Why does muti-display on 8 monitors and not 9?

[RandomCharacters]

…

[karl_jones]

@RandomCharacters

And don’t say 8 is a power of 2…

It’s just that if you wanted to do a video wall or something, 9 is a square grid. 8 doesn’t work. So the numbers of monitors should take this into account. 8 could be used as a 2x4 grid I guess, but if you wanted a 3x3 grid that would be 9. Just a thought.

why not put it on feedback
unity3d.com/feedback

[hippocoder]

Don’t worry Karl, he doesn’t expect you to do all that manually!

[karl_jones]

oh wow… That was the very definition of tl:dr
I’d did read a bit at the top and the end though. There are some good ideas but it needs to go on feedback or it will be lost to the depths of the forum. I’ll probably have another read through when I’m not on my phone with 8% battery!
the versioning numbering makes sense, the reason we have patch version numbered different is because they do not go through the same level of qa as a standard release and so are considered more risky to use. We suggest only using a patch if you need a fix that is mentioned in the release notes for it. If not then wait a month(ish) for the next release which does go through our thorough qa testing. So anything with a p is a patch, a b indicates beta, a is alpha and r is release candidate. Without the letters you’d have no idea what the version actually is. E.g I would not suggest making a game with 5.5.0a1 but 5.5.0r1 should be fine
we will also be putting out more experimental builds in the future so expect some more interesting version numbers!

[karl_jones]

@""

So if there will be no unity 6, then how will the numbering go next year??

still being decided. What we mean by there will be no unity 6 is that we won’t be doing major releases with loads of new features at once. Instead we release a feature when it’s ready and don’t hold it back for a big release.

[shawn_1]

@""

Thanks for the reply Karl. You are the only unity employee that is not a jerk but actually helps people.

Ouch. :\

I know a bunch of us developers try to take the time to be a part of the community (many of us came from the community) and pride ourselves to make people feel included and respected. I hope whatever negative experience you’ve had doesn’t continue to happen.

On the note of your list of improvements. I really love lists like this (hope I didn’t just make a ton of work for myself with people sending me lists directly). I’ll reply in-lined in my next post for things my team is responsible for (or things that I’m aware of). I’ll also hand this list off to our PM group who’s doing a bunch of good work collecting data from people so devs can better decide what makes sense to work on next.

[shawn_1]

quote="" Have colliders be able to have different colors. Currently, they are all green even if 3 colliders are on the same object. There should be a color picker to choose the color of the collider so that you have different colliders with different colors. This should also change the color of the text in the inspector.
[/quote]

We rely heavily (maybe too heavily, for accessibility's sake) on color to differentiate the different features of Unity. In research this has proven valuable for quickly telling apart similar looking gizmos (e.g. Sphere Collider vs Audio Source vs Point light) in the editor. We have icons to help differentiate, but in real world scenes, these gizmos and icons overlap a bunch making the icons less effective.

With that said, I believe this is really only beneficial to newer users and people who are not intimately familiar with the project they're working on. For power users, I agree, and think it makes sense to allow the colors of gizmos to be customizable per component.

quote="" If the previous is done with different collider colors, then also be able to bale the collider. In the inspector you could name a text field and then in the scene view, the collider name would on top of the collider in the right color. This way you could see what the collider is for. If no name is inputed, then no name would be displayed.
[/quote]

I've seen the most people use custom icons/labels for "labeling" gameobjects in the scene view. (See the bottom of this page: http://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/GameView.html )

I could see value in providing custom text though, rather than just showing the GameObject name.

@"

- Console

• When unity discovers 2 audio sources in the scene, it gives and error in the console. It does not say where they are coming from. It would be nice to know which game objects that are causing the problem.

• (V25) After upgrading to unity 5, I got over 100 warnings and errors from plug-ins being used. These showed up in the console in the order they happened. It would be nice to have a button at the top called ‘sort’. The sort would sort the list. This way all of the errors from a plug-in (folder) would be together.

