I just gave a (very) quick try to the new onboard view mode (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=15.msg70886#msg70886 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=15.msg70886#msg70886)).
I like it more than the normal one, maybe even much more (but I need to compare the two more for sure).
First sight (haha), it feels easier to my brain than the default one.
Only thing that looks a bit weird: when you wheelie, as the sight is kept aligned to the horizon, you basically look at your tank :)
Maybe we could apply a factor < 1 to the sight pitch compensation and partially avoid that (or maybe something more sophisticate, past a give pitch angle).
I invite all the onboard riders to give it a try and compare the two options !
Finally! , this is was i was talking about, much better now.
Now is a bit too static, but for sure much better than a fixed to the bike movement.
Indeed wheelies are dangerous this way lol ;D
lol same for stoppies ;D, the bike just dissapears below you lol
As H mentioned there is some disconnection from the bike feedback, but instead you can focus in the line you want to follow.
So something in between this new view and the old one will be just perfect.
And even better a setting to blend both to the point you like it most. :) -dampered + dampered.
How, How could I missed that. I did'nt saw it on the changelog so I thought Piboso was still working on it.
I'll try it this evening with and without VR and let you know.
Max, did you tryed with or without your head tracker ?
Quote from: tchemi on February 20, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
Max, did you tryed with or without your head tracker ?
With and without.
I think the positive effect is more visible without head tracker (using the head tracker takes away some of the weirdness I perceive in the default mode).
Quote from: Warlock on February 20, 2017, 12:59:05 AM
As H mentioned there is some disconnection from the bike feedback, but instead you can focus in the line you want to follow.
So something in between this new view and the old one will be just perfect.
As H mentioned where ?
yes, the new view rocks, it's definitely a lot more realistic and fun to play. just got to get more used to it now.
Where I can change the new mode for the onboard views?
I don´t see mode 1 on the game.
Regards
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 20, 2017, 10:04:03 AM
As H mentioned where ?
http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=4603.msg70436#msg70436
Reply 12
If i understood him correctly :P
Quote from: jemaro on February 20, 2017, 11:54:57 AM
Where I can change the new mode for the onboard views?
I don´t see mode 1 on the game.
Regards
Quote from: PiBoSo on February 19, 2017, 11:02:38 PM
There are a few settings that are only available manually editing profile.ini file that is located in profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ save path.
[view]
mode = 1
To select the "alternative" mode for the onboard views ( pointing to the direction of motion and pitch relative to the ground rather than the bike ).
Quote from: vin97 on February 20, 2017, 10:12:36 AM
yes, the new view rocks, it's definitely a lot more realistic and fun to play. just got to get more used to it now.
Haha, That's why you were so fast on mugello ^^.
Seriously, I think this is awesome that this new view came on the beta11. Strange that we have to edit the ini file and that this is not a option in the settings like lean, tilt, fov etc... Maybe it is completly unrelated.
Quote from: Warlock on February 20, 2017, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: jemaro on February 20, 2017, 11:54:57 AM
Where I can change the new mode for the onboard views?
I don´t see mode 1 on the game.
Regards
Quote from: PiBoSo on February 19, 2017, 11:02:38 PM
There are a few settings that are only available manually editing profile.ini file that is located in profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ save path.
[view]
mode = 1
To select the "alternative" mode for the onboard views ( pointing to the direction of motion and pitch relative to the ground rather than the bike ).
Thank you Warlock, But I don´t see this file.
C:\Documents\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\profiles\Your_Nick\profile.ini
Search in the file for [view] and add mode=1
Quote from: Warlock on February 20, 2017, 04:01:02 PM
C:\Documents\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\profiles\Your_Nick\profile.ini
Search in the file for [view] and add mode=1
Thank you again Warlock,now yes.
I like the new camera onboard much better.
WOA !!
Personnaly, I think that this is one of the most significant improvement I saw in GPB. It's awesome, near perfect !
