We’re a little confused about this Body Front Attachment problem.
Which add on / Accessory were you using that broke?
We’re a little confused about this Body Front Attachment problem.
Which add on / Accessory were you using that broke?
Any accessory with the BodyFrontAttachment is positioned too high, it should be reverted back to the 2nd version that was made today rather than the first.
accessories are positioned way higher
Neck attachments are also off, my necklace appears way too low in the torso.
You can also see my pin appear too high. (Which uses the front attachment)
(Normal attachments)
Why didnt they just retexture the epic face and use the classic face, honestly for 12,000 it just doesnt look right with the 3D
That’s exactly what I think, or at least add both versions, the 3D and the 2D inside the bundle.
There just pushing dynamic heads consistently like its for everyone, we should get the choice to at least choose,
if this was a classic face it could be for sale for 20k+ robux and would sell, i sometimes dont get it.
Allowing the classic face or even a blue version or something would make so much sense, we are talking 12,000 Robux !?
i wonder why it’s not a classic head and instead a dynamic face, the approach is cool, but the execution has been bad so far, i would have liked a default face that you can change but keep the fragmented part of it. for example, i don’t like to have a happy face when your body is being fragmented or whatever, what about if i want a “sad” of it? my main issue with these type of heads :7
Just want to let you guys know our progress. We’re going to check in the following fixes in the next few hours.
Still to fix:
The r6 version of it also doesn’t look quite right, with the mouth too low and the right side sagging a bit.
I would say it doesnt smilar with r6,eye and mouth is far than 2d epic face.
Not sure if this has been fixed in your new version, but back attachments are also incorrect. (Too high)
Editing to say I just realized that this was brought up in the original post for this thread, my bad! I hope this has been fixed
There was no reason bundle was 12,000 if no 2d classic epic face was included
No worries. It’s good to be clear.
The front and back attachments are fixed. We accidentally put the bad attachments back in when we fixed the left arm.
R6 support for the whole bundle? it kinda fits the vibe as it’s just blocky
I have a question regarding the versatility of this Dynamic Head;
In the 2024 AMA Recap, Greg says Roblox is exploring ways to allow players the choice between a head being static and dynamic. Based on this reply, would this bundle allow for functionality with the original 2D Epic Face in the future? Or is this Dynamic Head an exclusive rendition of the face.
Can you just give us the normal epic face? I think the whole community would much rather prefer that.
I’m uncertain if this was mentioned in this thread, but I noticed that there are some black lines painted around the mouth that is a mesh:
If this is an intentional behavior, it doesn’t look natural. Comparing from R6 to R15, they look way different. A viable solution would be continuing the mouth on the right side with a simple line (if possible).
I put your avatar in studio since you guys seem to be testing these fixes with a new uploaded version of the bundle. The shoulder attachments are broken and positioned in the head.
On the version that is currently uploaded right now, the left arm got fixed but now the left shoulder attachment broke and the torso attachments broke aswell but I think you guys fixed the torso attachments on the newly uploaded testing body parts? I’m not sure.
Last update for the day:
Fixed
Fixes in progress - This will take a few days, as we want to take the time to make it right.
Known bug - Will look into this tomorrow
HUGE THANKS to those who reported, to those who helped test, and to those who offered solutions.
Lastly, to those who requested various features, you’ll need to bring this up to another channel. We want you to be heard, but this is for bug reports. You can try ‘Feature Requests’ or ‘Development Discussion’.