i dont want to play this game anymore because graphics are outdated and its just not so good looking. still few years to go and its getting better i hope. physics awesome offcourse
Hockenhiem - WSBK 1199 panigale..
Stunning work..
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i cant play this game anymore because graphics are dated and its just ugly. still few years to go and its getting uglier. bye
The thrill comes from getting to grip with the simulation not sitting there admiring the graphics..... If you spent more time going faster instead of looking for pretty things...... Your opinion might be different.
The graphics are fine, keep on going Piboso.
Quote from: Toomes1 on January 28, 2015, 07:08:52 AM
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i cant play this game anymore because graphics are dated and its just ugly. still few years to go and its getting uglier. bye
The thrill comes from getting to grip with the simulation not sitting there admiring the graphics..... If you spent more time going faster instead of looking for pretty things...... Your opinion might be different.
The graphics are fine, keep on going Piboso.
iknow what you mean and agreed. i hope someday graphics are good as physics. great work piboso. i go check Hockenhiem :)
Stick with it -aGy- I'm sure your start to like mate.
Oddly i have gone the other way, tried all the latest and greatest commercial offerings and although they look pretty they do no simulate in any way the feeling of riding a bike which is what i am after in a sim. Even on max realism the SBK series feels like your riding a slot car racer - no fun.
Played a few car driving games on my mates PS4, same conclusion, once the initial cosmetics have been admired the driving model is just fantasy and not much fun beyond 'learning' how to exploit the fantasy car control model. The old MotoGP bike handling was a comedy of 'power' slides more tokyo drift than motogp - horror!.
Graphical trickery can be added easily, modders will produce beautifully detailed models but you need excellent core physics and that elusive bike 'feel' for a good simulation. Probably more important to optomise the 3D engine and make sure it has the flexibility for future development.
As an aside i am as easily swayed by pretty visuals as anyone else, spent loads over the years on fancy mulit graphics card setups just to watch the latest demos (strange how those fancy features took years to get into the actual games!) but with my bike/driving games its the physics and realistic bike feel first.
Must admit i wish more attention was paid to the on bike views, always like these to look good and they are often far less detailed than the bike model which you do not really see much of in game.
Don't know where you get all them words from but well said+1
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i dont want to play this game anymore because graphics are outdated and its just not so good looking. still few years to go and its getting better i hope. physics awesome offcourse
The tracks could be more detailed and have better textures.
Except for this, everything is supported: normal maps, specular maps, live reflections, static reflections, reflection maps, ambient shadows, 3D grass, 3D marbles, rain reflections, raindrops on the visor, ...
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
More fancy effects like motion blur or depth of field or post-processing filters may be added in the future.
The graphics are more than adequate level. Most track creator does not try to work the textures.
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 10:25:09 AM
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i dont want to play this game anymore because graphics are outdated and its just not so good looking. still few years to go and its getting better i hope. physics awesome offcourse
The tracks could be more detailed and have better textures.
Except for this, everything is supported: normal maps, specular maps, live reflections, static reflections, reflection maps, ambient shadows, 3D grass, 3D marbles, rain reflections, raindrops on the visor, ...
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
More fancy effects like motion blur or depth of field or post-processing filters may be added in the future.
Just one question Piboso: If I apply the normal, specular, maps/materials in a Pro 3D app like Maya, do we still have to create the shader text files in the track folders? I'd have said no, but not sure?
Hawk.
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 10:25:09 AM
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
You mean the "psychedelic HDR thing" or something else ?
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on January 28, 2015, 11:11:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 10:25:09 AM
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
You mean the "psychedelic HDR thing" or something else ?
MaX.
In Gran Turismo the ambient light is very dark, not realistic at all.
Another popular trick to make screenshots / videos look better is to use a sunset light.
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 11:40:58 AM
In Gran Turismo the ambient light is very dark, not realistic at all.
Another popular trick to make screenshots / videos look better is to use a sunset light.
OK, nothing new then.
As a side note, the way "fog" is handled in ambient light is not very satisfactory.
Many tracks look "bleached" because excessive usage of the fog: OK, that's something that the track creator can fix, but still it doesn't really look like fog.
MaX.
