Convince Me On Fusion 2.5 - I'm Needing Info

Quote from Volnaiskra

Yeah, I think this would be the way to go. If you're not needing to churn out 20 videos a week for some reason, then this should be pretty painless.

I'm surprised to hear that, since Animate CC is the descendent of Flash, and Flash was all about interactive stuff, and I figured that Adobe would have pushed the HTML side really hard now that the SWF is dead. I used to use Flash a lot back in the day for multimedia stuff (Please login to see this link.is one I'm still pretty proud of, although it's 11 years old). I used to love Flash - or I thought I did, until I started using Fusion, and instantly realised how much I hated Flash. Not just because of the Actionscript coding (though going syntax-free with Fusion was a huge part of the appeal for me) but also just the general workflow. Even though the Fusion interface is not without its foibles, it's still miles ahead of Flash (and probably even Animate CC) in terms of usability and power.

Thanks. Yep, Fusion 2.5

I make the artwork primarily in Photoshop, and animate in Toon Boom Harmony (it's expensive and subscription-based, but is a fantastic piece of software that's a joy to use). And the rest is all Fusion 2.5.

I used to be a heavy flash user. Made php apps with it and all.

When Flash became a no no, Adobe tried Edge Animate... which was basic. Then they converted Flash to Animate.... it does do Html5 export.

But it only does the basic html elements. So, they have a Label (single line) control and a single line input box. The textbox they do have can be multi-lined, but no scrollbar.
I mean how can they not include a text box with a scroll bar or an embedded (a.k.a) browser (which is just an iframe).

I actually don't mind using it for animations when I want to use the bones/keyframes, it just way behind what people want to make.
Adobe has always been slow with html 5 and catching up. And then there is the bugs as usual.

Quote from zip2kx

Why dont u just try it? theres a free version u can play around in

I have it... but because it is so limited, I really don't get a full spectrum of what it has to offer.

Quote from Rayek

Actually...
Please login to see this link.

Export your 3d scenes directly to a web page with WebGL. Including all animations, and there's even a simple visual logic node editor for visual coding.

logic editor manual entry: Please login to see this link.

Yeah... I have the Blend4Web exporter and I am playing with it.
And I am aware that Blender makes games and has a visual editor.

I have gone through a couple tutorials. If I want a true 3D game, this may be what I use.
But, to really do good blend4web content you do have to do some coding for added html layers and to be able to communicate with the blender scene.

I don't mind the coding, but for 2d game engines that has visual editing, that is what I am after.

Quote from Janette5

GM defaults to using a grid and placing objects in a grid but there's a shortcut to placing an object not aligned to the grid. They have quite a lot of features hidden away to simplify it, but it's still a slow process compared to Fusion.

Fusion has options - you can have a grid, snap to the grid or turn it off.

Another thing I forgot to mention that is a huge positive with Fusion is that you can run it frame-by-frame, so if you want to test something quickly you just click a button, run the frame and test it. GM has nothing like that - you have to compile the game every time and it will save the game before compiling, whether you want it to or not, and that process - save - compile - run - takes several minutes compared to Fusion which on my machine is instant.

Fusion & GM use INI files similarly, there's no real difference.

With both you buy the core program and export modules - html is an export module with both of them.

With both you can create your final app without further processing - so these extensions and C++ stuff people are talking about are features you can use, but they're not stuff you need to know about in order to create or compile an app.

Display More

Thanks for your input!

Another important question...

In most keyframe (timeline) applications you can have an object start with alpha transparency set to '0' and as the object moves it's alpha goes to 100%.
So, it does the fade as the object is moving.

In the F2.5 version, I found the fade In/out of an active object.
I set it's fade for 2 sec....

But, when I test the app.... it does the fade and the object stays stationary.... after the fade is done then the object moves.

Without the fade the object is supposed to start moving when the app starts...

So, why does doing a fade stop the object... then moves after the fade is done?

Because I don't have access to the Events with the free version, I don't know if there is a better way to do this.

Can anyone shed any light on this?

Thanks

Quote from ragem

There is an option in the Event Editor to manually adjust the transparency of an object.

The built-in fade in/out only applies to when an object is just being created or destroyed, so it won't do anything until the fade is complete. I haven't used the free version so I'm not sure what was removed or not.

And so, does the transparency in the events work as the object moves?

Quote from Volnaiskra

Yes, you can control the alpha channel directly, by setting it from 0 (opaque) to 255 (invisible) and/or making it change over time (eg. Decreasing it by a little amount each frame to make a fade in, or applying a sin() equation to make it pulse). That won't conflict with movement.

Fusion 2.5 has some archaic features left over from older versions that are of questionable value, and it sounds like that fade option is one. But when you 'roll your own' solutions, it works great. And Fusion's ease of use makes rolling your own quite easy most of the time.

Cool... Thanks

Okay... I have decided to get the Standard.
Thanks to everyone for helping me out.