The handling is shakey, unstable and unpredictable.
There is no feedback in the tyres and barley anything in the suspension. So why add chassis flex?
A new rider is that last thing this game needed.
The game is getting core.exe crash
The front still wobbles like heck.
It just generally is drifting further and further away from a simulator and feels more like a very early beta model.
I remember this game as feeling like a simulator, now it just feels like a mess to ride the bike around the track.
(I renamed the thread as it was disrespectful and insulting) -WALKEN :) <---taking the piss, fair enough
Hi Rodney.
Have you tried the WSS 600 bikes?
I have been riding the WSS 600 YZF R6 since beta 6c was released, and I find the R6 to be very good indeed considering the continued problems of the unstable front end....... Very enjoyable to ride.
I'm hoping that once the other MOD bikes have been updated for use in Beta 6c, that they too will show the same stability that the WSS bike set is showing in beta 6c(my fingers are crossed in hope). ;D
Hawk.
Sorry Hawk but no thanks......600 it's not real at all now.......you can slide you rear tire in 5 gear witch over 180 km/h ...lol ...this 600 has like 500 hp now ??
flexible chassis, do not cash the real power, it softens the reactions carried out simple situations.A chassie be hard and soft at the same time, the rear slides and jumps, when the power comes.
(Stress of chassis is equal to the mass times the acceleration)
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 08:27:30 AM
Sorry Hawk but no thanks......600 it's not real at all now.......you can slide you rear tire in 5 gear witch over 180 km/h ...lol ...this 600 has like 500 hp now ??
lolol...to me it does not happen, only if overheating the tires (but I think is a bug) and in any case perhaps you've never ridden a 600cc with 150 hp .
however it is good to see the child rodney back only to criticize after he made a fool many times Piboso and the rest of the community with his disgusting schizophrenic behavior , where is your dignity rodney?
Quote from: yoshimura on November 05, 2014, 08:37:04 AM
flexible chassis, do not cash the real power, it softens the reactions carried out simple situations.A chassie be hard and soft at the same time, the rear slides and jumps, when the power comes.
(Stress of chassis is equal to the mass times the acceleration)
You must remember this is a game, before adding "new features" the ones already implemented should be of an acceptable level so that things don't become worse and lost.
I understand that chassis flex along with many other physics attributes are important but is it really that useful for this game?. Every time a patch is implemented the riding experience gets worse -
sure you can get some decent lap times and there will always be fast riders for this game, but as I know from racing motorbikes is that there is something seriously incorrect accross the board.
I just dont get how I can open the throttle completely in a lean and the moment the bike becomes up-right it instantly wheelies. therefore you must be leaning to go fastest even in a straight line!
Aside from the wobble the bikes are twitchy and bouncy left, right, up and down. Even using a G25 wheel trying to be precise as possible I get such little feedback its miserable. The feedback from the brakes and front tyre
is very bad and how the gear shifts down is also bad. the TCS and anti wheelie are far to obvious are reduce way to much power that the bike vibrates.
Quote from: rodneyoo7 on November 05, 2014, 09:22:06 AM
Quote from: yoshimura on November 05, 2014, 08:37:04 AM
flexible chassis, do not cash the real power, it softens the reactions carried out simple situations.A chassie be hard and soft at the same time, the rear slides and jumps, when the power comes.
(Stress of chassis is equal to the mass times the acceleration)
You must remember this is a game, before adding "new features" the ones already implemented should be of an acceptable level so that things don't become worse and lost.
I understand that chassis flex along with many other physics attributes are important but is it really that useful for this game?. Every time a patch is implemented the riding experience gets worse -
sure you can get some decent lap times and there will always be fast riders for this game, but as I know from racing motorbikes is that there is something seriously incorrect accross the board.
I just dont get how I can open the throttle completely in a lean and the moment the bike becomes up-right it instantly wheelies. therefore you must be leaning to go fastest even in a straight line!
Aside from the wobble the bikes are twitchy and bouncy left, right, up and down. Even using a G25 wheel trying to be precise as possible I get such little feedback its miserable. The feedback from the brakes and front tyre
is very bad and how the gear shifts down is also bad. the TCS and anti wheelie are far to obvious are reduce way to much power that the bike vibrates.
yeah yeah...all were talking about on the topic of beta6c, but you want the most attention to say that this simulator is "horrible", right? You are a genius of physics, i forget.......Maybe you're developing a simulator? ahahahaha
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 05, 2014, 09:09:25 AM
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 08:27:30 AM
Sorry Hawk but no thanks......600 it's not real at all now.......you can slide you rear tire in 5 gear witch over 180 km/h ...lol ...this 600 has like 500 hp now ??
lolol...to me it does not happen, only if overheating the tires (but I think is a bug) and in any case perhaps you've never ridden a 600cc with 150 hp .
however it is good to see the child rodney back only to criticize after he made a fool many times Piboso and the rest of the community with his disgusting schizophrenic behavior , where is your dignity rodney?
Well helo FastFreddy .....i don't think that i'm overheating the tires....just take Kawasaki on to Victoria.....first corner 5 gear and buummmm big spin......is this real Freddy ? and please don't say what i have been ridden or not in real live cuz its just make me laugh
Is it a troll topic?
Rodney (are you the Rodney we met time ago?) on every new Beta release some people is disappointed on some features but this time wobble and front wheel feeling are better than in beta5 without any doubt.
Chassis flexing isn't a noticeable feature, I mean without Piboso talking about this feature I think no one could notice that flex is implemented.
I tried wss600 for a nice amount of laps, I didn't notice any powerslide in 5th gear, only normal sliding on long bumped turns and high leaning angles (like long right turns in A1 Ring). The bike tends to highside only on first or second gear turns when a lot of throttle is applied, which is not far from real. So what are we talking about?
TCS and AW bring vibrations to the chassis due to the throttle cutting but I reveal a secret.. You may disable electronic controls and use your sensibility on the throttle..
Quotefirst corner 5 gear and buummmm big spin
Never seen this behavior in Victoria. Are you sure are you using the right setup.
I get 1st turn in Victoria almost/full throttle with 2, 3 and 4 cyl WSS but I didn't get any spin.
You're hitting the nail right on the head here Rodney. This is exactly what me and many others here have been thinking about gpbikes lately.
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 09:53:04 AM
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 05, 2014, 09:09:25 AM
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 08:27:30 AM
Sorry Hawk but no thanks......600 it's not real at all now.......you can slide you rear tire in 5 gear witch over 180 km/h ...lol ...this 600 has like 500 hp now ??
lolol...to me it does not happen, only if overheating the tires (but I think is a bug) and in any case perhaps you've never ridden a 600cc with 150 hp .
however it is good to see the child rodney back only to criticize after he made a fool many times Piboso and the rest of the community with his disgusting schizophrenic behavior , where is your dignity rodney?
Well helo FastFreddy .....i don't think that i'm overheating the tires....just take Kawasaki on to Victoria.....first corner 5 gear and buummmm big spin......is this real Freddy ? and please don't say what i have been ridden or not in real live cuz its just make me laugh
the temperature goes too high when i start to slide i see in the garage i think is a bug i just say to odi whithout "lol" and idiot comments like you, and in any case can actually happen to slip into gear 5tha in real life, personally tried on track noob
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 05, 2014, 10:03:57 AM
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 09:53:04 AM
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 05, 2014, 09:09:25 AM
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 08:27:30 AM
Sorry Hawk but no thanks......600 it's not real at all now.......you can slide you rear tire in 5 gear witch over 180 km/h ...lol ...this 600 has like 500 hp now ??
lolol...to me it does not happen, only if overheating the tires (but I think is a bug) and in any case perhaps you've never ridden a 600cc with 150 hp .
however it is good to see the child rodney back only to criticize after he made a fool many times Piboso and the rest of the community with his disgusting schizophrenic behavior , where is your dignity rodney?
Well helo FastFreddy .....i don't think that i'm overheating the tires....just take Kawasaki on to Victoria.....first corner 5 gear and buummmm big spin......is this real Freddy ? and please don't say what i have been ridden or not in real live cuz its just make me laugh
the temperature goes too high when i start to slide i see in the garage i think is a bug i just say to odi whithout "lol" and idiot comments like you, and in any case can actually happen to slip into gear 5tha in real life, personally tried on track noob
ok....thanks Freddy ......im a noob and you are pro..... end of discussion
Quote from: JamoZ on November 05, 2014, 10:00:41 AM
You're hitting the nail right on the head here Rodney. This is exactly what me and many others here have been thinking about gpbikes lately.
+1
but...
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 05, 2014, 06:48:34 AM
Hi Rodney.
Have you tried the WSS 600 bikes?
I have been riding the WSS 600 YZF R6 since beta 6c was released, and I find the R6 to be very good indeed considering the continued problems of the unstable front end....... Very enjoyable to ride.
I'm hoping that once the other MOD bikes have been updated for use in Beta 6c, that they too will show the same stability that the WSS bike set is showing in beta 6c(my fingers are crossed in hope). ;D
Hawk.
+1
and...
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 09:57:53 AM
I tried wss600 for a nice amount of laps, I didn't notice any powerslide in 5th gear, only normal sliding on long bumped turns and high leaning angles (like long right turns in A1 Ring). The bike tends to highside only on first or second gear turns when a lot of throttle is applied, which is not far from real. So what are we talking about?
+1
im happy just riding the 600s but theres no doubt about it the original bike physics need sorting out..
if all the data and physics are correct (possible) then GPB is getting closer to a point where a control pad becomes useless..
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 09:57:53 AM
Is it a troll topic?
Rodney (are you the Rodney we met time ago?) on every new Beta release some people is disappointed on some features but this time wobble and front wheel feeling are better than in beta5 without any doubt.
Chassis flexing isn't a noticeable feature, I mean without Piboso talking about this feature I think no one could notice that flex is implemented.
I tried wss600 for a nice amount of laps, I didn't notice any powerslide in 5th gear, only normal sliding on long bumped turns and high leaning angles (like long right turns in A1 Ring). The bike tends to highside only on first or second gear turns when a lot of throttle is applied, which is not far from real. So what are we talking about?
TCS and AW bring vibrations to the chassis due to the throttle cutting but I reveal a secret.. You may disable electronic controls and use your sensibility on the throttle..
I know that you can turn these aids off lol. However would be nice to have TCS and anti wheelie implemented and usable just like real motogp bikes. A real GP-bike has smooth
TCS and anti wheelie.
QuoteA real GP-bike has smooth TCS and anti wheelie.
And one ore more processor working on it.
This is a feature to work on but I think it's not a priority.
By the way, engine brake control is improved from beta 5. Now it's a lot smoother and realistic like real slipper clutch.
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 05, 2014, 10:13:53 AM
I'm happy just riding the 600s but there's no doubt about it the original bike physics need sorting out..
+1
I totally agree mate! ;)
I also can't wait to get back on the 2 stroke 500 MOD bikes. ;D. Just hope they are more stable than the default bikes at present.
I can only presume whoever tested the default bikes rode them so slow that they couldn't see the problems inherent in the current default bike physics? Did any of you real life race experienced guys get the chance to test beta 6 default bike physics before it was released? If not then why not? It would seem like sense to me to get you guys to test out the bike physics before Piboso releasing any beta's? I hope that in the future this becomes the case. :) 8)
Hawk.
QuoteIt would seem like sense to me to get you guys to test out the bike physics before Piboso releasing any beta's?
Well, actually betas are testing versions. We are all beta testers.. ;D
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 10:33:22 AM
QuoteIt would seem like sense to me to get you guys to test out the bike physics before Piboso releasing any beta's?
Well, actually betas are testing versions. We are all beta testers.. ;D
LOL.... Well that is very true, but I'm sure we'd all appreciate some grass roots testing of any changes Piboso makes by guys with real race experience, so that by the time of any beta release we see bigger improvements as each beta is released rather than improvements in some areas and what seems like three steps back in other areas that were previously not too bad? ;)
Either that or more frequent beta updates to put right what is obviously not right in the current release? I think this would be a good compromise. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 05, 2014, 10:28:05 AM
I also can't wait to get back on the 2 stroke 500 MOD bikes. ;D. Just hope they are more stable than the default bikes at present.
As far as I recall, 500 mod bikes had just the varese physics, so ...
MaX.
QuoteI'm sure we'd all appreciate some grass roots testing of any changes Piboso makes by guys with real race experience
For sure, and help from engineers too. I know that default bikes are fictional (and only inspired to real models) but gathering real data from real prototypes should be a hard but useful work.
As always it's all about time and money..
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 05, 2014, 10:54:11 AM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 05, 2014, 10:28:05 AM
I also can't wait to get back on the 2 stroke 500 MOD bikes. ;D. Just hope they are more stable than the default bikes at present.
As far as I recall, 500 mod bikes had just the varese physics, so ...
MaX.
Yes... Forgot about that. Good point Max. ;)
Hawk.
try to use deathzone in the setting of controller, throttle to 20, steering to 15/25 and breaking 15/20 and play...
Changing some controller settings aren't going to fix the underlying physics problems here...
I find it very hard to use the wss600 bikes, if your off line at all in a turn it will fall over. I personally think the Murasama is the only bike to use right now.
I can only use this one right now.
The front falls out to easy on the other bikes and the side to side switch is like lightning fast and always makes the bike flip.
Very hard to dial in.
My $0.02
I love the challenge , just keep practicing and youll get better.
I am very happy with the Beta6c for the most part.
do it in real and after talk for bugs or everything else that you don't like of the physic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRaDhUEAt9w
Quote from: Nismo on November 05, 2014, 02:06:15 PM
do it in real and after talk for bugs or everything else that you don't like of the physic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRaDhUEAt9w
Not sure to get your point Nismo ... if you're saying that only the ones who have actually been riding a bike on a track at that level (congrats, by the way) are entitled to to speak up, then you're very very wrong.
MaX.
look the bike movements and try to think about the driver movements.... try to do it with controller... In some server I find someone that never fall, are they lucky or they find some solutions?
