• Welcome to PiBoSo Official Forum. Please login or sign up.
 
July 15, 2019, 10:32:15 pm

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Myst1cPrun3

1
Support / Crashes when saving a replay in VR
July 12, 2019, 12:45:40 pm
My sim has started crashing when saving replays in VR.

I do the laps I'm VR then I want to save the replay and launch GPB in non vr mode to record the replays.

Works fine usually, however with the new 500s, it crashes. After talking with Javi it seems to be a sim issue, as others have these issues?

2
Mods / Release: M2 2017/2019 Onboard Camera Set
July 08, 2019, 09:16:41 pm
My first on-board Camera Modifications, which works for both the 2017 and 2019 M2 variants.

Link:

https://mega.nz/#!RTZV3aKb!hNxJhYPFlsg1U_x6iGkaTxkj2jv8_Ke4kuZTAs1MyHU

Used the default cameras and davide's camera fix - Found Here - https://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=6497.0 - as a base, I modified most of them to my preferences to make a new set.

This set includes both Gyro and Non Gyro cameras for Tank and Tail Cams (I prefer the static cams but that isn't to everyone's taste so I included both.
I went for a realism style, so the cameras are hopefully placed roughly where a go-pro could be placed on a real machine.

Just paste the file into the schwaben m2 base folder (Be sure to back up your existing File though)




- Examples -


Tail Cam:





Tail Cam Gyro:





Tank Cam:





Tank Cam Gyro:





Nose Cam:





Front Wheel:





Rear Wheel:





Rear Wheel Gyro:





Dash:





Throttle:










3
I've recently started running Enna Pergusa as a practice track, as it focuses on all the areas I have been weakest at. (Hard Braking and Line Accuracy)

You really have to brake as late as possible, and 'thread the needle' very accurately through most of the turns to get it right, and most of them lead onto a large straight so you really notice any loss of pace on exits too.

For me its a good track to learn the limits of a bike, and understand GPB's braking characteristics a little more.
Because of its difficulty to 100% maximise its really satisfying to get right.

Previously I've not been a big fan of the 2014 STK 1000, as I felt it was dated, and I couldn't understand its behaviour on the brakes/turn in, which resulted in some god awful setup changes.

I feel like I've made some inroads into using the bike, and actually began to enjoy it a little more after a session on Enna P.

This got me thinking as to what track/bike combos to people use to hotlap in, or what their fav bike track combos are?

As I've just said I love Enna, and I should use it more often, and I do love the Yamaha cup Bikes, (R3 (while its a WSSP 300 denotation in GPB there aren't any more so I guess its a Yamaha Cup Machine), R6, and R1, and I quite like the new 250 Single Remake.



Wheelie Fun Track



Sliding into next week OK I'll stop



Enna's airtime is a bonus too...
4
Support / Not Launching with correct Profile
July 05, 2019, 08:35:45 pm
My GP Bikes has all of a sudden started creating a new profile instead of launching with my previous one, which is still there in the folder in full.

How do I get GPB to default to the Profile instead of making a new one?
5
Bikes / 3D Models: Is this viable?
July 03, 2019, 08:15:22 pm
Little curious, found a nice site that has a tonne of downloadable 3d engines. Wondering if its viable to use one from here in a bike or not?

(To put it into context I think there's every CBR 600 engine from about 1995 LOL)

Here's the site for anyone interested:

https://www.3dcadbrowser.com/3dmodels.aspx?download=engine&page=1
6
Can we please get point to point race support?

For hill climbs etc.

Found a vid on YT recommended (omg it's doing something right) and it got me all riled up, the enthusiastic frenchies did

Not shy are they :o

7
Bug Reports / Oculus VR Flicker Bug
June 29, 2019, 07:44:25 pm
I've been unable to really use GP Bikes since the Oculus Update a few months ago due to flicker in the headset.
It does not occur in other games however, regardless of them being updated or not so its a pure GP Bikes issue.
My drivers and hardware are up to date, and I'm running the latest Oculus Rift. (Believe its CV1)

This one:




I've been trying to fix this, including changing pretty much any In game settings, but am at a complete loss.


It happens to some degree on all bikes/tracks, but on the better ones its just at the bottom of the headset and really isn't a big deal. I'd still like it gone all together mind you.

The stock Victoria cicruit + M2 also do this, so its not a MOD thing to my knowledge, but is worst on mods, particularly the otherwise high quality Javiliyors tracks.