The only details that I would see would be better now:
- Motorcycle damage
- Exhaust flames
- Deformation field
Would be nice to see a small technology demonstrator track, very simple small oval (speedway track) size but with all the different graphic tech features implemented even if it was not in a very realistic way. Curious as to just what the engine could deliver if pushed to the limits on a small project and to highlight what is capable and how to execute it for the track builders. I think people only include what they are familiar with or have already seen in another track.
Does the engine do animation?, always nice to see flags flutter, look odd if they are static and it might be nice if the track marshalls moved a bit.............
Quote from: Hawk_UK on January 28, 2015, 11:00:24 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 10:25:09 AM
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i dont want to play this game anymore because graphics are outdated and its just not so good looking. still few years to go and its getting better i hope. physics awesome offcourse
The tracks could be more detailed and have better textures.
Except for this, everything is supported: normal maps, specular maps, live reflections, static reflections, reflection maps, ambient shadows, 3D grass, 3D marbles, rain reflections, raindrops on the visor, ...
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
More fancy effects like motion blur or depth of field or post-processing filters may be added in the future.
Just one question Piboso: If I apply the normal, specular, maps/materials in a Pro 3D app like Maya, do we still have to create the shader text files in the track folders? I'd have said no, but not sure?
Hawk.
Okay. I've had a look at "Victoria" and it hasn't any text files for including shaders, etc, etc.... So I'll presume that by adding shaders, normal maps in a 3D app doesn't then require further text files to implement these in GPB track creation.
Hawk.
Well I was waiting for someone to bring it up but I think Piboso is not getting a fair deal on this subject and a BIG AND, are not most of the graphics community made MODS???????????
That being my opening I would like to add my opinion here as I am one of the old farts in here and been with PC games from day one I have lived with the progression of graphics. I am a finicky old fart that wants the best in all I do or have. I want the great looking tracks and bikes like in some of the new bike games as I have lived with crappy graphics way toooooo long. Some of you dont know how lucky you are with GPB's graphics, try back in 1984 and the SHIT that I had to live with and I thought that was great!!!!! I think to say the graphics in GPB are out dated is unfair as I think it is being said because of the overall appearance of the game at present, BUT take a close look at the bikes 3D models, they are brilliant, not upto some of the BIG companies out there where they are PAID big bucks to make the models, the most bikes you are all riding are from the community, as are the tracks!!!! The guys that make them spend their spare and free time on something for all of us and they do it all with a passion and total dedication to the community. They work under the pressure of us all saying "hey dude wheres the update for the M1" while they are doing 10 OTHER models at the same time and all for FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!! To complain about graphic standards is an insult to the modding community in GPB.
These Modders have supplied us with these fantastic models that not only look great but have physics too!!!! Most of us make our own paints, so how can you blame Piboso for out dated graphics when its US making the graphics. I know you are all saying about spectacular lighting and other points but in the end as said before, if your riding fast you wont be looking at the pretty flowers on the grass verge, or are you??????????????? The tracks are the downfall at present but only in graphical content. The physical tracks are there and some are great, some still need work to be ride-able, but thats what WIP is. I am sure there is more to the graphics engine in GPB, but for it to function you have to have the physical components for it to work with, the backgrounds, the 3D models and everything have to be to the standard for the engine to use them, but WE are the ones making paints, bikes, helmets, suits and track graphics that make up GPB. So in the end, the out dated appearance is made by us.
I ride GPB because of the physics, I WANT the best graphics too, but for now the compromise is worth it. If I could make it look better I would, but I got enough to do trying to make a controller we can all have one day at as low a cost as possible. I have all the other bike games as I have to test my controllers in them, but otherwise I dont play them. The other day I was working with MotoGP 13 and 14, holy cow what crap!!! Yeah they look pretty good and the graphics engine is better than GPB, but I had NO fun, I get wound up by a terrible interface so Im pissed off before I have even got on a bike, then the racing!!!!!!!!! WTF is this shit. Come on guys, can you really put up with the physics that a 5 year old can ride with just to smell the frickin roses by the track???????? Oh and while on the subject of the track, tell me if you had 100 tracks to chose from????? Oh and how many bikes, and classes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GP Bikes is the dogs bollocks from road racing simulations, its the ONLY road bike sim there is, and if one of you mentions the RIDE I will hunt you down and burn your computer!!!! Joking!!! Maybe?????? No but seriously GP Bikes is a simulation and concentrates on physics not appearance and thats how it will stay. Piboso has enough to do with the physics so its up to us to improve the graphics and bit by bit its happening.
