Posts by Windlake

Welcome to our brand new Clickteam Community Hub! We hope you will enjoy using the new features, which we will be further expanding in the coming months.

A few features including Passport are unavailable initially whilst we monitor stability of the new platform, we hope to bring these online very soon. Small issues will crop up following the import from our old system, including some message formatting, translation accuracy and other things.

Thank you for your patience whilst we've worked on this and we look forward to more exciting community developments soon!

Clickteam.

    Hello,
    Would it be possible to have a little tweak in the debugger ?
    Right now, for active objects, animation values are shown through <User Animation #value>, and the #value relates to nothing in the editor afaik... I get it's something like <AnimNumber 12> = <User Animation #1> but i just find this very confusiong since I have lots of animations to test (custom engines in Fusion).
    If possible, may we have the real <Animation number> in the debugger instead? (=AnimNumber("Active_object"))

    Thanks :)

    Hello,
    Try this :

    * joeSearchStatus of joeAI = 5
    vent : Change animation sequence to joe scared
    vent : Force animation frame to 0 (if needed)
    vent : restore animation frame <-- this will release your previously forced animation frame
    vent : Reappear

    [MENTION=15682]Volnaiskra[/MENTION]
    I see what you mean. I've never had to reset multiple qualifiers in my project, so never run into this kind of mess lol
    I took the habit to define all the qualifiers I need upstream, but I get your point.

    Still, I think the actual option works as intended.
    We should have another option like "select objects with same qualifiers (strict)" and I can see many uses for this one too, now that i'm considering it.

    Yes, "contain" would be the clearer word, not "have".

    I get your point that this 'feature' lets you choose whether to select with more precision or less. But here's my problem with that: to choose with more precision, you just pick an object with ABCDE..... but what if you can't find one? What if you have 98 objects with ABCD and 1 object with ABCDE and 1 with ABCDEF? you first have to manually find the ABCDE and ABCDEF objects to deselect them, which could take you 3 minutes...

    I have a quite simple "routine". When I end up with a quite new object with unique combination of qualifiers, I add in a corner of my scene editor some kind of "prototype object" (a simple active), which has the same combination of qualifiers. This object does litterally nothing. It's not even created at runtime, but it helps me select all objects with the same qualifiers, when needed :) It's probably not the best way Fusion could allow us to handle this, but it's very simple to do and very useful during development (like a custom button to select some combination of qualifiers)

    Great on both counts, [MENTION=5114]Yves[/MENTION].

    I just ran into another thing that seems like a bug to me:

    Object 1 has qualifiers A B C D
    Object 2 has qualifiers A B C D E

    If you you right-click on Object 1 and "select objects with the same qualifiers", both objects are selected.
    If you do the same for Object 2, only Object 2 is selected.

    I guess the description in the help ("allows you to select all the objects that have the exact same qualifiers as the selected object".) could be taken two different ways, but I would have assumed that the correct interpretation was that since ABCD ≠ ABCDE, Object 1 and 2 do not have the exact same qualifiers.

    I noticed that too, but i do like this "feature". It's very cool when you have to add alterables values... etc, to whole bunch of objects with heavy usage of qualifiers. This allows to select objects with precision (your object 2) or less precision (your object 1) depending on what you need to change.

    The description looks clear to me, I've always considered that Fusion compares only the qualifiers of the selected object, as said.
    Edit : Considering groups A, B, C etc more like permissions (or sets) in Fusion helps, I guess.
    It's not ABCD ≠ ABCDE, but more like ABCDE contains ABCD, but ABCD does not contain ABCDE.

    This one was tricky to fix, random issue... It was not specific to the build 292, I was able to reproduce it with the build 291 too. Should be fixed in the build 292.23.

    Thanks for your work Yves!
    I think i've encountered this bug a few times in the past indeed, but always thought the fault was on my side... until last time :)

    Hi Windlake, I opened your sample and my copy/paste keyboard works as intended. Ctrl C and Ctrl V produce a duplicate for both orange and blue.

    Edit: However Im using an oplder version 2.5 build 291.6. So it must be a bug in 292.22

    Thanks for testing :)
    Tested the file again and the bug's still there :(
    It's probably a bug on recent build as you said.
    And i'm using the 2.5+ DLC too.

    Hello,
    I think I isolated a "bug" involving copy/paste shortcut.
    Please login to see this attachment.

    Here's the plot :
    We have 2 actives, each one has a quite simple behaviour.

    Active_A (orange) has a collision event in its behaviour - with Collider (green).
    Regular_A (blue) has a behaviour too, with an always event to set whatever alterable value.

    If you copy/paste "Active_A" using keyboard shortcut, you get an "Active_A 2" object.
    When you do the same with "Regular_A" you get another "Regular_A" object.

    ("Duplicate object" from right-click menu works as intended though, thanks god)

    It's very tricky because you end up with a keyboard shortcut doing 2 different things... it's quite messy imho :(

    No change for DX9. The full screen mode is also in DX11 mode though it's a fake full screen mode for the moment (= the resolution is not changed, the app is stretched).