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
Quotebrakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
It would be nice but without the feeling or a real lever "fading" with high temp it should be very hard.
It's the same problem with steering but with joypads there's not a lot room for improvements (talking about "touchy" feelings).
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 02:54:45 PM
Quotebrakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
It would be nice but without the feeling or a real lever "fading" with high temp it should be very hard.
I don't think it will be a problem: on hot brakes, the same stick movement will just brake less. Feeling is different (because we're using stick movement instead of applied force), but it's there.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes.
It is true that it improved in terms of what is actually simulated, but unless we have a bike (and better if it is one of the default ones) that really shows what GPB is capable of, the progress is only on the paper. What I've seen up to now of the default bikes (didn't try the varese that much) really does not show that much of an improvement, sadly. Nice to know anyway that there may be reasons explaining what we see right now.
Another missing bit could be the simulation of the tire profile (not sure the net effect will be huge tough, as the virtual rider is in the middle).
What's currently wrong with the brakes weight simulation ?
MaX.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
Thank you for the insight. This explains a lot about the instability problems showing up in the Stock Bikes.
I personally think the core physics in GPBikes is better and a good step forward... You only have to feel how the YZF R6 handles to see that. But your insight has explained why the stock bikes are not performing as people had hoped. Problem is that most people judge your work by using the stock bikes, at least initially until the MOD bikes have been updated, so with the current stock bike performance you're bound to get some critics talking about instabilities in handling, and if most MOD bikes are using stock bike physics files then a lot of the MOD bikes are not going to perform any better.
I can only hope that you will update the stock bike physics to perform as intended and release it as a hot fix in the near future? ;D
Hawk.
Quoteon hot brakes, the same stick movement will just brake less.
That's true, what I'm trying to say is that these little improvements are almost neutralized by the "interface" from sim to user.
Try to think at the "spongy" feeling of the lever when brakes are hot.
With a XBOX controller you have to think "Brakes are hot, I need to pull the stick more" without any tactile feedback.
Of course Piboso can't do anythink about this "problem" (unless they want to launch a kickstarter project of a real bike controller with force feedback etc ;D ).
I only think that these refinements should go in the bottom of the To-Do list, with major issues to get fixed first.
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 03:43:07 PM
Quoteon hot brakes, the same stick movement will just brake less.
That's true, what I'm trying to say is that these little improvements are almost neutralized by the "interface" from sim to user.
Try to think at the "spongy" feeling of the lever when brakes are hot.
With a XBOX controller you have to think "Brakes are hot, I need to pull the stick more" without any tactile feedback.
You can still feel brakes fading on a pad, it's only the way you feel it that is different.
Following your reasoning we wouldn't have GPB at all, as you can't have the feeling of real handlebars on a joypad. But today, when your tires are worn out in GPB, you do feel it ...
Quote from: Mac on November 05, 2014, 03:43:07 PM
I only think that these refinements should go in the bottom of the To-Do list, with major issues to get fixed first.
I can agree on that. Same for the new rider, the (nice) improvements of Victoria track and other stuff ... physics (including adapting the default bikes) and game stability should be priority number one and ... one.
MaX.
the brakes do not participate in the general instability,they are the effect of a cause.
About the brakes fading with high temp: it is a big problem and very noticeable on regular brakes at the racetrack (sometimes the front braking power almost disappears) but once you upgrade to steel-braided brake lines it doesn't fade nearly as much.
Personnally on a race bike with steel braided lines I don't feel the brakes fading much at all unless it's really a long session or if your braking fluid is old.
And all race bikes have these braking lines. This would be the last of my concerns in GP Bikes!
In fact to me the most important aspect of the brake thermal sim would be the fact that you need to bring the brakes up to their operating temp to get the full braking power.
So out of the pits, brakes (cold) could be weak. Also, keeping carbon discs in the right temp range in cold weather could be tricky: for rainy races you'd be better of with steel brakes (like in reality).
MaX.
Also I think the main problems with any motorcycle video game are:
- The feedback will never be as good as in real life so even if you made "perfect" physics identical to reality, you would crash easily and feel less things.
- The input of the rider will never be as rich as in real life. What I mean by that is that in real life you are doing things with your feet, your knees, your legs, your torso, your arms, your hands. Nothing is unused except your penis (but the balls are used) and to some extent your head.
If you were to build a gamepad with enough buttons for the kind of input riders use in real life you would need 50 buttons and a LOT of finger dexterity. Or you would need very precise kinect-like controls.
So what I mean by that is that at some point there needs to be a compromise to compensate the lack of feedback and input. In a word, maybe make the physics themselves more forgiving, or the input more forgiving.
I find it stupid that on the tracks I know in real life, if I try to do 50 laps without crashing on GP bikes, I cannot do it, even if I ride at the same pace than real life. In real life I've done over 200 laps at Dijon Prenois in the 1'30/1'35 (so 10/15 seconds away from the track record, not really fast) area and I've never crashed there. I bet only the best players of GP Bikes would be able to (maybe, barely) do that, whereas I'm certainly NOT a great rider in real life. Not crashing in real life is much easier than not crashing on GP Bikes. That's my main concern about this game.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
Piboso I really appreciate the physics improvements, ok, but me and other guys have many core crashes
offline with this beta6 (never had with beta 4 and 5), so playing is becoming very difficult and frustrating: what about that?
http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=1645.0
ps I also sent an email to support@gp-bikes.com
Quote from: EdouardB on November 05, 2014, 04:15:03 PM
Also I think the main problems with any motorcycle video game are:
- The feedback will never be as good as in real life so even if you made "perfect" physics identical to reality, you would crash easily and feel less things.
- The input of the rider will never be as rich as in real life. What I mean by that is that in real life you are doing things with your feet, your knees, your legs, your torso, your arms, your hands. Nothing is unused except your penis (but the balls are used) and to some extent your head.
If you were to build a gamepad with enough buttons for the kind of input riders use in real life you would need 50 buttons and a LOT of finger dexterity. Or you would need very precise kinect-like controls.
So what I mean by that is that at some point there needs to be a compromise to compensate the lack of feedback and input. In a word, maybe make the physics themselves more forgiving, or the input more forgiving.
I find it stupid that on the tracks I know in real life, if I try to do 50 laps without crashing on GP bikes, I cannot do it, even if I ride at the same pace than real life. In real life I've done over 200 laps at Dijon Prenois in the 1'30/1'35 (so 10/15 seconds away from the track record, not really fast) area and I've never crashed there. I bet only the best players of GP Bikes would be able to (maybe, barely) do that, whereas I'm certainly NOT a great rider in real life. Not crashing in real life is much easier than not crashing on GP Bikes. That's my main concern about this game.
Very true!
As I've said many times before, the controller is the missing link. Using a game pad and running 3rd person is RC racing. Designing a simulator based on RC controls would warrant a more realistic feel to the player. The physics of a RC bike vs a real bike would be relative to size weight etc...
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator.
That doesn`t mean anything if it`s not playable. Like i was discussing with someone yesterday, remember that 99% of us are using normal gamepads, and that simulating motorcycle physics 100% accurate will never make the transition on to our screens without proper input devices which will never be made for use consumers.
It has to be playable to a certain level, so compromises have to be made along the way somewhere. For car simulations we at least have controllers that come close to the real stuff, but controlling ultra complex 2 wheel physics & bodyweight shifting with a device with some buttons and 2 small joysticks is just not going to work.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PMHowever, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
Whatever you did, it resulted in a unstable, unpredicatable, and seriously not fun to ride bike.
I thought that the main focus of this beta was to improve the physics so that beta 7 would have the focus on the network part? As far as i can see, beta 7 is going to need alot of physics work to make me (and others) wanting to play this "sim" again.
my opinion,
maybe GP bikes only realistic motorcycle simulator even now.
I think its have some strange... lost front tyre grip too easy(but varase500 is good), strange motion at up hill (become oversteer) and down hill (become under steer), and too unstable on the washboard type Kerbs.
if it is solve these problem, I feel good to playing ride.
it is true motorcycle control use every part of your body. not only some part like car (car control use hand and foot,) but we control Bike only two hand finger(pad controller) its hard. It is necessary to enable it to operate it simply possibly. Or it may be filtering some.
it need or unneed, if need, how many it, that an opinion divides.
we discuss, and feedback to piboso, and submit if we have some good data.
I think it make more good GPBikes
Quote from: davidboda46 on November 05, 2014, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
true words.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 05, 2014, 04:10:32 PM
In fact to me the most important aspect of the brake thermal sim would be the fact that you need to bring the brakes up to their operating temp to get the full braking power.
So out of the pits, brakes (cold) could be weak. Also, keeping carbon discs in the right temp range in cold weather could be tricky: for rainy races you'd be better of with steel brakes (like in reality).
MaX.
If you start playing with those things it gets even more complicated pretty quickly: every time a rider grabs the brake with carbon disks (even when hot), they have less power at the beginning of the braking and more power after. A lot of riders like that because it allows for smoother suspension compression when grabbing the brake.
Quote from: davidboda46 on November 05, 2014, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
??? ??? ??? ???
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 05:11:10 PM
Quote from: davidboda46 on November 05, 2014, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Hahahah so my front wheal JUMPS like CREAZY in slow corners and this is state of the art physics ?......Waaaaw :o
seriously the simulation is not finished !!!! there are still problem.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 05:11:10 PM
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Well sad to hear this really, i personally think its gone backwards, the physics might be state of the art (to the beholder) but the total package is not even near to being finished.
Like many others already have mentioned its getting worse, the handling of the bikes. The violent wobbles and weaves are still there even worse then beta5b. Front still not stable enough to take a corner with confidence, (i always pray if i will make it). I guess we will have to make due like we always do.
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 06:11:15 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 05:11:10 PM
Quote from: davidboda46 on November 05, 2014, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Hahahah so my front wheal JUMPS like CREAZY in slow corners and this is state of the art physics ?......Waaaaw :o
Please note that physics algorithms are just one part of a simulator.
The others are:
1) input -> you have all the possible settings to tune them to your controller(s), but you HAVE TO learn and use them!!!
2) bike and rider parameters -> they need work
3) tracks -> if a turn is unrealistically bumpy, there is no hope for the simulator
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 07:21:18 PM
3) tracks -> if a turn is unrealistically bumpy, there is no hope for the simulator
Road-Racing.
PIBOSO excuse me but I want to know if you've already driven a motorcycle on the track ???
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 07:21:18 PM
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 06:11:15 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 05:11:10 PM
Quote from: davidboda46 on November 05, 2014, 04:38:12 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I have a hard time understanding this. The physics should be based on the stock bikes, as that is the core (no pun intended) of GP-bikes. When I try new versions, I always use the stock bikes because I have no idea what settings/tweaks the mod-bikes have. So if I can't trust that the games underlying physics comes through on the stock bikes, how the hell should I form an opinion and report feedback on the updated psysics?
Cheers,
David "Gonzo" Boda #46
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Hahahah so my front wheal JUMPS like CREAZY in slow corners and this is state of the art physics ?......Waaaaw :o
Please note that physics algorithms are just one part of a simulator.
The others are:
1) input -> you have all the possible settings to tune them to your controller(s), but you HAVE TO learn and use them!!!
2) bike and rider parameters -> they need work
3) tracks -> if a turn is unrealistically bumpy, there is no hope for the simulator
All i ask of you is will you please give the front wheel another go.....beta 5 and beta 6 has the samme problem witch front wheal in slow corners ....it's very unstable........i'm not trying to criticize you and this game....i love this game and im a big fan of you man
Quote from: yan24 on November 05, 2014, 08:09:45 PM
PIBOSO excuse me but I want to know if you've already driven a motorcycle on the track ???
What has this to do with making a simulator?
It's like asking Dall'Igna if he ever rode a MotoGP... ::)
Quote from: EdouardB on November 05, 2014, 05:02:54 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 05, 2014, 04:10:32 PM
In fact to me the most important aspect of the brake thermal sim would be the fact that you need to bring the brakes up to their operating temp to get the full braking power.
So out of the pits, brakes (cold) could be weak. Also, keeping carbon discs in the right temp range in cold weather could be tricky: for rainy races you'd be better of with steel brakes (like in reality).
MaX.
If you start playing with those things it gets even more complicated pretty quickly: every time a rider grabs the brake with carbon disks (even when hot), they have less power at the beginning of the braking and more power after. A lot of riders like that because it allows for smoother suspension compression when grabbing the brake.
It gets complicate as in real life, so it's good to have (and it's not too hard to implement).
The nice thing is that this change would be pretty localized (low interaction with the rest of the physics), so normally it shouldn't require a lot of re-tuning and modders spending nights and nights in adapting to it. But granted, having the 3 default bikes actually usable is far more important than brake temperature simulation.
On the whole discussion of beta6, I'm ready to trust Piboso once more (as I do think, as already said for beta5, that tuning of virtual rider and other parameters is really really needed).
But if before we had one outstanding item to tackle (game crashes), now we have two (bikes tuning and game crashes): even more than before, it's essential to have thse tackled
BEFORE any other (less important) stuff.
More and more riders are moving away from GPB. Not good.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: yan24 on November 05, 2014, 08:09:45 PM
PIBOSO excuse me but I want to know if you've already driven a motorcycle on the track ???
What has this to do with making a simulator?
It's like asking Dall'Igna if he ever rode a MotoGP... ::)
+1000, needless to say.
MaX.
Quoteseriously the simulation is not finished !!!! there are still problem.
Maybe that's why GpBikes is in a beta stage.. ::)
This thread countains a little of respectless posts. Keep in your mind that's forum and not a place to complain. All arguments have been done in other threads and i think piboso has read it.
Please, if you want to write something, do it for the best and not for the worst.
Thank you.
Quote from: Abigor on November 05, 2014, 06:11:15 PM
Hahahah so my front wheal JUMPS like CREAZY in slow corners and this is state of the art physics ?......Waaaaw :o
This whole discussion is pointless because most people don't seem to understand the following statement from Piboso....