Looking at GPB is not spectacular, that is true, but it is still a great looking SIMULATION, not a pretty looking game for 5 year olds who spend their lives following the bright pretty things in life, they always have a bad side to them and when it comes to bike games NONE have good physics if you can say they have any physics at all. Thank god I never paid for any milestone, blackbean or capcom product, I would want my money back for selling me a product that does not do as they say it does. They are just pretty boxes to have on the shelf.
I am sure as time goes by and Piboso and the community feels there is now time to concentrate on the graphical side of the sim they will, but until then what do you really want, physics or pretty pictures?????? I love driving in Pcars for the graphics, they are beautiful, but I want to ride a bike along the French coast not drive a car. So I stick with GPB and love it. I can slip into my racing leathers with my design on them, put on my helmet with my paint and then straddle my bike of choice with my paintwork. I can tune the bike to suit my riding style and chose between over 100 tracks to ride and do it alone or with others online. There maybe problems here and there, the graphics are not the best, BUT there is no other sim/game I would rather be spending what precious spare time I have in. I do miss lens flares though Im a kid when it comes to them lol.
If you want to give Piboso the money so he can use such graphics engines as cry engine 3 and what ever the latest ones are, then go ahead because until then GPB is all about the physics and the community, Piboso and the Modders give us so much it is wrong to complain about the quality when most of it is FREE.
I dont wanna ride in first gear and look at the way the sun reflects of this and that and how the grass is torn up by a tire, I want to ride and dont have time for prettiness.
I hope those who feel they will leave GPB because of the graphics not being the best, take the time to reflect on what they think, that they see GPB for what it is and then stay. This is the best sim community there it is and it would be a shame to lose you.
Keep in sunny side up.............even if there are no lens flares!!!
DD
Quote from: doubledragoncc on January 28, 2015, 06:21:04 PM
Well I was waiting for someone to bring it up but I think Piboso is not getting a fair deal on this subject and a BIG AND, are not most of the graphics community made MODS???????????
That being my opening I would like to add my opinion here as I am one of the old farts in here and been with PC games from day one I have lived with the progression of graphics. I am a finicky old fart that wants the best in all I do or have. I want the great looking tracks and bikes like in some of the new bike games as I have lived with crappy graphics way toooooo long. Some of you dont know how lucky you are with GPB's graphics, try back in 1984 and the SHIT that I had to live with and I thought that was great!!!!! I think to say the graphics in GPB are out dated is unfair as I think it is being said because of the overall appearance of the game at present, BUT take a close look at the bikes 3D models, they are brilliant, not upto some of the BIG companies out there where they are PAID big bucks to make the models, the most bikes you are all riding are from the community, as are the tracks!!!! The guys that make them spend their spare and free time on something for all of us and they do it all with a passion and total dedication to the community. They work under the pressure of us all saying "hey dude wheres the update for the M1" while they are doing 10 OTHER models at the same time and all for FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!! To complain about graphic standards is an insult to the modding community in GPB.
These Modders have supplied us with these fantastic models that not only look great but have physics too!!!! Most of us make our own paints, so how can you blame Piboso for out dated graphics when its US making the graphics. I know you are all saying about spectacular lighting and other points but in the end as said before, if your riding fast you wont be looking at the pretty flowers on the grass verge, or are you??????????????? The tracks are the downfall at present but only in graphical content. The physical tracks are there and some are great, some still need work to be ride-able, but thats what WIP is. I am sure there is more to the graphics engine in GPB, but for it to function you have to have the physical components for it to work with, the backgrounds, the 3D models and everything have to be to the standard for the engine to use them, but WE are the ones making paints, bikes, helmets, suits and track graphics that make up GPB. So in the end, the out dated appearance is made by us.