Its at its worst on Jerez, which is a shame as that's the track I've been wanting to use the most recently.

And by at its worst, its Literally unplayable in VR.

Any advice would be helpful.

Here are a few Screenshots of whats happening, and I should point out this IS visible in VR and its not a very nice experience.







I've posted this in several topics as I'm not sure which one it should go under. Admin can Delete as appropriate
8
Off Topic / TT IoM 2: Announced
June 15, 2019, 10:36:38 pm
Sooooo. Kylotonn announced a few weeks ago a sequel to the 'controversial' TT Isle of Man 'Ride in the Hedge' (as I call it as that seems to be all I can do), coming next year. (2020)

Thoughts?

My thought is that it could be good, or it could be a rehash of the first game with updated liveries. Based off the first game I honestly don't know what to expect from them.

What I do know is that Kylotonn are dedicated to becoming a big player in the Racing Sim/Game market, and have really been pushing the new WRC games 'simlike' qualities.

I also know that they've been trying to introduce VR to their Racing games, and mixed with the TT game, which had a VERY high quality representation of the TT course, could be amazing.

TBH, the main feature would be the handling. It needs to be improved, which again they've been focusing on massively in the WRC games, (Even getting pro rally drivers to develop most of the handling, not just provide feedback on a few areas) so I can't see any reason as to why they couldn't do this with the TT game.
Whether they will or not, well, that's a different kettle of fish but still.

Curious to see how this is going to be received, launching a new full price TT game, especially considering the lack of updates and developer feedback to the original.

As you can see from their posts about their new games, 'authenticity' seems to be a big push. Whether that's realism or not IDK, I hope it is but still its all in the open as of yet.

9
Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 26, 2019, 09:25:21 pmThis is something that has become quite clear to me from when I started in GPB, in that 'disabling' lean help doesn't entirely turn it off.

When I un-check the box for lean help, I would like it to allow me to lean forever effectively, at any point.

This would improve braking no-end, as it would make lines slightly more realistic, and trail braking would require more skill.

At the minute, you can apply pretty much 100% braking force right to the apex, as the rider won't tip the bike further than the grip allows.

This means that braking is somewhat backwards in input, as on most bikes, it is possible to apply MORE braking force leant over than it is when travelling in a straight line, where the bike tends to stoppie.

As a result applying light brake initially and more as you get to the apex and turn in, is the way to go in GPB, but removing the lean cap, and thus making the actual person control how much braking and to control how far to lean at the same time would be much more realistic.

It would increase the amount of front end crashes, as I suspect it would take people a while to get used to how far to go, but overall I feel it would be a step in the right direction, as GBP is supposed to be a simulation, and real bikes don't have stabilisers upon turn in. Hell, even the HIGHLY unrealistic Milestone games allow a full range of lean regardless of throttle/brake inputs. (The results/consequences of doing this may not be realistic but the fact its not prevented by an unseen force is a bonus)

I would personally go as far as removing the max lean limit all together, and make it possible to completely lean off the edge of the tyre. I understand this is a more awkward thing to do, as people have different steering setups, but removing the initial brake/lean help is a MUST for me.

If I was making these changes I would add these max lean 'stabilisers' into the 'lean help' aids option, and potentially make them more strict, (can't lean as far when selected) to result in people who have it selected going slower, thus encouraging them to 'turn it off'

While I would like it to be globally fixed in the next Beta, at the minute I would settle for a line of code to override this in the 'rider.cfg. files, although this code would have to be made redundant if it was to be introduced fully later on, as people would just enable it in the code and go much quicker.

Pls listen PIB


Quote from: PiBoSo on February 11, 2019, 05:00:48 pmJust to get into Piboso's Alerts Inbox





Quote from: Hawk on May 26, 2019, 10:09:45 pmIf you take the riding aids off, then IF the bike physics are correct then you should be able to wash the front end away if you apply the front brake too much. But then with modern bikes being mainly electronically controlled it may well be that they can apply full force on the front brakes without the front end washing away due to the ECU not allowing the front wheel to break grip while braking?
I'm not an aficionado on modern electronically controlled 4 stroke racing bikes, I can't stand them; I think they are an abomination to the sport, so I'm not sure if the electronics extend to controlling the front end traction-control or not? Maybe someone can enlighten me on that matter. :) 





Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 26, 2019, 10:36:00 pmIts definitely not electronics, as every bike does it, even those without any, such as the GP250's and GP500's. I also run with no aids, aside from the 'automatic tyre change option', as keep having to change your tyres manually isn't much help in an offline session.

