BaseMale

I don't think his behavior is abusive. He's trying to be helpful. It seems all too common to point the finger at the customer on these boards. This is the problem i was originally responding to. I'm far from computer illiterate and i have the writer of the software telling me i probably just don't know how to use the software. There are legitimate problems here that people are trying to bring to attention and are continually told it's their fault. But maybe we are just all "out of our element". What could we know about software development ?.

This is exactly what your customers will do. They are all front ends, all used for the same purpose. If somebody has performance problems leading to a bad user experience, all those extra features are worthless. I'm only trying to give a little bit of help in stating that I believe the performance problems many are seeing are caused by the loading of metadata. I could be way off base, but the fact that performance changes with the view type directly points to the metadata, in some form, as the culprit. If it's the searching and loading of that metadata, that is a very fixable problem. To be fair, you don't seem to have performance problems either. That's why I said the performance problems seem to lead to crashes. I've seen plenty of crashes when the UI starts to chug. Maybe that's helpful to @Jason Carr A smooth experience regardless of library size or the amount of metadata. I don't expect the metadata to update instantly, that's ridiculous. It will take time to load from disk. I don't expect the loading of metadata to impact my ability to interact with the application. I'm assuming this is what is going on. I've tested on a variety of hardware, from a Core 2 Quad to an I7, 2GB ram up to 32GB, with varying GPUs. They all experience hiccups at times. Less so with the beefier computers. None of them have issues with any other front end. And again, it makes sense to compare because they are all used for the same thing. The things Big Box does in the background don't matter to me when I'm simply trying to scroll through my games. If a beefy computer is a requirement for Big Box, fine. But I didn't see that stated anywhere when I purchased a license, and there was no trial available. The metadata is fluff. It adds visual beauty and some interesting info, but is ultimately unnecessary to the core purpose of a launcher. I can't convince you of the similarities of a launcher with a file explorer so we'll have to agree to disagree I'm not sure if this was meant as a dig at me, or if you were simply stating you don't have any coding experience. I'd like to get the performance problem figured out. I didn't find anything constructive in all the threads stating it's the users PC or their library. My PCs are tuned, well maintained, etc. If the solution is that you need an octocore and the latest NVidia card fine (I'm exaggerating the specs here), it's your software. But I hope you guys can find a way to make Big Box run at light speed on even the most limited of hardware.

I hope my comments aren't being taken the wrong way here. I'm not intending to anger anybody or belittle their efforts. I'm aware of the difficulty and amount of work it takes to write a piece of software as large as Big Box. On a platform as diverse as the PC no less. Especially for a single person. I was hoping to open a more constructive discussion on this topic. Yes, I've read through all the performance related threads. Finally, this one prompted me to chime in. I don't have access to the Big Box code base, so in that regard, I am "out of my element". That said, after using Big Box for a while, on several different PCs, and comparing to other front ends, I believe there is a legitimate performance problem with it. And worse, I think those performance problems are leading to actual crashes. From the responses I've read in the related threads, I'm concerned that this might be overlooked. Before I continue, yes, I've seen the posts stating that performance is an ongoing effort. It's the suggestions to improve performance that make me question if Big Box will ever work the way I would expect it to. My comparisons to File Explorer are simply because at a base level, they are very similar. They allow you to traverse through a hierarchy of files on your PC. File Explorer allows for more manipulation of your files, while Big Box provides a pretty interface. File Explorer does in fact deal with metadata. Perhaps not the amount that Big Box does, but that is irrelevant. And maybe that's where we disagree? In my opinion, metadata (to be clear, I'm including images, videos, etc.) should have no bearing on performance at all, especially in regards to user interaction (perhaps perceived performance). It should simply populate when it's ready. But as a user, it seems like the performance problems are related to metadata. It feels like I can't continue scrolling until the images and videos are loaded. Perhaps I'm wrong, but again, I'm shooting in the dark. This isn't open source software. The best I can do to help out is post my experience here and what I perceive is the problem. I think @syntax_X response above further strengthens my theory. Of course, it's only my opinion that the metadata should strictly be a visual nicety that has no impact on performance. Ideally, I should be able to have 100,000 games, each with video and 30 images, all in a single platform and be able to scroll through them all seamlessly. If my PC can't keep up with the loading of all that, I scroll through blank or placeholder metadata. But at least it's responsive. Again, I like Big Box and want to use it. Hopefully I've been a little help here.

I don't want a refund, and I'm not angry. I'm more disappointed that Big Box has these problems and that the solutions suggested by the moderators is to modify settings on your pc or accept it because you have a large library. I want Big Box to work, and I want it to be responsive. It doesn't always, and it's not. And it's not because of my pc or my game library. As I stated before, File explorer can deal with all the files on my pc and not slow down. Other front ends are very responsive. There is no reason Big Box should ever slow down (barring a rogue process hogging all the pc resources which isn't the case). To be clear, the loading of images or metadata shouldn't not impact the responsiveness of the UI. Maybe this is a WPF thing, as I've seen similar behavior on the Xbox one and Windows Store. At times it seems like all the images need to load before you user input is accepted, and that is aggravating as well. I'm not sure what you mean by stating I'm out of my element. I know the problems I'm experiencing. Acknowledgement of the problem instead of telling users it is their PC or their large library would go a long way. For some further info on launching the wrong game. It seems to happen when the UI slows down. Something isn't in sync.

I'm sorry, but the argument that performance should be expected to decrease with library size is ridiculous (isn't that the point of BB? sorting through a large library). You aren't processing the entire database each frame. At least I hope you aren't, Any pc running LaunchBox/BigBox is capable of running software much more complex than a launcher (emulating an arcade machine for example), and at a much more consistent frame rate. At it's core, BigBox is a tool for selecting and launching a game. Scrolling through a game library of any size on any machine capable of running Windows 10 (since BB uses WPF) should be buttery smooth without having to tweak any settings in BB or the PC in question. The artwork or any other metadata associated with a game or platform should only ever enhance the experience. If loading/caching of artwork or metadata is negatively impacting a user's ability to interact with the software, you are doing it wrong. If all the features you tout that make BB so much more advanced than any other launcher are degrading the applications response to user interaction, you are doing it wrong. I don't mean to sound like a dick here, but I've read through too many of these performance threads where the response from the moderators has been concerning. It leads me to believe that not only is there a fundamental flaw in BigBox's architecture, but that the developers behind the scenes don't even realize it. I don't configure my PC to run any other software I install, I shouldn't have to configure it to run BB. And I certainly shouldn't have to worry that my game library is too large (File explorer doesn't choke with the thousands of files on my pc). And from a software development standpoint: Make sure your core feature set is nailed down and rock solid. If you don't have that nailed down, nothing else matters. I like BigBox. More than I do any other front end. That said, it has serious issues. At times, it will launch the wrong game (seriously wtf). This usually happens if I'm scrolling really fast. If I exit the game and re-launch, then it will launch the correct game. This is the bread and butter of BB, and it screws up. Combined with the performance problems, this is unacceptable, and it forces me to use a different front end.