UPDATE: Please close this thread. I kept looking for a solution to my problem until I eventually found this blog post. Yeah, that's my problem right there. *sigh* So it means I won't be able to use Construct 2 properly until I don't fix this problem with my drivers, aparently; even though I updated them today.
Ah, well. Apologies, and please close this.
Hello. I have a problem with Construct 2, but I do not think it's a bug of the software, but of my PC. I'll explain...
Link to .capx file (required! If link is blocked remove the http and www parts):
No link needed.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Attempt to load a graphic for any element that requires one (sprites, tiled backgrounds, etc)
The image selected won't appear on the Image Editor, UNLESS I change the zoom. BUT, even if I accept the image (with or without zooming to see it properly) the resulting sprite/tiled background/etc is an empty square.
It should correctly show the loaded image at once. Or at all.
It's affecting Construct's Image Editor itself.
Operating system & service pack:
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Construct 2 version:
I recently moved to a newer, more powerful computer, but this one has AMD technology (my previous PC had Nvidia). Right from the get-go, Construct 2's interface would mess up, unless I switched to Carbon or Scenic themes (any other one would mess it up).
I've also tried re-installing the latest stable version (r158.2), in case it was a bug of the r161, but I had the same problems. I then began to research the forums, and the best I could come up with was the notion of updating my card drivers. Okay, fair enough. I gave that a try and, no luck, all the Themes but Carbon and Scenic mess the interface up, and the Image Editor is not loading images properly (or at all).
One thing I have noticed is that if I load a previously created project, everything loads perfectly, but when I attempt to change the image of an already-loaded sprite, the Image Editor won't load it and the previous, original image remains.
Can anyone give me a hint of what might be wrong? Thanks in advance, and apologies if I didn't follow the proper protocol, but this case was quite something.