An adjustable first-person "Camera Shake" feature, I feel would be a very welcome addition to the next GP Bikes release. I've included a video below as an example.
Start at 6m 14s
https://www.youtube.com/v/O48OJqet5Vg?t=6m14s
What do you mean exactly ? The POV moving/vibrating due to wind / bumps ?
[Off topic: the dude in the video is the perfect example of what a biker should *not* be. What an asshole.]
I think this video will more clearly demonstrate what I'm getting at
https://www.youtube.com/v/M97TBYYcyjI
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Quote from: Warlock on October 06, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Can't make me sick at all. Piboso's "tilt" feature on the other hand...
Quote from: Urban Chaos 2.0 on October 06, 2016, 06:55:46 AM
Quote from: Warlock on October 06, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Can't make me sick at all. Piboso's "tilt" feature on the other hand...
I see tilt in you video too, what's the difference with GPB's tilt (which can be lowered/adjusted) ?
Yes, tilt can be turned of or reduced , but i can't imagine ride a 20 laps race with all that shacking going on plus the bike shaking itself. Corner apex aiming could be a pain.
if anything, we need a more stable helmet cam.
You do get plenty of shaking on a camera views but your eyeballs and head are good at filtering that out. I'd prefer the eyeball view for 1st person riding myself, but maybe the shaking imitation would be suitable for replay camera views?
Quote from: Warlock on October 06, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Yeah, I agree. Your brain is not a camera and your eyes aren't lens. Mwell, they are lens technically but... The brain is a really advanced machine that embed the best stabilizing features.
If you are a real biker, you know that you don't see shake and vibration trough your eyes.
In order to make this sim as real as possible, the game should show what our brain could see and not what a mounted camera could see.
Quote from: tchemi on October 06, 2016, 06:00:01 PM
Quote from: Warlock on October 06, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Yeah, I agree. Your brain is not a camera and your eyes aren't lens. Mwell, they are lens technically but... The brain is a really advanced machine that embed the best stabilizing features.
If you are a real biker, you know that you don't see shake and vibration trough your eyes.
In order to make this sim as real as possible, the game should show what our brain could see and not what a mounted camera could see.
Well the brain definitely has a built-in stabilizer. But it also has its limits. I ride every day by bicycle to work, and there is a passage of cobblestone (you know à la Paris–Roubaix) and there my brain gets to its limits in terms of stabilizing. I definitely have a blurred vision there (I don't have suspension on my bicycle). And I also recall that sometime when riding my CBR above about 200 km/h I sometimes also had sort of blurred vision. I am pretty sure it depends on the wavelength of the oscillations the brain has to absorb whether it can filter them out completely.
Having said that, I would love to have some very nimble (only slightly noticeable) blurring effect, at least for say +250 km/h to give a better perception of speed. I would also love to see some sort of reaction of the upper body to very high g-forces. If I ride my bike and I really brake very very hard, I can really feel how I cannot completely keep my arms extended at the initial "shock" when the g-forces apply - it is only noticeable at braking with maximum braking force and only for a split second when the g-force is very high. Also sometimes in the other direction if I accelarate really hard and the 100+Nm take full effect. If that could be also applied in a nimble and realistic manner, I think it would give a better perception of really riding onboard.
Just to make sure I am not misunderstood - I am completely against such generic shaking and blurring like in the video above.
Just my 2 cents...
I have bad eyes and being an old fart dont help. It is hard enough in 1st person without adding more movement to it thank you very much.
Now STFU Urban lol
DD
Quote from: tchemi on October 06, 2016, 06:00:01 PM
Quote from: Warlock on October 06, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
So you get sick and also can't see anything riding onboard, good feature. :P
Yeah, I agree. Your brain is not a camera and your eyes aren't lens. Mwell, they are lens technically but... The brain is a really advanced machine that embed the best stabilizing features.
If you are a real biker, you know that you don't see shake and vibration trough your eyes.