Its definitely GPB physics related from my testing, although whether bike modders can disable it in their bikes is another story, but even Pibs M2 bike does this.

Its just like there's a block when turning in on the brakes, not quite preventing me from losing the front, as I can still crash, but definitely preventing me from leaning over fully, and making corner entry easier.

If I go beyond the maximum lean value, and then squeeze the front brake to slow down, even a little, I lose the front. Its when I'm approaching that value when the 'issue' arises.

As someone whose got more experience on GPB than a real world bike, even I can see that's not how it should work.

I'll try to make a video highlighting it as I'm not sure I'm explaining it very well XD

As for electronics controlling the front, from what research I've done, teh front is more controlled by ABS, which wouldn't prevent leaning over on the brakes. Most high end - modern superbike's (Panigale's, RSV4 Factories, S1000rr's etc) tend to run 'active suspension', where the ECU rapidly adjusts the Damping's to maintain optimum cornering stuff, (not sure what the term is on a bike, in a car its to corner level and flat, so I'm assuming its more stability and load on a bike), but again, this wouldn't prevent you from leaning on the brakes. Or at least that's how I interpret it, there are probably a load more intricacies into it but that's just how I've come to see it.

While the pic below is a 1:12 scale model, the plugs which are visible on the forks are the wires which go to the ECU for the adaptive controls:







Quote from: Vini on May 27, 2019, 04:46:08 pmYour proposal for an alternative (non-Direct-Steer) steering mode with absolute lean angle input is valid but not any more valid than the current default steering. Both do not resemble real life motorcycle steering and both are a compromise between realism and usability.
Both have their own subjective advantages: The fact that you cannot fully turn in at max brake (which is realistic) and the ability of standing the bike up with the brake vs. full control over lean angle at any time.
Anyway, I think it would still be good to give us the option because it could work well with certain controllers.







Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 27, 2019, 05:18:56 pmThis isn't just evident on the brakes, (That was the easiest one to use as an example, but I feel using it has got the entire thread of this topic lost in translation), it is evident when simply going around a turn, the rider will only lean so far, and its impossible to lean further.

THAT is what I'd like to see changed, removing the Maximum Possible Lean, and making it user controlled, or at least part of the 'Lean Assist' option.
As for everyone having different steering inputs, I completely understand that, hence why it should have its own option like you said, however there are several games that don't have a 'Max Lean Value' that utilise game-pads (hence making this a viable 'Default' steering option.)

The one that springs immediately to mind is the 'Suzuki TT Superbike' Game series by Jester on the PS2.
You could lean all the way over and fall off the inside of the tyre if you weren't careful.
This is because it used rider weight to steer the bikes, rather than just steering the bikes, similar to what GPB is trying to do.
So you'd move the joystick fully to whichever way you want to go, and then release it a little bit and hold it there, making minor corrections, to keep it at a constant lean angle, rather than just ramming the stick over fully and relying on the game engine to do the calculations and not crash you.

The reason I included Braking in the original post, as it would make trail braking a little more difficult, as you wouldn't be able to just ram the stick over, and be relatively safe, (Yes I know you can still crash) like you can now, and would do a decent job of covering the weird braking inputs that are possible, but those are for a different thread at a different time.

In other words, it would make it a little more about skill and judgement rather than invisible assists that aren't able to be turned off in the menus.

(Riding in the wet is another example of this 'Max Lean Assist', as it prevents me from going all the way over. (Yes, again, I know you WOULDN'T in the real world, but its not that you COULDN'T in the real world. (You'd crash at a certain point mind you, but GPB prevents this. Its only at camber changes, that result in the Max value becoming less than what your already at, that you crash.) The MG hairpin on Victoria is a good example of camber changes impacting the 'max lean value', and causing a crash, as you can lean fully on the approach, knee down etc, but the minute you hit the apex and it flattens out, the 'Max Lean Value' that would cause a crash is reduced to less than what was achieved on approach, so the front washes out.
The fact braking affects the 'Max Lean Value' is what I was trying to get at, the ability to use this to apply more brake than you could in a straight line is a side effect that could be changed with the removal of the 'Max Lean Value')



10
Following my other thread about the Max-Lean inputs getting a bit clogged up with braking for one reason or another, I decided to make a separate thread for those issues and do a little bit of housekeeping:

Quote from: Vini on May 27, 2019, 10:52:51 amI strongly disagree with the points you make about braking, though. You can definitely lock up the front and if you brake at the limit, the brake inputs will look very realistic (close to 100% initially and then trailing off). If your inputs are backwards, then you are not consistently at the balance point when the bike is upright.
Also, the way braking and lean input currently interact makes a lot of sense for me because in real life if you brake while in a corner, the bike will stand up by itself. This is exactly what happens at the moment in GP Bikes and the front brake is essential in that way to finetune your line into a corner.