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 07:21:18 PM
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
To all who have never programmed/modelled (big majority imo) the above statement from Piboso might come across like he assumes beta6 might be "state of the art" in terms of physics simulation. That is not what Piboso said, but it would only be understood correctly by people who know how a simulation model works.
So to make it more clear I try to explain it in a simplified way: Piboso has now pretty much found a satisfactory model for every part of simulating a motorcycle physics. But only the
model, the theoretical formula if you will. The way the user of GPB actually
feels it might be still very much work in progress because many parameters need to be tweaked. And Piboso admitted that and communicated it, which is a very good thing.
To understand this let's say you would want to model buying behaviour of a motorcycle sim:
Sales = A*Youtube_reviews + B*Steam_Access + C*Friends_Recommendations--> The accuracy of such a model would pretty much depend on the parameters A, B, C. Realistically tuned values for A, B, C might give a realistic approximate to sales, while bad parameter values would return bad sales predictions. Simple as that. So, all Piboso is saying is that is formula is very much correct, the parameters need to be adjusted. So if Piboso says that the simulation model is state of the art, you should believe him. I hope he will find a way to realistically tune the parameters.
Imo, the biggest obstacle atm seems to be the simulation of the virtual rider. In many cases of the sudden front loss, the behaviour of the virtual rider looks very suspect to me.
On another note: some time ago, we asked Piboso to not always wait for beta releases until there are very major improvements... We asked him to release even small step improvements. In terms of
modelling the bike physics Piboso has probably managed to make a huge step forward by introducing chassis flex, which really is a MUST in a motorcycle sim. So good step there. Unfortunately it doesn't feel much better in terms of rideability, as the chassis flex and rider sim improvements didn't change the bad front wheel behaviour. But still, I prefer Piboso releasing small step imrovement betas and us giving him valuable feedback (which he knows is important as he stated).
Quote from: Stout Johnson on November 05, 2014, 08:51:08 PM
Imo, the biggest obstacle atm seems to be the simulation of the virtual rider. In many cases of the sudden front loss, the behaviour of the virtual rider looks very suspect to me.
Agreed.
I agree with stout too..
Trouble is, its really hard to give feedback on this forum!
I think its split.. Some people just want a good playable game. Others want a full on sim!
Im still finding out what I want lol. Either way.. Love it or hate it, I cant stop anyway! :)
Also the fun im having with the 600s at the moment is unmatched! Thats a pretty good representation of a motorcycle in my opinion.
I totally agree with Stout in that I think Piboso is being misunderstood by many when he says the simulation model is now "state of the art"..... You have the simulation algorithms, and then the model physics file inputs to that simulation algorithm(if I'm correct in understanding how this works?).
Now. Piboso is saying that it's the bike model physics file inputs that need fine tuning now(Not the simulation), and because the simulation is now "state of the art" this should now be possible even by others who do the physics files for Mod Bikes. Am I correct?
Hawk.
I think you are correct and having tried the 600 tonight I think 6c has a lot of potential if people put time in the mods..
Gp Bikes Best simulation of motorbike !
It takes 2 years to learn to speak and a lifetime to learn to shut it
Quote from: EdouardB on November 05, 2014, 10:02:37 PM
I think you are correct and having tried the 600 tonight I think 6c has a lot of potential if people put time in the mods..
+1
Yes. I've only ridden the WSS 600 YZF R6 of all the WSS 600 bike set, and I think it's a great little bike, not perfect, but still a great little Bike MOD. It should be interesting to see what the Physics MOD guys can now do with this simulation. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: Stout Johnson on November 05, 2014, 08:51:08 PM
This whole discussion is pointless because most people don't seem to understand the following statement from Piboso....
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 07:21:18 PM
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
The problem is that the point has been made way too late: had it been made when beta6 went out (ideally even before), a lot of people would have been more inclined to accept the current status of affairs. As often, a tiny bit of communication can spare a lot of trouble.
MaX.
+1 billion
Im easily excited but easily dissapointed too..
So if the physics model is complete and its now down to fine tuning.. Then im excited again! ;D
Thinking about the 600s.. If the 1000s end up similar to that with more power, or more of everything.. That would be mega! ;D
Sounds like that can be a possibillity!! 8)
I think core exe crashes etc just adds to peoples frustration of not knowing if or when anything will be or is planned to be done.. Before old age sets in! :P
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I personally think you are a bit delusional about what/how you percieve the game to be currently....which is very frustrating.
State of the art doesn't mean realistic or simulation.
The features implemented are state of the art however they are not setup correctly..
What we are trying to say as although you think your game is perfect it is far from it. There are several members on this forum
that race or ride in real life who would be significantly beneficial to the development of the physics.
Considering you feel that not having race track experience has nothing to do with making a racing simulation just bit bit silly. Game developers engage with the community/professionals and make changes. Not just a few people but many to find the balance.
All in all I am personally extremely grateful for this game and your efforts, I think investing into this game was a positive but would like to see you work with people that know what they are talking about.
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 01:13:31 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
I personally think you are a bit delusional about what/how you percieve the game to be currently....which is very frustrating.
State of the art doesn't mean realistic or simulation.
The features implemented are state of the art however they are not setup correctly..
What we are trying to say as although you think your game is perfect it is far from it. There are several members on this forum
that race or ride in real life who would be significantly beneficial to the development of the physics.
Considering you feel that not having race track experience has nothing to do with making a racing simulation just bit bit silly. Game developers engage with the community/professionals and make changes. Not just a few people but many to find the balance.
All in all I am personally extremely grateful for this game and your efforts, I think investing into this game was a positive but would like to see you work with people that know what they are talking about.
You have a way of saying exactly what i`m thinking. Want to get married? :-*
Anyway..... Theres still 12 spaces left for the wss race at A1 ring!!! ;)
Just put yer bloody names down and have some fun! Lol :D
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ? Moreover what this project arguably ideally needs is the input of a professional motorcycle racer, either currently racing or retired, who can provide guidance & recommendation on development of the physics model so as to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, the realism & accuracy of the "on-track" behaviour of the racing motorcycles in this simulation.
It is my understanding that this is how the industry F1 simulators are developed and perfected. Input and consultation is made with real life F1 drivers from both a racing and/or testing background. This counterbalances the input from the engineers. An F1 simulator by its very nature, purpose and design must reflect as accurately as possible the real life on track behaviour & "feel" of a modern F1 racing car.
My question is this: Now that PiBoSo and the development team are satisfied they have achieved a "base" physics model that incorporates all physical parameters and aspects deemed necessary to move this project forwards will any ongoing consulation now take place with an experienced real life motorcycle racer? Has any consideration been made in the past concerning the possibility of approaching a suitable candidate to invite them to assist in the development of the gpbikes project?
To my mind as gifted and as talented as PiBoSo and his team undoubtedly are it would make sense to consult with an individual who has extensive real world on-track experience. In saying this I do not mean in anyway to undermine the position or authority of PiBoSo in relation to this project. To the contrary my thinking in this would be to enhance it.
What are your honest thoughts?
grT
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ? Moreover what this project arguably ideally needs is the input of a professional motorcycle racer, either currently racing or retired, who can provide guidance & recommendation on development of the physics model so as to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, the realism & accuracy of the "on-track" behaviour of the racing motorcycles in this simulation.
It is my understanding that this is how the industry F1 simulators are developed and perfected. Input and consultation is made with real life F1 drivers from both a racing and/or testing background. This counterbalances the input from the engineers. An F1 simulator by its very nature, purpose and design must reflect as accurately as possible the real life on track behaviour & "feel" of a modern F1 racing car.
My question is this: Now that PiBoSo and the development team are satisfied they have achieved a "base" physics model that incorporates all physical parameters and aspects deemed necessary to move this project forwards will any ongoing consulation now take place with an experienced real life motorcycle racer? Has any consideration been made in the past concerning the possibility of approaching a suitable candidate to invite them to assist in the development of the gpbikes project?
To my mind as gifted and as talented as PiBoSo and his team undoubtedly are it would make sense to consult with an individual who has extensive real world on-track experience. In saying this I do not mean in anyway to undermine the position or authority of PiBoSo in relation to this project. To the contrary my thinking in this would be to enhance it.
What are your honest thoughts?
grT
+1
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 09:00:32 PM
Quote from: Stout Johnson on November 05, 2014, 08:51:08 PM
Imo, the biggest obstacle atm seems to be the simulation of the virtual rider. In many cases of the sudden front loss, the behaviour of the virtual rider looks very suspect to me.
Agreed.
well thats good news.
couple of suggestions.. (without knowing what impact the virtual rider has already)
back off whatever forces are going through the arms/handlebars OR add a steering damper.. and somehow have some weight/forces on the foot pegs and the tank with the knee's so when flicking left/right the virtual rider uses his knee's more instead of too much force on the handlebars.. same for braking stabillity, use his knee's..
Edit: I know there is already a steering damper present.. but maybe an adjustable one in the garage to mess around with would work well with different setups! as it should do..
??? Not really clear on what people are expecting. Piboso has been into uncharted territory for years now, waaaaay ahead of anyone or anything else out there, netBike was as far as it EVER got in terms of a motorcycle simulation... and here we are with GP Bikes. I've done everything on GP Bikes I've done in real life from close calls to harrowing moments riding wheelies, all the way to catching air on a street bike. There is nowhere else in the simuation or gaming community with anywhere near this level of realism. Lets keep the critisizm constructive please? I'm grateful for this sim, and I think Piboso deserves a bit of applause here for Beta 6, compared to wheel spin 360 turns on the early alpha version, we are at a point where I think we should let the work keep going and hope the core crashes get fixed soon, as said by Piboso, it's tweaking that is left, I would say that is a good sign overall for the future of GP Bikes.
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 01:13:31 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
State of the art doesn't mean realistic or simulation.
Yes it is: the algorithms used in Beta6 make GP Bikes a full fledged realistic simulator.
Quote
The features implemented are state of the art however they are not setup correctly..
What we are trying to say as although you think your game is perfect it is far from it. There are several members on this forum
that race or ride in real life who would be significantly beneficial to the development of the physics.
Did you read the reply to Abigor? Or Stout's excellent post? ???
Quote
Considering you feel that not having race track experience has nothing to do with making a racing simulation just bit bit silly. Game developers engage with the community/professionals and make changes. Not just a few people but many to find the balance.
To quote myself:
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Did you read any of the posts in this thread? >:(
QuoteThe physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning.
PiBoSo: some users misunderstood this declaration.
As an ex automation engineering student I know that parameters tuning is essential to make a system working functionally.
Also in automation the "physics simulation" is pretty standard and the work is almos all about tuning. It makes the difference between a working and a not working system so you (PiBoSo) did a double job.
But for most users "parameters tuning" only means "small refinements", which are not.
Now we have the groundwork, it's time to build the remaining parts.
Good work.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 09:51:45 AM
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 01:13:31 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Bottom line: GP Bikes physics improved greatly since Beta4. It is now, at last, a full fledged simulator. Only brakes need some more work to simulate temperature, wear and weight.
Problem is, physics parameters of the "stock" bikes have not be properly updated to match the changes. Virtual rider and dampers are the first coming to mind. However, some data has already been changed to be more realistic: springs, steer lock, aerodynamic.
State of the art doesn't mean realistic or simulation.
Yes it is: the algorithms used in Beta6 make GP Bikes a full fledged realistic simulator.
Quote
The features implemented are state of the art however they are not setup correctly..
What we are trying to say as although you think your game is perfect it is far from it. There are several members on this forum
that race or ride in real life who would be significantly beneficial to the development of the physics.
Did you read the reply to Abigor? Or Stout's excellent post? ???
Quote
Considering you feel that not having race track experience has nothing to do with making a racing simulation just bit bit silly. Game developers engage with the community/professionals and make changes. Not just a few people but many to find the balance.
To quote myself:
The physics simulation is now the state of the art. So from now on you should not expect big changes, but a lot of parameters tuning. To do that, of course feedback is not only welcome, as always, but needed.
Did you read any of the posts in this thread? >:(
Yes... even this part:
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 05, 2014, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: yan24 on November 05, 2014, 08:09:45 PM
PIBOSO excuse me but I want to know if you've already driven a motorcycle on the track ???
What has this to do with making a simulator?
It's like asking Dall'Igna if he ever rode a MotoGP... ::)
To me you seem like someone with a very messy desk, you keep adding paper work without a correct filing system and moving to new documents because you thought the old ones where done.
Now documents are being left underneath and are being neglected. Although the fresh documents on top look good, and it may be easy to say "wait wait,... these documents are fresh and "state of the art" before you know it the stack of paper work will fall off the desk and you will be left in a pile messy crap (paper).
Now I am no wise pigeon however I think it doesn't take a genius to figure out how you go about managing your desk (game).
@rodney: I'm going to buy a license if YOUR sim is better than PiBoSo's one.
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 10:46:50 AM
To me you seem like someone with a very messy desk, you keep adding paper work without a correct filing system and moving to new documents because you thought the old ones where done.
Now documents are being left underneath and are being neglected. Although the fresh documents on top look good, and it may be easy to say "wait wait,... these documents are fresh and "state of the art" before you know it the stack of paper work will fall off the desk and you will be left in a pile messy crap (paper).
Now I am no wise pigeon however I think it doesn't take a genius to figure out how you go about managing your desk (game).
(http://performinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/jackie-chan-wtf-face-i16.jpg)
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 10:46:50 AM
To me you seem like someone with a very messy desk, you keep adding paper work without a correct filing system and moving to new documents because you thought the old ones where done.
Now documents are being left underneath and are being neglected. Although the fresh documents on top look good, and it may be easy to say "wait wait,... these documents are fresh and "state of the art" before you know it the stack of paper work will fall off the desk and you will be left in a pile messy crap (paper).
Now I am no wise pigeon however I think it doesn't take a genius to figure out how you go about managing your desk (game).