In order to make this sim as real as possible, the game should show what our brain could see and not what a mounted camera could see.
Exactly :)
Not only the brain, but the whole body, neck, act as a filter for those shakes
Obviously if you ride in a " à la Paris–Roubaix" you shake like hell, but i dont think any real track would be allowed to use this 'tarmac' lol ;D
In principle it shouldn't be too hard to simulate a non-rigid link between the bike chassis and the 1st person camera (it's a bunch of spring+dampers): that could simulate how a real head+body react to a moving/vibrating chassis. I have absolutely no idea if it's worth the effort though: it may be that once it's developed the end result looks either fake or so tiny to be almost irrelevant.
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 06, 2016, 08:40:14 PM
In principle it shouldn't be too hard to simulate a non-rigid link between the bike chassis and the 1st person camera (it's a bunch of spring+dampers): that could simulate how a real head+body react to a moving/vibrating chassis. I have absolutely no idea if it's worth the effort though: it may be that once it's developed the end result looks either fake or so tiny to be almost irrelevant.
Yeah thought of that too. I think it would depend on how it looks. It has to be very subtle, like irl. But I think it would definitely help the immersion. There are car sims that try to simulate the g-forces and how the head of a driver behaves. If it is not overdone then it really does help the immersion.
Here is a video which shows what g-forces do with the head of rider (I guess everybody can distinguish for himself which movements are done by the rider by moving around on the bike and which are g-force related unvoluntary movements). Intersting stuff starts at 00:35.
https://www.youtube.com/v/yjJ2GVJjfj8
There is definitely some involuntary head movements, especially due to bumps and the suspension working. The braking g-forces don't do very much, because the rider is expecting them and holds his head stiff - normal behaviour. But in the braking at around 00:47 you can see that the arm extends in order to absorb the brake forces, but you can see that the arms just do get bent a little tiny bit and the head moves a little bit forward because of the g-force. If that could be implemented in GPB it would help to get a feeling for the amount of braking, for the immersion in general.
But I agree it should have a high priority. It will only benefit the 1st person riders, who are still not very many. But as soon as VR will be widespread, that might be interesting for many more.
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 06, 2016, 09:07:48 PMThere is definitely some involuntary head movements, especially due to bumps and the suspension working.
Which is irrelevant because the brain filters those inputs, as outlined by tchemi.
I'd argue that the first person cam being aligned with the rider's head location and direction (which would make helmet cam possible in replays) has a higher priority than simulating 100% accurate neck/head movements.
A simple filter that reduces the extreme shaking when the bike is wobbling around is another story, though.
Quote from: vin97 on October 06, 2016, 09:42:36 PM
I'd argue that the first person cam being aligned with the rider's head location and direction (which would make helmet cam possible in replays)
I'm not sure the above is correct. My understanding is that today we don't have rider camera in replays because in replay files the exact position of the rider head/camera is not saved (nor reconstructed, if that is even possible). So I guess that having the camera aligned with the rider head (which btw is already the case right now when riding I think, no ?) will not give you automagically rider cam in replays.
You're right, it's not a direct consequence so to speak because, like you said, the head location and direction data is useless when it comes to reconstructing the helmet view, at the moment.
But if they matched, all you'd have to do is include that data in the netcode (GPB is already handling head direction for VR).
edit: And you'd have to make the rider invisible for the helmet cam of course.
Instead of having arbitrary tilt/"corner anticipation"/etc. sliders, you could have a couple of sliders/factors that "connect" the actual rider head location/direction to the helmet cam/view.
So for example one for left/right percentage and one for rotation/direction percentage (and if necessary also forward/backward and up/down).
To replicate exactly what other riders were seeing when watching replays, you'd have to include those factors in the netcode as well but I don't think that's necessary.
Quote from: vin97 on October 06, 2016, 10:36:32 PM
You're right, it's not a direct consequence so to speak because, like you said, the head location and direction data is useless when it comes to reconstructing the helmet view, at the moment.