Edit: Don't get this the wrong way but I think you should just work more on your trail braking and you'll see that it will get more realistic the closer you get to the limit. On your COTA lap for example it looks like you are never really loading the front into corners but instead roll into them with unnecessarily wide entries (first sector especially).



Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 27, 2019, 11:41:57 amI never said it was impossible to lose the front under braking, in fact I said it was more than possible, and I've done it may times.

As for what you've said, Its not when I'm in the corner its approaching the corner, as I can consistently apply more brakes when turning in, than I can when braking in a straight line.

Take the session I just did on the 500 at Javi's Spa, going into the left right left at the end of the back straight, (The chicane after the Eau-Rouge section), I can only apply around 75%-80% of brake without the bike pitching over the handlebars, however as I begin to turn in, and hit that Max -Lean buffer, I can then apply 100% brake all the way to the Apex, without looping the bike, or missing the apex. (Letting off just before to pull back and setup for the next 2 turns)

Its not a question of skill, or trail braking/rider competency.
Whichever way you look at it those inputs are backwards compared to real life.

As for the bike standing up under brakes, I can understand that, but my point regarding that is sure the bike will want to stand up, but its not impossible to lean while on the brakes it'll just be a little more difficult, which is hard to achieve in a game, so maybe slowing down the direction changes, or making the rider weight more imp active of this for those of us who use that separate control, that bits up to Pib.

My point is, there isn't an invisible external entity/force PREVENTING someone from leaning a bike over under brakes, and as a result there shouldn't be in GP Bikes if its set on being a Sim.
There is however a force/external entity that makes it harder to lean, but not impossible.

PS: As for my braking competency levels, I do tend to use a more '250' smoother style, which is great for low powered bikes, like the GP250s, or the WSSP 300s, and I was actually about there in the WSSP 300 championship that seems to have stopped. (Which is typical that I was actually about there speed wise and the championship stops lol.)
I was loading up the front perhaps more than it looks in the video, and into the Hairpins it was backing in, May put the 'Inputs' Hud on from the MaxHUD as it would be interesting to see. But I know the hairpin onto the straight I was at 100% brake lever travel right up to the Apex, but could only manage around 90% on the approach. Its one of the reasons why I tend to turn in early, as I can apply more braking that way.

EDIT: I was also using 20mm brake lever travel if I remember correctly, and possibly some different discs, due to the lack of feel GPB gives through controllers, so perhaps the braking on my MotoGP vids isn't really representative.
I will say as well my personal braking has gotten worse since moving to VR, and its something I do need to work on. (Pibs M2, (NOT the 2019 M2) was a hugely good bike to learn this on, and I pretty much halved my braking distances across most bikes after practicing on that.)


Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 27, 2019, 11:57:34 amFor me the fact that the Sim is preventing you from doing something bad is an Assist, so needs to be in the game as one, especially as you can do it (lean on the brakes) IRL. (Although as I've said, it may be harder)

At the end of the day however, rider skill, competency and every other external factor is irrelevant.

The simple facts are, it IS
Possible in GPB to consistently apply more braking force on turn in than it is when going in a straight line, (without crashing) regardless of speed, or anything else, including with all assists Off.
It is NOT possible to do this in real life (without crashing).

In GPB the 'sim' DOES prevent you from leaning over fully when on the brakes with all assists Off.
This does NOT happen in real life.

