I have a question about play asset delivery that is my game size is 60 MB but I want to reduce my apk size upto 30 MB. Is play asset delivery suitable for this or not?
and other question is .. we use PAD only for those games which are more than 150 MB ?
As per documentation of Google PAD(play asset delivery) recommended to have it for the app size more than 150 MB.
Use the editor logs in unity to understand the reason behind your app size, based on that you can use delivery modes which is suitable.
I would recommend you to go for Install-time delivery, which helps you to set up the app assets while installing.
Also if you need assets only on-demand choose on-demand delivery mode to achieve the lower app size.
if not try Addressables, please share the type of assets which you have in the game, so that get a better understanding to suggest more ways.
Thank you
Related
Native android supports different pixel densities like ldpi, mdpi, hdpi, xhdpi, xxhdpi and so on. This feature balances app quality and app size.
Currently I'm facing this issue in Unity mobile games (iOS & android) when I use,
high quality graphics it increases crashes and lagging in low-end devices.
low quality graphics it looks blurry and pixelated in high-end devices like iPad Pro etc.
I can use 2 different quality images but again it increases app size as the low-end devices end up downloading the HD images too.
How to solve this issue?
I suggest looking at the Unity Addressables system available in Unity 2020 LTS and beyond. This is a whole new tool that you'll have to investigate so I cannot provide a quick class or line of code to solve your problem. However, the Unity Addressables system is available in the Package Manager with docs available here.
Using this system will likely make it easier to run hi-res assets on lower-end devices. Since assets are streamed in when needed your texture memory is going to be significantly reduced as textures are unloaded as soon as you're done with them.
Addressables can also be used to load in assets remotely which would reduce your total file size. However, depending on how far you are in development this could be a big change.
You may also want to look at splitting the application binary if changing over to Addressables is too much work. If you split the binary, you can reduce the initial download of the application and have users opt-in to hi-res textures. There are a variety of other solutions provided by the Unity docs on Android builds here.
Good luck on getting your game to a shipped state!
I am currently using Unity 2013 p3. The problem is, when I build my project in android, the app apk size is about 29mb. And the installed app size in android is about 76mb.
Once the size was very huge, but after searching unity forums, as mentioned here, I altered the configuration settings under Project setting -> player, and changed the device filter to ARMv7. The size has been considerably reduced then. It resulted in the above mentioned metrics which is yet too large.
I tried reducing the size by compressing images that are used in the project, by using the image compression option available in unity as mentioned here. The apk size is reduced somewhat, but the image quality became low comparatively.
Now I don't know any other way to reduce app size without affecting the quality. Can anyone help me with this issue?? Thanks in advance :)
You should use compressed sounds, low poly models, set image quality to normal. Don't use unnecessary references to prefabs. Hope this will work for you!
Does using libraries like OpenEars will drastically enlarge my app size? Or I can just extract the text to speech stuff, and get away with it...Probably removing all those langs? I don't have any idea.
I checked and OpenEars sample app is 33MB - which is big!
So my question is - can I implement text to speech in my app without compromising the size so much? I mean I can live with 2-3 MBs but 30...
Thank you!
OpenEars developer here. Just follow the instructions here to reduce your final app size, there's no need to ship all the voices or any features of the framework that you aren't making use of. Depending on which voices you're using and which feature, you might see an app size increase of between 6 megs and ~20 unless you're using a large number of the available voices. The sample app uses all of the framework features and two voices, and supports a few iOS versions, so its binary size reflects that.
My guess is you can't, audio will take up a lot of space.
Removing unneeded language will free some space but 2-3 mb for all the audio guess that isen't really possible.
My application has a collection of around 1940 icons that are used throughout.
They're currently in ICO and new images provided to me come in ICO format too. I have noticed that they contain a 16x16 and 32x32 representation of each icon in one file.
Each file is roughly 4KB in filesize (as reported by finder, but ls reports that they vary from being ~1000 bytes to 5000 bytes)
A very small number of these icons only contain the 32x32 representation, and as a result are only around 700 bytes in size.
Currently I am bundling these icons with my application and they are inflating the size of the app a bit more than I would like.
Altogether, the images total just about 25.5MB. Xcode must do some kind of compression because the resulting app bundle is about 12.4MB. Compressing this further into a ZIP (as it would be when submitted to the App Store), results in a final file of 5.8MB.
I'm aware that the maximum limit for over the air App Store downloads has been raised to 20MB since the introduction of the iPad (I'm not sure if that extends to iPhone apps as well as iPad apps though, if not the limit would be 10MB).
My worry is that new icons are going to be added (sometimes up to 10 icons per week), and will continue to inflate the app bundle over time.
What is the best way to distribute these icons with my app?
Things I've tried and not had much success with:
Converting the icons from ICO to PNG:
I tried this in the hopes that the pngcrush utility would help out with the filesize. But it appears that it doesn't make much of a difference between a normal PNG and a crushed png (I believe it just optimises the image for display on the iPhone's GPU rather than compress it's size). Also in going from ICO to PNG actually increased the size of the icon file...
Zipping the images, and then uncompressing them on first run.
While this did reduce the overall image sizes, I found that the effort needed to unzip them, copy them to the documents folder and ensure that duplication doesn't happen on upgrades was too much hassle to be worth the benefit. Also, on original and 3G iPhones unzipping and copying around 25MB of images takes too long and creates a bad experience...
Things I've considered but not yet tried:
Instead of distributing the icons within the app bundle, host them online, and download each icon on demand (it depends on the user's data as to which icons will actually be displayed and when).
Issues with this is that bandwidth costs money, and image downloads will be bandwidth intensive. However, my app currently has a small userbase of around 5,500 users (of which I estimate around 1500 to be active based on Flurry stats), and I have a huge unused bandwidth allowance with my current hosting package.
So I'm open to thoughts on how to solve this tricky issue.
I did some research on MonoTouch for a client. MonoTouch has a minimum file size of 5.1mb because all the C# stuff. It doesn't seem to have affected apps store users willingness to download the MonoTouch based apps.
In my research I didn't see any evidence that end users pay much attention to app size when making purchasing decisions. A lot of apps are first downloaded to non-Mobiles via iTunes and the difference in download time between a 1mb and 5mb is barely noticeable. A lot of end users are only vaguely aware that apps even have a size.
My recommendation would be to try and prioritize the icons based on usage rate. Praeto's rule shows up in most data so you'll probably find that 20% of the icons get 80% of the use. Include that 20% most active icons in the app bundle and then download the rest.
Anyone knows the max size of Safari's 'Offline Application Cache' on the iPad & iPhone. Looks like it's 5MB. Is there any way to enlarge this size?
Offline application cache docs: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/SafariJSDatabaseGuide/OfflineApplicationCache/OfflineApplicationCache.html
I have the same problem on iPhone. On iPad though I figured a turn around. If your manifest contains files less than 5MB the first time and you update the cache by window.applicationCache.update() and before doing the update you increase the manifest files to be below 10mb it will work. If you continue doing that (increasing the manifest by <5MB each time and then update()) you will see that the iPad can cache more than the 5MB limit.
It is so sad that Apple by not supporting Flash and MIDP but only HTML5 for web-apps screws so much on that.
If your application uses more than 5mb than iPhone/iPad will ask the user to allow the website to use more space.
Let's read my test at here: Mobile Safari 5mb HTML5 application cache limit?
I think your apps need user's agreement for storage more than 5MB. Another problem you get is the network problem. It's too slow for 50MB transferring...