(http://whattheflicka.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/What-the-fuck-GIFS.gif)
I have just read this post and its perfectly clear where Piboso is going with the game.
He now needs our input not insults, our support and time to fine tune.
Piboso, if you can, I want debug mode (like a assetto corsa)
now we hard to what happen bike in GPBikes, if we have debug mode, we more easy to modding or fine tune ore anything...
Quote from: Yohji on November 06, 2014, 02:20:40 PM
Piboso, if you can, I want debug mode (like a assetto corsa)
now we hard to what happen bike in GPBikes, if we have debug mode, we more easy to modding or fine tune ore anything...
How should the debug mode work?
I seem like these
AC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUxx9_9W3fY
or beam ng (sry, I cant found good pic to explain...)
I hope, can check ex) tyre press, wear, temp, tyre wheel rate(how weight to tyre) how many Chassis flex, how power or toruque now, drag, anything, it can watch with playing real time (if one is allowed to wish so much its log and graphing.. )
and See-through circuit mesh...
(sry for bad explain and english...)
Quote from: Yohji on November 06, 2014, 02:46:06 PM
I seem like these
AC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUxx9_9W3fY
or beam ng (sry, I cant found good pic to explain...)
I hope, can check ex) tyre press, wear, temp, tyre wheel rate(how weight to tyre) how many Chassis flex, how power or toruque now, drag, anything, it can watch with playing real time (if one is allowed to wish so much its log and graphing.. )
and See-through circuit mesh...
(sry for bad explain and english...)
To enable debug mode, edit the file profile.ini ( located in the profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ ) and add:
[debug]
physics = 1
debug may be the solution to help you
Quote from: Alby46 on November 06, 2014, 04:08:29 PM
debug may be the solution to help you
It's not THE solution.
All feedback is needed: from modders, from those who test the bikes, from setup changes, ...
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 04:10:09 PM
Quote from: Alby46 on November 06, 2014, 04:08:29 PM
debug may be the solution to help you
It's not THE solution.
All feedback is needed: from modders, from those who test the bikes, from setup changes, ...
Exactly! So if anyone is going to post insults or overlord type opinions I'll just start deleting your posts, simple as that! Cause & effect people! Give feed back please and if you feel something is off to you explain how but don't assume you know better and if you think you do then go develop your own simulation. Insults are considered worthless information.
2 cents about the v-rider. We already discuss it in the old forum, and I don´t know if it serves, but in line with Stout´s said:
Testing the same curve, with the same line, same tyres, at the same speed, etc. the difference between rider lean on/off is huge. Allways wtih the rider lean to the curve´s inside, when you pull throttle you fall (no care if you are leaning in auto or manual set). Allways your rider lean is off ("Haillwood style") you can throttle and take the curve perfect (the only way to do that is in auto rider lean off).
thank you piboso!
it help me when I modding.
anyway, it's a big help to you
For what its worth...
My GP-bikes install has little to almost no front-end wobble at all.
The change has no impact on other physics characteristics (from my testing).
So if an issue like wobble is only a couple of lines that need to be changed why is it not already fixed?
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 10:32:10 PM
For what its worth...
My GP-bikes install has little to almost no front-end wobble at all.
The change has no impact on other physics characteristics (from my testing).
So if an issue like wobble is only a couple of lines that need to be changed why is it not already fixed?
What lines?
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 10:32:10 PM
For what its worth...
My GP-bikes install has little to almost no front-end wobble at all.
The change has no impact on other physics characteristics (from my testing).
So if an issue like wobble is only a couple of lines that need to be changed why is it not already fixed?
Hi Rodney.
If you've almost cured the front end wobble issue then please tell us what you've done to cure it. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ?
Engineers do this all the time. Because physical models are physical models.
I've been working for years on satellite and spacecraft simulators and guess what, we had no feedback from satellite or spacecraft drivers :)
Also, on this whole forum, I've met no more than 2-3 people with riding experience that could provide useful feedback (beyond basic stuff I mean).
Most of the other riders (whichever riding skill they may have) have such a little understanding of physics that they are totally unable to translate what they feel into useful info.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 03:58:54 PM
To enable debug mode, edit the file profile.ini ( located in the profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ ) and add:
[debug]
physics = 1
w00t ! Thanks ! I was about to ask for this two days ago (mainly for a tire overheating problem with the wss 600, but who knows).
MaX.
I think Piboso forward 100 years, compared to all driving games, they both have 2 wheels or 4 wheels, and I think that the biggest problem is the rider, but not the virtual one, I say the real one! ! how is it possible that there are 10 seconds of difference between a rider and the other? if there is a bug, then there is for everyone or not? So let's face honestly! do you think the teams take a bike out of the truck and run it immediately? of course not! you have to find the right setting, the right tires, the right calibration of the shock absorbers, the right steering angle, for every fucking track! ......... so before you criticize Piboso, let's examine honestly .. we want a simulator? or baby games? wich any person takes the motion from the motor-home and takes to the track and win! is this called simulation? no guys! and Piboso is well aware of this.....certainly there are problems! but many are not attributable to Piboso.
this is just my thoughts, I have the lot respect for your opinions. ;)
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 10:39:48 PM
Quote from: rodney007 on November 06, 2014, 10:32:10 PM
For what its worth...
My GP-bikes install has little to almost no front-end wobble at all.
The change has no impact on other physics characteristics (from my testing).
So if an issue like wobble is only a couple of lines that need to be changed why is it not already fixed?
What lines?
Will PM you later.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 06, 2014, 11:15:25 PM
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ?
Engineers do this all the time. Because physical models are physical models.
I've been working for years on satellite and spacecraft simulators and guess what, we had no feedback from satellite or spacecraft drivers :)
Also, on this whole forum, I've met no more than 2-3 people with riding experience that could provide useful feedback (beyond basic stuff I mean).
Most of the other riders (whichever riding skill they may have) have such a little understanding of physics that they are totally unable to translate what they feel into useful info.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 03:58:54 PM
To enable debug mode, edit the file profile.ini ( located in the profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ ) and add:
[debug]
physics = 1
w00t ! Thanks ! I was about to ask for this two days ago (mainly for a tire overheating problem with the wss 600, but who knows).
MaX.
Lol!! I definately fit in the ''most'' catagory haha ;D
In fact.. This forum alone is more helpful to me! ;)
Question.. Kart racing sim is used by quite alot of kart racers to practice! With a wheel and force feedback its pretty damn good I imagine!
Is that meant to be the purpose of gpbikes? Or does it exist simply because it can? Although it can help people understand setup/suspension.. Using a gamepad is a world away.. So whats the purpose? Simulation ''game'' ?? Or a simulator ??
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 06, 2014, 11:15:25 PM
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ?
Engineers do this all the time. Because physical models are physical models.
I've been working for years on satellite and spacecraft simulators and guess what, we had no feedback from satellite or spacecraft drivers :)
Also, on this whole forum, I've met no more than 2-3 people with riding experience that could provide useful feedback (beyond basic stuff I mean).
Most of the other riders (whichever riding skill they may have) have such a little understanding of physics that they are totally unable to translate what they feel into useful info.
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 06, 2014, 03:58:54 PM
To enable debug mode, edit the file profile.ini ( located in the profile directory under "profiles" in "My Documents"\PiBoSo\GP Bikes\ ) and add:
[debug]
physics = 1
w00t ! Thanks ! I was about to ask for this two days ago (mainly for a tire overheating problem with the wss 600, but who knows).
MaX.
Just waited for someone to point that out, so I didn't have to. THX Max :)
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 06, 2014, 11:15:25 PM
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ?
I've been working for years on satellite and spacecraft simulators and guess what, we had no feedback from satellite or spacecraft drivers :)
People have been working on and with satelite & space stuff/calculations/physics alot longer then PiBoSo or anyone else has been working on a bike simulator. Enough info & experience to be found there not?
Maybe a moderator could set up another topic/thread for direct feedback..
Usually all conversations/debates are started by a user who doesnt understand something or is having some trouble.. If piboso looks through these threads it must be difficult to take feedback from that.
Maybe piboso could ask specific questions on something he needs feedback on?
That would probably be more productive and would give people an idea of what to look out for when doing laps.. Just a thought.
Im on it every day.. So are alot of others! Give us some tasks! ;D
How about if I just rename this thread?
Feed back is great if something is repeated by many oppose to opinions from know it alls... ;)
Lol fair enough
The problem with this thread is the authors first line reads-
"No offence (though will likely offend) This game feels horrible."
That is just flat out rude and isn't helpful at all. What if someone likes the feel of the handling, does that make them ignorant?
If 50 people say "the riders head is backwards" then that is positive feedback. If one person likes the head on backwards then that would make him/her alone in their opinion. To say the game feels horrible is an opinion not a fact or helpful feedback. I would be worried to open a "feedback" thread as it might turn into a pissing match?
I agree with you but that happens anyway lol.
I think its all going around in circles.. Its just a thought that if piboso asked some questions now and again, that in itself would give a sense of direction for everyone.. Instead of arguing over bill and teds different opinion everytime somebody makes a post! (im guilty of it too)
you are all geniuses apparently ???, form a team to get things done, have to win 10 years of development.
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 07, 2014, 12:00:31 AM
Lol!! I definately fit in the ''most'' catagory haha ;D
Actually I have hope you can make it into the category "riders that can provide meaningful info" BOBR6 !
Quote from: JamoZ on November 07, 2014, 12:18:39 AM
People have been working on and with satelite & space stuff/calculations/physics alot longer then PiBoSo or anyone else has been working on a bike simulator. Enough info & experience to be found there not?
Admittedly, the parallel is a bit far fetched, but to answer your question, then answer is "sometimes not". When you plan to send people to mars (for example), you don't have a lot of feedback from previous experience.
Anyway, the idea here is not that feedback is useless: it's that most of the feedback usually given here is useless. But there's no way of getting only the good part of it, so we have to run through all of it and extract the gold.
MaX.
Piboso,
I completely understand what you mean when you say that the physics model "underneath" the game is very very good as it is and doesn't need to be changed much at all. That is already an impressive first step.
The latest WSS600 mod is proof that if the right data sits in the bike mods, the game is very good as it is (I'm having a lot of fun in 6c with the 600, so for me 6c is a success).
However, like you said, even though the underlying physics are good, the stock bikes need work right now because their behavior is unrealistic (and very frustrating).
Also, the behavior of the stock bikes is not evolving significantly in the right direction and that leads me to believe that you either have issues with this or lack time to do the proper testing.
It also shows that the feedback we give to you and the work that you do on the stock bikes doesn't always move in the same direction.
So my question is, where do we go from here to improve the stock bikes and the virtual rider?
- Do you want to select a few players who could provide feedback after each small change before the new beta is released?
- Or do you plan on maybe letting a team of modders modify the stock bikes and compare what values they have compared to yours, that way you have more time to work on game stability (core.exe)?
- Or do you plan to maybe have some players (who are calm enough and who may or may not ride in real life) who could participate in discussions with you on Skype with close feedback, a "thinkgroup", like it is the case in some MMO games for example?
Basically, there are many options, but how do we move forward now with these stock bikes?
Quote from: EdouardB on November 07, 2014, 09:33:28 AM
Piboso,
I completely understand what you mean when you say that the physics model "underneath" the game is very very good as it is and doesn't need to be changed much at all. That is already an impressive first step.
The latest WSS600 mod is proof that if the right data sits in the bike mods, the game is very good as it is (I'm having a lot of fun in 6c with the 600, so for me 6c is a success).
However, like you said, even though the underlying physics are good, the stock bikes need work right now because their behavior is unrealistic (and very frustrating).
Also, the behavior of the stock bikes is not evolving significantly in the right direction and that leads me to believe that you either have issues with this or lack time to do the proper testing.
It also shows that the feedback we give to you and the work that you do on the stock bikes doesn't always move in the same direction.
So my question is, where do we go from here to improve the stock bikes and the virtual rider?
- Do you want to select a few players who could provide feedback after each small change before the new beta is released?
- Or do you plan on maybe letting a team of modders modify the stock bikes and compare what values they have compared to yours, that way you have more time to work on game stability (core.exe)?
- Or do you plan to maybe have some players (who are calm enough and who may or may not ride in real life) who could participate in discussions with you on Skype with close feedback, a "thinkgroup", like it is the case in some MMO games for example?
Basically, there are many options, but how do we move forward now with these stock bikes?
1+
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 06, 2014, 11:15:25 PM
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 06, 2014, 02:40:34 AM
The thought that keeps occurring to me if I am honest is this: How can anyone devise a motorcycle racing simulation in the absence of full & proper input, testing and ongoing consultation with individuals who race in real life or have done so in the past ?
Engineers do this all the time. Because physical models are physical models.
I've been working for years on satellite and spacecraft simulators and guess what, we had no feedback from satellite or spacecraft drivers :)
I don't think the space industry is a valid comparison in the context of this discussion if I am honest. For obvious reasons. ;) A more valid & pertinent comparison is the F1 car racing world and to be more precise the ancillary sphere of F1 simulator design. In the design & development of F1 simulators the engineers and software designers do actively consult and seek opinion & input from real life F1 racers. To not do so in the circumstances relating to the F1 industry would be tantamount to sheer madness. Why would any engineer in his right mind ignore a select, expert and knowledgeable small group of individuals with highly relevant on-track experience of what it feels like to race a modern F1 racing car round a race circuit? The expert resource being the pool of F1 drivers is there & available & arguably quite rightly is made full use of..
