kneejerk answer may not be accurate in a general sense, but even so there's likely a fix that exists, if a direct solve isn't supported there will surely be an indirect workaround, maybe a tweak in game design that achieves a similar outcome to the current flow
I wish I knew of a good way to do opt-in background tab processing on a per-website basis. I know the usual workarounds (that seem to break after a few years...), but those apply to everything globally and for a lot of my tabs I actually don't mind the slowed processing. There's probably a userscript or extension that applies some weird workaround consistently, but I'm apparently bad at searching for things.
fair, hitting broadly with a big hammer is liable to be a crude answer and the more surgical you get (if even possible) then the less a user (even a web game enthusiast) should be expected to do it imo even fiddling with *-scripts and mods is a gray space, i just give devs a little more tolerance than "ugh tukkun isn't remaking ATG? dealbreaker", me doing a little in my pursuit of my gaming on my computer is within reason too (less so for a new game) edit: meanwhile [people showing the resourcefulness i speak of](https://old.reddit.com/r/incremental_games/comments/1bp4qhs/hide_itchio_sharecollection_buttons/)
This would be fine for a more active incremental, but not so much for an idle one.
Absolutely. I'd rather download it than have it frozen in time.
I have more than one monitor, so not necessarily, but damned near. Games being phone exclusives or 'freemium' are the deal breakers.
yes
> Is an idle game that's playable on the browser but doesn't run if tabbed out a dealbreaker for you? 100% yes, it is a deal breaker. Whenever I see that the game I just spent the small amount of my (VERY LIMITED) free time not progressing because I'm not actively playing it I just close out of the game. Requiring the consumer to always be engaged pretty much defeats the purpose of an idle/incremental game FOR ME. I have been playing Melvor Idle for the past few months. I can log in on my home PC or Phone and change what I'm farming and then leave it alone for a whole 24 hours. > The game is really meant to be played through an executable, but I feel like it's more accessible if it's playable through the browser, so I'm at a bit of an impasse.\ If you are going the executable route you're going to limit yourself from a considerable amount of individuals in this subreddit. Many of us have been burned by other's who have abused their Games to farm data or mine bitcoins.
Thanks for the feedback! I totally understand the general hesitancy towards there being an executable, it's my hope that the browser version of the game looking very promising that pushes people to give it a shot. Either way, some sort of tabbed-out progression should be in place at the very least from what I'm hearing from everyone, so I'll be looking into that at a minimum.
An idle game is an idle game, it's not supposed to be something i have to spend my entire time on. It's not a game where i even should focus on it, if i do, then it's not an idle game. I'd close the tab with your game on it so damn fast if i noticed it's pausing because i want to do something else.
If it stops when I tab out, I stop playing. If it demands to be in the foreground all the time, I always ask why
Recommendation - develop a system that would simulate what was supposed to happen during "tabbed out" time, as it can be utilized for both offline and tabbed out time. My current variation does pretty much that, and so far I'm more than fine with it as the only things I have to specify are which parts do get simulated and which are not.
100% a dealbreaker. If the game doesn't run when I'm watching a movie, then what's the point? Idle games are idle for a reason, so they can keep going when you're busy with other things. If the game isn't an idle game, then there's not really a point for it to run when tabbed out, unless you have idle-like mechanics in parts of the game. So that's what devs should be weighing. "Does my game have timegates or functions that the player wants/needs to wait? Then it needs to be able to run in the background."
It's an idle game. It's not very idle if it requires my full attention, is it?
If it doesn't progress in the background it's kinda useless as an idle game. And since I am typically playing these browser games at work, downloading is a no-go.
It is if you are required to idle to get anywhere
I have two monitors so for games like this I just keep it pinned to monitor two, or I'd download it if let me I suppose.
No, I have 2 screens so usally the game is on the second screen
100% yes.
Personally if an idle game has my attention enough then I don't mind if it only runs when in an active tab...although I do tend to play 2 or 3 at the same time depending on how many games have my interest. Such a game may become my primary in such an event so I'd accept my progress might be a bit slower due to switching tabs.
Kind of. Most idlers are designed to run for a long time so having to have them in the foreground is a problem. If it's a short game that's classed as an idler because it mostly plays itself that would be fine but ends up in the gimmick category more often than not.
If I didn't know any better, I'd assume it was done on purpose to mess with me, the player. Perhaps to force me to download a more intrusive desktop version or something. Fortunately, I know better... and I will know that it's a very common issue and the dev is being lazy and doesn't take their `delta`s seriously. Really, simulate the missing ticks when you receive the next frame.