I ride GPB because of the physics, I WANT the best graphics too, but for now the compromise is worth it. If I could make it look better I would, but I got enough to do trying to make a controller we can all have one day at as low a cost as possible. I have all the other bike games as I have to test my controllers in them, but otherwise I dont play them. The other day I was working with MotoGP 13 and 14, holy cow what crap!!! Yeah they look pretty good and the graphics engine is better than GPB, but I had NO fun, I get wound up by a terrible interface so Im pissed off before I have even got on a bike, then the racing!!!!!!!!! WTF is this shit. Come on guys, can you really put up with the physics that a 5 year old can ride with just to smell the frickin roses by the track???????? Oh and while on the subject of the track, tell me if you had 100 tracks to chose from????? Oh and how many bikes, and classes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GP Bikes is the dogs bollocks from road racing simulations, its the ONLY road bike sim there is, and if one of you mentions the RIDE I will hunt you down and burn your computer!!!! Joking!!! Maybe?????? No but seriously GP Bikes is a simulation and concentrates on physics not appearance and thats how it will stay. Piboso has enough to do with the physics so its up to us to improve the graphics and bit by bit its happening.
Looking at GPB is not spectacular, that is true, but it is still a great looking SIMULATION, not a pretty looking game for 5 year olds who spend their lives following the bright pretty things in life, they always have a bad side to them and when it comes to bike games NONE have good physics if you can say they have any physics at all. Thank god I never paid for any milestone, blackbean or capcom product, I would want my money back for selling me a product that does not do as they say it does. They are just pretty boxes to have on the shelf.
I am sure as time goes by and Piboso and the community feels there is now time to concentrate on the graphical side of the sim they will, but until then what do you really want, physics or pretty pictures?????? I love driving in Pcars for the graphics, they are beautiful, but I want to ride a bike along the French coast not drive a car. So I stick with GPB and love it. I can slip into my racing leathers with my design on them, put on my helmet with my paint and then straddle my bike of choice with my paintwork. I can tune the bike to suit my riding style and chose between over 100 tracks to ride and do it alone or with others online. There maybe problems here and there, the graphics are not the best, BUT there is no other sim/game I would rather be spending what precious spare time I have in. I do miss lens flares though Im a kid when it comes to them lol.
If you want to give Piboso the money so he can use such graphics engines as cry engine 3 and what ever the latest ones are, then go ahead because until then GPB is all about the physics and the community, Piboso and the Modders give us so much it is wrong to complain about the quality when most of it is FREE.
I dont wanna ride in first gear and look at the way the sun reflects of this and that and how the grass is torn up by a tire, I want to ride and dont have time for prettiness.
I hope those who feel they will leave GPB because of the graphics not being the best, take the time to reflect on what they think, that they see GPB for what it is and then stay. This is the best sim community there it is and it would be a shame to lose you.
Keep in sunny side up.............even if there are no lens flares!!!
DD
Got a TLDR version of that :P ;D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on January 28, 2015, 11:00:24 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on January 28, 2015, 10:25:09 AM
Quote from: -aGy- on January 28, 2015, 04:37:26 AM
i dont want to play this game anymore because graphics are outdated and its just not so good looking. still few years to go and its getting better i hope. physics awesome offcourse
The tracks could be more detailed and have better textures.
Except for this, everything is supported: normal maps, specular maps, live reflections, static reflections, reflection maps, ambient shadows, 3D grass, 3D marbles, rain reflections, raindrops on the visor, ...
You can even change the track lighting to get that super-contrasted "Gran Turismo style" look.
More fancy effects like motion blur or depth of field or post-processing filters may be added in the future.
Just one question Piboso: If I apply the normal, specular, maps/materials in a Pro 3D app like Maya, do we still have to create the shader text files in the track folders? I'd have said no, but not sure?
Hawk.
I think these sort of effects (especially the one thta gives depths to 'flat' textures would have a massive impact on appearance, things like tyre walls, gravel traps and buildings would loose the unnatural flat look that they have at the moment and most graphics cards have supported these types of texture manipulations in hardware for years so you would not expect a noticeable impact on frame rates.
I have no idea how you implement them in the engine though so my apologies if this actually a lot of extra work.