I fully agree that physical models are physical models and in fact remain nothing more than physical models..which is why the input of real life racing drivers / riders is arguably so crucial in ensuring an accurate degree of realism in the finished product. What if the physical model is flawed in some way? We are all after all only human. What happens then? And how would anyone know if it was flawed in the first place? The answer of course is that this is why you need real life racers to tell you whether the on-track behaviour & feel of the simulator on any given race track or any given racing motorcycle is realistic. I personally do not think there is any getting away from this if I am to be honest. Just my opinion but I have to say from the perspective of a rider/racer this all seems quite straight-forward & logical to me. You need to be able to properly test your "physical model". Left solely to the engineers it might not end up as being as perfect as otherwise it might be. ;)
At the end of the day just my opinion. Nothing more.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 06, 2014, 11:15:25 PM
Also, on this whole forum, I've met no more than 2-3 people with riding experience that could provide useful feedback (beyond basic stuff I mean).
Most of the other riders (whichever riding skill they may have) have such a little understanding of physics that they are totally unable to translate what they feel into useful info.
Which is surely precisely why, ideally, you need an experienced real life motorcycle racer on board who is quite used to the concept of talking with engineers and who is able to enter into meaningful conversation with them.
On gp500, which admittedly was designed as a simulation game as opposed to a simulator, Melbourne House secured the services of Valentino Rossi, Kenny Roberts Jnr and Simon Crafer to help test and aid in the development the physics model in the game. Particular attention I understand was paid to the tyre wear & grip model as well as the other main aspects of the physics model. I think the strategy paid off. For the type of game it was designed to be and for the context of the era it came from it was a much respected and successful simulation game. I fully accept that gpbikes is a different kettle of fish entirely. The concept is that of a simulator rather than a game. Surely, however, bearing this in mind is there not arguably even more of a requirement, if not a pressing need, for the physics model(s) to be vetted and approved by an experienced real life racer(s) on an ongoing basis during its development?
Again I am just putting this out there as my own personal opinion. Nothing more. I fully accept the practicalities of getting the right sort of person on board to assist might not be a straightforward & easily met challenge. In all of my rambling above I do, I assure you, hold PiBoSo and his development team in extremely high regard. I am just making what is probably a painfully obvious point to your collective ears. I suspect my thinking might possibly be met with a more sympathetic ear from the real life racers amongst the forum members? Conversely maybe such individuals with real life racing experience may think that I'm talking out of my back-side ;) .
grT :)
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 07, 2014, 02:19:42 PM
I fully agree that physical models are physical models and in fact remain nothing more than physical models..which is why the input of real life racing drivers / riders is arguably so crucial in ensuring an accurate degree of realism in the finished product.
In GPB in the garage you have the setting of the swing arm pivot: I had to inform countless riders (some will recognize themselves here) that the effect of this setting is the square root of bugger all. AKA zero, nada, niente. Many were reporting the bike being more stable with the setting at 0, or sliding less with it at 2 or a better feeling (::)) with it at 1. And you expect these to help Piboso to understand where the physical model is flawed ? If yes, be sure to insert some "placebo" case in your test plan and see the feedback you get on it. And good luck.
There's space for feedback, but most of the feedback will be diverging crap.
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 07, 2014, 02:19:42 PM
On gp500, which admittedly was designed as a simulation game as opposed to a simulator, Melbourne House secured the services of Valentino Rossi, Kenny Roberts Jnr and Simon Crafer to help test and aid in the development the physics model in the game.
I'm ready to bet that the only thing they secured was a photo session with the riders (posing as if they were) playing with the game and the right to let people know that these riders have participated in the development of the game.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 04:12:43 PM
In GPB in the garage you have the setting of the swing arm pivot: I had to inform countless riders (some will recognize themselves here) that the effect of this setting is the square root of bugger all. AKA zero, nada, niente. Many were reporting the bike being more stable with the setting at 0, or sliding less with it at 2 or a better feeling (::)) with it at 1. And you expect these to help Piboso to understand where the physical model is flawed ? If yes, be sure to insert some "placebo" case in your test plan and see the feedback you get on it. And good luck.
My "plan" as it were would be for an experienced real life racer to act as a consultant to the gpbikes project as I have outlined above. Someone who is experienced in communicating with engineers and you never know even with software engineers if the person concerned has current/recent era racing experience. Such a concept, if it was possible to undertake, seems like plain common sense to me.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 04:12:43 PM
There's space for feedback, but most of the feedback will be diverging crap.
Perhaps not if you had someone from the real life sport of motorcycle racing involved who was experienced in the art of setting up a racing motorcycle for the race track &/or experienced in liaising with real life mechanics/engineers.
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 07, 2014, 02:19:42 PM
On gp500, which admittedly was designed as a simulation game as opposed to a simulator, Melbourne House secured the services of Valentino Rossi, Kenny Roberts Jnr and Simon Crafer to help test and aid in the development the physics model in the game.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 04:12:43 PM
I'm ready to bet that the only thing they secured was a photo session with the riders (posing as if they were) playing with the game and the right to let people know that these riders have participated in the development of the game.
I believe that your assumption is incorrect Max. My understanding is that the physics engine in gp500 simulation game was developed over a period of time with guidance & input received from the grand prix riders concerned. I think the truth is that back in 1998/9 it was a different age and Melbourne House were able to devote more time & effort to the project in hand. I think the phenomenon of photo-shoots & "blind" endorsement of racing games by professional racers belongs more to the present day and modern world of video game development.
I am a little surprised by your stance over this if I am honest Max. You seem to suffer from a slight aversion in trusting to the experience and wisdom of real life motorcycle racers. In real life racing just as in the development of F1 simulators the opinion of professional racers is taken into account and is respected. My point is under
ideal circumstances why should the gpbikes project be any different?
grT ;)
"I am a little surprised by your stance over this if I am honest Max. You seem to suffer from a slight aversion in trusting to the experience and wisdom of real life motorcycle racers. In real life racing just as in the development of F1 simulators the opinion of professional racers is taken into account and is respected. My point is under ideal circumstances why should the gpbikes project be any different? "
There is a huge missing link. The controller! In a F1 simulator you have entire cockpits with all the controls in short of reality its all there. Handing Rossi a silly little game pad and asking him for feedback is silly as its apples to oranges. Writing physics code and the translation of proper physics is lost in between the code and the controls, unless the controls are proper which in this case they are not.
Sadly this is what will hinder GPBikes to bring it to a proper simulation.
Feedback for KRP can be more beneficial from a real shifter kart pro as the controls are there. Feedback from anyone playing GPBikes with a gamepad etc is all opinions of what translates smoothly for that person regardless.
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 07, 2014, 05:19:58 PM
I am a little surprised by your stance over this if I am honest Max. You seem to suffer from a slight aversion in trusting to the experience and wisdom of real life motorcycle racers.
The slight aversion comes from years of observation of feedback given here by many experienced riders.
As I said, there are a few on this forum I would personally trust. But not the vast majority, no matter how fast they are in real life.
And +1 to Walken: most of the people here don't even know what the steering input in GPB does ...
MaX.
In that I completely agree with you WALK3N.
In many ways this is the "missing link", as it were, in the whole gpbikes project.
What exactly to do about this is not a straightforward thing to solve by any stretch of the imagination.
If someone, DoubleDragon perhaps ;), could perfect an advanced controller for gpbikes I for one would struggle to pay for it. But I think I would have to have one nonetheless.
If you handed something like that to a real life professional m/c racer and offered to buy him kebabs for the rest of his life perhaps you could be in business for some advanced testing of PiBoSo's simulator?
grT :)
Again sadly we are years away from a "real" controller.
The only instant remedy/solution is to write the code for a RC controller http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/futk9200-10j/index.html This might be the in between solution at best?
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:37:40 PM
Handing Rossi a silly little game pad and asking him for feedback is silly as its apples to orange
Its not that silly Kenny Roberts Jr., Carlos Checa, Gary McCoy, Alex Barros, Nobuatsu Aoki, Simon Crafar, Sete Gibernau, Valentino Rossi were all involved in GP500
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:56:27 PM
Again sadly we are years away from a "real" controller.
The only instant remedy/solution is to write the code for a RC controller http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/futk9200-10j/index.html This might be the in between solution at best?
Would that really be any better than a good gamepad? Can't see it myself.
Hawk.
Probably not :) Hence the point at hand.
Any real riders involvement concerning a game would be IMO for marketing purposes and a tip here and there, not where PIboso is going. Besides GP500 is only as realistic as it can be with a game pad.
Then to consider feedback from us (virtual riders) who do you trust? Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
The mention of RC controls is only to bridge the gap. Meaning even with a PS3 pad GPBikes can be coded to act as a RC simulation which in turn would be more realistic as you are granted the tools, until a proper controller is compiled.
Quote from: Ian on November 07, 2014, 06:42:19 PM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:37:40 PM
Handing Rossi a silly little game pad and asking him for feedback is silly as its apples to orange
Its not that silly Kenny Roberts Jr., Carlos Checa, Gary McCoy, Alex Barros, Nobuatsu Aoki, Simon Crafar, Sete Gibernau, Valentino Rossi were all involved in GP500
Yes I heard the same thing. Even senior Dunlop factory tyre technicians were involved from what I understand which I think may account for the very advanced tyre grip/wear model (for its time) seen in the game. Nothing else in the m/c racing game spectrum has matched the tyre model since. Simon Crafer enjoyed the game so much he played it for fun after its release according to what I am led to believe..
To be realistic though the gpbikes physics model is much more advanced than gp500. Some would say infinitely more advanced! ;) As great as gp500 undoubtedly was for its day. I suppose the question is whether someone like Rossi could provide an opinion & feedback on gpbikes if he was to use say an xbox 360 controller..? I think personally that he could, at a basic level, although undoubtedly the full subtleties of the simulation would be lost to him if he did this. But yes I think a professional m/c racer could at least provide some basic feedback. But I guess PiBoSo & co. are after something somewhat more advanced than this in terms of the depth of critique they would wish to receive.
grT
How about a physics engineer? :-X
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 07, 2014, 07:24:40 PM
Yes I heard the same thing. Even senior Dunlop factory tyre technicians were involved from what I understand which I think may account for the very advanced tyre grip/wear model (for its time) seen in the game. Nothing else in the m/c racing game spectrum has matched the tyre model since.
What makes you think that the gp500 tire model was that accurate ?! That just beats me.
At the time, decent tire models were barely appearing in research papers ... and still many thinks what was coded in gp500 was a good model.
It's not because it feels good (to some) that it is indeed good. Otherwise bike riders would be designing and engineering bikes. But that's not the way it works.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 08:26:49 PM
What makes you think that the gp500 tire model was that accurate ?! That just beats me.
I did say for its time Max. ;) Compared to other m/c racing
games (not including gpbikes which is a simulator) it is, in relative terms, very advanced. Compared to say SBK2001 or dare I say it motogp14..
If you were to do a full distance race on gp500 Max (say 35 minutes of racing) I think you would appreciate what I am saying. On the 1st lap or so you have to be really careful not to lose the front end on the brakes through it tucking or the rear end on the power through a high-side. Until you get some heat into the tyres.. Likewise towards the end of a long race the tyres will start to go off. You have to adjust your riding style accordingly. Tyre selection and tyre management is quite crucial to winning in gp500. As I say for its time gp500 was in the opinion of many, including real life racers, quite an achievement in terms of its tyre wear/grip model. I think this probably accounts for the popularity of the game. I am judging this in terms of the on track feel and experience of playing the game. In simple terms that's why Max. Exact basis of the physics model notwithstanding. Surely the most important aspect in judging the tyre wear/grip model in a game like gp500 is how it feels on track compared to how it feels in real life? In that respect to many people it felt & still feels pretty good.
Why does that beat you Max? In the context of when it was designed and made and in the context of a simulation game gp500 delivers a first rate tyre model in my opinion. Compared to real life. It is possible to judge something like this from the seat of one's pants as well as from a slide-rule Max. ;)
grT
Usually a model is not "accurate for its time", either it's accurate (for its purpose) or it is not. If it is accurate (for its purpose) today, it will be accurate in 10 years too.
I have no idea of what is implemented in gp500: if somebody cared to explain as much as Piboso has explained his own model, then one could compare.
But that aside, do you realise that tire wear is relatively easy to implement in a manner that feel satisfactory for gamers and even riders ?
On the other hand, physically accurate tire wear is so freakin' hard that nobody has it today (not even in F1, where, despite the gazillion of $ put into simulators, you still see pilot struggling with tire wear in the middle of a race).
To me it is pretty clear that there are two "schools": Piboso starts from the physics and builds up from that. Others starts from the "feeling" and tweaks whatever is tweakable in order to have the 'feeling' they want to have. There are overlap areas between the two approaches (Piboso does consider some feedback, some tweaking is done), but the line separating the two philosophies is very clear.
MaX.
If I am honest Max one of the things I do not feel sufficiently connected with when I play gpbikes are the tyres.. the feedback from the tyres has always felt rather vague and imprecise to me. Granted I have only been playing gpbikes since beta 4b but in none of the beta versions I have sampled am I getting much feedback from the tyres. I fully accept you are running an advanced tyre model in gpbikes but I am just not feeling it very much on track. I am hoping that the feedback from the tyres will improve as the base physics model is enhanced and progressively fine tuned. But at the moment, if I am honest, no I am not feeling much..
I am just being honest and in making these comments I do accept that I am hardly a veteran on gpbikes.
grT
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 09:08:14 PM
Usually a model is not "accurate for its time", either it's accurate (for its purpose) or it is not. If it is accurate (for its purpose) today, it will be accurate in 10 years too.
Your words not mine Max. I used the phrase advanced for its time. ;)
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 09:08:14 PM
To me it is pretty clear that there are two "schools": Piboso starts from the physics and builds up from that. Others starts from the "feeling" and tweaks whatever is tweakable in order to have the 'feeling' they want to have. There are overlap areas between the two approaches (Piboso does consider some feedback, some tweaking is done), but the line separating the two philosophies is very clear.
I agree in essence with what you are saying. However, to get the right
feel on track at the end of the exercise is also imo vitally important. Physics models might be to all intents & purposes correct but if the end result on the track simply doesn't feel quite right then something arguably would be missing in the simulator. This is why in F1 simulators I think the input of the F1 drivers can & does play an important part. I think it needs to be a subtle marriage of the two schools of thought with the engineers leading the way..
grT
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:56:27 PM
Again sadly we are years away from a "real" controller.
