At 10/1/09 05:00 PM, Doneveno wrote: One thing I noticed about AS3 is how incredibly difficult they made OOP, for seemingly no reason. With non-OOP I can just do it all in one frame in CS4 in the actionscript editor. With OOP I have to make a new file for every goddamn class, organize them into folders, then make code that finds and uses these classes. Why? It's incredibly stupid. Is there any way around this, or did they just ruin OOP with unnecessary rules?

Of course, I could be wrong about it and the tutorials I've found are just trash. I've noticed AS3 doesn't have many decent tutorials. Anybody have some AS3 OOP tutorials you reccomend? Just as long as I don't have to buy a physical book I'm fine.

Honestly, I don't see much difficult with OOP in AS3. The idea behind using a different file for each class is that you can use classes you've created in a multitude of projects instead of having spaghetti timeline code that's unmanageable and hard to read. To access these classes all you have to do is import them. It's as easy as

Import package.class

Then you have access to everything you need.

At 8/11/09 12:31 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote:

At 8/11/09 12:27 PM, Shalashaska-1 wrote: Advertisment on this site is no where near as bad as it used to be. Back in 02-05 it used to be really bad, porn ads everywhere.

And pop-ups. Don't forget the pop-ups.

I turn adblock on when I'm on other sites because their ads are just plan obnoxious. They're either the ones with sound, pop ups, or whatever else. But, I turn it off when on ng.

Don't forget the interpage ads that many websites still have today, where you click on a page and it redirects you to some advert.

Forgot to add,

http://drawlogic.com/2009/01/16/as3-soun dmanager-class-for-flash-updated-for-twe ener/

That's the class I'm using to handle the sounds.

So I was working on my new game, a side scrolling shooter, when I ran into a problem. I had X set as shoot, Space set as jump, and the arrows controlled jumping and shooting.

The problem I ran into was that I couldn't run, look up and jump at the same time. Now that would take me hitting 3 keys at the same time to do, Up, Space, and Right. But when I changed jump to C, I had no problems doing any commands.

Is there any way for me to keep space as jump and not run into that problem?

Also, whenever I add sound effects to games, when they begin playing or when they overlap each other, they stutter the game for about 3 frames. That's only when they overlap though, so I had to take sound effects such as the ones for jumping and landing on the ground out because the game would lag from the sounds of the gun and the jumping coinciding. Could it be the method or is this just a problem I'm going to have to deal with.

At 7/19/09 09:26 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote: we can all agree that metalocaslypse is the best AS show though, right?

I like Moral Orel better.

Spelunky much?

Not saying it's a bad thing.

Get off the high horse.

At 7/19/09 02:12 PM, Gustavos wrote: This week I played Super Mario 64 for my brother. That game has aged well, but one thing is still notorious for causing trouble. The camera, and our lack of control over it. It doesn't ruin the game, it just makes it worse in comparison with other 3d platformers made afterwards. Speaking of bad cameras, let's talk about Fixed-Camera angles. This is a type of camera used in the popular Metal Gear Solid and Resident Evil games before these series' evolved. Yes, evolved. Fixed Camera Angles are easier than programming a movable camera that follows you. Not to mention they only need to make the area only with the visible parts. Except in Metal Gear Solid we had a first-person aiming view, so never mind that. In the Resi games, the rooms had only one or two walls and no ceiling.

Just because something is easier to program does not mean that it's a flaw, but that's not the point.

There is one more type of game that is outdated, and it happens to be a full genre. The FPS genre. First-person shooters are outdated. I wasn't around to play Doom, but I was around to play Goldeneye. Besides online, tell me one way First person shooters have evolved since Goldeneye. There's just one, and that came during the 6th generation (PS2 vs. Gamecube). Use of dual control sticks. We can walk and move the camera simultaneously.

2 sticks came from the dualshock PS1 controller actually. And first person shooters are constantly evolving. Just because changes haven't been 'innovative' enough for you doesn't mean that the genre isn't producing better games. Each game that comes out, graphics get better, the games become easier to get immersed in. Games like Bioshock, Half-Life, and Crysis astound people with great stories and innovative gameplay, AND their boundary pushing graphics. Even new controllers are being made for FPS's like the Novint Falcon.