Whether these options are good practice, is irrelevant, as is who does them, their skill/speed and everyother factor.
As it's about what IS and ISNT possible, and whether it's 230mph, or 30mph, it doesn't matter, as it being POSSIBLE to  apply more brake leant over (without crashing) is just wrong

Quote from: Vini on May 27, 2019, 04:46:08 pmBut on top of that you seem to be indicating that there are fundamental physics issues with braking in GPB and this is not the case.
When using setups or bikes with less powerful brakes and when not riding at the bike's actual limit, it may appear like you described.
I can upload the brake inputs from my fastest laps and you'll see perfectly realistic, smooth inputs that peak when the bike is relatively upright and trail off to zero right at the apex with no transition visible from outside. In many instances you can see the rear wheel slightly hovering in the air or the front chattering, proving that the bike is consistently at max. deceleration. On the MotoGP bikes, I use 340HM carbon discs and 16mm leverage (100% gain) and there is only one place where I am ever at 100% brake and that is COTA turn 1 with the bike fully upright.
Yes, you can hold max. brake on some other bikes right until the apex but then you will never reach max. lean of the bike because the bike can't turn like that. Also, when leaning the bike up to a certain point you can actually brake marginally harder because the traction of the front is still good and the weight distribution and geometry is better, hence backing in the rear. But this is only works up to a certain lean angle, where continued brake intensity will begin hindering the bike's ability to turn, resulting in either running wide or locking the front.
Moreover, because it is easier to feel the limit of the front (vibration and visual feedback) than the exact balance point of the bike in GPB, one tends to get a lot closer to max. decel. when being at (slight) lean, making it seem like you can brake harder at more lean.

In your COTA MotoGP vid, I can see that you are not at the balance point when the bike is upright, then quickly back it in to feel the limit better and apply more brake (T1), keep that braking power relatively consistently but then drop it abruptly in order to get the bike to turn instead of trailing off smoothly all the way up to max. lean at the apex (T15/T11/T19), making you run wide.






Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on May 27, 2019, 05:18:56 pmThis thread, although it has turned into a 'Braking thread', was made to be more of a leaning thread, as GPB imposes a leaning limit where there shouldn't be. Only reason I brought up braking is because the 2 can be related, and are more often than not. If there's an issue with the brakes then that really should be somewhere else.

But what the hell, I'll continue anyway.

Off Topicness:


When I ride in GP Bikes, on the default setup of most machines, applying full brake lever travel will loop the bike over the handlebars, or lock the front, so therefore  I have to reduce my braking Input. (realistic)

However as I begin to turn in, this goes out the window so to speak, and all of a sudden I CAN apply full front brake leverage, without flipping the bike, or even pulling a stoppie. This becomes an issue, as it allows the braking force to be increased as you near the apex and turn in further, without any issues.

AGAIN, whether its the fastest way to do it in GP Bikes, is up for debate, and AGAIN, it doesn't matter how fast you go or how competent you are at riding, that is quite simply impossible in the real world without crashing.

This in itself isn't too big of an issue. Its when its 'mixed' with the original topic of this thread, and that's the invisible 'Maximum Lean Assist' that GPB forces us to use.

It IS possible to fully lean the bike over when on the brakes in the real world. You WILL Crash, and it may be harder and a little more difficult, due to forces etc, but it is possible however, in GPB it prevents you from 'over-leaning' completely.

From the testing I did the only explanation I can come up with is that GPB calculates crashes with the amount of lean applied, hence the 'Max Lean Assist', rather than a combination of brakes and lean. I feel that sorting this would also sort out a lot of the 'Un-explainable off throttle front enders' that people have been having with more frequency since the release of B15.
Could be way off with the last para but that's just how it seems




Quote from: Vini on May 27, 2019, 07:35:39 pmUse a more aggressive brake setup and you will see that your observation will not hold true.
Here is an example that shows that adding lean angle will not give you more braking power. You can clearly see that I had to reduce front brake in order to lean further without crashing.

11
This is something that has become quite clear to me from when I started in GPB, in that 'disabling' lean help doesn't entirely turn it off.

When I un-check the box for lean help, I would like it to allow me to lean forever effectively, at any point.

This would improve braking no-end, as it would make lines slightly more realistic, and trail braking would require more skill.

At the minute, you can apply pretty much 100% braking force right to the apex, as the rider won't tip the bike further than the grip allows.

This means that braking is somewhat backwards in input, as on most bikes, it is possible to apply MORE braking force leant over than it is when travelling in a straight line, where the bike tends to stoppie.

As a result applying light brake initially and more as you get to the apex and turn in, is the way to go in GPB, but removing the lean cap, and thus making the actual person control how much braking and to control how far to lean at the same time would be much more realistic.