The console window needs love. Filtering, sorting, differentiating between Unity entries, User entries, Plugin entries, and more. It's on our radar.

quote="" I would like to see the primitives have a component script attached to them. We’ll call this script ‘scene gizmo’. This would be an additional script attached to all of the primitives. It would have a ‘activate’ button to turn it on or off. It would also have a ‘transparency’ slider to set the opacity. So, if a person want to set a trigger, he creates a cube and deletes the mesh renderer. Then he has to click on it to see the collision box in the scene view. This goes away when something else is selected. I’d like to see a new script attached to the box. When it is turned on, then the outline of the box gets shown in the scene view but NOT the game view. This way, it will always be shown in the scene view. Then, one could set the slider to set the transparency of the edges of the box from invisible to solid. This way, the user can set up a trigger zone and see its area in the scene view at all times and never have to worry about it in the game view. This would be great for kill zones and basically and trigger area. By having these come with the primitives would standardize it.
[/quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this sounds very project specific. In cases like this our approach is to do our best to expose as much functionality through API to allow people to extend the behaviour of Unity to match their needs in a project. It's an ongoing challenge to balance what we expose through API vs what we create whole workflows for in the UI.

Definitely agree that we need to expose API for extending the behaviour of the buitlin primitives though.

@"

'Mute audio’ has a lowercase ‘a’. It should have a capital ‘A’ like ‘Mute Audio’.

Looks like it's already fixed :) (Admittedly an easy one)

quote=""-“maximize on play’ do not work if it is on a second monitor. So if you have the game window on a laptop with it selected it will work. Now if you add a second monitor and move the game window to the second monitor with ‘maximize on play’ turned on, it will not maximize.
[/quote]
This is a known issue. We're wanting to tackle this when we properly support fullscreen in the editor. I think the expected behavior for second mointor "maximize on play" is to actually go fullscreen and not have window borders or anything. Or do you actually want the game view to "maximize" only within the popped out window, like it does in the main window?

@"

Have automatic backup setting. If the user has not used unity in a while, then start backing it up. The backup should have a unique name.

Agreed, it's on our roadmap. No ETA unfortunately.

@"

V30: Instead of referring to the color values as a float between 0f and 1f, just be normal and make it and interger between 0 and 255.

I don't think it makes sense to have the backing data type for color to be limited to only 256 values. There are uses for color values with higher precision. However, I agree the common case is for only 256 values, this is why the color picker uses this as its input.

@"

In the hierarchy, have gizmos indicating what the game object has. Some plug-ins like playmaker or master audio use these gizmos. It’s be nice to have unity do the same thing. One gizmo could be shown if the item has a ‘mesh renderer’ and another if the item has a ‘collider’ attached to each or another is an audio source. This would allow a programmer to see where the elements are without having to go to every single level to look. There should be a button to turn this on or off. There should also be a button for each gizmo to be listed. So if a programmer wants to see every object with a mesh, he could click the mesh button and only those would be listed.

We've been playing around with ideas on how to improve quickly recognizing "types" of GameObjects in the hierarchy. One problem is that it's very project specific, but we want to be as little maintenance as possible for people. Anyways, it's been something we've been thinking about and discussing quite a bit. Nothing to show for it yet though.

@"

Have a button to allow items dropped/created to start at world (0, 0, 0) and not some random location.

The location isn't random. It is always in front of the last active scene view camera. Usability wise, this is super important so people don't lose track of their newly created objects and don't get confused about why a new object they just created didn't show up.

However, I can understand having a modifier key or something to place in the world origin. I've noted it in our feature request backlog for the Scene View.

@"

In the hierarchy, you select 50 items and want to group them. How about right clicking and in the menu popup, have a 'send to new object'. This would create a new object and put the highlighted items in that object. When you have a lot of items it is really annoying to try to group things.

Good idea! Noted.