The only instant remedy/solution is to write the code for a RC controller http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/futk9200-10j/index.html This might be the in between solution at best?
That's pretty much what I'm doing with DST. Both sticks are working together and opposite of one another.
Quote from: Klax75 on November 07, 2014, 09:37:15 PM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:56:27 PM
Again sadly we are years away from a "real" controller.
The only instant remedy/solution is to write the code for a RC controller http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/futk9200-10j/index.html This might be the in between solution at best?
That's pretty much what I'm doing with DST. Both sticks are working together and opposite of one another.
Not sure the r/c controller have any relationship to DST, it's just two sticks with (far) better quality.
Also, no need to write the code: you can get a Walkera Devo radio and use the custom DeviationX firmware (http://www.deviationtx.com/ (http://www.deviationtx.com/)), as it allows you to use your radio as an usb input device.
MaX.
I think its safe to point out that if one wants to give feedback and have a deeper understanding of the void then KRP and a good wheel and a lot of hours will bring to light what is missing.
You can debate about this game that game all day long but the one major thing they all have in common is the controls. The difference is GPBikes physics might not translate as friendly as all the other "arcade" offerings which where designed to be used with a game pad including GP500, where in comparison to Climax GP1 concerning tire to tarmac isn't even close. And that was just Shawn Hargreaves idea of what feels real but isn't even close to reality.
Also feedback should be taken from first person view only or it is no longer valid as now we are back to RC racing again.
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Probably not :) Hence the point at hand.
Any real riders involvement concerning a game would be IMO for marketing purposes and a tip here and there, not where PIboso is going. Besides GP500 is only as realistic as it can be with a game pad. Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Then to consider feedback from us (virtual riders) who do you trust?
The mention of RC controls is only to bridge the gap. Meaning even with a PS3 pad GPBikes can be coded to act as a RC simulation which in turn would be more realistic as you are granted the tools, until a proper controller is compiled.
Secrets? Do tell.... Hehe ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: Klax75 on November 07, 2014, 09:37:15 PM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 05:56:27 PM
Again sadly we are years away from a "real" controller.
The only instant remedy/solution is to write the code for a RC controller http://www.futaba-rc.com/systems/futk9200-10j/index.html This might be the in between solution at best?
That's pretty much what I'm doing with DST. Both sticks are working together and opposite of one another.
One idea I was working on Klax was sixaxis for rider lean using Motion in Joy. Very hard to do but made for a different adventure altogether :) Also Mx vs atv had separate thumbstick controls on one offering I think it was "reflex"
But again our feed back will mostly point out what Piboso already knows to an extent until someone clever enough bridges the gap.
I understand previous comments in regards to the fact that you cant just grab a bike rider and hand him a controller to test a bike game as it is significantly different to a race driver siting in a simulator and being able to get fully into things.
I think in order to get the correct feedback you need to assign a small group of riders in real life who actively play this game
and are confident re the physics behind forum walls to be allowed to work without distractions.
I am willing to help on this front and have spent hours upon hours tweaking lines of settings to get the most feedback and true-to life experience and immersion from this game.
However as some may agree - through a process of delegation and changes through community feedback I feel we were able to get the KTM RC8 mod to a very VERY good place ,although there was alot of negative feedback most likely fueled by hatred towards me more so than genuine feedback.
I benefited hugely from the input and feedback others riders through the forum and as you could see would make changes and tried to find the balance although a challenge seemed to work great.
Some community members could not grasp the idea of simply bouncing changes off comment to comment however the process worked and is how many games such as PROJECT CARS has been handled.
So, for what its worth I am keen to put my hand up and help develop some prototype physics adjustments incorporating what I have learned from experimentation and hours of testing
alongside my skills with working on 3D to benefit the community with others members here.
Just to quickly reflect on some of the changes we made to the KTM RC8 bike was:
-Bike wobble reduced / nearly gone
-Front end stability and feedback
-Braking realism, strong on straight, ease off into corner
-Realistic tire heating values for front/rear
-Weight balance to help control the wheelie issue
-On-throttle steering and rear tire feedback
In my opinion these changes were not perfect and of course need fine tuning however I feel that these changes are what could benefit the new patch significantly.
By improving the base physics it also provides a base-line for new bike mods which means more time can be spent adjusting them to be unique to the geometry
in contrast to time being spent simply trying to fix the many problems first OR only releasing 3D mods as most are which seem quite pointless as this game is a simulator.
@Rodney: Does this mean you'll consider releasing your TZ750? ;D
Hawk.
@Rodney,Very good news,for your work :D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 07, 2014, 10:11:18 PM
@Rodney: Does this mean you'll consider releasing your TZ750? ;D
Hawk.
Lets see what Piboso's stance is on the recent ideas of a team of guys working together to help him first. Then.... we can have many mod bikes each with
unique physics not only TZR....
Quote from: rodney007 on November 08, 2014, 12:32:12 AM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 07, 2014, 10:11:18 PM
@Rodney: Does this mean you'll consider releasing your TZ750? ;D
Hawk.
Lets see what Piboso's stance is on the recent ideas of a team of guys working together to help him first. Then.... we can have many mod bikes each with
unique physics not only TZR....
???
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Explain please.
Quote from: nuovaic on November 08, 2014, 07:35:46 AM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Explain please.
+1.... Hahaha....yes please ???
Quote from: Abigor on November 08, 2014, 08:37:29 AM
Quote from: nuovaic on November 08, 2014, 07:35:46 AM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Explain please.
+1.... Hahaha....yes please ???
Are you talking about gp500 or god forbid gpbikes?
You sound like a very naughty man to me WALK3N and you probably deserve to have your bottom smacked and to be sent to bed early with a glass of milk! ;)
grT
Quote from: girlracerTracey on November 08, 2014, 09:40:15 AM
Quote from: Abigor on November 08, 2014, 08:37:29 AM
Quote from: nuovaic on November 08, 2014, 07:35:46 AM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Explain please.
+1.... Hahaha....yes please ???
Are you talking about gp500 or god forbid gpbikes?
You sound like a very naughty man to me WALK3N and you probably deserve to have your bottom smacked and to be sent to bed early with a glass of milk! ;)
grT
:P
Quote from: nuovaic on November 08, 2014, 07:35:46 AM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 07, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years.
Explain please.
Still waiting Walken.
See that, everybody wants to know how to manipulate setting in a odd "unrealistic" way to go faster. :-X
Not me.
Just want to know who and why people do it.
Still waiting.
Quote from: nuovaic on November 09, 2014, 03:00:03 PM
Not me.
Just want to know who and why people do it.
Still waiting.
+1 and how ? lol
I am making a point about realism is all. And perspective in terms of what is real to the individual regardless of settings.
Like someone making a modded bike to overcome wobbles and feels the physics are wrong and in turn feels the mod has overcome this. Then feels they have the authority to test in a small group for future betas prior to release.
Beside that once something is considered complete, finished, then there exist a limit to be found and in some instances limits can be found in strange ways beyond typical thought.
Yet more of an example, in Toca 3 (Gokarts) to max the limits you had to set all the setting to soft. Soft tire/suspension etc and run in first person view to see the apex. The settings were not realistic in any way and could be manipulated to reach the limit. In MotoGP1 (Climax) you needed to build a bike with zero brakes to reach max limits of bike limit vs track limit. Also a rubberband was set in place to hold the rider down at all times hence fastest laps etc... While testing MotoGP7 Ps2 (Milestone/Capcom) I realized the fastest way around was by holding the rear brake around the corners to tighten them even more, not realistic but fastest!
I'm not implying that anyone is using strange techniques to go faster in a cheating sense, but we are talking about feedback for a motorcycle simulation and feedback from a community should be from a community not 4 fast people who may think they are more qualified is all.
Food for thought.
Ok, maybe I got the wrong impression from your post. Not sure.
Anyway, if you have found something that is unrealistic, but improves lap times, I hope you will share it here so others will be aware of it and can maybe test it also and give a more rounded feedback. Everything needs to be out in the open at this stage, otherwise things won't get any better and bad feeling among the community will ensue.
You should be a politician WALKEN......nice....politician says much without saying anything
Abigor,
If I have found anything to improve upon lap times in GPBikes settings in a odd manner I would report this to Piboso.
My point is I trust Piboso and his opinion on his releases, not a small group of testers as implied.
Again I am pointing out a fact that being fast means nothing as how are you going fast to begin with? I would rather trust someone who knows how to exploit things to report to Piboso.
Another point to clarify is some of the community is playing GPBikes as a game and want it finished as fast as possible and trusting others mods to improve upon beta releases where the mods have odd effects on the beta physics. I'm I making sense to you?
As a part of constructive feedback I want to ask something. Is the moment of inertia calculated based on the weight of individual parts? Cause I couldn't see any corresponding parameter in bike tools.
Is the moment of inertia constant for the bike with specific values set or is it done other way?
Quote from: WALKEN on November 09, 2014, 07:37:44 PM
Abigor,
If I have found anything to improve upon lap times in GPBikes settings in a odd manner I would report this to Piboso.
My point is I trust Piboso and his opinion on his releases, not a small group of testers as implied.
Again I am pointing out a fact that being fast means nothing as how are you going fast to begin with? I would rather trust someone who knows how to exploit things to report to Piboso.
Another point to clarify is some of the community is playing GPBikes as a game and want it finished as fast as possible and trusting others mods to improve upon beta releases where the mods have odd effects on the beta physics. I'm I making sense to you?
No WALKEN...Not making sense at all to me........First you write "Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years" and now "If I have found anything to improve upon lap times in GPBikes settings in a odd manner I would report this to Piboso" but hey let's just end this discussion ;D
Quote from: Furious on November 09, 2014, 07:41:31 PM
As a part of constructive feedback I want to ask something. Is the moment of inertia calculated based on the weight of individual parts? Cause I couldn't see any corresponding parameter in bike tools.
Is the moment of inertia constant for the bike with specific values set or is it done other way?
To me it seems all the parts are there, with their own inertia.
I even think (if I recall correctly what Piboso said) that the level of fuel in the tank is taken into account in the overall moment of inertia.
What you don't see that should be there ?
MaX.
OK I'll spell it out for you.
If Rodney releases a bike mod that makes everyone in this community feel that it corrected a beta Piboso released where as Piboso's physics are proper but Rodneys are not then this isn't good for the community.
My statement ("Fastest means nothing as you can manipulate setting in a strange way to achieve faster laps, I have done this for years" )
Again Rodney released a bike to trick the bike to work with Piboso's beta and the physics are wrong but people seems to like them. So if Rodneys bike allows you to go faster in the current physics it means nothing to be able to give feedback for a proper simulation... "I have done this for years"- I have tricked many racing games and exploited them due to lack of proper physics for years....
I hope that clears it up?
These mods are awesome! Cant get enough of the R1 Its brutal ;D 8)
Theres more than enough here to keep me busy for while so I guess im happy with beta6c!!
Getting alot more core crashes though which is never good.
Piboso said the core programme physics algorithms are now state of the art(I take as meaning they are correct and finished). If this is so then surely the bike physics file can only be set to correct settings to get the bikes handling correctly and therefore a bike being able to go faster? Surely then anything set incorrect should show-up like a saw thumb in slower and more erratic performances as we are seeing now in the stock bike because their physics files are not set-up properly for the core-physics of GPB.
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 09, 2014, 08:53:37 PM
Piboso said the core programme physics algorithms are now state of the art(I take as meaning they are correct and finished). If this is so then surely the bike physics file can only be set to correct settings to get the bikes handling correctly and therefore a bike being able to go faster? Surely then anything set incorrect should show-up like a saw thumb in slower and more erratic performances as we are seeing now in the stock bike because their physics files are not set-up properly for the core-physics of GPB.
Hawk.
files are set correctly, stock = slower bike ;)
edit. oh you mean standard bike of gpb, ok :P
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 09, 2014, 08:36:02 PM
These mods are awesome! Cant get enough of the R1 Its brutal ;D 8)
Theres more than enough here to keep me busy for while so I guess im happy with beta6c!!
Getting alot more core crashes though which is never good.
Exactly my thoughts BOBR6 84 but minus the cores mate.
Quote from: _oDi_ on November 09, 2014, 09:03:33 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 09, 2014, 08:53:37 PM
Piboso said the core programme physics algorithms are now state of the art(I take as meaning they are correct and finished). If this is so then surely the bike physics file can only be set to correct settings to get the bikes handling correctly and therefore a bike being able to go faster? Surely then anything set incorrect should show-up like a saw thumb in slower and more erratic performances as we are seeing now in the stock bike because their physics files are not set-up properly for the core-physics of GPB.
Hawk.
files are set correctly, stock = slower bike ;)
Then how come Piboso said that the stock bikes physics were not tuned correctly for the finished core physics algorithms of beta 6c and the bike physics file needs tuning to work properly? Or am I and many others here misunderstanding something?
Certainly with the 500 Varase the physics still do seem to be incorrect(a lot of instability in front end and wobble no matter what set-up you use. Not tried the stock 4 strokes. ;)
Hawk.
PS: Yes we are talking abuot standard stock bikes in this thread.... Well I presumed we were. LOL ;D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 09, 2014, 09:20:33 PM
PS: Yes we are talking abuot standard stock bikes in this thread.... Well I presumed we were. LOL ;D
hihihi hard follow your words for me ... sorry m8 ;D
Been riding in cockpit view.. I have corner anticipation quite high. I noticed the riders head snaps back in line after the corner! Can this be smoothed?
Quote from: _oDi_ on November 09, 2014, 09:25:55 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on November 09, 2014, 09:20:33 PM
PS: Yes we are talking abuot standard stock bikes in this thread.... Well I presumed we were. LOL ;D
hihihi hard follow your words for me ... sorry m8 ;D
Having now read some of the posts about the newly released STK1000 bikeset I understand the misunderstanding completely, as a lot of descriptions for the STK1000 bikeset are talking about "Stock" bikes; I should have said "default" GPB bikes in my post to avoid any misunderstandings. Anyway, no probs mate. Lol ;D
Thanks oDi
Hawk.