Now, 3D platforming, fixed camera angles, and first person shooters were all big during the 5th generation (N64 vs. PS1). 3D platforming had gotten better cameras, and there's no real problems with that genre now. It's just all about quality of the game now. Fixed-camera angles have been abolished. And first person shooters carry on oblivious to how bad they are. Right now, the only reason to play a first-person shooter is for the online. The story modes are terrible. And story modes won't be getting any better than those in the recent Call of Duty games at this rate. And since every FPS game's online is the same Team Deathmatch, I can conclude that the FPS genre is an outdated cashcow. Getting it's sales from the casual gaming audience.

There are great stories in FPSs being released today, look up. Games like Halo have hundreds of options for types of games, and games by Valve let the community create content which results in hundreds of different game modes. I don't know what games you play but many, many FPS's have more modes then just Team Deathmatch, or Deathmatch all the same. You have no idea what you're talking about.

disbelievers need to realize that casual in a gaming sense means playing video games sparingly. It does not mean one who plays the Wii games labeled as "casual games". People who play Wii Fit more than once a week are larger in number than male teenagers with their Halos and Call of Duties.

Since Third-Person shooters have no core problems, they also rely on quality to be great. They are a step above first-person.

A third person shooter would be a first person shooter if you position the camera at the players face.

UH-DUH.

There's not much difference in between those two genres.

But then again, First person shooters still have some unmet potential. In most war simulators, it's a one-man war. You, a "nothing special" soldier take on the Nazi Regime. Oh, and some other guys hiding behind cover with you who shoot at the air. And from my experience, bullets often don't actually come out of their guns. THIS, is ridiculous. I want to be competing with fellow AI soldiers on who can shoot the most enemies. I want to watch them reload behind cover. I want to see THEM, move forward occasionally. I haven't studied much of WWII, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't won by a single American soldier with the last name of Miller, or the Russians pushing back the German forces, all by one man named Dimitri. Oh, and health bars please. There were medics in every war, I want to see them. And in online, you can be carrying medical equipment as a perk and heal soldiers near you. In story mode, have a way to call over a medic and prey they're not shot down.

And if Modern Warfare 2 does not meet the requirement above, I will be pissed.

TL/DR: I am pissed that the first person shooter genre hasn't evolved to it's full potential. It should either move on like fixed-camera angles, and get rid of it's problems like the 3D platforming genre.

So mainly you're complaining about WW2 shooters.

Honestly you don't have much idea what you're talking about and you don't have much knowledge about games it seems. Just the notion that you think third person shooters are inherently better then first person shooters reflects that. Stop complaining about WW2 shooters, branch out to better and more diverse games, then come back to me saying that shooter games are all the same.

I was just wondering, when making a Object Oriented game in flash, on average, how many classes do you make? I'm programming a game right now and I'm nearing around 15, and I believe I'm going to need a lot more. I'm not too sure if I'm just being inefficient, and I should condense it. Are there any performance losses by using a lot of classes?

At 7/2/09 11:56 AM, LoliBear wrote: I'm searching the whole evening to find a tile engne that matches my form of tile. (crystal-like)
I know how to do so with squares but not with mine..
So does anyone have tutorial for my shape or just the code with explanation? :P
Here is the tile with a 100% alpha black filling:

That's called isometric.

http://www.gotoandplay.it/_articles/2004 /02/tonypa_p21.php

Tonypa's tutorial helped me a bit.

I used to be someone who spent a lot of time alone and I can't really think of doing that now. Me and my friends from school set up a teamspeak server, and whenever we're using our computers we use that to communicate and to find out when we can actually hang out or play some games together. About 5 days of the week I leave the house and do something for an hour or more now that I have a car, and although being around people is exhausting I consider it much better then spending time alone. Even I'm scripting stuff, it helps to be able to talk through the problem with some people so I don't get to frustrated at things.

Just depends if your an introvert or an extrovert.

How about you just use friction instead of slowing it down by decreasing the variable directly. Example.

if(Key.isDown(Key.LEFT)){
if(xSpeed>-maxSpeed){
xSpeed-=1
}else{
xSpeed=-maxSpeed
}
}else if(Key.isDown(Key.RIGHT)){
if(xSpeed<maxSpeed){
xSpeed+=1
}else{
xSpeed=maxSpeed
}
}else{
xSpeed*=.7
}

That's all it takes. You should name your variable better so you can understand whats going on. Multiply X by a fraction to decrease it, decrease the variable based on how quickly you want him to stop. You could replace .7 with a variable, and then change the variable based on how slippery the surface is.

