• Welcome to PiBoSo Official Forum. Please login or sign up.
 
June 14, 2021, 10:45:30 PM

News:

World Racing Series beta14 available! :)


Constant Core.exe

Started by dareaper46, April 01, 2016, 10:47:06 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

doubledragoncc

Hawk, SlovakiaRing is the best example of tracks needed. It has no core crash holes I can find and frame rates are great. What it lacks in prettiness it more than makes up for in rideability.

DD
GPBOC Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/c/IASystemsComputerControls; i7 7700 5GHz z270 ASUS Maximus Code Mobo 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 RAM ASUS Strix RTX3080 OC 10GB DDR6X Kraken X62 AIO Cooler ROG Thor 850w PSU in ROG Helios Tower Case.
https://paypal.me/IASystems

HornetMaX

Quote from: Hawk on April 19, 2016, 12:57:49 PM
Bottom line is - Do you want a good selection of tracks in the database that are useable but still a work in progress, or do you want 3 or 4 tracks that we can probably say are good enough not to contribute to the core.exe issue?
Both :)

That's why, a long ago, I proposed to group our tracks depending on their readiness/reliability. Something like :

  • Perfect: track fully functional (timing, replay cameras, race data), no known issues like holes, gaps etc.
  • Good: a few known issues, but usable
  • WIP: work to do
  • Bad: track with major issues, nobody working on it (as source files not available).
It's just a matter of creating folders on your Mega page and put the tracks inside accordingly.

I like to have plenty of tracks, including ones that are wip or bad, but we need to make very clear what is still wip/bad and can have issues from what is fully functional.

Hawk

Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2016, 01:12:24 PM
Quote from: Hawk on April 19, 2016, 12:57:49 PM
Bottom line is - Do you want a good selection of tracks in the database that are useable but still a work in progress, or do you want 3 or 4 tracks that we can probably say are good enough not to contribute to the core.exe issue?
Both :)

That's why, a long ago, I proposed to group our tracks depending on their readiness/reliability. Something like :

  • Perfect: track fully functional (timing, replay cameras, race data), no known issues like holes, gaps etc.
  • Good: a few known issues, but usable
  • WIP: work to do
  • Bad: track with major issues, nobody working on it (as source files not available).
It's just a matter of creating folders on your Mega page and put the tracks inside accordingly.

I like to have plenty of tracks, including ones that are wip or bad, but we need to make very clear what is still wip/bad and can have issues from what is fully functional.

Yes I agree with what you say there Max and is something I could do with the communities help(probably via polls), as what tracks don't cause a core.exe crash for me might be causing core.exe crashes for someone else, so the decision of what tracks to put in what category folders would have to go to a community poll or I'm sure to get complaints that such and such a track should be in another category folder than it currently is.  :-\

Personally I don't get many core.exe crash issues(Luckily, "Touch Wood!".), so to do this just on my experience and opinion would be wrong, I'd definitely need to put the tracks to a community poll to achieve this I feel. But a good idea Max!  ;) 8)

Hawk.

doubledragoncc

I agree. I get core crashes as I am not so good yet and invariably run wide or crash where you good riders dont. Most cores are off the track itself so should not be a problem but we ALL go down lol.

One question, why is a track online not giving a core crash in they same spot as if offline???

Surely I am still using my data for the track so GPB SHOULD core on and off line at the same spot????

DD
GPBOC Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/c/IASystemsComputerControls; i7 7700 5GHz z270 ASUS Maximus Code Mobo 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 RAM ASUS Strix RTX3080 OC 10GB DDR6X Kraken X62 AIO Cooler ROG Thor 850w PSU in ROG Helios Tower Case.
https://paypal.me/IASystems

Hawk

Quote from: doubledragoncc on April 19, 2016, 01:07:51 PM
Hawk, SlovakiaRing is the best example of tracks needed. It has no core crash holes I can find and frame rates are great. What it lacks in prettiness it more than makes up for in rideability.

DD

I really appreciate the compliments DD, Thank you mate.  ;) 8)
But this is just another example of the totally randomness of the core.exe problems, because the SlovakiaRing track is in more a state of WIP than say Snetterton 300 and Silverstone, and yet Slovakia is obviously working very well for you, and that's great!.  :)

Another problem with working on tracks is the lack of feedback from most in the community. It seems when bikes are released they get SO much feedback and yet tracks get very little feedback, almost as if tracks are the backing group to the main star performer. Lol

I know 2 or 3 people do tend to provide me with feedback when a track is released or updated and I appreciate it very much, but guys in general, if you want to contribute to better MODS then you have to provide good and more importantly, HONEST, feedback.... Don't fear appearing disrespectful of the work already done - Any decent modder will welcome criticism so long as it's constructive, and anything that could be done better is probably more down to a lack of time available than their ability to do it. So say what you want from a track.  ;) 8)

Hawk.


HornetMaX

Just use Nick's events. If a track passes the Nick's test, it's good enough to go into the "perfect" category.

We could even add a score in terms of visuals for each track, as some are pretty good but others are plain terrible (which is OK for some users, but bad for others).