Quote from: rodney007 on November 07, 2014, 09:59:20 PM
*snip*
I agree with your ideas and the approach you take. Seems that the community is rather divided by "Realism" (LOL, it's a friggin' game/sim in beta form) and "Immersion" (what you and I desire far more than real numbers that result in crap feeling bikes).
I still ride the KTM and the KX-F more regularly than anything else. The KTM was like a forecast for the future of GP Bikes, anyone that says beta 6c handles any different than beta 5 with the KTM are only looking to argue, the behavior you coaxed out of the KTM is the exact same way all the bikes handle now. Your work around for the bike to feel more real despite the underlying code, or whatever it is that caused the issues in the first place, was something I applaud, even if there is a "hardcore" group of modders that turn their collective nose up at you and spit on your shoes for doing a job they wouldn't even attempt.
I'm not a racer, but I am a rider, speed and lap times are not my idea of a good time on a bike.... so I fall into the category of a "pick up and ride" player on GP Bikes. I enjoy the feel of the bikes and the look and behavior of them on track, if they don't feel real I don't care for them. The new STK1000 pack feels dead and lifeless to me, a few of the WSS600 feel okay but still have what I would consider glaring issues for a player like me to enjoy them all that much, and I'm not a racer, a modder, or anyone that matters so my opinion means zero, hence why I don't say anything at all about the bikes I don't like. ;)
I still think The Gent, the RC8, and the final version of the KX-F were pretty awesome for someone like me that is casual about gaming and moto simulations. Until someone actually does something about the lack of a proper controller ::) not much interests me in "real numbers".
Quote from: WALKEN on November 09, 2014, 07:12:15 PM
I am making a point about realism is all. And perspective in terms of what is real to the individual regardless of settings.
Like someone making a modded bike to overcome wobbles and feels the physics are wrong and in turn feels the mod has overcome this. Then feels they have the authority to test in a small group for future betas prior to release.
maybe the thought of a group of guys relaying positive constructive feedback back to the developer is not a good idea...
how about we all just make the bikes 9999 HP and get fast laptimes like you?
in all seriousness though... I am wanting the most realistic racing simulator of all time, but maybe its just me and there are too many obstacles in the way such as Game devs and Forum sheriffs.
Quote from: grimm on November 09, 2014, 10:40:08 PM
I agree with your ideas and the approach you take. Seems that the community is rather divided by "Realism" (LOL, it's a friggin' game/sim in beta form) and "Immersion" (what you and I desire far more than real numbers that result in crap feeling bikes).
I still ride the KTM and the KX-F more regularly than anything else. The KTM was like a forecast for the future of GP Bikes, anyone that says beta 6c handles any different than beta 5 with the KTM are only looking to argue, the behavior you coaxed out of the KTM is the exact same way all the bikes handle now. Your work around for the bike to feel more real despite the underlying code, or whatever it is that caused the issues in the first place, was something I applaud, even if there is a "hardcore" group of modders that turn their collective nose up at you and spit on your shoes for doing a job they wouldn't even attempt.
I'm not a racer, but I am a rider, speed and lap times are not my idea of a good time on a bike.... so I fall into the category of a "pick up and ride" player on GP Bikes. I enjoy the feel of the bikes and the look and behavior of them on track, if they don't feel real I don't care for them. The new STK1000 pack feels dead and lifeless to me, a few of the WSS600 feel okay but still have what I would consider glaring issues for a player like me to enjoy them all that much, and I'm not a racer, a modder, or anyone that matters so my opinion means zero, hence why I don't say anything at all about the bikes I don't like. ;)
I still think The Gent, the RC8, and the final version of the KX-F were pretty awesome for someone like me that is casual about gaming and moto simulations. Until someone actually does something about the lack of a proper controller ::) not much interests me in "real numbers".
Cheers dude, i really appreciate it. It was great getting your feedback on all the mods I made because I trusted your senses being a real rider and sim racer like myself. Its unfortunate that alot of these guys here are more concerned about "if real life is a 9, make it a 9 in the game regardless of how it feels". My mentality is "if real life is a 9, but 9 feels like shit in the game, make it 192837192 for all I care until it feels right.
however "feels right" and "on paper it must be right" is the battle we face here. From what I can see there are just too many barriers and mindless knumbskulls in this community to help it go forward, so many walls and so much narrowminded
dictator godlike worshiping of a higher power that anything else is not satisfactory.
I'm sorry to say this but this constructive feedback is turning into a bloody newspaper, can we stop with the novels and keep it down to a changelog you prefer.
Honestly I'm not against opinions but there going nowhere for this beta and I for one think Piboso has done a good job.
rodney007,you can finish the KX-F, for the beta 6 please :D
every thing related to roodney turns into a "bloodynewspaper".I do not understand what he want,and if he were to join the group of Piboso development (.....he deserve it?his mods are all wrong.....),I think many will leave this simulator!we trust in Piboso not in ""rodney""!
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 10, 2014, 09:36:04 AM
every thing related to roodney turns into a "bloodynewspaper".I do not understand what he want,and if he were to join the group of Piboso development (.....he deserve it?his mods are all wrong.....),I think many will leave this simulator!we trust in Piboso not in ""rodney""!
I think in this thread rodney expressed his opinions in an almost proper manner. Maybe a bit too loud, but still almost OK to me in terms of form (I may disagree on the content, of course).
Not sure I could tell the same about your comments in this thread Freddy.
So let's try to avoid to start another flamewar again ... we all recall what was the outcome of the last one ...
MaX.
Quote from: grimm on November 09, 2014, 10:40:08 PM
...
There is nothing wrong in using "feelings" to tune the physics, because unfortunately there is a lot of data that cannot be got ( or that would be too difficult to get ) from the real world.
But
at the very least the basic, known data should be accurately replicated: rake angle and geometry in general, mass, weight distribution, inertia, springs, aerodynamics, engine, gearbox, ...
Especially since bike and engine editors have been released.
If a modder just take the Murasama and turns it into a supermoto without even changing the springs, or with a rake angle that is half the real one, then this guy is not putting feeling over numbers: he's not even trying and he's just doing a
VERY crappy work, that GP Bikes and ( most of ) its community don't deserve.
PiBoSo +100000000000
I rode KTM and it was very funny and with a good feeling but when I read that Rodney changed gear ratio because the bike was too fast for a stock bike I made this face: ??? Gear ratio is one of the easiest info to know for a stock bike, why not using real data?
Quoting Rodney- "however "feels right" and "on paper it must be right" is the battle we face here. From what I can see there are just too many barriers and mindless knumbskulls in this community to help it go forward, so many walls and so much narrowminded
dictator godlike worshiping of a higher power that anything else is not satisfactory." end quote
See what I mean? Now we (the community) know where we all stand due to your constructive feedback on us all ;)
Your idea of moving forward is starting threads that read- "This game feels worse than ever- Simulator or a mess" I changed the title topic and then you took the liberty to change it again and back pedaled.
"no offence" Rodney, but your feedback isn't very helpful for this community. As you stated - We are just a bunch of mindless numskulls. dictator godlike worshipping of a higher power.
Remember one thing- this is not about you or me or anyone else, its about the cause & effect.
@Piboso,
I totally agree with representing the actual data as accurately as possible. From what I saw when I was helping test the KX-F, was that at such an early stage in development there wasn't a whole lot of time for anything further to be modified before it was pushed for early release and then denounced as unfinished and poor feeling. Given constructive feedback, I feel that Rodney would have adjusted the things that were amiss and provided a far better platform for future supermoto releases. One of the largest concerns when the beta of it was released was the fact so much of it had not been changed from the basic platform it started on.
I surely can't be the only vocal member here that tried the earliest version of the KX-F, it was atrocious, hence why it wasn't released, and release wasn't planned until the data and behavior matched the real thing. The beta that went public was miles beyond the first try I got at it, and I still feel it was really headed the right way in the long run. The community here seems just as brutal in feedback to Piboso (early beta's, holy crap, these guys turned into starved animals!) as they are to the modders that are developing bikes (not enough real data, time to get chastised by the community!). I always had an elevated idea of how good motorcycle communities are, but it seems the sim community is one rough place to put yourself on the line for judgement.
On the topic of Beta6c, every bike released up until now (gotta change some numbers around to get the rider to fit the bike and no core crashes upon loading the track from the pits) even the less polished bikes feel light years ahead of what they did back in beta5 where so many of them struggled with front end issues, further enforcing my belief that the further Piboso goes in developing the actual simulator the better the mod bikes get. Solely blaming a modder for their bike feeling bad seems rude, I don't like a bike and think to myself I'll await further development from Piboso and then go back and try them again. The WSS600 bike set was a perfect case for that feeling for me, the usual bikes that came from that area of the community usually didn't feel good to me, but with beta6, they actually have a good feeling on track... and I am pretty sure the numbers didn't change much on the bikes themselves, but in the underlying sim they have been implemented into.
Sorry for the novel just spewing opinion. Probably not the most constructive thing posted here. :-[
Quote from: WALKEN on November 10, 2014, 01:59:00 PM
"no offence" Rodney, but your feedback isn't very helpful for this community.
"you" are not the community. Walken,
Quote from: PiBoSo on November 10, 2014, 11:58:02 AM
There is nothing wrong in using "feelings" to tune the physics, because unfortunately there is a lot of data that cannot be got ( or that would be too difficult to get ) from the real world.
But at the very least the basic, known data should be accurately replicated: rake angle and geometry in general, mass, weight distribution, inertia, springs, aerodynamics, engine, gearbox, ...
Especially since bike and engine editors have been released.
If a modder just take the Murasama and turns it into a supermoto without even changing the springs, or with a rake angle that is half the real one, then this guy is not putting feeling over numbers: he's not even trying and he's just doing a VERY crappy work, that GP Bikes and ( most of ) its community don't deserve.
The bike had alot of work left in it. We did change springs and many other things through testing.... when something didn't work we took steps back and changed them. In this case the springs were left,
I am wanting to help nominate a group of people to help Piboso yet you guys keep bringing stuff back to me. I am not perfect and have never said I am therefore when people work collectively in a team
we can become more productive and really take this game to the next level!.
meh it aint gunna happen... I am glad I have voiced my opinion ... can't say I didn't try
I definatley don't take back the part of this game being a complete and utter MESS currently
I respect Piboso for his efforts and hard work - and have always said this throughout.
I wish the guys who PM me with support would have the balls to share there thoughts here more instead of me VS all
@rodney: if you want help and you know where problems are, maybe you can send PM to Piboso instead of opening another thread that throws shit on this sim.
When you released ktm i was very satisfied with the feeling of the bike but looking at the progress of betas i noticed that this approach simply doesn't work.
If bikes with the same settings behave better through beta evolutions it's the sim that gets better.
Rodney.. Why not start again? One thing for sure is your good at creating bikes! Why not try again but stay within the ''guidelines'' with the physics.. You might find what you want from beta6c!?
Wss600 and stk1000 clearly have benefited from beta6c so I dont see why not?
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 10, 2014, 07:52:52 PM
Rodney.. Why not start again? One thing for sure is your good at creating bikes! Why not try again but stay within the ''guidelines'' with the physics.. You might find what you want from beta6c!?
Wss600 and stk1000 clearly have benefited from beta6c so I dont see why not?
This 100%... I feel that if there was some tuning in how to get to the goal of a more realistic bike, and correct numbers were used, Rodney would be one of the top modders on GP Bikes. His models and physics feel great, and the more tuned the sim gets the better his bikes can get without fudged numbers to feel correct. Not sure what so many others are on about with talking bad about his bikes, but given enough time to adjust them I think he would get right on par with the best of the best the community deems fit for public release. ;)
Quote from: grimm on November 10, 2014, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 10, 2014, 07:52:52 PM
Rodney.. Why not start again? One thing for sure is your good at creating bikes! Why not try again but stay within the ''guidelines'' with the physics.. You might find what you want from beta6c!?
Wss600 and stk1000 clearly have benefited from beta6c so I dont see why not?
This 100%... I feel that if there was some tuning in how to get to the goal of a more realistic bike, and correct numbers were used, Rodney would be one of the top modders on GP Bikes. His models and physics feel great, and the more tuned the sim gets the better his bikes can get without fudged numbers to feel correct. Not sure what so many others are on about with talking bad about his bikes, but given enough time to adjust them I think he would get right on par with the best of the best the community deems fit for public release. ;)
yes +1
I know at least 100 people that finds rodney mods really ridiculous.His mods are made at random on the basis of his feelings,c'mon,tat's not gpbikes:Maybe is "rodneybikes" Lol...
There are far more experienced and capable modders even without tools were able to achieve excellent bike with real data: C21, Jc21, Gpbikesitalia,Tchoum22 if i remember correctly.Let us not kid ourselves,all this attention towards this "character" just arrived is absurd.
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 10, 2014, 10:19:24 PM
I know at least 100 people that finds rodney mods really ridiculous.His mods are made at random on the basis of his feelings,c'mon,tat's not gpbikes:Maybe is "rodneybikes" Lol...
There are far more experienced and capable modders even without tools were able to achieve excellent bike with real data: C21, Jc21, Gpbikesitalia,Tchoum22 if i remember correctly.Let us not kid ourselves,all this attention towards this "character" just arrived is absurd.
No! The mods are great! The moddeling work was brilliant! Anybody who thinks otherwise is probably just a jealous troll!
Its the physics that caused concern!
End of the day its piboso's sim.. So if he expects you to stay within the lines, I personally dont see an issue.
The 990 needs work (no interest in using it) but the 600's etc prove to me that its all worthwhile! I dont see anything ''out there'' representing a bike better than what we have now with the 600's especially.