It would increase the amount of front end crashes, as I suspect it would take people a while to get used to how far to go, but overall I feel it would be a step in the right direction, as GBP is supposed to be a simulation, and real bikes don't have stabilisers upon turn in. Hell, even the HIGHLY unrealistic Milestone games allow a full range of lean regardless of throttle/brake inputs. (The results/consequences of doing this may not be realistic but the fact its not prevented by an unseen force is a bonus)

I would personally go as far as removing the max lean limit all together, and make it possible to completely lean off the edge of the tyre. I understand this is a more awkward thing to do, as people have different steering setups, but removing the initial brake/lean help is a MUST for me.

If I was making these changes I would add these max lean 'stabilisers' into the 'lean help' aids option, and potentially make them more strict, (can't lean as far when selected) to result in people who have it selected going slower, thus encouraging them to 'turn it off'

While I would like it to be globally fixed in the next Beta, at the minute I would settle for a line of code to override this in the 'rider.cfg. files, although this code would have to be made redundant if it was to be introduced fully later on, as people would just enable it in the code and go much quicker.

Pls listen PIB


Quote from: PiBoSo on February 11, 2019, 05:00:48 pmJust to get into Piboso's Alerts Inbox
12
Support / GP500 paints not showing in VR?
May 26, 2019, 01:00:55 pm
I have been running VR for a good few months now, and I love it, however, upon trying the GP500 set, my paints only part show up in VR.

The fuel tank and front fairing are painted in the bikes base colours, yet the seat unit is painted in my skin. When viewing the replays, even in the VR window, the skin appears normal. Just wondering if its a bug in GPB or if I've renamed something in the skin incorrectly.

Skin is the NSR500 found here:

https://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=6572.0

Any advice would be appreciated, as while its not a big issue, it can be awkward, especially seeing as I want to use it for a video.
13
Tracks / Milestone Conversions?
May 14, 2019, 11:52:40 am
So, it's the NW200 this week, and I've been watching it, obviously, and there's quite a good representation of the course in the ride games, even if their layouts are slightly different.

To all the amazing track modders out there, how hard would it be to convert one of these representations and change the layout to the actual one (putting the chicanes in).

I'd do it myself, but I'm about as useful as a chocolate fireguard when it comes to track/bike modding, or anything that isn't painting a bike, and I'm not particularly good at that either  ;D

I've managed to get to the scn files in the ride 2 version, however I'm having no luck in getting that into blender/3dsmax, and the ride 2 version, while good, is a little out of date, the ride 3 version is much better imo.
14
I can't say I'm too bothered by it, as some of them are quite funny to read, but even with the new forum software there are still a fair few spammers.

At the minute it's free to create an account, and a license isn't needed to acees the forums, so I was wondering if it'd be possible to stop people registering, or posting, to the forum unless they've linked a prepurchased, unused license for the forum they're trying to access?

At the very least spammers will hopefully be reduced, and/or if they really are determined to spam piboso will get some extra income
15
Bikes / Return of the STK1000
May 12, 2019, 10:32:28 pm
The 2014 STK 1000 machines have had an update for beta 15, and there is a new championship going ahead using these bikes, as well as the fact servers are using these bikes to test new tracks.

I was just wondering why?

Personally the bike type to me is what I'd choose to ride, superbike and 1000s and all, but there are other sbk mods put there, that are more modern and arguably better.

For me, aside from the external 3d models being excellent, the dashboards are minimal, the sounds are glitchy, although replacement sounds out the database fix this, and the handling is a little odd, with no wet tyres visually for me the entire thing is due a massive update visually and handling wise.

I'm not hitting on the creators by any stretch, I'm just wondering why people run this 'big bike' mod over others like the Wsbk 2017 pack for instance, which for me handles nicer, sounds a little better and looks very good visually in 1p and 3p.

Just wondering what others see in these bikes and why these were updated, but the 2012 supersports, and the 2015 WSBK packs haven't been?
16
I was fettling with some of the graphics settings for ride 3, as to me it looks a little saturated and fake, and I came across some file changes to make in the 'engine.cfg' folder, at this location:

%LOCALAPPDATA%\Ride3\Saved\Config\WindowsNoEditor

All these files are relevant to ride 3, and are installed when ride 3 is installed, and the things that stood out to me was the addition of an 'Oculus.cfg', and while it is blank, there is some base code for an Oculus in the 'Engine.cfg' folder.

I don't know if these files are default for unreal engine, and are standard across all the games using it, but it did get me wondering if Milestone were experimenting with adding VR onto their PC releases, which could make their games even more awesome, and should they add 'proper sim handling' well....  :o

Are these files default with the Unreal engine, as I've not been able to find any, but then again I don't have many Unreal games installed

Here are some Screens:






17
This is a new thread, due to the fact this could be implemented without any other changes to rider tracking, and on the theory that Pib will see and read lots of  little threads.