On the plus :
- image stability, it helps to be much more reliable and decrease brain and eyes fatigue on long runs
- immersion, It's just awesome ! You (Piboso) kept the essential ! The movement from back to front when braking or changing gear, like a little kick in the butt. The little woblles that are still present. They are no more a difficulty but it's like, any little movement you won't notice is just normal or acceptable. Any movement you will notice on the bike is an alert ! The first time I pull up the rear wheel on a breaking, I didn't realised, it was just my brain saying "hey, isn't the bike disapearing ? you should release everything !!" and I released the brake. Then I realized, ooooookkkkk so that's how stoppies look like now
- confidence, You can target the apex or the exit of the corner and stay focus on it. My trajectories are a bit cleaner and I feel a lot more comfortable
- still has some feedback, wobbling, the cam that raise a bit with the front of the bike, kick in the butt on shiftings... It has nothing to see with 3rd P. It is not altered, not arcade, it is just an other 1P cam logic.
On the neg :
- bit less feedback, when sliding, or when the rear wheel pull up. Yes, thos movement are little, subtile and you have to get used to it (depending on the bikes, the moto GP for instance, you have a great view on the cockpit, it gives more feedback than the varese that is very low (no offense or what, I did'nt tested all bikes, I just take examples))
- setup more difficult, you don't feel any little change and I think it can be more difficult to set up the bike cause you don't have the full feedback
On definitive, this is a great work and a great surprise Piboso could have done this so fast !!
There are maybe some little features that can be added to polish it.
As Warlock said, maybe a cursor to chose how much we want it dampered, but I'm afraid the two logics between mode=0 and mode=1 are too much different.
Otherwise, a feature to move the default cam position (up/down, front/back) could be very usefull too
Green thumbs for PiBoSo !! <3
Edit : If anybody want to try, here are my settings
[view]
fov=85.000000
tilt=0.250000
pitch=0.500000
corner_anticipation=2
corner_anticipation_scale=0.500000
lean_heading_scale=6.000000
free_look=0
free_look_input=0
curview=0
mode=1
very very nice improvement thank you guys :) alot more realistic feeling now
Tchemi, if you car about immersion yoiu should try an EdTracker.
I have a TrackIR and a HTC Vive ;)
I'd still throw the TrackIR away for an EdTracker :)
Do you see the improvements in the onboard even when using the TrackIR and/or the Vive ?
Please note that when using VR the camera is always fixed to the bike.
I didn't tryed the VR yet. I think it's not a urge regarding the last message ::)
I was more interested in knowing if you see a difference with the TrackIR, just to be sure the improvement I think I have with the EdTracker is not placebo :)
WOW !! I was tryed new view and I am in shock :o how small change can significant improve the riding now the keep correct race line is so much easier, riding is pure fun only 2 things i noticed the cam on wheelie and second on track Autobahn on road CBR900RR on low speed camera shaking horizontal in Brno is OK Thank You Piboso. cheers
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 21, 2017, 08:55:32 AM
I was more interested in knowing if you see a difference with the TrackIR, just to be sure the improvement I think I have with the EdTracker is not placebo :)
So it makes a difference when using EdTracker (I do)?
Cheers,
/David "Gonzo" Boda #46
Sounds like a good update. Is this going to be ported to MXB? And if so will there be some compensation for big hill climbs I.e Washington, Maryland?
Quote from: TheFatController on February 22, 2017, 08:52:01 AM
Sounds like a good update. Is this going to be ported to MXB? And if so will there be some compensation for big hill climbs I.e Washington, Maryland?
It has already been ported to MXB.
Could you please explain what "compensation" means?
You know, if it looks at the horizon then climbing the big hill at Washington, or Mount St Helen on the custom track Glen Helen which has what must be a 40* climb give or take would leave the rider looking at the tank.. By compensation I mean a way of using the terrain to maybe influence the view for hills and decents.