Think we can give the flower borders a miss for now though ;)
I think the problem is, that many like myself, dont know how to extract the files from a track and work on them to make them look better, then repack and use the track. If the track modders gave us the files that are the editable psd, tga, jpg etc and we the normal community could work on them, make them better and then submit them to be put in tracks a lot of the workload would be taken off the track builders. It is one thing to know how to do the 3D part but another to manipulate and do the actual artwork. I would love to help and am an artist in many ways, but in the real world and not on the computer, but I can use paint and drawing software to a high standard. I know from peoples skins how good they are in photoshop so why not put this skill to use. I am sure many would agree with me when I say that we all enjoy giving to the community and not just taking. The hours of editing it takes to make one building look real is hard work for track builders to do as well, so can one of you track builders let us know if we can help. I really think this would solve the lack of detail on tracks.
We could have a thread that handles the graphical side to editing tracks where we could download and submit the files to help the track builders, much as with bikes and clothing in GPB. 1 bike, loads of paints, 1 track and the builder could chose which was the most realistic and also best for speed of the game if implemented. I understand the higher quality of the track reduces framerate so the builders set us a limit to the file size in dpi or whatever will keep the quality but also not effect the framerate too much.
This is just an idea to help the builders with the PRETTY side of a track build. I hope someone will let me try this as I and Im sure many others would love to do it.
Keep it sunny side up................with lens flares and a few roses lol
DD
Just had a quick watch through a couple of you tube demos on making textures look 3D and it does looks more of an 'arty' than 3D designer exercise so it would appear to be a task where the community could produce a library of useful stock images especially for the more common trackside scenery.
Watching the demos its quite amazing how a flat original image can be transformed into something that looks like a highly detailed 3D surface with the application of the correct filters. 8)
This is coming down to MOD'ers more then Piboso. A of tracks, or bikes are quick versions ripped from other games. With color palletes of 256-16,000 colors when it could be millions of colors. Or old models, what adds to something to make it look real is reflect surfaces, and lighting, shadows. Reflectiveness gives depth, without it everything will flat. Majority of the tracks we have have virtually no reflective surface to them so it makes the track look really flat, and has the same shades and tones no matter where I am. Where other tracks look better since they have many different shaders and reflective maps. For me, my big thing is tracks surface when it doesn't reflect light at all. It makes it look 2D and uninteresting. Where when you can see the shine of the sun hitting it, changing with your heading.
Colors need to be more vibrant. When I am working with something I always picture it black and white. Then colors are gone but tones are there, with a lot of tracks the colors are all the same tone so nothing stands out. The sky blue isn't bright like it would be, it's a dull tone.
Like the sun in a lot of tracks, looks like a 40 watt bulb. The real sun is bright, I mean we invited sunglasses just for it. lol ;) Plus ambient light will have it's own colors.
I'd like to see some real time shadows, a no sky box, so we can have real time lighting changes. So if we had a endurance race the light source would be changing direction over time, and the color could change over time. With real time shows casting the position of the light. So bike light sources and track light sources. So we could make a Losail with etc. Or headlights for endurance races.
A lot of these things we have in GP Bikes, just the MOD'ers are the ones that need to use them.
Yep gotta agree Klax. It is down to the modders, but they are pressured by us all the time to release a track and in reality they dont have time to work on the pretty side of life. You have to remember with each beta release things change too, look at the bikes, always having to be changed with each beta, these modders are really under pressure. I take my hat off to them for the amazing work they do in such short time gaps. If they could build ONE bike or track and it worked on EVERY beta the problem would diminish as they would have more time for the graphics as you said. Thats why if we can help with the visual side by doing the 2D graphics it might help the track builder. Look at the track numbers now, over 100 different tracks, some have more than one version admittedly but dang thats a lot to keep updated for each beta!!!!
We need to stop moaning about the lack of this and that and help each other like you did for me with the cameras for Limerock Klax. A bit here and a bit there soon adds up. Lets pull up our panties and get out of the daisy field and work together to make this as we want it. These modders have enough pressure on them and are not obliged to do a thing, but they spend hours of their free time to give us everything they can. Lets help them to start by not pushing them so much.
3 massive big motherf**king cheers for the MODDERS and PIBOSO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DD
Im all for nice shiney graphics but the bikes are already real nice.. Some content looks great some of it does'nt.. Mainly about the bike physics anyway. All been said above.