@"

- - (v20)-If you use ‘alphabetical sort’ and NOT ‘transform sort’, it will not render the UI properly all of the time. If you move elements up and down the ladder to render differently, they mess up. For example. If I have the following in alphabetical sort, then click over to transform sort and re-arrange them, then click over to alphabetical sort, then they will show as below. This looks correct, however, they do not render this way. They still render as set in transform sort. However the UI is displayed in alphabetical sort is irrelevant. It is how they are organized in the transform sort that matters. They look correct in the alphabetical view in the hierarchy, but in reality they are rendered how they are listed in the transform view.

• Canvas

• 1-Health

• 2-Damage

• 3-ScreenFader

• 4-GameOvertext

• 5-ScoreText

If I understand you correctly, this is intended behavior. This is why we discourage using Alphanumeric sort in the hierarchy, because it hides important information about the actual order of transform children. Switching sort in the hierarchy is purely a visual representation change, not a data change.

@"

- - (V26) There are many things that the hierarchy could show that plug-ins now do.

• “QHierarchy” adds things to the hierarchy like tags, missing scripts, error warnings, visibility, number of children and other stuff.

• "Hierarcy2” adds 1 neat option and that is colors to show level. It has vertical level bars with colors so you can quickly see the deept of an objects.

Like I mentioned with having icons in the hierarchy, we've had many discussions about what we could do to improve the hierarchy. The things you mention have been points of discussion.

@"

- - Allow changing of input (see C-Input). The input manager is a joke in unity. It needs a complete overhaul. Not only is it tough to work with, but you can not change the input during the game. A player may want to change his keyboard configuration but unity doesn’t allow that.

This is actively being worked on! See: http://forum.unity3d.com/forums/new-input-system.103/

@"

In the inspector, have a button next to scale to allow scaling of all 3 at the same time (XYZ). So it would lock in editing of the 3 axis’ like in Photoshop.

I'd love to see something like this too. Uniform scale is super important for performance in many systems. Would prefer having a workflow where uniform scaling is the default.

@"

Another Photoshop thing. How about next to the scale in the transform area you have a 'constrain proportions' button. When pressed, the x, y and z axis all would be the same number. So if you change the y axis to 1.9, then the x and z would also change to 1.9. It is so annoying to constantly have to change all 3 when 1 would do it.

Hmm.. I'm having a difficult time picturing when this would be useful for values other than scale. Do you have any examples?

@"

Decimal places. Why can't there be a setting in the inspector where you can set the number of decimal places? So instead of 5 billion decimal places that I have to delete every single time, I could just put '2' or '1' or '0' and that's the number of decimal places that would be allowed for ALL transform items.

Unfortunately, not a super simple thing to do. With values that are backed by floating point data (that is actually calculated for rotation euler angles), it's quite problematic to have sanitized values show up. We do a fair bit to try and approximate the intended value in the inspector. I think there's more we can do, but note that this will always be masking the actual backing data, because floating points like being difficult like that.

@"

In the transform area under the scale, have a 'real unit length'. The scale is just a number multiplier, but how long is it? It should say 1.35 for the X axis when the scale is 1. That way I could change the 1.35 in the real unit length to 1 (which would change the scale to .6) and the length of the x axis is now 1 unit long 91 meter). This way if you had a train track and you wanted it to be exactly 10 meters by 3 meters by 1 meter, you could do this in the real unit length. No more guessing.

This kind of goes against the idea of preferring uniform scale that I mention before. In most cases, scale is actually not what should be modified (it's overused in many games). Instead there should be additional metadata on the object to describe it's size, so objects can smartly fill out the space needed (this is what RectTransform does for UI objects). Unfortunately, this is very object specific. I need to think a bit more about this.

@"

In the inspector, if red-green-blue corresponds to XYZ, then why can’t the inspector area in the transform show this? The transform component should have red text or red inverse video for the X position, green text on the Y position and blue text for the Z position. This would help people out when trying to move something from the inspector’s transform component to sync up with the XYZ gizmo in the editor.

Yep, it's in our backlog.

@"

When an object is a child, then in the inspector under the transform area, change the text from ‘position’ to ‘local position’. In fact, just have ‘world position’ and ‘local position’ and forget ‘position’. This way it would remind a user which co-ordinate system is being used. One step farther, whenever a child is there, have both world and local positions. The ‘world position’ could be greyed out while the ‘local position’ could be selectable. The same with rotation.