Quote from: TheFatController on February 22, 2017, 11:01:51 AM
You know, if it looks at the horizon then climbing the big hill at Washington, or Mount St Helen on the custom track Glen Helen which has what must be a 40* climb give or take would leave the rider looking at the tank.. By compensation I mean a way of using the terrain to maybe influence the view for hills and decents.
The new onboard views are not locked to the horizon.
The reference is the ground.
Aha, awesome. That should make for some interesting motocross, thanks ;D
Just to be sure we understand the new view mode correctly, what changed is:
- pitch (of the view) aligned to the ground (was aligned to the bike)
- yaw (of the view) aligned to the bike direction of motion (was aligned to the bike "longitudinal" direction)
Correct ?
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 22, 2017, 11:22:43 AM
Just to be sure we understand the new view mode correctly, what changed is:
- pitch (of the view) aligned to the ground (was aligned to the bike)
- yaw (of the view) aligned to the bike direction of motion (was aligned to the bike "longitudinal" direction)
Correct ?
Correct.
Thx !
As it seems the new view mode is appreciated, it may be interesting to understand if the improvement comes from the pitch change, from the yaw change or from both.
Two things I was wondering about:
1. If MXB already has the same pitch view behavior (sight aligned to the ground), how does it cope with whoops and similar stuff ?
Is the link "ground slope --> view pitch angle" rigid ? Some sort of filtering / deadzone / averaging of the ground slope over a given distance ?
2. Maybe to limit the weirdness in case of wheeling (looking at the tank), you could make it so that the sight is kept aligned to the ground only if the pitch angle of the bike is below a certain threshold. Example: flat track surface, small wheeling (let's say 10deg), the sight stays horizontal, but big wheeling the sight goes up. Of course you could make this more sophisticated (perfect correction below some threshold, filtered outside that). Or maybe just some filtering will work fine: will compensate bike pitch movements (relative to "ground pitch") but only within a limited control bandwidth, i.e. it will react with limited speed: hitting a ramp too fast will cause the sight to stay horizontal in the first moments and become parallel to the ramp only after.
@MAx,
Yes, it is smart and if we take the actual hypothesis, this should be achievable.
Standard view : pitch (of the view) aligned to the bike
Implyes that we can align a camera axis with bike elevation
Mode=1 view : yaw (of the view) aligned to the bike direction of motion
Implyes that we can align camera with bike direction of motion
If we can align a camera angle with ground/ actual bike elevation / bike actual direction, we can have a smooth and high end cam behaviour on wheelies (sorry, when I say 'we can', you know what I mean)
Then, your last sentence is very interesting !!
It made me think that there is something you seamed to have miss. There is a longitudinal movement from front to back / back to front. If you grab the brake, you will move forward like if your balls where smashing on the tank.
is this movement from back to front related to G force / actual deceleration of the bike ?? or static/constant variable ?
Your example with the ramp made me thing about it. The fact that in reality you will still look in front of you for a few moment is due to G force. -decided to skip explanations-
If whe have -in real time- bike speed, acceleration / gforce, direction of the bike etc... We can implement a logic on the pitch alignment.
Let's find a good formula !!
MaX, good question with the dead zone. I'd also be interested to know. Its a shame you can't load up mxb tracks in gpb to find out..
Quote from: tchemi on February 22, 2017, 05:22:53 PM
@MAx,
Yes, it is smart and if we take the actual hypothesis, this should be achievable.
Standard view : pitch (of the view) aligned to the bike
Implyes that we can align a camera axis with bike elevation
Mode=1 view : yaw (of the view) aligned to the bike direction of motion
Implyes that we can align camera with bike direction of motion
If we can align a camera angle with ground/ actual bike elevation / bike actual direction, we can have a smooth and high end cam behaviour on wheelies (sorry, when I say 'we can', you know what I mean)
Not sure I understand what you're asking here. Mode 0 (default) and 1 (new) set both pitch and yaw behaviour
Quote from: tchemi on February 22, 2017, 05:22:53 PM
Then, your last sentence is very interesting !!
