How many of you were around at the time of GPB alpha?
Today I was doing a couple test laps on a very old track and I was thinking: "GPB sure changed a lot over the years".
So I decided to make a comparison video, just for fun:
http://www.youtube.com/v/LmSygVJga4s
On the left, the Alpha5 ( from the beginning of 2009 ), the earliest version that still runs without graphical glitches.
On the right, the latest private build.
In theory they should simulate roughly the same bike ( 2004 vs 2003 ). The reality is that the alpha physics was very strange and doesn't feel like a motorcycle.
Nice comparison, out of curiosity track name? Looks good. 8)
P.S. The 3p rev counter was better in the alpha :P
Since 14 june 2009
Nice work. Looks like the bike is being ridden and not guided around (sim vs arcade)
Quote from: Blackheart on October 22, 2016, 08:48:27 PM
Nice comparison, out of curiosity track name? Looks good. 8)
P.S. The 3p rev counter was better in the alpha :P
Isn't this Limerock?
Why did it get removed? it's a nice little track.
I have some distant memories of playing around with one alpha (to be honest I can't recall which one, could be 5 or 3).
At the time it looked already interesting and already far superior to the competition. So yes, despite everything, good work !
P.S.
Wasn't the track called Russian Ring ?
Limerock :)
Yes, old memories, got interested enough at that time , alpha 7 , i still have the installer :)
Quote from: Warlock on October 22, 2016, 10:24:18 PM
Limerock :)
Yes, old memories, got interested enough at that time , alpha 7 , i still have the installer :)
Ahhh! Yes alpha 7,I too have that installer and have it running on my laptop I remember it
came with a free version of WRS, woot woot!!! I still use my same key from back then.
GPB is a part of my family and all the progress over the years makes it the best SIM ever.
;D ;D ;D
Yep lime rock, with the 250 that was fun indeed.
Quote from: PeterV on October 23, 2016, 06:54:05 AM
Yep lime rock, with the 250 that was fun indeed.
I loved approaching that hairy corner as it takes you over the rise and down into the fast right leading onto the straight....amazing on the 250...After that I was in awe of this sim and have never stopped really. Well done Piboso, you've been leading the bike sims for years now so go for it chap.
Good to see a video like this thx.
A night i was searching around about moto games and finally found gpbikes. Download the demo, try it about 5 laps and buy the alpha7 minutes after.
Gpbikes lives with me since that time.
Only one problem:" i can no more play to another moto game"
Why did this track and the 250 get removed? I`d say swap the current 125 with an updated version of the 250 and let that be the demo bike...
I remember playing this track with the 250 with an old joystick and showing it to iVolution, we both were amazed and bought a license not very long after that :)
I started with alpha6 or 7. I felt in love at the first time. I knew about it on a gp500 forum with wxat and raroo's posts (the last one was inlvoved in early stages of gpb, doesn't he?).
I played with keyboard till beta 1 por 2, lol.
Like janaucarre, gpb closed all the doors to another bike game (and I only play bike games), except a couple of laps on gp500 or sbk2001 for some nostalgic moments :)
Still have the setup exe of alpha 7 too :)
I still have a copy of LRP kicking around in beta9c, it's alot of fun to ride, still after all these years. ;D
I came into GP Bikes right around the release of Alpha3 I think it was, been a long time! I'm always getting a new version, getting frustrated for the first two laps or so because I have to re-learn so much about the physical limits (being able to go faster without a crash) but every single time, I settle into it, and find more speed, more big moments, and more fun! I think the only thing that could make GP Bikes better at this particular point in time, is not giving up completely on it and working to improve the rider (is a rag doll rider after leaving the bike even possible? it is the last thing that doesn't look super realistic... not that crashes should be a feature :P) and get the netcode up to par with other multiplayer games so it runs smoothly without issue and GP Bikes will be top of the sim market for years to come. I'm unsure anyone is even going to get near this level where it is at now, let alone in a matter of years.
My brother broke down and bought Ride2, and it just highlighted for me how far GP Bikes is ahead of the curve in the motorcycle sim/game market!
