Wishlist

it would be great to expand the work environment settings for the pet pallet; maybe a color scheme or appearance setting, maybe a size setting independent of screen resolution.
the follow cursor or go to predefined location has always been an option, but if we could change it to bright red buttons or something, so it stands out, we wouldn't need to play hide and seek with it quite so often.

There is a laundry list of documents that require 2d drafting for most graphic standards... IMO the goal of BIM should be to NOT have to draft anything on any drawing smaller than 1/2"=1'.
But...
we need to draft contours, because the mesh boundary pen/line type and mesh user define ridge pen/line type are not independent of each other.
we do need to draft roof overhangs below home story because there is no option to hide hips/valleys/ridges

we do need to draft polylines around our exterior elevation because there is only a single all or nothing "fade distant elements" gauge

we do need to draft cabinet drawer pull symbols... because that wasn't included in the model view options of any of the cabinet objects

we do need to mask ceiling/roof elements in vaulted spaces

we do need to mask floor/wall and wall/roof junctions in sections where building materials don't play nicely with each other (if at all)

Please allow composite skins to heal though empty doorways and other openings, and at wall ends - as an intrinsic part of the wall, not requiring messy workarounds and wall end objects.  The workarounds all fail in one way or another, with unwanted outcomes either in 2D or 3D.

Please ensure these just skins clean up seamlessly with the skins of other walls that intersect adjacent to openings.

Cleanup of composites (including with skins healing through holes) should work in section as well as plan, without extra effort, and without the current workarounds or compromises. 

All composite elements should work and clean up this way, without the huge time wasting overhead involved to 'fool' the model into displaying what it should logically display by default in all views

There's that little palette called Element Information. It is very helpful doing manual calculations. (Yes, in the golden age of BIM, we still do manual calculations; not everything is worth* or can be** scheduled.)

One thing it doesn't offer is the sum of a selection.

Please, add that!

Köszönöm!

* Sometimes you just want to hand select a few items. Believe me, I love schedules, but it carries a danger of including something unwanted and unnoticed.

** Try to make a schedule of fills on an elevation, or polylines etc.

Straight pipe has fixed values fot MEP symbol fill , pen and pen2. It would be very helpful if I could set a different colour in the route settings. It is important because now I can barely see the difference between 2 MEP systems of vertical pipes.

The short and simple version:

We would like to be able to move the Graphisoft folder under the user profile (C:\Users\%Username%\Graphisoft).

Extended with context: ArchiCad has a lot of cache functionality built in, that needs to be stored somewhere. The Graphisoft folder is the spot for most of this data. The (usually) largest sub folder amongst these was the TW data folder, which we're now able to relocate. And we are very thankful for that. 

But there are other reasons why the main Graphisoft folder can grow (too) large in size (>100GB). We can delete some older files from previous versions, but that is -sadly- not enough. Therefore, we would like it if we had the option in AC to move this Graphisoft folder to a different location. 

I often find myself searching for drawings in the Layout Book and realizing that I am in the wrong folder (for example, “Study” instead of “Building Permit Documentation”). This happens quite frequently, especially in larger projects with many folders and drawings.
It would be very helpful if users could assign background colors (or any kind of color coding) to folders in the Organizer (Layout Book, View Map, Publisher Sets). This would significantly improve visual orientation, reduce mistakes, and speed up navigation within the project structure.

Even a simple option to assign a color label to folders would make a big difference in daily workflow.

There are almost 1000 wishes in this forum. Many of them would be obvious improvements - making the software more functional, intuitive, integrated, and dynamic.

Instead of waiting for TWO HUNDRED people to express dissatisfaction on this forum, how about somebody from Graphisoft regularly reviews the wishes for what are almost objectively good ideas and works to get them on the roadmap and into the software?

I've been on this Wishlist since it was created and there's a lot of gold in here. I don't know that we deserve compensation for these wishes as another user has suggested, but I would like all of the good ideas we are putting forth to actually help improve the software.  I know wishes are moving to "Under Consideration" with 20, 30, 40 upvotes. I'm just saying can we restructure this a little?

