Animation in Storyline through the Morph Transition

Nov 12, 2018

Cameron Ward
By Cameron Ward

Some time ago, PowerPoint came out with a transition called Morph that literally morphs shapes, colors, strokes, graphics, etc. from one slide to the next. In other words, if you build a design on one slide, duplicate the slide, and make changes to the shapes on the second slide, the Morph transition will smoothly deform the shapes from the first slide to the next.

This transition is POWERFUL for animation. I feel that small animations of this kind are especially important for a product like Storyline. In a sense, the ability to build animations is one of the key features that I feel is missing from Storyline. If Articulate would consider adding the Morph transition to Storyline, it would allow users to animate the graphics on the screen with triggers, and I believe that would open up new worlds of possibility with Storyline.

Is this something you all would consider adding to Storyline?

249 Replies
Patrick Maurer
over 2 years ago01/31/22 at 6:42 pm (UTC)

Came here hoping to read about how to do it, but seems it is still a dream years later. MORPH would be a gamechanger for me. I'm spending far too much time with motion paths and it is clunking at best. I'm also finding that those reviewing my courses have become so familiar with their live PowerPoints that I've built for them that they can't figure out why I can't do the same look in Articulate.

Julia Mays
almost 2 years ago05/31/22 at 1:45 pm (UTC)

Nope.  Miguel isn't "Staff."  Look at the road map published above by Phil, who is. 

Articulate is all about the accessibility and the templates.  Zero interest in going back and improving or shoring up dated existing product, regardless of input from current users.  From the size of the road map, their development team must be pretty tiny.  Meaning, no bandwidth.  

The roadmap is bland, it's boring and most of all, it's relatively easy.  

At this point, we can give up on this one.  They don't wanna and they not gonna.

You may want to reframe how you think about Articulate's place in your L&D platform.  Instead of being the cornerstone of course design and delivery, relegate it to one spoke in the wheel.  Learning Experience Platforms are rapidly shifting course authoring tools to being only one of many arrows in the quiver.  And there are course authoring tools coming up that integrate just as well into these platforms, with more features and faster turnaround.

Elblearning.com is one to watch.  The graphic on their home page gives a good overview of how course authoring tools fit into a larger L&D strategy.  No, I'm not affiliated with them in any way.  Just a representative example.

Articulate is resting on its laurels and milking their cash cow.

Math Notermans
almost 2 years ago06/01/22 at 6:29 am (UTC)

I have been working with Lectora untill it was bought by the Elearning Brothers ( now Elblearning ). At some point they shifted their focus in development on tools that were in the hype of the moment ( CenarioVR ) and somewhat lost focus on their main tool ( Lectora ). When ELB aquired Lectora from Trivantis i hoped on improvement. It didnot happen and as ELB and Lectora were not the most widely used tools in Europe ( for freelancers and in jobs ) i switched back to Articulate.

Is the one better then the other ?

No.

Both are tools, both companies have pluses and minuses. Development wise both are NOT top notch. Both tend to bring out bugged versions too early too soon. As Julia says... do check the competition. In your company checkup on whats needed and what works with your LMS or LRS. Find tools ( and people ) to help you get the desired results. Donot forget open source tools and software.

Julia Mays
almost 2 years ago06/01/22 at 12:37 pm (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Math!  I am definitely looking at ELB (along with others) with a very careful eye, and your input is exactly why.  Building a comprehensive learning platform now requires a number of moving parts, of which course authoring software is only one component.

For a while, Captivate was the only game in town, even though it was difficult to learn and had security protocols that didn't always play nice with Enterprise sized systems.    Then Articulate moved in with a more intuitive approach and a less steep learning curve, and sliced into Captivate's market by targeting the middle-of-the-road customer who didn't need the might of Captivate.    But both were the big players in town.

Now, I'm seeing more and more "portmanteau" learning platform offerings, where course authoring software is one of a number of tools available to design and deliver content.  If your course authoring needs are fairly straightforward, and you don't regularly design complex, highly triggered, multi branched material, we have choices now.  And with separate microlearning software, and adaptive learning services like Qstream, course authoring software will be one of many, or just a starting point in the "which approach will we take?" analysis.

Companies like ELB are building by buying up other companies that offer tools in each major area of their proposed platform.  https://www.reworked.co/learning-development/elb-learning-makes-acquisition-rebrands-next-day/amp/    It's intriguing, but it also can mean a lack of cohesive company support, and a squashing together of different corporate cultures that may not initially fit.  And I don't want to be their guinea pig.  So I'm carefully watching with an eye to the future.

Meanwhile, Articulate's failure to continue to support its initial customer base with basic industry-standard feature growth while pursuing a roadmap intended (I think) to make it look innovative has left it standing in the middle of the road.  Platform integrated authoring tools are going to be no-brainers in the future, and if they can offer even roughly what Articulate does now, then companies are going to start having those conversations...soon.

To put it another way, Articulate has made it possible for instructional designers to outgrow it.

Sign In to Reply