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 10, 2014, 10:43:32 PM
No! The mods are great! The moddeling work was brilliant! Anybody who thinks otherwise is probably just a jealous troll!
Its the physics that caused concern!
End of the day its piboso's sim.. So if he expects you to stay within the lines, I personally dont see an issue.
The 990 needs work (no interest in using it) but the 600's etc prove to me that its all worthwhile! I dont see anything ''out there'' representing a bike better than what we have now with the 600's especially.
Not jelous trolls but competent people,sorry for you.
Regarding the 990:yes 600 and stk1000 are really good realistic bikes,but, I do not think piboso needs rodney or anyother modder!for fixing his 990.If he created gpbikes,it's not a incompetent,I trust in him.
Well.. I agree, I think everybody is entitled to give feedback and opinions. A small team of selected people would just piss off everybody else.. Concidering all the different views and opinions!
For sure though personal mods its up to the modder/s to decide who gets involved.
There is things I like and dislike about GPB's but the core feeling I get is very good! Again especially with the yamaha R6 ;D ;D
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 10, 2014, 10:19:24 PM
I know at least 100 people that finds rodney mods really ridiculous.His mods are made at random on the basis of his feelings,c'mon,tat's not gpbikes:Maybe is "rodneybikes" Lol...
There are far more experienced and capable modders even without tools were able to achieve excellent bike with real data: C21, Jc21, Gpbikesitalia,Tchoum22 if i remember correctly.Let us not kid ourselves,all this attention towards this "character" just arrived is absurd.
???
You seem to be speaking on behalf of the entire community by stating your opinion like that. Seems you are one of the "core group" that really dislike Rodney due to beta releases of bikes... you are clear what beta means, right? In case you missed it, in short, it means
unfinished. The WSS and STK bike sets both state as clearly as Rodney did about his bikes, they are still under development and there will likely be changes before they are called "finished". But somehow it's only Rodney that gets you upset? This is a case of personal opinion on your part, an allegiance to some group of modders as it seems that even Piboso and a great deal of this community doesn't share your same attitude about a modder having a go at addon bikes.
I dunno man, it seems everything and everyone before and after your replies is pretty constructive, and yet you just attack one person about how they find the end result of a proper handling bike. Just because my (or a modders) path from A to B is different doesn't make arriving at B from A any more or less useful. He is testing waters nobody else is trying and I applaud it, if you don't like it why worry about downloading it? And if a bike is released as a beta why not just exclude it from the bike mod unless it is finished properly and let the community decide if they want to use it or not? Telling him to get lost is pretty harsh on the grounds of how he finds a proper handling bike on a simulator platform that was and to an extent still is under development itself.
Sorry for a 2nd novel. :-\
Quote from: grimm on November 11, 2014, 12:56:17 AM
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 10, 2014, 10:19:24 PM
I know at least 100 people that finds rodney mods really ridiculous.His mods are made at random on the basis of his feelings,c'mon,tat's not gpbikes:Maybe is "rodneybikes" Lol...
There are far more experienced and capable modders even without tools were able to achieve excellent bike with real data: C21, Jc21, Gpbikesitalia,Tchoum22 if i remember correctly.Let us not kid ourselves,all this attention towards this "character" just arrived is absurd.
???
You seem to be speaking on behalf of the entire community by stating your opinion like that. Seems you are one of the "core group" that really dislike Rodney due to beta releases of bikes... you are clear what beta means, right? In case you missed it, in short, it means unfinished. The WSS and STK bike sets both state as clearly as Rodney did about his bikes, they are still under development and there will likely be changes before they are called "finished". But somehow it's only Rodney that gets you upset? This is a case of personal opinion on your part, an allegiance to some group of modders as it seems that even Piboso and a great deal of this community doesn't share your same attitude about a modder having a go at addon bikes.
I dunno man, it seems everything and everyone before and after your replies is pretty constructive, and yet you just attack one person about how they find the end result of a proper handling bike. Just because my (or a modders) path from A to B is different doesn't make arriving at B from A any more or less useful. He is testing waters nobody else is trying and I applaud it, if you don't like it why worry about downloading it? And if a bike is released as a beta why not just exclude it from the bike mod unless it is finished properly and let the community decide if they want to use it or not? Telling him to get lost is pretty harsh on the grounds of how he finds a proper handling bike on a simulator platform that was and to an extent still is under development itself.
Sorry for a 2nd novel. :-\
Another lawyer of Rodney.
The song remain the same.What a bore.
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 11, 2014, 01:39:00 AM
Another lawyer of Rodney.
The song remain the same.What a bore.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/louie.gif)
Quote from: JamoZ on November 11, 2014, 02:18:36 AM
Quote from: FastFreddy on November 11, 2014, 01:39:00 AM
Another lawyer of Rodney.
The song remain the same.What a bore.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/louie.gif)
ohh man who speaks with the gif ... lol ...
(http://lumpimages.s3.amazonaws.com/blowjob-gif/http%253A%252F%252F24.media.tumblr.com%252Ftumblr_m79j7mpSUd1qlkpdmo1_500.gif)
Shes using the wrong finger freddy!
I have to agree with grimm in his last post.
And really, if you dont like the bike dont ride it dude.
DD
i think you, FREDDY, are on a personal campaign on rodney, dont know why and what he did to you.
and with your method you have liekely prevented some bikes to be released. thanks for that mate!
my 2 cents
Quote from: JJS209 on November 11, 2014, 09:10:50 PM
Quote from: doubledragoncc on November 11, 2014, 07:47:23 PM
I have to agree with grimm in his last post.
And really, if you dont like the bike dont ride it dude.
DD
i think you are on a personal campaign on rodney, dont know why and what he did to you.
and with your method you have liekely prevented some bikes to be released. thanks for that mate!
my 2 cents
Sorry JJ think I wrote it wrong I was sticking up for Rodney making MODS not against him.
DD
sry wrong quoted, updated post.
No problem mate lol. We all do it once in a while.
DD
I would like to make something clear. I have nothing personal against anyone!
One thing that you have to realize is some people come off in an arrogant way and maybe Rodney needs to cool his jets a bit if he wants to be a "humble" asset to the GPBikes project as complaining and making rude remarks does not help regardless of any mod work that someone may do even if the mod work is good or bad.
That is the issue!
(Quoting Rodney- 'in all seriousness though... I am wanting the most realistic racing simulator of all time, but maybe its just me and there are too many obstacles in the way such as Game devs and Forum sheriffs."- end quote)
So I ask this question, is that someone you would want leading or being a integral part of this project? In a Nut shell Rodney is saying Piboso an Myself are in the way, that is interesting thought there? :o
Quote from: WALKEN on November 11, 2014, 10:19:56 PM
I would like to make something clear. I have nothing personal against anyone!
One thing that you have to realize is some people come off in an arrogant way and maybe Rodney needs to cool his jets a bit if he wants to be a "humble" asset to the GPBikes project as complaining and making rude remarks does not help regardless of any mod work that someone may do even if the mod work is good or bad.
That is the issue!
(Quoting Rodney- 'in all seriousness though... I am wanting the most realistic racing simulator of all time, but maybe its just me and there are too many obstacles in the way such as Game devs and Forum sheriffs."- end quote)
So I ask this question, is that someone you would want leading or being a integral part of this project? In a Nut shell Rodney is saying Piboso an Myself are in the way, that is interesting thought there? :o
You see how that quote button works? Damn rookie admins :P
(http://media.giphy.com/media/tPdYQaW6oCIOA/giphy.gif)
I got so much stuff to say, a thousand thoughts. But it`s to tiring to even write it all down. My brain hurts thinking about it. These kind of discussions have been going on for years and only go in circles. I don`t even care anymore at this point. I got quite alot of PM`s of people asking what`s going on with this game & community lately. Congratulations....
Quote from: JamoZ on November 11, 2014, 11:12:04 PM
These kind of discussions have been going on for years and only go in circles.
So let's stop them going around in circles:
- rodney (and many others) are OK to have huge deviations from real data in order to get a bike behaviour that they perceive as "realistic" (I put quotes because we don't have all the same definition of realistic here, which is normal).
- piboso (and many others) are not OK with the above.
No biggie. Anybody can create a mod, no matter how crazy. Just don't go mad when you ask for feedback (*).
So peace to all, personally I'm glad rodney is back (but I'm not glad his position is still the same as before).
MaX.
(*)
There are some technically picky people around here ... I just complained to oDi that the custom bike stand for the STK bikes with a single-sided swingarm (e.g. the Panigale) should enter the wheel axle from the left side of the rim, not from the right ... ;D
(quoting Jamoz- " You see how that quote button works? Damn rookie admins :P")
Or maybe that is how I like to quote, is there a rule against that? So now your breaking my balls no? Do I need to give you my history of moderator /Admin or any work I have done for motorcycle gaming forums/developers? I can assure you the trail isn't short my friend, hardly a rookie! Beside that, did you step up to the plate as a moderator when Piboso asked for help?
Everyone needs to understand the facts of a healthy community. As Hornet stated, there isn't anything wrong with making fun mods that are not realistic for a laugh.. But the point of this project is to have a serious bike simulation. Focusing on improper things gets this project nowhere fast... Its not worthless to discuss this issue because would you rather have deleted posts or banned members because of their opinion on direction?
The direction is a pure bike simulation. That is the focus!
Concerning Rodney and this thread, when I became moderator it was a mess because of the very person at hand. Now this same person is back at starting trouble by being arrogant and thinking he knows better. If someone feels more gifted than Piboso, then go develop your own game and run your own forums and see how that turns out.
We have a great bunch of people here and we should all be grateful for GPBikes. This isn't about taking sides with anyone as we should all be on the same side.
Quote from: WALKEN on November 12, 2014, 01:34:00 AM
(quoting Jamoz- " You see how that quote button works? Damn rookie admins :P")
Or maybe that is how I like to quote, is there a rule against that? So now your breaking my balls no? Do I need to give you my history of moderator /Admin or any work I have done for motorcycle gaming forums/developers? I can assure you the trail isn't short my friend, hardly a rookie! Beside that, did you step up to the plate as a moderator when Piboso asked for help?
Wow bro, calm down. It was a joke. I'm really happy for your long list of moderating stuff, I'm impressed. Now that you mention it, can you email it to me so that i can print it out and put it above my bed? :P
Quote from: JamoZ on November 12, 2014, 01:58:53 AM
Quote from: WALKEN on November 12, 2014, 01:34:00 AM
(quoting Jamoz- " You see how that quote button works? Damn rookie admins :P")
Or maybe that is how I like to quote, is there a rule against that? So now your breaking my balls no? Do I need to give you my history of moderator /Admin or any work I have done for motorcycle gaming forums/developers? I can assure you the trail isn't short my friend, hardly a rookie! Beside that, did you step up to the plate as a moderator when Piboso asked for help?
Wow bro, calm down. It was a joke. I'm really happy for your long list of moderating stuff, I'm impressed. Now that you mention it, can you email it to me so that i can print it out and put it above my bed? :P
Well I'm glad to see you know how to use the quote button ;)
Quote from: WALKEN on November 12, 2014, 01:34:00 AM
Now this same person is back at starting trouble by being arrogant and thinking he knows better. If someone feels more gifted than Piboso, then go develop your own game and run your own forums and see how that turns out.
really? is that how I am or are you just having a winge?
Oh and who is this person that feels more gifted than Piboso? From what I have read everyone is very appreciative of his efforts and wants to work with him. Or is this fueled by something else?
@Rodney: you are quite a flamer, aren't you?
Anyway, we can solve this 'problem'.
You want to create mods with your methods, right?
When you give a product to a community you become like a seller, you can make things that satisfy the biggest amont of people or you can make a product like you want, ignoring that some/a lot of people don't appreciate the things you make.
Your choice.
Also you have to receive any kind of feedback and accept negative (but polite) ones.
Negative feedbacks should be an input to improve your work or you can ignore them and become a market niche seller.
Quote from: Mac on November 12, 2014, 06:06:58 AM
@Rodney: you are quite a flamer, aren't you?
Anyway, we can solve this 'problem'.
You want to create mods with your methods, right?
When you give a product to a community you become like a seller, you can make things that satisfy the biggest amont of people or you can make a product like you want, ignoring that some/a lot of people don't appreciate the things you make.
Your choice.
Also you have to receive any kind of feedback and accept negative (but polite) ones.
Negative feedbacks should be an input to improve your work or you can ignore them and become a market niche seller.
I agree, and through a process of making mistakes, saying things i regret (admit-ably) and so forth I have become (a bit) wiser. Not to get all frisky or anything but a I
really cant be fu*cked spending much time on modding for this game at the moment. though I have spent time making models for other games such as this full Pagani Zonda R engine
I made from scratch complete with internal components :-)
(http://i1106.photobucket.com/albums/h377/rodney007xx/213124.jpg)
Sorry totally off topic now
sweeet :P
shame its not a bike engine though, wasted talent! :'(
this thread needs sacking off.. replace it with something positive! ::)
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 12, 2014, 07:50:13 AM
sweeet :P
shame its not a bike engine though, wasted talent! :'(
this thread needs sacking off.. replace it with something positive! ::)
mmmmm turbo busa....... ah the posibilities
if i could.. i would make all the golden era superbikes.. zx7r's, gixers.. the works!!
REal sweet mota rodney. I love cars too so its off topic, l do it too lol, but its still good to see such talented workmanship even if its not a bike.
AS BOBR said, some old gixxers and CBR's would be coooool beans baby. Or for a special class Z1300 and CBX, the old 6 cylinder monsters for the wannabebigboys lol. (Used to ride both!!!)
Keep up the great work and dont stess.
Keep it sunny side up
DD
Quoting Rodney- "Not to get all frisky or anything but a I
really cant be fu*cked spending much time on modding for this game at the moment." end quote!
Awesome work Rodney awesome, your the best bro! Now could you please do 1 of 2 things for me? Either take your "talent" and be a positive part of the GPBikes project or take your "talent" elsewhere 8)
Thank You