Ok, I'm not sure if this is a bug or if I'm just missing something. Anyway, while I was working on my game I noticed some strange behavior, after testing a bit I realized the following:

If an OR block has 2 or more conditions that have the same result, the actions corresponding to the OR block will execute once per each condition.

I made a quick project just to test this.

The project displays the number 0.

If you press the Up Arrow the number will increase by 1.

If you press the Down Arrow the number will decrease by 1.

The text object is called "Text" and it has an instance variable called number.

This is the event sheet:

So far it works fine, but if we make an OR block and add a second condition(which has the same result), the actions will execute twice.

Now, when pressing Up the number will increase by 2 instead of one. And if we added a third same condition it would increase by 3.

The obvious "fix" would be to not use the same condition more than once, but sometimes you have to use different conditions which have the same result. Example:

If the value stored in the dictionary's key is the same value for the Up Arrow then the number will increase by two just like it would with the code in the second image.

In my actual game, there is a menu for the user to customize the controls, by default the Arrow keys control movement (you move up with the Up Arrow key, etc). The relation of keys is stored in a data dictionary.

The problem arises during menu navigation. I want the user to move from one option to the other using both: The arrow keys and whatever keys they defined. And, as I mentioned earlier, the default keys are the Arrow keys, this lead me to a situation exactly the same as in the third image (an event which asks if the Up key or a keycode corresponding to the Up key has been pressed).

I'm sure there can be a few workarounds, but the problem is the code behaving in an unexpected and unintuitive manner. Even if I have the same condition more than once in an OR, I would expect the corresponding actions to execute just once.

So... is this somehow normal and I should just use a workaround or should I post this in the bug section

Can you attach the capx?

Go full editor - and upload attachment and attach the capx of your test.

That will save us time. I suspect your json isn't formated correctly.

Sorry to butt in, but I'm also trying to learn how to use json files.

I'm trying to populate a dictionary with a json file. But when I try to get the values from the dictionary (after the loading is completed) I only get a 0 on each of them. I guess my json doesn't have the right format.

So I'm trying to manually populate the dictionary and then Download it as json (so I can inspect the file and see the format) but I can't find the resulting json file. So...

When you Download something as a json file where is it stored?

(For example: In the capx you provided, after populating the array you download it as json with the file name "carddata.json". But where can I find "carddata.json" ? I can only see the project file "CData2.json".)

EDIT:

lol, I found my answer. I had node webkit for previews. I changed to Firefox and after running the project now I see it ask you where to store the file as any regular download. So, please omit this post.

Yep, this should definitely happen.

Ok, I'm having a problem.

Usually, after exporting a project with webkit I replace the ffmpegsumo.dll file on the resulting folder with the ffmpegsumo.dll file from Chorme. This way the video plugin works fine after exporting to .exe.

But now, with Construct 163, after exporting with webkit and replacing ffmpegsumo.dll, the game crashes when attempting to run. (without replacing the file the game runs but the plugin doesn't work)

I tried with the newest ffmpegsumo.dll and with and old one I've successfully used before. Same results.

Then, I updated to Construct 164.2. and replaced the file, same results.

Any advices?

Thanks for reading.

I also support the idea of adding family inheritance.

Sure, you can keep adding variables, conditions and copy/paste code in order to replace inheritance, but inheritance would be a lot more convenient.

Families exist only as a convenient tool. Why not making them even more convenient ???

I use boolean variables for this. But I find it a bit inconvenient.

I support the idea of adding a "is running" condition.

Picks

An option in the debugger displaying an event number plus the results of he picked objects.

This makes debugging the picking events a lot easier.

Yes please.

This would make my life a lot easier.

Yes, this really needs to happen.

Some type of "selective solid" that acts as a solid for certain objects only.

I haven't been able to find a working workaround for this.

get object scale does indeed feel like its missing, and there's an incredibly easy and obvious solution to the issue Ashley raises:

GET OBJECT X SCALE

GET OBJECT Y SCALE

Most of the time, for most games objects are scaled uniformly in X and Y. Sacraficing the obviously useful and bizarely missing "get object scale" for the fact that people will scale x and y separately a minority of times seems very unnecessary to me.

If you offer get x scale and gex y scale then the user can use EITHER one arbritrarily to retrieve their objects scale if he always sues the "scale object" action...which most people would do for most cases.

Just what I was thinking.

I agree with all of these suggestions. Specially this one:

-A display option for toggling the drawing of effects in the layout editor.

In a future project, I've been thinking about putting all the objects in a layout that is never shown to the user. That might be the best way to organize the objects and keep them out of your way.

About two weeks ago I removed all of the stuff I had in the margins of all my layouts and placed them on an inaccessible layout I called "defaults". I recommend it. It helps you keep things clean and organized <img src="smileys/smiley1.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

I really hope this happens.