[=arbopa;229377]
I seriously question those studies. It sort of suggests that humans really are that stupid. Sorry, I am not. I hate .99 prices… I want round numbers back. I might just have to contact some of the marketplace people directly and buy straight from them for round numbers …
[/]
That is one of the pettiest things I’ve ever .
[=MkII;229504]
On a side note, does anyone else see an where the default values for blueprints are reset when they upgrade (4.6.1 - 4.7.0)? I have at least 1 float value that thinks its default is now 0.0 not 60.0, despite the editor telling me its default is 60.0. Similarly for a vector (0.0, 1.0, 0.0 thinking it’s 0.0, 0.0, 0.0). I can get around it by remaking these vars in the blueprint it seems, but maybe someone else came across it and fixed it without all the hassle?
[/]
I actually had in 4.6, so it’s not newly introduced. I just remade the variable.
[=;229652]
Yes, it’s an intended change and large performance optimization for complicated UIs. No, we don’t traverse the tree as soon as we encounter an invisible widget. Having a flag would still require us to traverse the tree. You should move your logic either into a visibility binding, or make another object or widget responsible for changing the visibility state. Assuming that’s what you were using the tick to decide.
[/]
They were target markers (think Dark Souls lock-on circle) that would set themselves to hidden when no target was assigned to them. I’ve moved the logic around a bit and got them to work, thanks for the clarification.