I don't particularly have anything against this. I suppose this does what it claims to do. Not sure how users at large will react to this change, and I would hope that eventually the visibility can be adjusted on a per-element basis.

That said no functional objections here.

I would hope that eventually the visibility can be adjusted on a per-element basis

i'll also note that this change doesn't allow "always visible" elements on the playfield layer to be anchored to the sides or corners of the screen (such as a hit error bar on the bottom). they instead move around when scaling the playfield

Well aware yes.

I personally think the decision of "should this be attached to the screen or the playfield" and the decision of "should this always show" should be separate, but not that it should be a checkbox in the element properties; the layer system is what makes the most sense to use as "when should this show", and so I think attaching stuff to the screen or playfield should instead be decided in the right-click menu's Anchor selection -- maybe with some better UI than just a list?

Attaching the decision of "should this be attached to the screen or the playfield" to the existing layer system just blurs the lines on what the layer system is supposed to be, and limits options

I guess what I'm imagining is something like this? (except executed better... this is just a quick concept to convey the idea lol)

@april83c I don't foresee us going in this direction. What you propose is more complicated in understanding than a visibility toggle. Users are already struggling to understand the anchor system as is; your mockup looks cool but is a nightmare to explain to users imo.

As has been stated above this change is a stopgap measure at best.

@april83c I don't foresee us going in this direction. What you propose is more complicated in understanding than a visibility toggle. Users are already struggling to understand the anchor system as is; your mockup looks cool but is a nightmare to explain to users imo.

As has been stated above this change is a stopgap measure at best.

The point I'm making is not to use that exact design, the point I'm making is to try to think of some better UI for this that allows for more options. I was just throwing something out there that could be built off of, so maybe someone sees it and gets a better idea

I kinda like the UI proposal, with a bit more refining it could actually be a better way of exposing anchors/origins to end users.