The community provides good ideas -> Graphisoft reviews *ALL* of them -> The good ones get incorporated, *especially* the ones with many upvotes.

Would anyone else like to see more than a handful of these ideas get into the software?

EDIT: (moving this from a comment into the post)

I think part of what is happening is that the Wishlist forum is fielding both Wishes with a capital W ("wouldn't it be cool if Archicad could ___"), and User Experience feedback ("this tool isn't working as expected", "there are inconsistencies in your interface", "I'm not able to ___ when this happens, but it works everywhere else", "in your latest update, you lost this feature").

There is so much UX feedback - we have essentially become a global UX team, which on the one hand is great - we use the product day in and day out and can easily notice when the experience isn't meeting par. The key is that Graphisoft needs to sort out which "wishes" are aspirational and which are essential. As a daily U, this would greatly improve my X.

When placing a Keynote label on a selected element, the label is currently inserted at the center of the element by default. I would like to have the option to define a preferred default position, such as the top-left corner of the element (e.g. based on its bounding box), instead of manually repositioning the label each time.

This would improve efficiency and ensure more consistent annotation across drawings.

For clarification, a short video illustrating this behavior is attached.

I would like to suggest an improvement for railings when they are used as fences or wire mesh enclosures.

Currently, railings are very useful for modeling fences, but there is no straightforward way to insert a gate or door within them. It would be very helpful if it were possible to place a gate element directly into a railing, similar to how doors are placed in walls.

This would make it much easier to create complete fence systems without needing workarounds or separate elements.

I'd like to be able to control the display unit of information shown on a schedule.

The dimension for elements displayed on a schedule is a global setting defined by the Calculation units;

However, I'd like to be able to independently control the display units on schedules in a project.

For example, on a schedule for brick wall, I'd would like to have the wall length in meter, the wall opening in centimeters, and the brick dimension and tolerances in millimeter. That isn't currently possible.

Additionally, since I would need 3 decimal spaces for the tolerance, I would have to set up the calculation unit to meter with 3 decimals, so the length of the wall and the opening would also have 3 decimal houses, which is unnecessary long.

It would be great to have a "Hide zero decimal" option for the calculation units, like we have on the Dimensions setting.

Element Information is lovely and great!

Selecting fills, slabs and similar items, we can get the following areas:

Area, holes considered

Area, holes not considered

How about the sum of all holes in a fill/slab/roof?

Yes, that would be awesome for calculations!

Thank you!

I wish I can mirror dimension text, when I remove Always Readable option in Dimension Text Settings so I don't need to rotate single text dimension.

We use it in formwork plans.

In complex profile walls, it is currently not possible to define a separate origin for each surface.

Being able to control the surface origin individually for each face would make it much easier to accurately align textures and materials.

Ideally, this could be implemented either within the complex profile settings or through an editing interface similar to those used for stairs, railings, and curtain walls.

The handrail tool is very cumbersome to work with and almost any real project application results in finding workarounds rather than actually using a properly working tool. While it does offer lots of applications, it almost feels like the application it was meant for is missing design freedom and control at the same time. 

It would be great to improve some points such as:

• reliable behavior - sometimes when drawing a handrail associatively vs manually the results will differ substantially. The left hand side has its nodes and segments set associatively while the left one is drawn manually. 

• It would be great to have more control over how elements intersect and get continued, by being able to at least drag endpoints of Rails to achieve the desired results. In order to trick the handrail tool into actually generating the desired geometry, a horizontal segment slightly shorter than one stair thread was created. This allowed me to adjust the connection of the Toprail so that it continues on the top while the bottom one steps down.

