menu
 

AudiokineticのコミュニティQ&AはWwiseやStrataのコミュニティ内でユーザ同士が質問・回答をし合うことができるフォーラムです。Audiokineticテクニカルサポートチームからの回答をご希望の場合は、必ず サポートチケットページ をご利用ください。

0 支持
When organizing objects in the Project Explorer > Audio tab hierarchies, I prefer to use Actor-Mixers instead of Virtual Folders because it allows me to have hierarchical control over the children (overall volume control, default output bus, default RTPC behavior, etc.). Whenever I see people using Virtual Folders, I recommend they use Actor-Mixers instead. Here's my question: In what circumstances are a Virtual Folder preferable over an Actor-Mixer? I can't think of any situation in which I'd want to use a Virtual Folder.
Ian S. (2.1k ポイント) General Discussion

回答 1

+1 支持
An Actor-Mixer will take a tiny bit of runtime memory vs. virtual folders that are not packaged in the SoundBanks. We're really talking about a few bytes per Actor-Mixer, so nothing to care about 99.x% of the time. The workflow benefit during development usually outweigh the runtime consideration.  

Simon
Simon A. (Audiokinetic) (3.6k ポイント)
Aha! Thank you!
...