It made me think that there is something you seamed to have miss. There is a longitudinal movement from front to back / back to front. If you grab the brake, you will move forward like if your balls where smashing on the tank.
is this movement from back to front related to G force / actual deceleration of the bike ?? or static/constant variable ?
Your example with the ramp made me thing about it. The fact that in reality you will still look in front of you for a few moment is due to G force. -decided to skip explanations-
My understanding is that, at least in MXB (don't know in GPB), the rider arms/legs(and maybe torso too) are some spring/damper links to the bike, hence the dynamics of the rider (or its torso) is driven by physics. Don't know if it moves fwd (as in translate fwd), but for sure it "bends" (pitch) forward.
But that "only" controls the camera position (assuming the camera is bolted in the rider head), not the direction the camera points to. or, if it controls the direction also (camera attitude = head attitude) then there's some extra sight adjustment on top. That last part (camera attitude adj) is what has been changed with "mode = 1", not the rest (camera pos). That's my understanding, at least.
Quote from: TheFatController on February 22, 2017, 06:38:49 PM
MaX, good question with the dead zone. I'd also be interested to know. Its a shame you can't load up mxb tracks in gpb to find out..
On the GPB Mega tracks page there's a "track" named funring that has 4 ramps.
They are extremely basic (just flat planes, with different angles).
The "track" is just a huge (and mostly empty) space so if you want to figure out where the ramps are, be sure to raise thew drawdistance in your profile.ini (from 1000, to 100000m), so that you can see where they are.
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 22, 2017, 06:49:15 PM
But that "only" controls the camera position (assuming the camera is bolted in the rider head), not the direction the camera points to. or, if it controls the direction also (camera attitude = head attitude) then there's some extra sight adjustment on top. That last part (camera attitude adj) is what has been changed with "mode = 1", not the rest (camera pos). That's my understanding, at least.
Ho, you may be right !! I didn't saw that.
Also I was thinking about one thing. Why are we talking about tuning the view for wheelies and stopies ? Do we need more realism, more immersion or just more feedback.
In my opinion, the actual mode=1 is very realist and a tuning could be just a matter of feedback. It is actually hard to know, Is the angle of the bike that dangerous or can I continue full throttle ?
But in any case, as I remember my wheelies IRL, even if we talk about little ones, big ones, slow ones, surprises ones... I always had my tank in front of me and I was guessing the road in front of me. Also, I'm not a stunter and I never made wheelies for kilometers.
IMO it's already realistic, i don't see a problem with wheelies.
the only thing that is missing would be the "dampened" rider/cam from MXB to simulate the G-forces acting on the rider (particularly, pulling the head/cam down a bit under braking).
..but just to make sure, having the option of controlling yaw and pitch independently would be good.
It was just loud thinking: the first wheelies with the new view looked very weird, but maybe it's just because I (and others) were too accustomed to the old view ...
At any rate, personally I'd make the new view (mode = 1) the default for GPB.
I'm still curious how exactly the "ground" direction is computed (especially in MXB where the track may be very bumpy).
Toying around on Funring (that has some sort of pipe section) I've seen some weirdness with the new view: sometimes the view varies in a weird manner (but that was when trying to "climb" on the pipe wall, a hardly reasonable situation for GPB) and sometimes there was some sort of fast vibration of the view. But maybe it's just due to that specific "track".
I don't know how the direction is computed but I guess it is something like "actual pos - last post" and this is computed every T (period). the more little T is the more fluid the camera will be. The greater T is, the more fluid the camera is.
Is it how direction is computed ? What is the size of T and could it be changed ? Is it static, computed ?
Maybe this is a matter of camera actuation.
=> TL;DR how the bike direction is computed ?
So I did a few more testing.
TL/DR version: I.LOVE.THE.NEW.1ST.PERSON.VIEW !!
Details: so I did another short session, putting some more thinking in it.
First, I disabled auto rider lean (both l/r and f/b). This has allowed me to confirm that the GPB rider behaves like the MXB one: if you brake, the torso pitches forward. Good ! Actually you can see it even when shifting gears up (little fwd/back shake).
