I am using quite a lot of sequencers for some camera movements and setpieces, and setting them up in Telltale-like way with interactivity.
However, when I go from sequencer A to Sequencer B, the last frame of sequencer A will give an irritating flicker, as if its not reading the camera animation anymore.
I am using “Set Timer by Event” node, which launches an succeeding sequencer upon the end of the current one.
Reference shot:
There will always be a one frameish of flickering between the sequencers this way.
If I add an float - node with 0.05 seconds in before “Set timer by Event”, I can hack my way through this bug:
Like this:
This is not ideal way though, and I am wondering if I could have less bug-prone approach to this…?
I have tried to shorten the actual sequencer by 1 frame so that there is animation+camera data beyond the timeline, but it doesnt help.
Also, I cannot simply use Shot Tracks in the sequencer to line everything up there, as there is interactivity that is launched via blueprints, and the cameras dont go in fixed linear timeline.
Rather than using a timer (should it be looping?) you can use an OnStop event from the create level sequence node and start the other sequence when the first has finished.
I only found a node called “Bind Event OnStop”, which does work as intended, but it will create an eternal bind to the sequencer, meaning that every single time the sequencer ends, it will launch the custom event. I do not want this to happend endlessly, just launch the event once, when the sequencer is finished.
I also did find an “unbind all events from OnStop”, which does fix the issue, but this method increases the ammount of nodes quite dramatically, as I have to place those unbindings here and there. I would rather just simply launch the event when sequencer has finished, not create everlasting bindings.
Yes, every time the sequencer player that you bound the event to stops the event will get called. How many times are you playing the sequence that needs to play another sequence after it? Maybe you’re better off using master sequences.
Is adding one node too much? Also there are alternative methods of doing different things depending on how many times it was played, like adding a branch with HasPlayed?, if false it plays the second sequence and sets HasPlayed? to True at the end. The next time the flow goes through the branch it goes through True this time which may be empty or whatever.
Adding one node seemed much at first, since I have plenty of branching paths to go back and forth, thus eventually hundreds of nodes to add and pay attention to, but I found a better place to include those unbinds within a function, so its not a problem at all after all.
So you can finish the cookie now, things work as intended now.
