File: Oscillator2.swf-(9.56 MB, 510x150, Other)
[_] Sound Reactive Oscillator Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)19:03 No.2724378
File works with custom sounds (mp3, also works with lossless 320kbps) if you have a decompiler.
Replace the original sound file with your own and don't forget to rename it to the correct value
(1_Sound1).
A good decompiler you say? JPEX. It can replace/delete any files inside the sfw and also edits
Actionscript. And it's free. Why aren't you using it?
Song is Subsonic by Com Truise.
>inb4 Adobe tutorial
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:13 No.2724385
>>2724378
I don't know if you noticed, but pressing play multiple times stacks it, instead of restarting or
something.
Also, the sound is slightly delayed from the visuals.
>I'm the guy who made Oscillatoresque.swf
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)19:17 No.2724390
>>2724385
Well the play buttom plays the sound, if you press it again it'll just play it again. But I agree
it's retarded. And pressing stop only stops the last soundChannel instance, and that's a problem.
The sound isn't really delayed, the visuals are just faster than the human ability to process
them (around 80ms) at 60fps
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:17 No.2724391
And oh yeah, as a note for anyone using Debian or a debian based linux, you need to get Java 8 to
make JPEXS run, and getting it was a bit of a hassle. I tried to manually install it but in the
end the easiest way to get it to work is just use this method http://www.webupd8.or
g/2014/03/how-to-install-oracle-java-8-in-debian.html
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:20 No.2724393
>>2724390
That doesn't make any sense. If the visuals were faster than the human ability to process them,
wouldn't the visuals appear delayed? It's the other way around.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)19:25 No.2724395
>>2724393
Perhaps, that's just my guess. In the end it shouldn't be delayed.
You can also fiddle with the colors and the glow filter parameters in Main.as with the decompiler.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:30 No.2724397
>>2724385
>Also, the sound is slightly delayed from the visuals.
set quality to low
no thanks necessary
also buy a new rig
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:31 No.2724398
>>2724378
so how many lines did you put there?
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:32 No.2724399
>>2724397
Nah it's the same thing, and pretty sure my rig should be able to handle a bunch of actionscript.
It's more likely that the fault is on Adobe who refuse to update flash for linux. Shame that
gnash still sucks balls.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:34 No.2724400
>>2724395
>You can also fiddle with the colors and the glow filter parameters in Main.as
that's what I was wondering about
thanks for pointing that out
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:40 No.2724403
>>2724397
On further analysis it seems to have a small impact on the delay, it's still big enough to be
slightly distracting though, it's easier to see on Oscilleratoresque.sfw.
>>2724395
Might be I'm just retarded, but what's the system behind the color variable? I assume it's the
variable called this.glow.color, is it just a decimal representation of a hex color?
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)19:43 No.2724406
>>2724403
>a decimal representation of a hex color?
am wondering the same thing and looking all over google if flash has some special numbering of
colors
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)19:46 No.2724410
>>2724406
>>2724403
I didn't notice that until now, but it seems JPEX translates hexadecimal to some other shit, I
have no idea why. But randomly changing the parameters yields results.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)19:48 No.2724412
>>2724406
>>2724403
Also to change the line color you edit line 67's second number
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:02 No.2724424
>>2724412
If you ever get around to making a second version, then be sure to make comments at the places
where people would be inclined to make changes.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:04 No.2724428
>>2724412
>67's second number
well shit
what does 22nd line actually change?
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:06 No.2724429
>>2724428
ok nvm I'm just retarded it's the color of the glow/blur around the line
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:08 No.2724430
>>2724424
I second this notion even though we are the only ones who actually care for this flash at this
depth
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)20:08 No.2724431
>>2724424
noted
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:21 No.2724437
>>2724399
Chrome has pepperflash which is an up-to-date version.
Firefox/NPAPI in general won't get new flash versions on Linux.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:25 No.2724444
>>2724437
Yeah not gonna go Chrome just for a bit higher flash efficiency.
Thanks for the tip though. Seems like gnash is the only hope, though nothing would be okay too. I
seriously hope we stop using flash, shit's deprecated as fuck. The only thing it's good for is
shitty loops and memes.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)20:28 No.2724447
>>2724444
Why not go Chrome?
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:37 No.2724450
>>2724447
Lots of reasons, the one that made me make the switch was actually instability with flashes. It
would randomly crash when loading flash elements, if they worked at all.
After switching I've come to enjoy the better performance, much much much lower inclination to
crash, bigger extension support, and customizability. I don't think that Chrome has anything like
the userChrome.css.
last, and probably also least, then there's also botnet concerns. I don't even use any google
services other than youtube so the 'benefits' of taking part in the botnet are very slim.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)20:43 No.2724458
>>2724450
I see. I have no idea how it works in Linux, but in Windows Flash usually crashes because of
conflicts between the standalone Flash player and Chrome's built in player, if you disable one or
the other the crash rate goes down.
Also Chrome has built in support for advanced HTML5 and the use of custom libraries (check
chromeexperiments.com) and you can use Chrome Canary, which lets you do some nice stuff.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)20:50 No.2724469
>>2724458
You know, I actually remember doing that to fix it, might be it was something else that pushed me
to firefox. I honestly can't remember if it wasn't that. Could be I did that while I still used
Windows.
Might be I just succumbed to the group mentality of /g/.
Yeah, I realize I lost some of that functionality, but honestly it doesn't really bother me. It's
so rare for me to actually need that functionality, and what's lost is generally just some neat
experiments, as they're so aptly named.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)21:01 No.2724480
>>2724469
Each to their own, but Flash is dying and other browsers will have to catch up to Chrome when the
time comes.
>> [_] Anonymous 03/21/15(Sat)21:15 No.2724495
>>2724480
I think flash will die BY other browsers catching up to chrome (among other reasons), not the
other way around. So that won't really be a problem.
>> [_] Lockwert !nnIgGerRZ. 03/21/15(Sat)21:17 No.2724496
>>2724495
True. For sure these things are interdependent.