Piboso, as hard as you are on yourself, you've created something that not even the (to some legendary) Kunos couldn't follow through with! netBike (the trento bondone video on youtube with a rider on the R1) was the most promise anyone of us have seen until GP Bikes launched, and through the years of development you've surpassed that teasing video from Kunos by such a margin that even if netBike became a reality, it would still face years of development to get anywhere near the benchmark you created. If I was you, I would ignore the discontent of the few and appreciate the love shown from the many. Congratulations on getting this far, and I hope to see another comparison later on, showing what a surprise it is that it's gotten even more in depth and technical than it is at this point. ;)
Quote from: grimm on October 23, 2016, 04:58:54 PM
Congratulations on getting this far, and I hope to see another comparison later on, showing what a surprise it is that it's gotten even more in depth and technical than it is at this point. ;)
Thank you for the kind words.
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact. However, the leaning problem when turning uphill is clearly visible on the right, so that's one point that will make a difference.
Quote from: Alone on October 23, 2016, 03:51:33 PM
I started with alpha6 or 7. I felt in love at the first time. I knew about it on a gp500 forum with wxat and raroo's posts (the last one was inlvoved in early stages of gpb, doesn't he?).
Same here :) I also came from gp500. And I also can't do any bike game since I fell in love with this sim.
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 24, 2016, 07:08:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
As far as I understand from what I've been reading about the "Pacejka Magic Tyre Formula", it doesn't work well at low speed. If I remember rightly it's because of a situation were it starts dividing by zero in a calculation? I didn't really understand it fully but that's the impression I got that the formula gets into a situation at very low speed were it becomes unstable and dev's have to artificially stabilize the formula until a certain speed is attained?
Hawk.
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 24, 2016, 07:08:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
3. realistic high-sider physics
4. better simulation of powerslides and trail-braking (probably related to tyre model and virtual rider)
5. less rigid linkage between bike and rider
(6. rider ragdoll ?)
Then it would be perfect imo...
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 24, 2016, 07:08:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
Thats one of the biggest issues. Less experienced riders (like me) always crash again after a reset... especially if you reset the bike and you face the wrong race direction or your on the grass ... Once the virtual rider has put his foot down on the ground, that shouldnt be possible. I used to put myself into similar positions in real life (Most, Sachsenring and Oschersleben aswell) and i NEVER felt while going low speed. Pib has to fix that.
In GPB, you sometimes steer to the right and bike falls to the left while going slow ... sometimes it does a flip flop :S weired. IMHO thats one of the points, people dont buy the game because you need the feeling of success. The first answer i got on the forums was "GP Bikes is the top tier of demoralizing games ever" ... not sure who said that but its true. Of course its a sim ... but it would be easier for less experienced players or beginners to have some ingame helps.
(Im still racing with clutch help ... it seems like racing with clutch help dissabled has some advanteges too as the engine brake is a bit better (best possible to try at Jerez) )
~doN
Quote from: doNico on October 24, 2016, 04:55:10 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 24, 2016, 07:08:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
Thats one of the biggest issues. [...] I used to put myself into similar positions in real life (Most, Sachsenring and Oschersleben aswell) and i NEVER felt while going low speed. Pib has to fix that.
In GPB, you sometimes steer to the right and bike falls to the left while going slow ... sometimes it does a flip flop :S weired.
You are right, the low-speed crashes are a bit of a pain. Especially if you know, in real life you would just put your foot down to stabilize. Also I think the virtual rider should have some sort of filter to eliminate certain behaviour that would be causing a stupid crash.
But in general those low-speed crashes are owing to the fact, that Piboso has implemented a real counter-steer behaviour which only really takes place from a certain speed on (everybody that rides a motorcycle in real life knows what I mean). And on the edge of that speed or below, it is actually quite hard to simulate I guess. So yeah it needs some sort of improvement or VR-help, but I take the edgy behaviour over anything uncomplicated but also very unrealistic. Just look at how turns in Ride2 are initiated - there is no counter-steering whatsoever. Although a counter-steering to initiate a turn is only very nimble, it still looks odd when it is missing.
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 24, 2016, 07:55:05 AM
Quote from: HornetMaX on October 24, 2016, 07:08:54 AM
Quote from: PiBoSo on October 23, 2016, 05:51:03 PM
Unfortunately there isn't much left to improve on the physics' side, so a new comparison video will not make such an impact.