At 6/18/09 05:59 PM, jozojozojozo wrote: Hi, I'm trying to make it so that the vcam does not leave the area where the character is, I tried

onClipEvent (enterFrame) {
if (this._x>593) {
this._x = 593;
}
}

But it doesn't work, so would anyone be able to help me and tell me what I am doing wrong?

Thanks.

Are you doing that for every direction? How does the camera move and is the camera dynamic?

I agree with your image.

At 6/9/09 08:26 PM, masterlink950 wrote: as far as it being infuriating unless you cheat, that sounds like a personal issue to me. And to be honest I don't think ive ever seen a GOOD mouse avoider, thats what im wanting to do with this, and so far from what I've been told its turning out to be that way.

ANYTHING you do with a mouse avoider will have already been done before, and will probably have been done 3x better then what you could create. The only reason you can't find a good mouse avoider is because all the good ones have faded into obscurity because they're not really unique and not really as fun as other types of games. I'll just point to one series that I remember from a while back that executed mouse avoiders well.

Overhead: persistence, by acridrose Type: Game Rating: Everyone

But seriously, there are hundreds of these types of games. Move on and do something unique.

At 6/1/09 12:23 PM, Jinzoa wrote: Can't see a problem with the flash to be frank, in the real world the death was a tradgedy but alot of kids die from random stuff like that in home related deaths. If a guy made a flash saying "X unknown kid died this way" in the comments box then i doubt it would even get this much if any attention.

With other Flashes, the character dieing would probably be some nameless girl who no one knows anything about. But this was a little girl who died in an accident n real life, who people are still probably mourning over. Once you give the little girl a real identity and relate it to a real event, it goes over the line, for me at least. This is someones daughter who died, not even 2 week ago. Some mother is still probably crying over the loss of her child, and you're sitting here laughing at them because she died on a treadmill. I don't even see how that funny, the situation of the accident doesn't even seem funny to me.

We have crap like this all the time come through the portal with some sense of humour behind it. Personally i saw the general humour side to this, just like how everyone else here laughs at something unfortunate when a joke of some form is made out of it.

I just don't find it funny at all. I can see how some people can find it funny though. I laugh at unfortunate events all the time, but someones little girl dieing is something I just can't laugh at.

Again it's the shame the kid died but the fact she was mike tysons daughter is the only thing that is even making people pay attention to this i think.

Who cares who's daughter she is? The media may only be paying attention because it's Mike Tyson, but it's still a 4 year old girl.

At 5/31/09 08:03 PM, J-qb wrote:

At 5/31/09 06:47 PM, Skeik-Sprite wrote:

At 5/31/09 06:18 PM, Fleshlight wrote: The only thing in this thread is one image and a link which tells me I need to download something. If you want me to give you an overall critique, you have to provide images that are right in the thread.

If you don't feel like looking at the portfolio don't complain to me. It's a tiny 5meg pdf.

Well, I have to agree with fleshlight here... If you want poeple (us) to do something for you (review your artwork) you will have to make it easy for them (us). It took me three tries to open your portfolio, even though I consider my computer to be quite okay

To be honest I don't think there's an easier way for me to show it without spamming the forum and spending a few hours grabbing all the images from the PDF file. PDF's and Adobe reader are widespread, and making an electronic portfolio in InDesign is pretty common now a days.

as for the pieces in your portfolio...
It seems kind of plain. I see a portfolio as something to show off your style, or your abilities. Your portfolio has a lot of pretty similar works in it, and none of them show a lot of skill. They are allright, don't get me wrong, but they are not really good imo.

Yeah, I see what you're saying :P A lot of them are basic because there's no need to go further with them. I also limited my colors a lot, like the Noises Off poster I made with only 2 colors.

And pretty much half of the projects in the portfolio were made for my high school or some spin off department of my high school, so yeah, lol.

as for the sketches in the middle, they aren't really sketches are they? seem to be more like studies to me.

Yeah, I did plenty of sketches for the designs in there so far, but most of them were done on loose leaf paper and are since gone, so I threw a few of those in there instead.