Besides.. My rig struggles with 3d grass already lol!!
But the way the grass is constructed as 3D objects does make it hard for the graphics and they still look like simple 'spikes', this is why modern engines use texture based trickery to emulate the effect of a very complicated 3D model from simple large flat textures.
It the main reason for having a lot of ram on modern cards and the processes are optimized in the cards hardware so its relatively low processing overhead. Moving to these methods will unlock the true potential, currently unused of your existing card (as long as its not too ancient ;))
Haha yeah its not so bad to be honest.. On some tracks it takes a hit when recording the replay etc but in the main its ok.
When I get round to it il upgrade a couple of things.. Graphics card, SSD etc.. Going by what was said in the ''pc advice'' thread.. ;) I use my pc mainly for music and GPB.. So its all good for now.
Biggest general upgrade you can make is to move your boot and OS to even a very small SSD the rest is actually quite happy on a mechanical drive, boot to the desktop in a few seconds. :)
I think motion blur could make a big difference. I remember turning it off once playing DRIFT or F1. Difference was like day and night. I know, it's a (not even very realistic) filter, but somehow makes everything look nicer ;)
Quote from: Nitrox on January 29, 2015, 09:06:11 PM
I think motion blur could make a big difference. I remember turning it off once playing DRIFT or F1. Difference was like day and night. I know, it's a (not even very realistic) filter, but somehow makes everything look nicer ;)
Yeah especially with helmet cam!
Personally I think the lack of robust console platform hardware has made developers creative and lazy at the same time, covering up "good enough" graphics.
There is a difference between real and PC real. I prefer PC real where the developer takes time on fine tuning redundant processes, rather than using effects to cover up half @ss work...
I still play the Commandos series PC strategy games and find the graphics to be so detailed and perfect oppose to first person offerings of the same genre.
When talking motorcycle racing games I still scratch my head when people say how great MotoGP 9/10 graphics were by Monumental. That version of MotoGP had the worst graphics on the face of this planet! Like a cartoon... GPBikes is coming along just wonderful and the use of OpenGL is great.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 29, 2015, 09:26:25 PM
Personally I think the lack of robust console platform hardware has made developers creative and lazy at the same time, covering up "good enough" graphics.
There is a difference between real and PC real. I prefer PC real where the developer takes time on fine tuning redundant processes, rather than using effects to cover up half @ss work...
I still play the Commandos series PC strategy games and find the graphics to be so detailed and perfect oppose to first person offerings of the same genre.
When talking motorcycle racing games I still scratch my head when people say how great MotoGP 9/10 graphics were by Monumental. That version of MotoGP had the worst graphics on the face of this planet! Like a cartoon... GPBikes is coming along just wonderful and the use of OpenGL is great.
+10000
Well said WALKEN! ;)
Hawk.
Yeah those motogp games by monumental were horrible..
I always played the SBK series.. Graphics on SBK were nothing special either..
Anyway iv never had an issue with the graphics in GPB. in fact, I think the graphics are really good and clear! Its just some detail, effects and scenery arnt there.. Stuff im not really fussed about..
Anyway.. The helmet in MaXhud with a dark visor tint.. Thats how it looks to me when riding my bike lol. Everything else only benefits 3rd person gameplay. ;)
Quote from: WALKEN on January 29, 2015, 09:26:25 PM
GPBikes is coming along just wonderful and the use of OpenGL is great.
The use of openGL is debatable. OK it leaves the door open to Linux and Mac users, but in the meantime we suffer because often GPU drivers performs worse on openGL than on D3D (just because 99.9% of the games are D3D). DirectX 12 may bring some serious improvement in terms of drivers overhead (so I've read), not sure openGL will follow closely.
Not a big deal right now anyway, at least not to me: I'm still 100 times more concerned about physics and stability than about graphics.
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on January 29, 2015, 10:22:47 PM
Anyway.. The helmet in MaXhud with a dark visor tint.. Thats how it looks to me when riding my bike lol.
Ahh so somebody is using the visor tint stuff ... I thought I was the only one :)
MaX.
OpenGL = freedom.