Second I was thinking on which track we could really stress test this and .. bam: Ledenon ! It's not a track, it's a rollercoaster (I've been there for a round on french SBK, amazing).
Result: I find the new view lovely. Seriously lovely. Fuckin' lovely in fact. I absolutely love the way it behaves when you have an head-shake: if it's moderate (wobble), you only see the bike shaking, but if it becomes more serious (weave), the view shakes too. Just perfect.
I'm finding the behaviour in case of wheeling more tolerable, so yeah, i't may be just a matter of getting accustomed to this.
I still think there's some filtering to apply (wouldn't know where though, either on the ground reference or on the sight pitch movement): in some low-speed turns in which the bike is seriously leaning there seems to be some sort of high-freq vibration in the sight. There's a chance this may be due to poor track surface as the track is pretty old (don't know, maybe Hawk can check this out), but I'd tend to say that the onboard view should work reasonable even with a poor surface. If somebody can try the same I'd like to hear your feedback.
Overall, I'd put the mode=1 as the default one or, if for whichever reason this can't happen, then it would be nice to have an in-game option to switch between mode 0 and mode 1. With mode 1 by default, of course :)
Well done PiBoSo !
P.S.
I'm pondering ditching the 3rd person view. And before somebody comes up saying "3rd person is for sissies", let me tell you: the old 1st person was for masochist sissies :)
Quote from: tchemi on February 22, 2017, 11:43:02 PM
=> TL;DR how the bike direction is computed ?
This comes more or less straight out of the physics, should be smooth enough.
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 22, 2017, 11:47:26 PMFirst, I disabled auto rider lean (both l/r and f/b). This has allowed me to confirm that the GPB rider behaves like the MXB one: if you brake, the torso pitches forward. Good ! Actually you can see it even when shifting gears up (little fwd/back shake).
Hmm, I don't see it. The bike just moves but the G-forces are not pulling the rider (whose muscles are apparently simulated as dampers in MXB).
What 3rd person view? Thought that was just for replays ;) ;D
Quote from: vin97 on February 22, 2017, 11:55:36 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 22, 2017, 11:47:26 PMFirst, I disabled auto rider lean (both l/r and f/b). This has allowed me to confirm that the GPB rider behaves like the MXB one: if you brake, the torso pitches forward. Good ! Actually you can see it even when shifting gears up (little fwd/back shake).
Hmm, I don't see it. The bike just moves but the G-forces are not pulling the rider (whose muscles are apparently simulated as dampers in MXB).
it's not the bike that moves, it's the rider that moves relative to the bike.
i just looked very closely at the horizon/ground under braking and it doesn't move so the cam is not affected by g-forces. only the bike moves forward/"down" (dash drops out of the FoV).
the g-forces should pull on the neck of the rider and consequently rotate the cam towards the bike (with some dampening in between), so that the relative movement between cam and bike is not as big.
perhaps it should even be the other way around: the dash should not "drop away from you" but rotate towards you to give better feedback of how hard you're braking.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 01:52:23 AM
i just looked very closely at the horizon/ground under braking and it doesn't move so the cam is not affected by g-forces.
I'll take another look tonight but then why when you're accelerating an you shift up a gear you have a small jerk of the view then ?
To me camera pos is affected by acceleration (but notice that camera direction may be unaffected by that as it is "stabilized" to the horizon by default or to the local ground with the new mode).
I agree with max. I experienced the camera moves when accelerating / braking or shifting. That is what I called the kick in the butt.
Camera longitudinal position is affected by acceleration / deceleration.
@Vin, Talking about Gforce, I'm not sure your head will rotate under deceleration. The Gforce effect is based on how many energy your body has stored and how strong you will try to change the direction of this vector. Your body will continue forward will the bike brakes. In any case, your sight won't rotate. Your eyes will stay focus on the horizon.