Not that they would be visible in a video, but a couple of things that come to mind physics side (aside the already mentioned problems leaning uphill):
- Gearbox sim
- Brake thermal simulation (not sure where we stand on this: I thought there was none, but I may be wrong)
Very low speed handling is also sometime problematic (more a virtual rider issue than real physics).
3. realistic high-sider physics
4. better simulation of powerslides and trail-braking (probably related to tyre model and virtual rider)
5. less rigid linkage between bike and rider
(6. rider ragdoll ?)
Then it would be perfect imo...
Guys don't start on physics improvements now... i am still thanking baby jesus and the holy spirit for the fact that mister P. is actually crushing some bugs now. Checking the daily development makes me happy nowadays.
Quote from: iVolution on October 24, 2016, 11:03:02 PM
Guys don't start on physics improvements now... i am still thanking baby jesus and the holy spirit for the fact that mister P. is actually crushing some bugs now. Checking the daily development makes me happy nowadays.
Exactly. Those problems are minimal compared to the issues that are under investigation right now, so please have some patience.
Let Piboso solve the big issues, then i'm sure he will be happy to work again improving physics, once the unpleasant work is finished.
Quote from: Warlock on October 24, 2016, 11:59:00 PM
Quote from: iVolution on October 24, 2016, 11:03:02 PM
Guys don't start on physics improvements now... i am still thanking baby jesus and the holy spirit for the fact that mister P. is actually crushing some bugs now. Checking the daily development makes me happy nowadays.
Exactly. Those problems are minimal compared to the issues that are under investigation right now, so please have some patience.
Let Piboso solve the big issues, then i'm sure he will be happy to work again improving physics, once the unpleasant work is finished.
Exactly my thoughts - I did not state anything else ??? I also read everyday in the daily dev blog. Every time I read something related to netcode or dynamic track, I am all smiles :)
But that does not mean, we cannot discuss the way further down the road. If we really should be afraid to talk about anything here, then we should close the whole forum down until netcode is fixed.
But Piboso could be tempted to work on the physics ! ;D don't distract him! :)
Quote from: Warlock on October 25, 2016, 06:09:23 AM
But Piboso could be tempted to work on the physics ! ;D don't distract him! :)
Then shut down the forum. ;) (Btw, we answered to something he wrote, not the other way around.)
But I really agree... Piboso should lock himself into fixing the netcode stuff.
Quote from: Stout Johnson on October 24, 2016, 05:05:27 PM
You are right, the low-speed crashes are a bit of a pain. Especially if you know, in real life you would just put your foot down to stabilize. Also I think the virtual rider should have some sort of filter to eliminate certain behaviour that would be causing a stupid crash.
But in general those low-speed crashes are owing to the fact, that Piboso has implemented a real counter-steer behaviour which only really takes place from a certain speed on (everybody that rides a motorcycle in real life knows what I mean). And on the edge of that speed or below, it is actually quite hard to simulate I guess. So yeah it needs some sort of improvement or VR-help, but I take the edgy behaviour over anything uncomplicated but also very unrealistic. Just look at how turns in Ride2 are initiated - there is no counter-steering whatsoever. Although a counter-steering to initiate a turn is only very nimble, it still looks odd when it is missing.
As far as we can see, the VR is an adaptive controller, in the sense the value of the parameters depend on the bike speed. This in principle should allow to have "somehow different controllers at different speeds", but it's likely hard to find a tuning that gives the expected results at very low and low to very high speeds. It seems like the current tuning is OK for low to very high speeds (what you usually have while on track), but fairly bad for very low speeds: it's not even granted it is possible to find a tuning that satisfies us at all speeds.
As the bike behavior is very different at very low speeds, I'd try with the current VR for low to high speeds and a dedicated controller for very low speeds. But that requires handling the "crossover" between the two controllers, not exactly trivial.
Not a huge deal to me anyway, maybe something he can think about once he's back from "operation netcode" :)
P.S.
I'm really happy to read in the daily dev posts that stability issues (that may be independent from the netcode stuff) are taken care too !