Direct X = Proprietary.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 29, 2015, 10:35:32 PM
OpenGL = freedom.
Direct X = Proprietary.
Freedom of what exactly ?
I'm not a big fan of Microsoft but I really see little danger in binding yourself to DirectX, unless you have a really good reason to go openGL.
MaX.
Its more of a personal choice. I find it important to use/support open source oppose to proprietary companies...
Once heartworks become a main stream reality is when the costumer has very little control over their options, more like a feeding trough. Development in Linux is by far the most appealing for me.
"Freedom of what exactly ?"
An operating system I would rather not deal with, which is designed to spoon feed the user. Besides that I feel that GPBikes being a simulator is a niche market and selfishly I wouldn't ever want to see it become destroyed by consoles/DirectX etc....
Quote from: WALKEN on January 29, 2015, 11:58:46 PM
"Freedom of what exactly ?"
An operating system I would rather not deal with, which is designed to spoon feed the user.
No problem with the personal choice, but if Windows "spoon feeds" the user, Linux obliges him/her to "do the dishes and clean the toilets".
And by the way, when the food is good, I like to be spoon fed :)
Quote from: WALKEN on January 29, 2015, 11:58:46 PM
besides that I feel that GPBikes being a simulator is a niche market and selfishly I wouldn't ever want to see it become destroyed by consoles/DirectX etc....
I don't see the connection between the two things: you have DirectX games that are PC only, no consoles.
Anyway, if GPB is ported to a console maintaining its spirit, I don't have a problem with that. Not sure it would sell a lot but if the port comes for free (or almost) ...
Commercially, it would make much more sense to port GPB to consoles than to port it to Linux.
MaX.
By pure chance (I received it in a digest of software-related news) I just stumbled on this:
Windows 10 is the final nail in the coffin for the Linux desktop (http://betanews.com/2015/01/25/windows-10-is-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-for-the-linux-desktop/)
Note that it is written by a Linux supporter.
Damn, I put another thread into off-topic territory :)
MaX.
I've been using Win10 for months and it is so much better all round. The main thing for me is the way it handles hardware a lot cleaner. It is faster than my 7 64bit Ultimate and only the preview version. It still has bugs in it but they will be sorted by release.
It will have DX12 support so thats a big plus again. I find it manages memory better so higher quality graphics could come of it on lower end systems. I recommend installing it as dual boot if your gonna try it as there are still a few points not sorted. It certainly boots quicker too.
Just thought to mention it as it will maybe effect graphics for GPB, which run perfectly on 10.
DD
The graphical evolution of GPBikes is fine is the point. Again there are more important issues to resolve before graphical enhancements are focused on.
Discussing platforms isn't going off topic as they are the very tools to provide us with direction in the future, as long as it doesn't turn into - I like this! you like that! mine is better!
Think about this- When a 3rd party developer develops a game through their own passion and decide to push their work to the market they have choices to make. Once published it becomes locked out for future choices concerning the developer in terms of changes to a point. I wonder how difficult it is for Gabe Newell to reach agreements with publishers to recode games written strictly for M$ (no OpenGL) for SteamOS?
Beyond that, as mods and traditional means go's we are use to moving tangible files/folders, might not be so easy in the future where cloud bases servers stream your games and you have zero control over mods. Hence my allure for OpenGL or any other way to present graphics regardless of platform.
Thinking of the bigger picture is all.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 04:08:04 PM
Beyond that, as mods and traditional means go's we are use to moving tangible files/folders, might not be so easy in the future where cloud bases servers stream your games and you have zero control over mods. Hence my allure for OpenGL or any other way to present graphics regardless of platform.
Wow, but how is "cloud based game streaming" related to D3D/DirectX ?!?!
Is openGl significantly better than D3D ? No.
Is D3D significantly better than openGL ? No (but DirectX 12 looks very interesting in terms of direction taken).
Does sticking to openGL have disadvantages ? Yes. Drivers are typically worse and tends to be fixed/updated at a slower pace. Because very few games use openGL. It may suck, but that's life.
Does sticking to openGL have advantages ? The only ones I've heard (aside the "I hate microsoft") is potential ability to port to linux and Mac. GPB has been there for what ? 7, 8, 9 years ? And there's still no mac / linux version. And no absolute certainty there will ever be one.
