Irbis

While I agree with your point of view to certain degree, being a douchebag wont help your public image wchich certainly can have effect on if Ashley will take you seriously to change something in c2 you suggest.

i give what i recive. nothing more, nothing less.

I am crawling this forum from 5 years and, i really em way too old to care about my public image(left alone its totaly not the subject of this thread) or sweet talk when i know i am right.

And i much rather prefer a honest douchbag rather then polite ignorant.

Irbis

I tend to disagree with you. The purpose of these default behaviors is to create a quick and simple series of actions which follow (what is perceived to be) the most common usage of these actions. It is not to handle EVERY SINGLE possible usage. As such, there are many things these behaviors are not going to do that each individual user may want. In these cases, there are 3 options:

1 - learn to work with the behavior as it is.

2 - create your own behavior that does what you want.

3 - send in an enhancement request to have the behavior changed. If enough people show interest in changing the behavior to change Ashley's perceived idea of the most common way it would be used, and to add enough value to the product, then the change will most likely be made. If not, the change will only take away time for adding features that will add value. Why change something that is working as desired for the majority of users.

Developing new features adds value that makes the product more marketable and brings in income. Changing features that are working just fine for the majority of users, just because a small minority want it, does not. That being said, I believe at least some of the features mentioned by shinkan would be very useful. Especially having the fade behavior take into account the current alpha value of the object when it begins to fade.

BTW shinkan the axes drag and drop feature can be faked easily, and without too many extra events, by setting the x/y value to it's locked position every tick. If the locked axes is the y axes, set a variable to store the start y position and every tick, set the sprite y back to the stored value. If the locked axes is the x, do the same for the x. See the attached capx. You can do a similar work around to fake many of the other things you are requesting as well.

whats your damn problem? i can walk and i can drive a car.

i prefer driving. you prefer walking. what it cost you to let me drive?

I request that and this - you don't? then what are you doing here? huh?

Then lets freaking dump all behaviours - because you can do everything via events.

IF you go that path then the whole Construct 2 is a waste of time and space because you can learn programming and you won't need such game making software.

jesus

Why the hell people on this board are such a pain in the ass.

Closing as won't fix. It's trivial to workaround, and changing how this works will likely just break lots of existing projects in confusing ways.

huh? can you explain a bit more?

If you are not going to fix it - regardless your reasons - you should at least add a warning tooltip.

Because if you RESTART a layer you EXPECT that layout to go back to its original state, in every and all aspects.

So either fix it or place a warning inside editor. otherwise be prepared that more people will come here and report this issue.

every attribute of any behavior should have a reflecting action/condition/expresion.

Period.

This should not be requested. It should be there from the beggining.

Whats the point of any behaviours if i don't have full control over it?

Instead of adding more and more new features that no one uses maybe make a step BACK and finish whats unfinished (from months/years)?

jump for a quick cash eh?

Words cannot express my gratitude. You made job of so many of us so much easier.

Thank you kindly. Genui creation.

Try 3rd plugin Nickname before supported officially.

interesting. how stable would you consider the plugin to me? (damn i speak like Yoda today).

I am asking because i have a very bad expirience with 3rd party plugins.

A short and simple one. A way to create an object by name.

So for example i can type

Create object by name>"Object"&int(Random(3))

and have object 0, 1 and 2 picked and spawned randomly.

Or picked which object to spawn based on some outside variable.

Easy to add i hope.

Would make my job a bit easier, thx.

i would advice everybody from the page 2 to actually READ the first post in this thread.

Because you obviously just read the thread title only and skip the rest. And then you keep on ignoring what the OP has to say and you just keep talking nonsense.

Which is pure ignorance. And the OP is an old and well respected member of this community from LONGER then any of you even THOUGHT about GameDeving. So your ignorance is unforgivenable.

If what OP wrote is beyond your capabilities of understanding - just ignore this thread and keep going.

OP is not asking anybody to turn the image editor into freaking Photoshop. But to give it more features regarding the engine. More control over frames. And in general make it much more user friendly and usefull.

And i am baffled that i had to write all this.

Just come across this and it's great! just what I'm looking for but how do you position the 'rotating planet'? It always seems to be in the bottom left and how do you remove the black square behind it?

Preety much this. Without proper alpha channel or/and autocentering this effect is mostly just an eye candy.

Still cool thought.

+1 Arima. This should be here from the beggining.

You guys are joking right? please tell me you are joking.

I remember 4-5 years ago, when i was reporting various issues with CC and i would keep on bumping people (i restrain myself from calling them "fanboys") who would defend CC even for the cost of their own life, regardless how broken it was at times.

And now i hear the same bullsh*t over again.

So what exactly changed for BETTER...? Except that now you have to pay for the engine.

I am not requesting anything fancy, no shaders, no quantum physics. Just the very basic things, the damn foundations. And sorry - C2 was not released yesterday. Its been for a while now. And it cost now.

So drop that tone will you?

I cannot understand why people nowadays accept like anything thats being throw at them and keep on smiling. Have some self-respect, respect the money you keep on spending. Ashley and the crew don't need your sympathy and sweet-talking - it doesn't pay the bills. I hate how this community keep on comming up with excuses each time someone complain about something. "its hard to implement", "its still in developing", "it will be added eventualy","don't be so demanding". Makes me wanna throw up. C2 just like CC - can easly dominate the market but it needs constructive support from the community. CRITICISM. Not buttlicking. Same damn story that burried CC, happening all over again. But whatever.

The point is - when moving from CC to C2 - i was promised from various sources (both official and unoffical) that C2 is like CC just bigger, better and constantly updated. So finaly i took the bait and switched. And now when i actually gone into work i see half of the silly old CC features not being present. And i am not talking about fancy Layout Object (you people even now what that is? Of course you don't bah) or some crazy ass shaders or 3D box who preety much no one used. I am talking about basics. DAMN basics. I open up conditions/actions and i see half of what i know that should be there - GONE.

Are you - who defend C2 so madly - even tried CC for once? even for a week? Then how do you DARE to give me reprimands?!

Going back to where it started: Custom Movement.

In CC you could preety do whatever you wanted using this alone. You wouldn't really need any other behaviour - you could emulate any other behaviour with CM and do 1000 % more. It was the core of CC. And here? its broken, deformed little shadow of what it once was. And i should be happy?!? Oh you really have the guts to tell me this, i give you that.

But go a head = prove me wrong - my initial request stands unchanged.

Heres the situation:

1. There is a variable number of small objects being randomly spawned across the layout.

2. They are all the same Object, just diffrent instances.

3. They have to be moved away from each other when being closer then 128 pix.

Now go ahead. Tell me how this can be done in C2. Because i don't know. In CC that'll be 1-2 events. But here? I am out of ideas. I have no clue. And i've spent last 4h trying to figure out a method.

Now its your turn. So you can go with

1. Try and help/resolve the case

2. Continiue trying to lecture me

If you are interested in picking number 2 - don't.

If you feel the urge to be a jerk to someone - type 4chan.org. Theres planty of room for you there. I don't need it. I don't deserve it.