Your comments

Hmm, to be honest I would hate to call it, the I love the idea of the node for sure. Inner Product seems that it better describes what is going on though..
All good, be nice to have later though :)
Unless there is another way to solve this, I tried using the distance between view position and the world position but I need it very fine grained, it is for line markings on a sports field, The line is quite thin and I am trying to make it kind of 'curl' up in the distance to give me more pixels visible.
ah, now that you ask, it seems it might be user stupidity, :(

I am trying to do a shader where I increase the Y of a vert based in the grazing angle. So was looking to use View Direction to work out when the angle was low, perp the Vertex Offset between 0 and 0.5. If I plug View Direction into emission no errors but if I try and feed it into a series of nodes that ends up in Vertex Offset I get this problem.

FYI, this is only broken when the Visibility Term is ticked

Vote for keywords !! ra ra ra ;)

Yup I can imagine.. I was actually thinking that in the nodes this might be easier, at least conceptually.. A Keyword Node. be able to insert it at the end of a block of nodes for example..


Texture2D (SpecMap)

Color (SpecColor)


Multiply Tex2D with Color


KeywordNode (Specular On/Off)

Its a bit like a IF node, if the keyword is on - use the previous nodes, if the keyword is odd, break the connection.


I can imagine it is a LOT of work for the shader itself but then you would have an awesome ubershader :)

Hmm, good one.


I think I would vote for sticking to the 'standard' if we can call it that. It just make things easier. If Unity ever add more I guess Shaderforge could keep adding them..


Thats the problem of course, it makes Shaderforge less flexible and means we have to wait for updates from you if and when new internal names are required and if you make it say a drop down of internals + custom then might as well just have fully unlinked really. 


Whats simpler for you?