Originally this wish started with wanting to display clean hyperlinks in schedule value fields.   Currently, when displaying hyperlinks in schedules,  a PDF publishing of it results in the displaying of the full text of the hyperlink.  It is mostly functional on the PDF side,  BUT... , if it becomes truncated or wrapped, the results become unpredictable.   To make the links work,  evidently the entire text of the link must be visible.  This results in long, unsightly text strings which detract from the intended conveyance of information.

Markdown Syntax, being lightweight, can be a valuable feature during documentation.   The resulting PDF and BIMx files can become more readable and uncluttered.     For example, the full hyperlink text for this page while I'm composing this wish, is

"https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/forums/postpage/board-id/wishlist?message-subject=Integrated%20Markdown%20Syntax%20in%20Texts,%20Labels,%20Schedule%20Value%20Fields,%20Property%20Value%20Fields,%20etc."  ..  imagine having that in a 5cm-wide schedule field...

With Markdown Syntax - [Friendly Text](full hyperlink text) - you'd see only the Friendly Text, and when clicked it would open the hyperlink page in a browser.

There are other useful features of this syntax (see the attached image, or search "markdown syntax guide" for the full list).   This functionality can be extended to Text, Label, Property values, or any other text-containing element types. 

I propose that Markdown Syntax be integrated in all text-containing element types in ArchiCAD.    I think the hyperlink feature alone would be worth it.

Thank you for considering.

Harout

Hi,

I want to spent as little time as possible placing views on layouts and preferably no time at all on resizing drawing frames on layouts. So I'm a big fan of the Place Drawing function in de Organizer. And when placing one view on one layout (details, single floorplans), or placing multiple views which are adjustable (and therefore predictable) in width and height (sections and elevations through their markers) all is well.

But when placing multiple views which are a zoom in/portion of a larger model (ie. floorplan of one row of many rows in a development) on a single layout there is room for improvement.

The grid function of Master Layout is helpful, because Place Drawing centers all the views on in gridcells, but when the zoom and thus the frame of a view is larger than a grid cell, the drawing extents past the grid cell. It would be great if the grid cell acts as Illustrator clipping masks or as InDesign image frames from InDesign. The optional grid cell lines already detect when a drawing extents over the line (because then it will be hidden) so hopefully this is not a difficult feature to add.

And adding to that, it would be great to be able to graphically adjust the grid cells on each Master Layout. Now it is not possible to make a 3x3 grid, because AC combines 4 cells in one larger cell.

And it would also be fantastic to be able to place one view on multiple layouts at once by selection one view and multiple layouts in the Navigator and use Place Drawing.

I am aware of, and using, Save current zoom option in the View Settings and the Crop Drawing to Frame setting in the Drawing Settings. The problem with this function is that this Frame is determined by the active window size (which is adjustable by adding toolbars or change the size of the Navigator). So controlling this window size and corresponding zoom would also be an option, like setting 3D window size is also an option.

Reverse engineering the proportions of the active window is possible by using the drawing on a layout as a reference. But this is a labor intensive workaround and my active window size changes quite a bit from time to time, depending on having functions like the design option toolbar visible or not. 

Thanks.

Within DGL, there are equivalents to Archicad elements—e.g., walls, ceilings, roofs, etc.
If you save a GDL from these standard Archicad elements, Archicad also uses these GDL equivalents to create the GDL library element for automatic scripting, thereby generating a 3D copy of the original Archicad element. Wonderful!

Question:
Why isn’t it possible to create walls, ceilings, and roofs from these GDLs in reverse when “deconstructing” them? So far, the only option is conversion to a Morph, which is problematic for further editing within the actual Archicad infrastructure.

If I have a Wall command in GDL—there should be a way for the GDL script to also generate a corresponding Archicad wall when decomposing.

I would like to suggest an improvement regarding the new Distance Guides feature in Archicad 29.

It is very useful to see distances to surrounding elements while working. However, it would be even more powerful if this tool could also help with automatically centering elements either within a space or between other elements.

For example, being able to snap directly to the midpoint between two elements, or to the center of a room based on surrounding geometry, would greatly improve precision and workflow efficiency.