The most difficult moment for me.

Thanks for the info Yves, it's a relief to know some info about F3, I was basically losing hope about it and was even going to post a suggestion on improving current Fusion with more Exporters, Editors, big features and better compatibility. Etc
But to know that F3 development is a bit focused on rn is very nice to hear

Yves, thank you so much for joining into this conversation, it's always great to know your thoughts and point of view of the situation!

I know that Clickteam struggles a bit with design, and it's natural that UI would be a problem, specially when moving away from system UI elements.
I'm not the greatest designer as well but I have experience with design/CGI in general, so I really wish me and perhaps even the entire community could help figure out the definitive Fusion 3 UI.
Feel free to contact me, I've worked a long time with VFX and motion graphics, I might be able to make some animated mockups to help visualizing what could work on Fusion 3.

Thanks guys.

I'll keep this in mind NaitorStudios

Quote from piscesdreams

Yves,
Looks like PMs are closed for you.

Ah yes, I've just added you to my contact list, it should work now.

Quote from Linky

Thanks for the info Yves, it's a relief to know some info about F3, I was basically losing hope about it and was even going to post a suggestion on improving current Fusion with more Exporters, Editors, big features and better compatibility. Etc
But to know that F3 development is a bit focused on rn is very nice to hear

As I said please don't stop posting suggestions for 2.5, we'll continue releasing updates until F3 is released and even during some time after. Posting them in the beta build threads is better, I usually focus on this thread. Thanks!

Yves

CT revolutionized things once. I hope you can do it again. Please don't let CT disappear! I hope the future will be bright.

Quote from Yves

Thanks guys.

I'll keep this in mind NaitorStudios

Ah yes, I've just added you to my contact list, it should work now.

Still no option to PM.

Quote from Edel

Yves

CT revolutionized things once. I hope you can do it again. Please don't let CT disappear! I hope the future will be bright.

Thanks

Quote from piscesdreams

Still no option to PM.

Weird, I'll PM you my email address then.

Quote from piscesdreams

Parallax placement is a major PITA. I have to place objects in the level editor where I want them to really appear, then take the X & Y coordinates and multiply by the coefficient to get the new X & Y position they really need to be at so they appear in the desired spot at runtime. For example, if I want an object to appear at 10,000 X at runtime and it's on a layer that has a 0.65 X parallax coefficient, I do 10000 x 0.65 and set the X position in the level editor to 6,500.

Quote from Yves

- Parallax placement in frame editor: I'll think about it, we could probably add an option for this.

Figuring out the correct placement of objects affected by parallax layer offset coefficients is something I've had to struggle with as well. In my custom level editor I have a transparent ghost version of the background object that is displayed in the editor at the actual location that the object will be seen at when parallax is applied in relation to where the camera is on the screen, by using a calculation. When placing the object, the editor briefly places the camera back at 0,0 before actually placing and saving the object, and then snaps back to the view it was at when I made the placement. This way the object coordinates are saved with the correct values so that it will display in the correct spot at runtime with parallax.

I wonder if something similar to the 'parallax preview' I use could be implemented in Fusion in some way? Perhaps a toggleable mode in the frame editor where Fusion can display where in the frame a particular object will actually appear when the screen is scrolled to specific areas based on the layer coefficient?

Below is a demonstration video of how this preview works in my custom editor. It's difficult to explain in words so hopefully this demonstrates what I mean more effectively. The transparent background hill object with pink inverted colors represents where the background object will actually appear visually at runtime based on the layer coefficient.

Please login to see this media element.

Quote from AftPeakTank

Are there going to be any improvements on the out of the box features? Like for example movement types and their collisions?

What issues do you get with current movement collisions? (that's the part I didn't understand in your post) Built-in movements should be better yes.

Quote from Tek

Below is a demonstration video of how this preview works in my custom editor.

Interesting, thank you for sharing.

Quote from Tek

Figuring out the correct placement of objects affected by parallax layer offset coefficients is something I've had to struggle with as well. In my custom level editor I have a transparent ghost version of the background object that is displayed in the editor at the actual location that the object will be seen at when parallax is applied in relation to where the camera is on the screen, by using a calculation. When placing the object, the editor briefly places the camera back at 0,0 before actually placing and saving the object, and then snaps back to the view it was at when I made the placement. This way the object coordinates are saved with the correct values so that it will display in the correct spot at runtime with parallax.

I wonder if something similar to the 'parallax preview' I use could be implemented in Fusion in some way? Perhaps a toggleable mode in the frame editor where Fusion can display where in the frame a particular object will actually appear when the screen is scrolled to specific areas based on the layer coefficient?

Below is a demonstration video of how this preview works in my custom editor. It's difficult to explain in words so hopefully this demonstrates what I mean more effectively. The transparent background hill object with pink inverted colors represents where the background object will actually appear visually at runtime based on the layer coefficient.

Please login to see this media element.