And you will say, yes, you don't talk about cam direction but cam height. If you deactivate auto lean, It's like you are locking your legs around the tank and your arms on the steering bar. This way, it is just like the rider body manage all the negative force. It is not completly irrealist that the camera height dont' move.
Anyway, This could be achieved easily and this could be customized as the lean angle and tilt are today.
The best possible solution should to make the arms act like springs as in MXB
Quote from: tchemi on February 23, 2017, 11:24:16 AM
The best possible solution should to make the arms act like springs as in MXB
I'm tempted to think they already are like that, that's why you see the cam movements when acc/brk/shift.
Even if the rides's ass is bolted on the seat (at least longitudinally), the torso can pitch fwd/back and that makes the camera move (translate) fwd/back.
I still don't see any cam movement. The "kick in the butt" is there because no bike in GPB has anything close to a seamless gearbox and the relative movement to the bike under braking is there because the forks compress.
In any case, I think we are agreeing that there could be a bit more feedback under braking (the bike just dropping out of the FoV is not really useful).
I don't think the view/rider should suddenly slide forward against the tank, that doesn't happen in real-life.
The rider positions his body for braking (done by f/b lean in GPB) and his muscles will counteract the g-forces that pull the torso forward. The muscles would be simulated as dampers, resulting in some backlash/variance in longitudinal cam position but that would only be a very minimal amount that (alone) will barely be noticable or give useful feedback (otherwise f/b lean would also feel way too "spongy").
The head/cam rotation, similar to the helmet rotation of Max' plugin, that I suggested would just be a way of getting the feedback you would normally get by other senses in real life (inner ear).
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 11:56:22 AM
I still don't see any cam movement. The "kick in the butt" is there because no bike in GPB has anything close to a seamless gearbox and the relative movement to the bike under braking is there because the forks compress.
If the rider is rigid on the bike and the fork compress, then there's no relative movement between bike and rider.
But there is, so the rider is not rigid (and hence the camera moves).
The fact the camera drection does not chnage (in mode 0 or in mode 1) is something else.
the cam (which doesn't align with the rider model) is not rigid on the bike but it also doesn't respond to g-forces. the bike is moving relative to the ground (rotating around the rear axis) while the cam isn't, resulting in relative movement between cam and bike.
manually tuck in all the way and then brake or accelerate.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 12:33:16 PM
the cam (which doesn't align with the rider model) is not rigid on the bike but it also doesn't respond to g-forces. the bike is moving relative to the ground (rotating around the rear axis) while the cam isn't, resulting in relative movement between cam and bike.
manually tuck in all the way and then brake or accelerate.
If you manually tuck in all the way, then the rider is rigid and it is normal that the camera doesn't move (or at least not as much) as the rider itself doesn't move.
Do the test: auto rider lean fully off (so the rider is in its "middle" position, not tucked in), go on a straight, brake (or shift gears up).
It's exactly the same, it's just harder to tell what is actually happening because the cam is so far away from the cockpit.
Plus usng fully manual lean and keeping the stick in the neutral position is just as much of an input as tucking in is. It would only be different, if using auto lean + manual override.
If the cam was to react to g-forces, "rider lean" would have to be turned into "target rider lean" with some dampening calculations in between that dictate the actual rider lean.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 01:56:35 PM
It's exactly the same, it's just harder to tell what is actually happening because the cam is so far away from the cockpit.
Plus usng fully manual lean and keeping the stick in the neutral position is just as much of an input as tucking in is. It would only be different, if using auto lean + manual override.
If the cam was to react to g-forces, "rider lean" would have to be turned into "target rider lean" with some dampening calculations in between that dictate the actual rider lean.
I think that's exactly what is done for MXB and, from what I see, for GPB too: the rider has spring and dampers, the rider lean command is in fact a target lean one.
So yes, to me the camera reacts to g-forces.
but you just said the rider remains rigid when tucking in, meaning the rider lean is currently not a "target input" in GPB.
maybe we should just ask piboso what is actually the case.
