Can you prove that this is intentional?
2 Likes
So it’s intentional because it hasn’t been fixed for years.
Huh, that’s interesting.
2 Likes
That’s not what I’ve said but it is one of the reasons why it’s intentional.
You know what they say, “there’s nothing as permanent as a temporary solution”. I really don’t want this to be the case, but leaving this not-recommended yet still technically intentional and recognised behaviour for so many years, has probably made it more difficult to change because of people relying on it, despite their warnings.
It was intentional, but not in the way you describe. It was a bandaid to reduce performance impact.
Notice how they warned not to rely on it as it “may change”. This wasn’t meant to stick around, but sort of has to now because people didn’t abide by this warning, making it more difficult for other people to use Glass in the process.
Is this not physically accurate? It renders like a very small crack between two objects, as they are two distinct objects instead of being interconnected.
5 Likes
They can always add a property to affect the way glass renders, the old behavior remaining default and then a new option to make glass work properly.
@InsanityFE4R’s point proven
@Crazedbrick1’s point proven
If my math is correct, y’all’s two half-rights make one whole fact! The good ending
4 Likes
Not a good opinion, because a big game named Phantom Forces uses this for their scopes to remove the ability to view the inside of them. Bug? More like a new feature.
He uses the word “bug” as in “not intended to be there”, that’s still wrong.
This is a bug.
A better solution would be to add “occluder” (for lack of a better word) parts or an occluderglass material, and occluded parts so you can choose custom parts that are invisible behind occluderparts no matter what. Ideally you’d be able to select basic options for occluders such as occlude transparent parts, and even unanchored parts for cool game concepts.
Is there anything stating this was intentional?
3 Likes
While it is intended, the staff member @Judgy_Oreo quoted specifically said not to rely on it, so Crazed was right about that. Plus even if it’s not a bug per-se it’s still buggy, as it’s completely non-intuitive…
Although you were right about it being intentional, the reason you provided was wrong and led to you believing this behavior is ‘safe’. It’s not, and can be removed at any moment
To be fair, I don’t think most of us had seen the staff post, but now that we have we know that we’ll have a fix for this weirdness at some point. Let’s hope they prioritize this
1 Like
The fact it was stated in the release post as intended to reduce performance issues.
Not at all. Here is sufficient evidence that I acknowledged your points:
I’ve made it abundantly clear that I understand that it isn’t a bug. Unless you want me to say it a fourth time.
I’ve pointed out what you got right, but you’ve chosen to ignore that as well as my one critique of your reasoning:
This wasn’t the reason why it was added, this is just a random byproduct of the feature
And above all
Even though Crazed was wrong about it being a bug, he was completely correct that you should NOT rely on this for your games. It will be removed when Roblox optimizes glass. So I completely disagree with your statement:
2 Likes
I’m not saying I don’t believe you, but are there any images of staff responses to back up what you’re saying? (or the name/link of the release post)
This is the quote, it was intentionally added to prevent what I just stated. Although it also states we shouldn’t rely on it. It’s still not a “bug” as he calls it nor are they likely to remove it because many games have already adopted this as a feature. E.g. Phantom Forces being a big one.
1 Like
That is not the reason you were using before. You said it
There was absolutely no problem with SmoothPlastic You thought it was for aesthetic reasons. It was for performance reasons. You can accept your mistakes you know. Even @Judgy_Oreo could see you didn’t understand why translucent parts weren’t rendered behind glass:
Please just accept responsibility for things you say and move on
Let’s fix his sentence then; Don’t rely on temporary features
Can you respond to the above quote @InsanityFE4R, it seems you’re trying SO hard to avoid it. According to Roblox staff, you aren’t supposed to rely on it because Roblox only adopted it as a temporary feature for being able to roll out glass.
1 Like
Could’ve addressed my points before deciding you’re done, but instead you’ve taken the low hanging-fruit of throwing a meaningless epithet. No matter.
I’m not saying you should stop using it, do whatever you want. Just keep in mind that this is not supposed to be. It was a temporary fix, not a permanent thing.
Remember how this all started?
My point stands:
Crazed was right that you shouldn’t rely on this behavior as it can be removed at any time(though he was wrong about it being a bug)
You were right that the feature was no bug(but were wrong about why it was a feature and in saying it was here to stay)
In your focusing on Crazed you’ve been unable to look at yourself. I encourage you to start doing that as it will have a positive impact in your life
Chill out, just drop it.
They’re doing the opposite of what Roblox staff recommends and you’re saying this is a good practice. They already stated that this behavior may change at any time and is not to be relied on, so this should not be the reason why you oppose this suggestion. A better idea is to provide an alternative you see as fair to please both sides.
1 Like
It’s good practise, because they’re not going to change how it functions, it has been so long since they’ve first introduced the glass material and so far no change. It’s safe to say it’s finally grown in and we can use it as a feature.
Just because staff recommended against it upon release doesn’t mean it’s still accurate today. Especially when majority of Milsim games which is like 30% of Roblox Games have also adopted it and of how lazy Roblox typically is.
I definitely agree
Roblox is not above removing features people rely on though, and I expect they’ll have more leniency on removing things they already claimed they would
Here’s my take on this feature request: Far more developers are held back by this feature than those who are helped by it. The better option is to optimize glass refraction and remove the whole decal & translucent part disappearing behavior. Then, Roblox should do one of the following:
- Make a new object that when parented under translucent parts gives them glass’s old “X-ray” behavior
- Add a property in MaterialService that allows you to choose glass’s behavior
- Add a new material without glass refraction but with the old X-ray capabilities
Option 3 seems best to me
1 Like
Wow the original post already said this, I didn’t realize haha