Hi,
Some days ago i wanted to make some alterations on my character's look. And shortly after, i've thought about creating a bag on the back of my character. Then, figured out that i will no longer be able to drive any car. Resulting from that, i've put "0108: destroy_object $object" for a deactivation before entering any cars. However, it did not destroy the object even though there wasn't a single fail (according to me). I've asked this to 3 different remarkable and well-known sources, still couldn't get a solid reply.
Here is the entire codeflow :
http://pastebin.com/eg0H2q2h
Before i forget, in order to understand where the code fail would be, i've placed some messages starting with "debug:" between the actions, so that if i don't get one message, i would understand the failed spot. However in this codeflow, i can get all the debug messages, while the object was not getting deleted once the script is theorically deactivated.
Is the fact here (the fact that 0108 doesn't destroy the object) really a bug ? Or is there a simple mistake in the codes ?
Some days ago i wanted to make some alterations on my character's look. And shortly after, i've thought about creating a bag on the back of my character. Then, figured out that i will no longer be able to drive any car. Resulting from that, i've put "0108: destroy_object $object" for a deactivation before entering any cars. However, it did not destroy the object even though there wasn't a single fail (according to me). I've asked this to 3 different remarkable and well-known sources, still couldn't get a solid reply.
Here is the entire codeflow :
http://pastebin.com/eg0H2q2h
Before i forget, in order to understand where the code fail would be, i've placed some messages starting with "debug:" between the actions, so that if i don't get one message, i would understand the failed spot. However in this codeflow, i can get all the debug messages, while the object was not getting deleted once the script is theorically deactivated.
Is the fact here (the fact that 0108 doesn't destroy the object) really a bug ? Or is there a simple mistake in the codes ?