To me the perfect solution would be a sticky post managed by a single person with all the tracks referenced and the two ratings (usuability and visuals).
Of the two, the usuability one is the most urgent.

Hawk

Quote from: doubledragoncc on April 19, 2016, 01:30:20 PM
I agree. I get core crashes as I am not so good yet and invariably run wide or crash where you good riders dont. Most cores are off the track itself so should not be a problem but we ALL go down lol.

One question, why is a track online not giving a core crash in they same spot as if offline???

Surely I am still using my data for the track so GPB SHOULD core on and off line at the same spot????

DD

To be honest I do not know why that is..... But you'll probably find that on another day it will core.exe offline at that same spot but not online..... This is the total randomness problem about the core.exe issue that is frustrating us all I think. Lol

Hawk.

doubledragoncc

OKay, so why if Nicks events are perfect do I get cores on ALL those tracks lol. Only through holes btw.

DD
GPBOC Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/c/IASystemsComputerControls; i7 7700 5GHz z270 ASUS Maximus Code Mobo 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 RAM ASUS Strix RTX3080 OC 10GB DDR6X Kraken X62 AIO Cooler ROG Thor 850w PSU in ROG Helios Tower Case.
https://paypal.me/IASystems

Hawk

Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2016, 01:43:40 PM
Just use Nick's events. If a track passes the Nick's test, it's good enough to go into the "perfect" category.
Trouble is getting the feedback from all participants to make that decision, and also the fact that most will have no cores while a few will. Also a race event is only usually supported by 8 - 18 maybe 24 competitors on occasions, hardly a true representation of the majority who use GPB as a whole?  :)

Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2016, 01:43:40 PM
We could even add a score in terms of visuals for each track, as some are pretty good but others are plain terrible (which is OK for some users, but bad for others).

To me the perfect solution would be a sticky post managed by a single person with all the tracks referenced and the two ratings (usuability and visuals).
Of the two, the usuability one is the most urgent.

This would be great, but something for someone else in the community to organise because I'm involved in too much work already for the time I have available.  ;)

Hawk.

HornetMaX

Quote from: Hawk on April 19, 2016, 02:04:07 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2016, 01:43:40 PM
Just use Nick's events. If a track passes the Nick's test, it's good enough to go into the "perfect" category.
Trouble is getting the feedback from all participants to make that decision, and also the fact that most will have no cores while a few will. Also a race event is only usually supported by 8 - 18 maybe 24 competitors on occasions, hardly a true representation of the majority who use GPB as a whole?  :)
True, but better than nothing. Also, some tracks have very clear issues, so for these one it's an easy job.
You are the trackmeister, who better than you ? :P

Come on, just a sticky post, at least with the tracks we consider as good. Probably below 20.
And you'll have the power to give the notes for the visuals, as a compensation !


h106frp

Quote from: doubledragoncc on April 19, 2016, 01:30:20 PM
I agree. I get core crashes as I am not so good yet and invariably run wide or crash where you good riders dont. Most cores are off the track itself so should not be a problem but we ALL go down lol.

One question, why is a track online not giving a core crash in they same spot as if offline???

Surely I am still using my data for the track so GPB SHOULD core on and off line at the same spot????

DD

I am wondering if 'approach angle' to the gap is a factor in the variance of core. Crossing a small gap seems much less sensitive than running along the length of a gap to core.

This is a very unscientific appraisal of what i have observed in game so far.

Hawk

Quote from: h106frp on April 19, 2016, 03:21:25 PM
Quote from: doubledragoncc on April 19, 2016, 01:30:20 PM
I agree. I get core crashes as I am not so good yet and invariably run wide or crash where you good riders dont. Most cores are off the track itself so should not be a problem but we ALL go down lol.

One question, why is a track online not giving a core crash in they same spot as if offline???

Surely I am still using my data for the track so GPB SHOULD core on and off line at the same spot????

DD

I am wondering if 'approach angle' to the gap is a factor in the variance of core. Crossing a small gap seems much less sensitive than running along the length of a gap to core.

This is a very unscientific appraisal of what i have observed in game so far.

Your absolutely correct I feel H..... I've done similar tests in the past for just that, and it does seem that if you hit a gap at right angle then you have a good chance of getting away with it, but if you hit a gap along it's length then there's a good chance you'll core.exe crash..... But I think also that the speed you pass over the gap can make a big difference too to whether you get away with it or not.  :)

Hawk.

doubledragoncc

+1 on that guys.

Also, if the bike is tumbling and the wheels dont hit that area it just carries on to the gravel etc with no core. its possible it flew over the gap but I have had slides with no cores at places it cores if I ride on it.

DD
GPBOC Live Streams: https://www.youtube.com/c/IASystemsComputerControls; i7 7700 5GHz z270 ASUS Maximus Code Mobo 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 RAM ASUS Strix RTX3080 OC 10GB DDR6X Kraken X62 AIO Cooler ROG Thor 850w PSU in ROG Helios Tower Case.
https://paypal.me/IASystems