Hmm... the transform is actually always showing values in "local space". It just so happens that local space == world space when an object is on the root. I agree that this could be communicated better, but I'm worried about swapping local and world values, when the data you're modifying is actually always local.

@"

The ‘Gear’ icons on components should be changed. The gear icon, at least on Android, is known for ‘settings’. This is not a settings function and thus should be changed. Interestly, in the terrain settings, the gear icon goes to settings correctly.

This is macOS standard (being able to access the object's context menu with a dropdown button, not only right click, see Finder). In macOS human interface guidelines this is a gear icon still. Windows has no such standard. I'm inclined to keep the gear icon still, since we are not a mobile app, but we are a desktop app.

@"

Skins or colored options. How about being able to change the skin of Unity to a *.PNG file? Or how about just being able to change the color of the windows? So If I have a series of windows, maybe I want the asset store to have a red tab and red look to it. Maybe for the animation I want green for the tab….and so forth. By clicking on the little icon on the top right of the window which brings up the drop down menu list, it would also have colors. A person would click on the color and change the window color.

Making Unity's skinning more customizable/extendable is in our backlog. Until then, see the awesome work done here: http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/zios-editor-theme-support.411818

@"

In the top drop down menu there is a ‘save scene’ and a ‘save project’. I would like a ‘save scene & project’ so it would save the scene and then the project. Everyone saves both anyways just in case, so why not have it built in?

Save Scene already also saves the project.

@"

On the main bar you have the drop down window ‘window’. You can select scene, game, selector and so forth here. It would be nice if these were alphabetical. It’s so annoying to always have to look for windows. Or at least an easy way to reorganize the list.

That window menu needs a rethink. It's grown organically, and not scaled to the amount of possible windows that Unity has nicely. It's on our radar.

@"

Icons. When you have an icon, such as a hand for the selection tool, there should be a setting to include the name of the icon. This is standard in many programs like Internet Explorer where you can have the icon, name or both. It should be in the settings. In Unity’s case, there just needs to be icon or icon/text.

I feel like this is what tooltips are for. Having text next to all icons adds a fair bit of clutter and also easily breaks layouts in ways that weren't intended.

@"

- - (Ver 21) Under Edit>ProjectSettings, you can select a number of things: input, audio, time, player and so forth. After clicking on one, the window pops up. However, if you want to go to another one, you have to go through the whole process again. What is needed is 2 arrows buttons in the window at the top. This would be the inspector window that now is ‘player settings’. If you click on the arrows it should take you to the next one in the list. So, I select Edit>ProjectSettings>Audio, then the inspector window shows the audio menu. Then on the audio window it would have 2 arrows. If I click the right arrow

• OR, have a ‘settings’ window that is separate than the inspector window. There you could have the arrows and even a drop down menu to change to a different settings window. This would be better.

Yep, we're very aware of this pain. We have some plans to improve this. Nothing to report yet.

@"

Whenever a person is in front of an audience, dress appropriately. I watched the Unity 5 launch and the presenters looked like they just woke up. One guy has a little gay white tank top on and the CEO couldn’t even bother tucking his shirt in. What slobs. At the very least get cotton polo shirts with the Unity logo on the front and wear them. Stop acting like children and grow up.

Please note that this borderline offensive and definitely not constructive criticisms.

In general, public speaking is not something we're strong with, and it's been something I've personally been pushing internally that we improve.

@"

Web Site: get new moderators. “Superpig”, “Andy Touch”, “Eric5h5” all act like a bunch of A-Holes. If someone has a suggestion, they knock him down, delete his posts and end the thread. This is not how to be professional. Messages on other sites about Unity say the same things. The people working on Unity’s forums are just a bunch of dickheads. Unity is trying to sell a product and also make money off of the Asset Store. When you have jerks as moderators, that’s not good. Imagine if you watched a TV show and a commercial came on and the people onscreen acted that way. Any unity employees are sales people and show always be presenting a good image. Every business in the world knows this.