The main thing I'd like to do is have the ability to decide which tracking device controls which axis the rider moves on, and have the ability to use 2 separate tracking devices for L/R lean and F/R lean ( or U/D if it gets patched how I'd like it) individually.

While not a big deal, it could open up the way to being more involved with actually riding the machines, and could be a game changer for those that are lucky enough to have a full ride-on system.

In my imagination, what I would use would be an Oculus Rift, or other VR/Headtracking Headset to track the F/R (U/D) lean, meaning wherever I place my head would be reflected in the rider sitting up or tucking down behind the screen.

After this, I would use a secondary piece of tracking equipment, either an Ed-Tracker or a TrackIR, or something similar, and have this attached to my hip, as central and as close to where I was sat as possible, for the most accurate tracking. This would then be assigned to the L/R lean, meaning that I would actually need to hang off my chair to get the rider to move.

It  would add another layer to GPB, and involve us as users more. And I'm sure I don't need to state the possibilities of a ride on system being actually used to emulate actual riding body positions, thus adding more Immersion.

In order to achieve this, we would need to be able to assign devices to each axis, in a similar way we could select what controller to map, perhaps in a drop-down menu next to the rider axis, but of course with the option to assign both or none as well for those that don't have this option.,

Here is an example image to show which device would control what axis, Ideally:




Quote from: PiBoSo on December 04, 2018, 02:33:02 pmThis is just being used to try and get an alert in Pibs forum alerts, not an actual quote XD
18
Off Topic / The end of UK Amateur Club racing?
April 29, 2019, 09:08:11 pm
The reason for my post, is that sadly, one of my local tracks has been closed until further notice for safety reasons, which in itself isn't really too big of a deal.

Its the circumstances in which it has had to cancel meetings and stop operations that's the worrying part.

Here are the original Posts:





For those that haven't been, Aintree is set in a huge expanse in the centre of the Grand National horse racing course, and has some of the largest run off areas seen in club racing, however it also has some of the highest speeds as well.

For those wondering here;s an onboard: (NOT ME just taken off youtube:


In the post, the surface condition is mentioned, and for me, (whose only ever spectated, not ridden), I can see the bikes clearly juddering up and down on what seems like an overly bumpy surface, and this pic shows its not a particularly modern surface, and as such this is possibly the most justifiable suggestion/requirement.



The issue comes with the rest of the requirements, which could bring it on par safety wise with Donnington/Oulton, which again isn't a bad thing on its own, but should this standard be homologated across UK tracks, it could close several tracks for club racing as there are quite a few that meet those standards. Cadwell, Mallory, and Castle Combe spring instantly to mind.

The next issue comes with the fact that lawyers are chasing a claim, for a huge amount of money, despite the fact the rider has signed a waver, and all the necessary indemnity/declaration forms accepting responsibility. If he is successful in getting a claim, (Which I doubt he will be personally), then it could set a precedent, and make it near impossible for tracks/riders to get any relevant life/medical insurance, for fear of them having to pay out large sums of money every race meeting.

The fact that they are still pursuing the claim, despite the fact he's got written legal documents accepting responsibility for his actions could also cause issues in that any written legally binding contract could become null and void, and not just in racing, but in work contracts as well.

Granted these are extreme circumstances, and in the grand scheme of things, I doubt much will come of it except Aintree becoming a little safer and losing a year of racing (Providing it reopens, as if I'm not mistaken its a non-profit organisation and track resurface works are expensive).

It's just a shame that this has to happen, and the fact that People have lost their lives at Aintree, and nothing was done, as they, like this accident, were unique and rarely because the rider hit anything, but the minute lawyers were involved it was shut at the drop of  a hat, despite meeting the safety regs for this year.

According to what I heard, (I wasn't there) the rider has some form of paralysis, (Not sure how bad), as he ran on at T3 onto the back straight, and hit the wall separating the course from the houses. For those that haven't been to Aintree, I'd say its about 150-200m away from the racing course, and is a unique incident in that no-one to my knowledge has done that ever :/

I should also point out, that the FB comments weren't exactly friendly to the rider, and while some were comical, 'Giving him something to actually claim about' isn't the right option, especially considering he may have life changing injuries, so if you're going to reply to this or on the Aintree FB, don't be a d**k, and don't spread rumours that aren't true.