..and, as i wrote earlier, i don't think all this is really relevant anyway because if you accurately simulate the g-forces and counteracting rider muscles, the effect of the difference in longitudinal cam position (delta between target and actual rider lean/cam position) alone (without any cam rotation) is so insignificant that it's pretty much useless as feedback (the cockpit disappearing under you even takes away feedback you would normally get from the handlebars). i mean, even if it was already there, it is so insignificant that we cannot agree that it's there.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 02:48:20 PM
but you just said the rider remains rigid when tucking in, meaning the rider lean is currently not a "target input" in GPB.
It is a target input when the "stick is centered" and the torso can move ... when you're tucked in, laying on the tank, well, then you're essentially one with the bike.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 02:48:20 PM
maybe we should just ask piboso what is actually the case.
Agree.
But for MXB the answer I got is: the rider legs and arms are springs/dampers.
that differentiation only makes sense when talking about manual override. just do the test but only tuck in half way or something if you believe that the "input type" suddenly flips from target to actual lean once you reach max. lean (or some other magical value). i just said it because when the cockpit is closer, it's easier to see that it's the bike that's moving and not the cam.
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 03:09:20 PM
it's easier to see that it's the bike that's moving and not the cam.
If the bike moves relative to the cam, the cam moves relative to the bike. I really don't see what you're saying ...
What I am saying is that, with manual rider lean and no input, when we shift up / brake we see the camera move (or the bike move, if you prefer, but it's the same thing).
This means that there's a relative movement between the bike and the cam, driven by forces. This is consistent with what PiBoSo told about the rider in MXB (spring/damper arms/legs).
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 03:09:20 PM
i just said it because when the cockpit is closer, it's easier to see that it's the bike that's moving and not the cam.
I'm using the second 1P view, the closest one. And even if your explainations are good, I can't see the bike going "under" me. I clearly see myself making front and back slides on the seat.
And that corresponds quite well with what I can feel when riding. Before I had the alcantara seat, I was quite often smashing my balls on the tank and quite often seated on the back seat cover.
Quote from: HornetMaX on February 23, 2017, 03:36:24 PM
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 03:09:20 PM
it's easier to see that it's the bike that's moving and not the cam.
If the bike moves relative to the cam, the cam moves relative to the bike. I really don't see what you're saying ...
What I am saying is that, with manual rider lean and no input, when we shift up / brake we see the camera move (or the bike move, if you prefer, but it's the same thing).
This means that there's a relative movement between the bike and the cam, driven by forces. This is consistent with what PiBoSo told about the rider in MXB (spring/damper arms/legs).
Quote from: vin97 on February 23, 2017, 12:33:16 PM
the cam (which doesn't align with the rider model) is not rigid on the bike but it also doesn't respond to g-forces (so it's not "target lean"+dampers). the bike is moving relative to the ground (rotating around the rear axis) while the cam isn't, resulting in relative movement between cam and bike.
manually tuck in all the way and then brake or accelerate.
You've lost me vin97.
Have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tdtbT_--gs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tdtbT_--gs)
Full manual rider lean, 1st onboard view, with mode = 1 (new one).
First 12 seconds I show my controls: right joystick is rider f/b (up/down) and bike lean (left/right); left joystick is rider l/r (left/right) and clutch/rear brake (up/down).
Now look between 0:25s and 0:30s: I *only* use the front brake (no rider lean input). You say "the bike moves below me". I say it's the camera that under inertial forces moves forward.
Bonus part: between 0:50s and 0:58s I'm fully tucked in (my right joystick is fully up) and again I only press the front brake. Same thing happen: due to inertia, the camera moves forward. To me it's all good.
I'm too lazy to upload another video (my connection sucks) but do this: steady speed, no input at all, brake with constant force until the bike stops. The camera will move forward while braking but at the end, when the bike stops, as there's no more braking force the camera will go back to it's "middle" position. You can even see it bounce a bit ! The cam is springy !