This is not the experience that I've seen. These moderators are quite passionate and want to make sure that the community stays a safe & productive place to talk about Unity.

I haven't looked at your post history, but if you are taking this kind of tone on the forum that you are taking in the last two points, I guarantee that you will be shut down. I would do the same. There's a difference between being rude and having constructive criticism.

@"

Why is it named ‘assets’ on the hard drive but in the window it is ‘project’????? If you have an assets folder, why not name it ‘assets’ in a window OR if you have a ‘project’ window, name it ‘project’ on the hard drive. A bit confusing when looking for things. Maybe in an older version of unity, the ‘Assets’ was listed in the project window, but not anymore. Watching the space shooter tutorial on unity’s web site, it shows the assets folder and its sub-folders. In unity 5, it is no longer the case. You can not get to the root folder. That’s OK, but then rename the ‘project’ window to ‘assets’.

There are discussion about having more folders (other than just Assets) that can be seen in the project view. I understand the confusion though. I've made note of it as a usability concern in our project view backlog.

@"

Have a gizmo for North-South-East-West. There is a RGB gizmo, but a NSEW would be good too. Right clicking on the middle of the gizmo and holding down would allow a person to set the north. It would also allow a person to select his zoom level (basically where he wants the scene to reset to). Clicking fast and letting go would rotate the scene window so that the top of the screen is north. I find myself constantly zooming in and out and rotating the scene. I get my bearings by north 9which is an arbitrary direction.

Hmm.. This is also very project specific. Not all projects have the same cardinal directions in the same axes. Maybe it makes sense to be able to change the name of the axes though. Need to think about it.

@"

Have an option to allow grids that are in 3D (XYZ). So every 10 units, a line goes on all 3 Axis’s. This would make placing items easier.

There's some work being done to improve this coming from the 2D team (it'll apply to 3D as well). Until then, you can actually change the snap intervals in Edit->Snap Settings. Admittedly, this isn't fully featured enough right now, but it helps in many cases.

@"

Have the gizmos point where they are going. So if the camera is pointing up, have the camera gizmo point up. Currently, they all point in the same direction. This would be for cameras, lights and so forth.

We've experimented with this, but haven't yet found a good way of doing this without losing the immediate recognition of the various objects in the scene. Still more experimentation to be done.

@"

Have a ‘gravity’ button in the scene window. So if you highlight game objects in the hierarchy and then click the ‘gravity’ button, then those objects fall with gravity. That way you do not have to set items perfectly. You can have a pile of boxes that have space on top of them. When you click on the gravity button, the top boxes fall down using their colliders. That will then have everything down on the ground. This would be a faster way sometimes of making sure the items are together. After words, the items/boxes would be in a new position. It is a one click to make the gravity move items down. This is a one shot button. When clicked, everything in the scene changes. It can be used many times if needed.

Have a button to apply ‘collision’ boxes/rigidbodies in the scene view. If active, the items affect each other. Currently, items move through each other. Sometimes ones wants to edit the game and push things up against each other rather than guessing. This would be a toggle.

I'd love these physical scene view tools too. :) (not my team, but I'll poke Physics team)

@"

Stealing from MS word, how about allowing a 2nd hierarchy or 2nd project window. In word/excel, you can click on the window and it divides in 2. That way you can have 1 part of the document showing while working on something else. In unity just allow the hierarchy/project windows to be able to split into 2. That way one could move something from 1 hierarchy window to the other.

You can do this already with the "core" windows. (See the bottom section of https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/CustomizingYourWorkspace.html ) This is why Hierarchy, Project View, and Project View have lock icons. Definitely want to make this more discoverable and usable though.