At 5/31/09 06:14 PM, Lundsfryd wrote:

At 5/31/09 06:00 PM, Skeik-Sprite wrote: The class I was in required that I put my sketches in the portfolio. Although it may have been smarter to put them at the end of the whole thing.

Mmm.. Nope.. Not if you ask me. I would have to say don't include them at all.

I'm saying I think it would've been smarter if I had put them at the end of the portfolio so they weren't smack dab in the middle, and so it wouldn't seem so jarring and out of place with all the other polished pieces. I had no choice whether or not to put it in, but looking back now the best option that I could choose would be to put them at the end IMO.

At 5/31/09 06:18 PM, Fleshlight wrote:

OH, you're talking about the poster :P I did it that way because I wanted it to seem a little crazy to reflect the play. The small size of the image I posted doesn't do the whole thing justice, and it's a lot more obvious in the actual size poster. I think taking it further then what it is right now would look even more unprofessional.

The only thing in this thread is one image and a link which tells me I need to download something. If you want me to give you an overall critique, you have to provide images that are right in the thread.

If you don't feel like looking at the portfolio don't complain to me. It's a tiny 5meg pdf. On most peoples computers it opens up in the browser. Most flash movies now a days are bigger then the file I have, and it contains 15 different designs. I would rather you look at the pdf rather then post each separate image because I don't have copies of all the images stand alone, the pdf contains them in high quality format, and the layout and placement of the images inside the portfolio itself is a part of the portfolio.

And I put the poster up because I feel like it's one of my strongest pieces. Even if you looked at it in the portfolio I uploaded, it would still be roughly the same size. Seeing it in print at around 17 x 24 is a lot different then seeing it on a monitor.

At 5/31/09 05:47 PM, Fleshlight wrote: I don't really like how you just color under the outlines so obviously. If that's intentional, it should be taken further, because right now it looks sloppy and unprofessional.

OH, you're talking about the poster :P I did it that way because I wanted it to seem a little crazy to reflect the play. The small size of the image I posted doesn't do the whole thing justice, and it's a lot more obvious in the actual size poster. I think taking it further then what it is right now would look even more unprofessional.

At 5/31/09 05:54 PM, Lundsfryd wrote: I have to disagree with fleshlight. I rather like it. A classic european newspaper illustration type of thing.. I think it works. However I looked at your portfolio. But I really didn't like your sketches in the middle. They looked sloppy and sort of dragged the whole impression down a bit. But I like the rest.

The class I was in required that I put my sketches in the portfolio. Although it may have been smarter to put them at the end of the whole thing.

At 5/31/09 05:47 PM, Fleshlight wrote: I don't really like how you just color under the outlines so obviously. If that's intentional, it should be taken further, because right now it looks sloppy and unprofessional.

Which piece are you talking about, or are you talking about the cover page?

At 5/31/09 05:33 PM, Lundsfryd wrote: The rules say you need to include a "starter-picture" with every new thread.. And a link won't do :)

Oops

I'm not too sure how smart it is to show the whole internet this, but I just finished my portfolio for my graphic design tech prep class and I'm pretty damn happy about it. It's a PDF, only 5 megs, and it can be found here.

http://www.scribd.com/word/download_prev iew/15979070?secret_password=2otgbm42a25 r9b7idbaz

Spent a lot of time and research doing each of these pieces, and 90% of them were made for actual usage, even if they didn't get used XD. My poster design actually won me 1st place in a design show, and won me a laptop.

At 5/26/09 10:27 PM, WinchesterLock wrote:
AT THE VERY LEAST GIVE THE ARTIST THE OPTION TO DENY EXPANDED VIEW ON THEIR FLASH CONTENT!

That's why I said we should have the option to choose.

And seriously, nothing I expanded lagged at all.

At 5/26/09 09:58 PM, JonBro wrote:

At 5/26/09 09:48 PM, Skeik-Sprite wrote: *stuff*

You say that as if everything I said was purely opinion and everything you said was purely fact, which is not the case.

I think it's pretty obvious that most every Flash artist who has responded to this thread either wants the new layout either completely taken out or at least left as an alternative option for a select few Flashes. Having it left like it is now has already resulted in many problems, and keeping the old layout as the main option would fix nearly every one of them.