Interesting, and a great idea also. While I think it would be better for the user's time if Fusion could perform the parallax calculations at runtime based on our placement in the level editor against the layer coefficients, a preview would be a good alternative if the runtime suggestion weren't possible.

I agree that may some competitor have more modern UI/UX and more features "out-of-the-box".

But all these "non-coding" competitors have their bottleneck at non-native-export. They give up where it becomes most important.
the amazing thing in Fusion - the possibility to export to native code (example: Objective C for iOS) and on the other hand to integrate everything by extensions gave me the option to make serious business with a "non-coding-dev-tool".

if i imagine FUSION3 with state-of-the-art UI/UX and some state-of-the-art features out of the box AND the native export option - this would be game-changing and Fusion could become the most important and most shiny engine, where you do not have to learn a coding language.

as important as the F3 engine itself would be of course professional UI/UX designer and marketing expierienced team members. these are some things that some competitors are doing really well. I'm sure that if clickteam will take this serious, there would be a big opportunity for them on the market.

Quote from piscesdreams

Interesting, and a great idea also. While I think it would be better for the user's time if Fusion could perform the parallax calculations at runtime based on our placement in the level editor against the layer coefficients, a preview would be a good alternative if the runtime suggestion weren't possible.

Ah, so your idea is that objects placed in the frame editor would in effect be the representations of where the object should be at runtime when they are in the center of the scrolled screen with a coefficient. At runtime it would then adjust the objects as needed? That would be an excellent feature as well. I imagine it wouldn't require the frame editor to display the effect of the parallax in that situation.

If something similar to either idea can be implemented, I think it would be a very useful feature for anyone who hasn't already developed a solution of their own. That being said, if it doesn't happen for 2.5 I understand. There's certainly a lot of other important work being done.

Quote from StingRay

But all these "non-coding" competitors have their bottleneck at non-native-export. They give up where it becomes most important.

I very much disagree on that, and I think you underestimate how far web technologies have come in recent years. Javascript has become powerful and fast now, and there's WebAssembly for even better performance. There's hardware acceleration for graphics through WebGL2. You can have native-looking UI elements through React Native etc. There are new APIs that give access to sensors, gamepads etc.
And of course, it's easy to wrap your web application through Ionic (mobile) or Electron (desktop), or to make it a PWA (such as the Twitter, Tinder and Instagram apps).

It's genuinely a case of "write once, run anywhere". With Fusion, you're having to pay an additional fee for the exporters, Clickteam are having to work on maintaining and updating both Fusion and the exporters, and extensions all need porting over for every different exporter, so a good chunk of them are Windows-only. And then in some cases (like XNA), after all that work, the exporters may quickly become obsolete. I personally think Clickteam would be mad not to base Fusion on WebAssembly and WebGL2, with Javascript for extensions.

MuddyMole doesn't the Fusion 3 blog mention it's based in C++ and JavaScript?
I would bet it will go this way, but better, since it will be able to compile not just a wrapper but full native code for any platform without the need of multiple runtimes.

Quote from Tek

Ah, so your idea is that objects placed in the frame editor would in effect be the representations of where the object should be at runtime when they are in the center of the scrolled screen with a coefficient. At runtime it would then adjust the objects as needed? That would be an excellent feature as well. I imagine it wouldn't require the frame editor to display the effect of the parallax in that situation.

If something similar to either idea can be implemented, I think it would be a very useful feature for anyone who hasn't already developed a solution of their own. That being said, if it doesn't happen for 2.5 I understand. There's certainly a lot of other important work being done.

Yes. The basic idea is some sort of option in the app properties that calculates all objects on its specific layer against the layer's x,y coefficients at runtime. This way, all you have to do is place it in the level editor where you want it to appear at runtime, and the potential app property option does the calculation for you. All it really would be is an object's x,y position multiplied against its layer's x,y parallax coefficient. Or, maybe there is a way to just do the entire layer instead of object by object, which seems like it'd theoretically be faster to calculate at runtime. Yves is the wizard and knows what can and can't be done, but this could be a major help for parallax level editing if he found a way.

You, guys, need to work better on PR and marketing. Because it somewhat looks as weak point of otherwise great product. Especially with F3 later on. All the best, wish u all the luck.

To get some positive flow back into this thread I just re-read the Reddit --> Please login to see this link.

This all sounds very cool, I'm sure Fusion3 will become great once released!

A lot of my frustration was me thinking F3 was around the corner due to all the time that has passed. I just assumed it was close cause it's the end 2021! Now that Yeves gave us an update on things I have no problem waiting. I also noticed people a bit more relaxed and exited on the forums and Discord. I would hope that things don't stay dark again and more communication will continue to excite people. I also hope F3 can put CT into a position that won't cause stagnation or slow updates again. Be it one time purchase of the Sofware or subscription, if fair, I would be 100% in. Has long as we have constant growth like in other engines and no more communication blackouts, I'm in.