[shawn_1]

@""

Another Photoshop thing. How about next to the scale in the transform area you have a ‘constrain proportions’ button. When pressed, the x, y and z axis all would be the same number. So if you change the y axis to 1.9, then the x and z would also change to 1.9. It is so annoying to constantly have to change all 3 when 1 would do it.
Click to expand…
Hmm… I’m having a difficult time picturing when this would be useful for values other than scale. Do you have any examples?

yes. Let’s say you have a square or box that is 1x1x1. If you want to make the box bigger, you can drag the x out and xyz all get bigger to 2x2x2. Now you can do this with the gizmos, however, by forcing a constrain portion, it will always be the same box/square. that way you do not accidentily get it 2x2x1.9

Okay, so I agree that gizmos with resize handles (e.g. BoxCollider) should support uniform resizing, noted. But for transform, I can only see it making sense for scale.

@""

Decimal places. Why can’t there be a setting in the inspector where you can set the number of decimal places? So instead of 5 billion decimal places that I have to delete every single time, I could just put ‘2’ or ‘1’ or ‘0’ and that’s the number of decimal places that would be allowed for ALL transform items.
Click to expand…
Unfortunately, not a super simple thing to do. With values that are backed by floating point data (that is actually calculated for rotation euler angles), it’s quite problematic to have sanitized values show up. We do a fair bit to try and approximate the intended value in the inspector. I think there’s more we can do, but note that this will always be masking the actual backing data, because floating points like being difficult like that.

I was only referring to the input in the inspector when not in play mode. That way we can set the float to 2 decimal points and all float values will be truncated at 2 decimal points. This is for setting up the scene. When the game runs, it would have no bearing at all., mostly placing objects. Funny that on the videos you all post they do what everyone does, they go back and change or delete the decimal places to 0 or 1. this is only for setup with no play mode on.

I understand, in reality, the editor is actually just a fancy Unity player. All the same underlying engine with functionality added on top. Anyways, this is something I think we can improve, but I don’t think it’ll ever be perfect.

@""

The ‘Gear’ icons on components should be changed. The gear icon, at least on Android, is known for ‘settings’. This is not a settings function and thus should be changed. Interestly, in the terrain settings, the gear icon goes to settings correctly.
Click to expand…
This is macOS standard (being able to access the object’s context menu with a dropdown button, not only right click, see Finder). In macOS human interface guidelines this is a gear icon still. Windows has no such standard. I’m inclined to keep the gear icon still, since we are not a mobile app, but we are a desktop app.

We have to agree to disagree here. I’d have another icon. I’d use the gear icon for settings and find another one for this.

I’m more tied to making sure that there’s still a button that clearly communicates “Hey you! This UI element has a context menu!”. So if you have an idea for an icon that communicates that more clearly, I’d be open to suggestions. Unfortunately, Windows doesn’t really have this concept, so we’ve fallen back to macOS standard.

@""

In the top drop down menu there is a ‘save scene’ and a ‘save project’. I would like a ‘save scene & project’ so it would save the scene and then the project. Everyone saves both anyways just in case, so why not have it built in?
Click to expand…
Save Scene already also saves the project.

I never knew that. Maybe change ‘save scene’ to ‘save scene & project’.

I always felt that “Save Project” was a bit of a hack workaround to force changes to be flushed to disk. Feels like this is something that should just happen, and you would never need to manually “Save Project”. Maybe there’s no good way to do this though. Have to draw the line somewhere about how often we write to disk.

Need to think about this more.

@""

Icons. When you have an icon, such as a hand for the selection tool, there should be a setting to include the name of the icon. This is standard in many programs like Internet Explorer where you can have the icon, name or both. It should be in the settings. In Unity’s case, there just needs to be icon or icon/text.
Click to expand…
I feel like this is what tooltips are for. Having text next to all icons adds a fair bit of clutter and also easily breaks layouts in ways that weren’t intended

Tooltips take to long. I hate icons without text. When I use this window to type info in, there are icons without text. I have to go over every one to find the file upload. takes way to long. If there was a text underneath them, I can go right to that icon. In internet explorer (100 times better than edge), you can set the text on or off in the settings area. One of the reasons edge sucks is the interface sucks BTW. I’ve been saying this for 20 years that most people want the option of including text. It would just be a setting to include text underneath. this used to be a standard on every major program, but I guess Apple trying to simplify everything, that other companies copy. The problem is that is makes things more complicated and slower. Don’t believe me? Try final cut pro X on a mac and then adobe premiere on windows. FCP look like something a 5th grader did. It’s a joke which is why everyone has been switching over to premiere lately.