Look, I'm not trying to say my opinion is fact, or is better then anyone elses, but I really feel like the wide layout brings a lot of the focus back to the movie itself. I like the idea that people are going to actually see my movie/game now if they click a link, rather then just reading a few bad reviews and leaving. And that's another thing I think is good. Getting the reviews out of the way may encourage people to take the movie in by itself, rather then being swayed by the opinions of the reviewers.

But yeah, I really like this new layout and the fact that I can enlarge the flash things. Even if raster images get a little messed up, the movie itself is much more engaging (to me) bigger.

I dunno, maybe having an option to switch it back but I wouldn't use it. And no one seemed to ever use that lightbox style play movie button.

Oh yeah, looking back I do agree with the play button thing. Many submissions begin with music, and I think auto play opens up the way for a lot of spammers to mess with viewers.

But I still stand by my other points :P

At 5/26/09 09:22 PM, JonBro wrote: I've put some thought into it... and I've decided I heavily dislike this new layout for many reasons.

There are a good many movies and games out there that are absolutely positively NOT meant to be witnessed in widescreen, for reasons like image quality, zooming, visual errors, etc.

True enough, but many a game and movie do look better in the larger format. If the movie wasn't meant to be viewed in widescreen, I think it would be easy enough not to view it in widescreen or to allow the developer to choose whether larger screen is okay or not.

Pretty much nobody's ever going to see the 46x46 icons people make for their submissions now.

Not really a big problem. The 46x46 icons actually draw some people away from good submissions, and they're a VERY small part of the flash overall.

It's fairly likely the double-sized screens would increase lag. I've tested this theory on a movie or two and haven't actually found that to be the case, but somehow it doesn't seem possible for it not to lag a little more when in widescreen.

Even if it lags, it still looks better. Like I said, the widescreen button is choice.

Everything on every page is stretched out, and with the 0-5 voting system unaligned with everything else and the trophies and Flash information in a new place... it looks horrendous. Complete garbage.

The only thing that looks bad is the top bar, and that's only because it's not fleshed out with the rest of the website. Everything else, other then the voting bar, looks fine stretched out. It makes the comment text look a lot less intimidating. It gives newgrounds space to advertise their own products instead of super duper hot anime websites. It also gives them more space to advertise other games made by developers to people who might enjoy them.

It fits with the more modern feel other wesbites are adopting now-a-days with wider layouts, and most of all it gives developers more room to create more indepth games. It takes focus away from the website itself and puts that focus onto the movie. I think many of the people who say it looks horrendous are most likely mainly saying this because it's a change from what their used to, and their not taking the new layout in. And I know that's a matter of opinion, but I can't really find anything wrong with it.

Any movie without a play button or a preloader will start automatically without giving a chance for the rest of the page to load. With pop-ups and the old dimming-lights setup, this was never an issue. There should be a way to be able to start a Flash and THEN have it start loading. Say, like a "WATCH THIS MOVIE" button!

The starting automatically was actually the best choice. How many times have people clicked a link but never opened the movie. How many views do you think movies and games get from people who don't bother to open the movie up. Having it like this forces the person to actually view the content that people like you and me put so much hard work into making. It is a bit intrusive but to me, this seemed like the best solution.

Where did the age rating go? Out of curiosity, I've checked a couple of Adult-rated movies and games, which I now almost regret seeing, but it helped me to know to avoid them later. Now you can't even tell what kind of movie you're going to watch.

Adult movies aren't played right away, and the age rating is in the corner.

And those are just a few of many more mistakes I could easily find.

Some of the suggestions mentioned earlier in this thread I thought would be very nice.
1. Glaiel-Gamer mentioned the possibility of a no-widescreen-option when submitting. This is a feature I personally would immediately use for all the Flashes I've already submitted to Newgrounds.

In my BFF games I would disable it in too. The larger screen looks amazing, and it's not laggy, but it bugs out many of my games due to the graphical way they were programmed. Other then that I think it's a great idea, especially for vector based movies.

2. Others have mentioned the possibility of an account option where you could switch back to the old layout and not have to worry about any of the new flaws.

I think that would work.

3. My favorite suggestion of all (and the most common one) is that the whole layout be completely changed back.

Opinions.

To quote livelavalive, "this actually makes we want to stop making flash."

I think that's a really immature thing to say.

And right after I post the topic, I found out a solution.