But if they matched, all you'd have to do is include that data in the netcode (GPB is already handling head direction for VR).
Instead of having arbitrary tilt/"corner anticipation"/etc. sliders, you could have a couple of sliders/factors that "connect" the actual rider head location/direction to the helmet cam/view.
So for example one for left/right percentage and one for rotation/direction percentage (and if necessary also forward/backward and up/down).
To replicate exactly what other riders were seeing when watching replays, you'd have to include those factors in the netcode as well but I don't think that's necessary.
I have a doubt: maybe it's just placebo effect, but it seems to me that the 1st person camera position (X,Y coords, not orientation) is already tied to the riders head position.
When I go from the classic rider style to the modern one, the 1st person view in a high lean angle turn seems to be different to me. At any rate, if you use manual rider lean/lean overrie, the position of the 1st person camera changes when the rider leans (l/r or f/b). So somehow the camera pos is already tied to the "head' pos.
But that won't solve the camera direction problem and I dont see how what you propose is any better than the current solutions (corner anticipation or a freetrack device like an EdTracker).
Actually, I don't even get what you mean exactly: left/right percentage of what ?
The current 1P camera does not follow the rider model - try moving the camera start position into the rider helmet position and you can observe the difference. It seems to track (damped) within a limited box of it start location.
Quote from: vin97 on October 06, 2016, 09:42:36 PM
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 06, 2016, 09:07:48 PMThere is definitely some involuntary head movements, especially due to bumps and the suspension working.
Which is irrelevant because the brain filters those inputs, as outlined by tchemi.
Wrong. As I pointed out in my first post, what the brain filters out are vibrations. Because there the head oscillates around a stable middle, which the brain uses as a reference and filters out those mini-oscillations.
But if you have certain g-force "shocks", where the head gets moved for longer periods or even stays there, there is nothing to filter. If you brake hard and your upper body with head gets compressed 2cm towards the front, then you are 2cm towards the front and your brain will show you that like it should. This is what happens @00:48 in the video. It is very subtle, but if you look at it numerous times in a row you'll see it.
Also if there are certain g-force "shocks" from bigger bumps in the tarmac (@01:00 in the video) or the head gets a shock from wind catching the helmet outside of the windscreen (@00:40 in the video) you have certain movements that are not filtered.
Again, I am not talking about vibrations. I know you ride a bike yourself Vin, next time you are riding (at the temperatures we have atm it might be a few months ;) ) try to ride really hard and try to memorize what your head is doing and your brain is showing. You will see there is a difference between vibrations and certain g-force shocks. And I know that those g-force effects are not extreme. The head might be shocked only within certain mm-ranges to maybe 2-3cm only. But still it would help the immersion immensely.
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 07, 2016, 06:28:14 AM
Quote from: vin97 on October 06, 2016, 09:42:36 PM
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 06, 2016, 09:07:48 PMThere is definitely some involuntary head movements, especially due to bumps and the suspension working.
Which is irrelevant because the brain filters those inputs, as outlined by tchemi.
Wrong. As I pointed out in my first post, what the brain filters out are vibrations. Because there the head oscillates around a stable middle, which the brain uses as a reference and filters out those mini-oscillations.
bla bla bla
hum... bla bla bla is Wrong too. Remember guys that your eyes can roll in your skull and again, the brain is very powerfull weapon, decated to hunting rabbits. It filters vibrations and has a very cool features that we can call "target lock". It has benn developped during the first beta's in order to hunt rabbits and dears.
Anyway, untill a certain limit, your body, neck muscles, brain and eye rolls will filter any vibration, oscillation, rotation.
To come back to the initial topic. A simple feature could consist in blurring the edge of the screen when reaching a certain speed. But ! as it can be realistic for some of you guys, the brain can get used to it and with time and practice, it is less affected by the speed and you can still have a clear field of view with speed...
So, let's abandon this thread.