So I agree and disagree. I believe that there are some icons that really standalone quite well, but that is not the majority. (I personally feel that macOS human interface guidelines rely too heavily on icons, but that’s just my opinion) We’ve been doing a lot of icon redesigning lately (nothing shipped yet), and you’ll often hear “Really, the best icon here is text” in our design discussions. So maybe not exactly what you want to hear as the solution, but I think we’re understanding the same problem.

[Baste]

@karl_jones

why not put it on feedback
unity3d.com/feedback

Because users should have zero confidence in feedback?

The combination of the kinda horrible voting system and suggestions that linger for years without official responses means that I’ve got no reason to believe that putting anything on feedback will make any difference whatsoever.

By the way:

@""

Whenever a person is in front of an audience, dress appropriately. I watched the Unity 5 launch and the presenters looked like they just woke up. One guy has a little gay white tank top on and the CEO couldn’t even bother tucking his shirt in. What slobs. (…)

Web Site: get new moderators. “Superpig”, “Andy Touch”, “Eric5h5” all act like a bunch of A-Holes.

Stones and glass houses don’t go together like that.

Also, the mods are doing a fantastic job. These forums are generally well-behaved and orderly. The only things I’ve seen get moderated are toxicity and advertising. Also @Andy-Touch isn’t a mod, just a genuinely awesome person that works for Unity! Can’t just let you bad mouth the guy!

[Baste]

@shawn_1

(Reply to “allow placing objects at (0,0,0)”, since the forum’s reply button doesn’t keep quotes for context)

The location isn’t random. It is always in front of the last active scene view camera. Usability wise, this is super important so people don’t lose track of their newly created objects and don’t get confused about why a new object they just created didn’t show up.

A big problem with the automatic location is that the distance from the viewport is based on some internal value - it seems like it’s the same value that adjust how far the camera moves when holding down rmb and using WASD.

That value resets when you focus an object - the larger the object, the further out you’re zoomed, and the faster WASD moves the camera.

For our case, that value is pretty much always wrong. Every time I create eg. a cube, it’s spawned 20+ units below the level geometry, and 20+ units behind where I want it. The distance from where it’s placed to what I’m looking at is often about the same as the distance from (0,0,0) to what I’m looking at. I agree with you that the object should be created in front of the camera, but this could be much better.

The behaviour from dragging-and-dropping objects is much better - it seems to raycast from the viewport to the mouse, and place objects there. If the Assets/Create menu did the same thing, using the scene view’s center as the raycast origin, that would be a straight up improvement.

[shawn_1]

@Baste

A big problem with the automatic location is that the distance from the viewport is based on some internal value - it seems like it’s the same value that adjust how far the camera moves when holding down rmb and using WASD.

That value resets when you focus an object - the larger the object, the further out you’re zoomed, and the faster WASD moves the camera.

For our case, that value is pretty much always wrong. Every time I create eg. a cube, it’s spawned 20+ units below the level geometry, and 20+ units behind where I want it. The distance from where it’s placed to what I’m looking at is often about the same as the distance from (0,0,0) to what I’m looking at. I agree with you that the object should be created in front of the camera, but this could be much better.

The behaviour from dragging-and-dropping objects is much better - it seems to raycast from the viewport to the mouse, and place objects there. If the Assets/Create menu did the same thing, using the scene view’s center as the raycast origin, that would be a straight up improvement.

Adding a raycast for object placement in front of camera makes sense. Noted.

[Andy-Touch]

@Baste

Also @Andy-Touch isn’t a mod, just a genuinely awesome person that works for Unity! Can’t just let you bad mouth the guy!

<3 <3 <3! Thank you Baste! Ill have to bring Rain Games some more Unity Swag next time i’m in Bergen.