I still have no idea what the problem was, but I fixed the problem by pushing numbers into the array rather then pushing a premade array into the array. No idea why the last version didn't work, but now I can move on with this. Once I get this thing pumping out completly random city's, I have a few ideas for games to put it in.

http://spamtheweb.com/ul/upload/260509/7 1142_City.php

for (i=0; i<=stories*storyHeight; i++) {
				if (i%storyHeight==0) {
					temp = 1+random((girth*3)-1);
					currentBody[i] = new Array();
					for (p=0; p<=girth*3; p++) {
						if (p !=temp) {
							currentBody[i].push(1);
						} else {

							currentBody[i].push(0);
						}
					}
				} else {
					currentBody[i] = levelWall;
				}
			}

Okay, what I'm trying to do is procedurally generate a city. Before I can generate the city I need to generate buildings. I don't want any comment on how the project looks right now, I know what I'm doing and it'll be fine in the end, I just need help figuring out why this array is being stupid. Sorry if that sounds kinda stuck up.

package {
	import flash.display.Sprite;
	import flash.events.Event;
	import flash.display.MovieClip;
	import tile;
	public class building extends Sprite {
		public function getTile(kX,kY) {
			return new Array(Math.floor(kX / 5),Math.floor(kY / 5));
		}
		public var currentBody:Array = new Array();
		public var girth:Number = 0;
		public var stories:Number = 0;
		public var levelFloor:Array = new Array();
		public var levelWall:Array = new Array();
		public var buildType:Number = random(5);
		public var storyHeight:Number = 9+random(5);
		private var i:Number = 0;
		private var temp:Number = 0;
		public function random(integer:int):int {
			return Math.floor(Math.random() * integer);
		}
		public function building(e:Event=null):void {

			stories = 2+random(10);
			girth = 2;//9+random(13);
			/*trace(stories);
			trace(girth);*/
			for (i=0; i<=girth*3; i++) {
				levelFloor.push(1);
			}
			
			for (i=0; i<=girth*3; i++) {
				if (i==0 || i==girth*3) {
					levelWall.push(1);
				} else {
					levelWall.push(0);
				}
			}
			
			for (i=0; i<=stories*storyHeight; i++) {
				currentBody.push(levelFloor);
			}
			for (i=0; i<=stories*storyHeight; i++) {
				if (i%storyHeight==0) {

					currentBody[i] = levelFloor;
					if (currentBody[i][1+random((girth*3)-1)]!=0) {
						currentBody[i][1+random((girth*3)-1)] = 0;
					}
				} else {
					currentBody[i] = levelWall;
				}
			}
			buildLevel(currentBody, this);
		}
		public function buildLevel(levArray:Array, movie:Sprite) {
			for (var i:Number=0; i < levArray.length; i++) {

				for (var p:Number=0; p < levArray[0].length; p++) {
					if (levArray[i][p] ==1) {
						var curTile:tile=new tile();
						curTile.x=p * 5;
						curTile.y=i *5;
						curTile.gotoAndStop(Number(levArray[i][p])+1);
						movie.addChild(curTile);
					}
				}
			}
		}
	}
}

This is the class for buildings. The buildings themselves are generated separately from the city itself. A 2d array of one building. What this bit of code is doing.

for (i=0; i<=stories*storyHeight; i++) {
				if (i%storyHeight==0) {

					currentBody[i] = levelFloor;
					if (currentBody[i][1+random((girth*3)-1)]!=0) {
						currentBody[i][1+random((girth*3)-1)] = 0;
					}
				} else {
					currentBody[i] = levelWall;
				}
			}

is pushing each individual layer of tiles into a larger 2d array that makes up the whole building. The problem is with this line of code.

currentBody[i][1+random((girth*3)-1)] = 0;

I have an array made for the floor of a building and for the wall boundaries of a building. When I create the floor, I want to randomnly put a hole in the floor so I can put a ladder in that hole so the player can actually get up to the next floor. What results is this.

http://spamtheweb.com/ul/upload/260509/7 0877_City.php

The same hole in the floor is copied to every floor. Anyone have any idea why?

Way to many buttons for all the different moves. Try and reduce it all down to 3/4 buttons, all on the same row. Right now it's hard to understand all the moves you can do, and the way burter just come right after you it's hard to figure out what to do.

I was wondering, do non visible DisplayObjects use CPU to render themselves? I'm making a tile engine with large levels and it would help to know that I could just set visible to false instead of removing them and reattaching them.

Thanks.