PS: I am not involved in the running of this course, or involved in the organisation of any events, I'm just calling it like I see it and wondering what others perceive of this, or whether I'm making it into something its not
19
So I've been looking at getting more into actually setting up the bikes to suit my personal style, and hopefully unlocking some extra speed.
This meant I installed MAX_TM, (Which is cool AF BTW), however, I have no idea how to interpret the graphs I'm seeing into useful setup changes in GPB, if that's even the point of it at all.
Which axis are the most useful for setup changes/seeing mistakes/issues with riding/bike?

Any advice, or links to tutorials would be great thanks :)

HELP:

20
I have been fiddling with the head tracking in GPB, using my oculus rift to do the tracking and have come up with some suggestions, improvements and feedback/fixes for (Hopefully) the next beta, if PIB reads these :) I'll try to be as simple and concise as possible, but this will probably be an essay so here goes:

1) Movement

Overall the movement is good, and very smooth with the visual transitions of the rider, and functions as intended.
That is not to say it is without issue, as the real world head movement needed to affect the rider is too large.
EG: In order to tuck forward/back I have to physically get out of my chair, which is definitely not ideal.
The left and right movement is pretty close to perfect, and is certainly more manageable when compared to F/R, although could benefit from a small boost to the sensitivity.
I understand wanting to have a 1:1 ratio of movement to maintain maximum realism, however in most cases this is not practical, and for the F/R lean it doesn't even feel like 1:1.

2) Axis

The axis are fairly standard, and as a result there is probably some confusion as to why I'd bring these up.
If you imagine a standard 3D graph, with a standard X,Y,Z layout, the L/R leaning runs along the X (Horizontal Left/Right) axis as it should, however the issue comes with the F/R leaning.
The issue is in the name, F/R, which is Forward/Rear, and as a consequence it runs on the Z (Horizontal Forward/Back) axis. This feels like an issue, as, from the admittedly small amount of track riding experience I have, and several hours on-board videos, the head movement to replicate this seems more on a vertical Y axis (Up and Down).
Granted there is a small amount of front to rear (Z) movement, however that is secondary to the up and down (Y) movement, certainly in GPB.
I do however understand the weight transfer IS to the front and rear of the machine IRL, however that appears to be with the lower body in seat positioning under braking, and acceleration.
The reason I bring this up, is because while running on a Y axis for head tracking may not be 100% realistic, as I've previously mentioned its F/R the weight movement IRL, however it would feel more natural for being sat in a chair, and for me personally, something that feels natural is more useful/immersive as a training tool than a 1:1 simulation in some situations, such as this.
TrackIR has the option to stop it registering some axis, and it certainly felt very natural when I was running with that after setting up the sensitivities and dead-zones, however I also appreciate there are some large differences in TrackIR and an Oculus.

3) Current Temporary Solutions

While its not ideal, if someone is set on running rider tracking I'd have to suggest running the second first person view, (The one that is not affected by manually tucking in/rider movements) and running automatic F/R leaning. This, for me, felt more natural than running full tracking.
NOTE: The more aggressive with the throttle and brake the faster the rider sits up and tucks in, so don't change how aggressive you speed up/down, just make the gaps between letting off and applying the brakes slightly larger, and vice versa.
(Smoother not Slower)

4) Development Fixes

For a release into the Game by Pib, I'd recommend sliders to control the ratio of real head movement : in game rider movement on each axis (X,Y,Z)
This would allow it to be more easily tailored to each persons setup and desires/needs when it comes to GPB.

Next, I'd recommend changing the F/R (Front/Rear) lean on the Z axis to U/D (Up/Down) on the Y axis. This would certainly feel more natural in its movement, after all we're in control of head tracking not bum tracking, so it feels a little weird to control where you're sat with your head.

Finally, an option to mix both rider tracking with manual tuck-in/rider lean. For instance, using the L/R tracking with my headset, but leaning F/R (U/D) with assigned controller buttons, and the same with using buttons for L/R vs Rider Tracking for F/R (U/D)

In this picture you can see just what I mean, where the green arrow is what movement is required to sit-up/tuck-in, bu the yellow is the actual movement of most riders.
While this is not 100% to scale, it does have some semblance of scale in that the green arrow is much bigger than the actual movement, no matter what axis its on.



Quote from: PiBoSo on December 04, 2018, 02:33:02 pmThis is just being used to try and get an alert in Pibs forum alerts, not an actual quote XD