MaX.
You say "wow" like I'm clueless?
I don't think you get the point. Once software becomes cloud based you have zero control over its tangible content, hence no modding etc... Sure, it doesn't matter at that point if its D3D/OpenGL etc, as it is being streamed in whatever format it was written. How its related is down to where the developer decides to sell out to. So if it is sold to a publisher that only works with M$ then obviously it will be DirectX. If the developer chooses to keep their work unto themselves then using DirectX can box you in.
The difference between OpenGL and D3D is the word "proprietary" (forget Apple all together as they are nothing but proprietary)
I got involved with GPBikes to get away from the main stream and enjoy something more passionate with attention to detail on a more broad scope. I don't think the progression of GPBikes allows for interest in keeping up with the levels of DirectX as it isn't about graphic enhancement more so the level of detail for simulation... And I ask, by who"s standards for 2015? Taking full advantage of DX12 can mean tripping over your own feet trying to run as fast as you can to get nowhere quick.
Besides that I can run GPBikes in Linux. And at the graphical level it resides at the moment I see no advantage in either or.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 04:59:20 PM
You say "wow" like I'm clueless?
No, I say "Wow" because I don't get the link between directX/OpenGL and cloud streaming.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 04:59:20 PM
The difference between OpenGL and D3D is the word "proprietary" (forget Apple all together as they are nothing but proprietary)
GPB is proprietary too. As a lot of other stuff one runs, even on a linux pc.
Anyway, it's not an issue as the choice has already been made (in favor of openGL) and there's not a lot of benefit in changing that, at least at the moment.
Depending on how things evolve, it could become more of a problem mid-term.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on January 30, 2015, 05:34:45 PM
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 04:59:20 PM
You say "wow" like I'm clueless?
No, I say "Wow" because I don't get the link between directX/OpenGL and cloud streaming.
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 04:59:20 PM
The difference between OpenGL and D3D is the word "proprietary" (forget Apple all together as they are nothing but proprietary)
GPB is proprietary too. As a lot of other stuff one runs, even on a linux pc.
Anyway, it's not an issue as the choice has already been made (in favor of openGL) and there's not a lot of benefit in changing that, at least at the moment.
Depending on how things evolve, it could become more of a problem mid-term.
MaX.
Well the difference Max is if Piboso chooses to develop in DirectX and ignored OpenGL then in the future if/when GPBikes can be sold through a publisher, they may box him in and not offer other options beyond the strive to go cloud based streaming in our ever evolving mobile world we live in... When using OpenGL you allow yourself freedom from huge corporations and their idea of what is awesome.
And remember as well as GPBikes evolves, OpenGL can/will evolve.
Gabe Newell's interest is a bit of a game changer. A multi-platform API allows the developer to not be bound by a proprietary software, along side their own proprietary software.
Do ati graphics card still suffer from poor performance with opengl?
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 06:12:29 PM
Well the difference Max is if Piboso chooses to develop in DirectX and ignored OpenGL then in the future if/when GPBikes can be sold through a publisher, they may box him in and not offer other options beyond the strive to go cloud based streaming in our ever evolving mobile world we live in...
This is an utterly remote chance. What interest would Microsoft have in oblige people to cloud stream games ?!
We depend anyway on may other companies: Intel, AMD, Nvidia, ... what do you plan to do, ask for a GPB that runs on an Arduino ? :)
Quote from: WALKEN on January 30, 2015, 06:12:29 PM
Gabe Newell's interest is a bit of a game changer. A multi-platform API allows the developer to not be bound by a proprietary software, along side their own proprietary software.
I wish them luck, because facing PCs and established consoles they do not really have an head start in that race.
Quote from: h106frp on January 30, 2015, 07:39:42 PM
Do ati graphics card still suffer from poor performance with opengl?
It's not really a matter of performance (even if, IIRC, Nvidia cards fare a bit better on openGL): the real PITA is AMD drivers, each new release you have 50% chances that they screw up on openGL.
And of course nobody cares, because ... well, there're no bloody openGL games around :) (OK, OK, there are a few).
MaX.
:-X