    [MENTION=5114]Yves[/MENTION] I don't know what you guys have changed recently, but the DX11 fullscreen works finally as I need actually. My screens are 1920x1200, and my app is in 1920x1080.
    Previously, it was "weirdly" stretched out in fullscreen DX11, leading to ugly pixel display. But since last patch, I was happy to have a nice display in fullscreen on my screen : the picture is not stretched, the app limits its display nicely in 1920x1080 with black strips on top and above. That's what I hoped for a long time ! :)
    I just hope you will keep this option when you implement true fullscreen display.

    Please login to see this attachment.

    Hello,
    if you want to repeat an animation, you should do the following :
    • animation 12 is over
    -force animation frame to frame 0
    - restore frame animation (or release frame?)
    (sorry for the wording, i'm not using the english version)

    I suppose "restore animation" should be used when the animation is paused.

    :cf25+: has definitely decreased my level of confusion. If only for being able to give custom names and icons to qualifiers, so can know exactly what they are when I look at them without second-guessing. Plus global events are way less confusing now: you can easily reach them, you can use qualifiers as normal in them, and you can actually see your altVal names in them instead of wondering what Alterable Value E and Alterable Value F are. Overall, I suspect :cf25+: is likely to make your life easier, not harder.

    Exactly my opinion.
    Fusion feels way more clear and friendly to use now!

    Hi guys,
    I have a question : is there a way to achieve a full screen display in direct3D 11 mode, without stretching the frame if your screen has a higher definition?
    My screens are 1920 x 1200, and I'm working on a 1920 x 1080 project. When I test my project, the image is always stretched to fit the entire pixels available (graphics looks kinda bad when stretched).

    The only way I found to keep the ratio is this unexpected combination (sorry it's in french but you can find them easily in Project > Window properties) :

    Please login to see this attachment.

    With these options checked, the 1920 x 1080 is almost ok, with 2 black bars (top & bottom).
    The problem is that around 60 pixels are missing at the bottom (like hidden by the bottom black bar).
    The top black bar is even larger than the bottom one (?).

    Does anyone have an idea how to achieve proper full screen in directX11 mode without stretching the pixels?

    (Note that there's no problem when the project is tested in window mode.)

    Thx guys :)

    I assume it's part of the problem that I reported in the thread 292.10 #65 (Page 7).
    I've not had this error again after I created a object with the qualifier group.good at start of frame.

    I got a similar problem some time ago.
    I think it was something like :

    "Active object X is overlapping Group.Y > do something"
    with no actives from Group.Y at start of frame, they were supposed to be created later.
    Fusion considered the event was always true though O.o

    To avoid this, I had to create a "prototype" object of Group.Y and leave it outside the scene, and it was all ok since then, as Fusion had an object to refer to when testing the event.

    Hello,
    Another bug (or weird hidden behaviour) concerning animation of actives.
    If you don't use the first default animations, and have only animation n°12 with frames in your active object, when the app plays the animation without calling this specific animation at runtime, it considers that the object plays the animation "Walking". (see debugger)
    O.o

    Hello,
    Just thought of one feature that could save a lot of time : the possibility to replace objects by other ones in selected lines (or groups) only.
    Like, right click on selected event(s), and have a menu "Replace object(s)".
    I know you can do it for all lines in the EE atm. I can imagine the complexity of this feature as you have to consider all types of objects that could be replaced when lines are selected though...
    I'm aware you guys have a lot of requests (i assume the to-do list must be quite huge now), so maybe an idea to consider for CF3?

    Salut, il me semble que les efforts sont principalement concentrés sur les patchs correctifs + ajouts supplémentaires suite à la sortie de la version 2.5+. Et vu toutes les demandes sur la partie anglaise du forum, je t'assure que le boulot fourni est colossal et impressionnant! Yves est au taquet (et il bosse aussi sur du code qui n'est pas de lui à l'origine, ça doit représenter un effort particulièrement conséquent).

    Je crois avoir vu passer l'info que le dev de CF3 était en pause voire très ralenti, mais ça remonte à quelques semaines. A mon avis, ça ne sert à rien d'attendre ou de demander des infos, lorsque CF3 sera prêt ou très proche de la sortie, une annonce sera faite. L'annonce de CF3 était peut-être prématurée à l'époque, et je pense que l'équipe ne refera pas la même erreur en donnant une date de sortie ni même une estimation. Je crois aussi qu'ils ont également rencontré des soucis au niveau du personnel (personnes parties?). Mais bon je peux me tromper, ce n'est que l'idée que je m'en suis fait suite à toutes les infos croisées ça et là sur le forum anglais. Et comme je ne m'intéresse plus trop à la sortie de CF3 maintenant que CF2.5+ est sorti, j'avoue ne pas y prêter trop attention ^^'