• Welcome to PiBoSo Official Forum. Please login or sign up.
 
November 17, 2019, 08:45:14 pm

News:

World Racing Series beta14 available! :)


So, what's next?

Started by DidietXFuera, June 21, 2019, 08:05:04 am

Previous topic - Next topic

Hawk

Quote from: HornetMaX on June 25, 2019, 06:27:59 am
Quote from: Hawk on June 24, 2019, 03:26:10 pmAs for switching GPB to UE4.... A lot would depend on the design of Piboso's code.... If it's well designed then it would make the transition a lot easier with less work involved(I presume Piboso codes in C++). But only Piboso could know how complicated it would be for him personally to achieve this; so there's no point in saying how hard it is when, to be honest, without studying Piboso's GPBikes source code you really haven't a clue just what complications would be involved in achieving that aim, only Piboso would know that.
I think he's already answered this a while ago: switching to a different game engine would be a massive project.
I also think he's already said he's using C, not C++.

Ah. But he didn't say why?

Would it be a massive job due to Piboso needing to take a lot of time to research and learn how to use UE4 as well as how he would even start to go about the transition of his code into UE4 and taking advantage of all the AAA visual technologies and texture, lighting and mapping capabilities, etc, etc?
OR, would it be a massive job because he thinks cause of the way his code is designed that to take advantage of the UE4 capabilities he would basically be better to start from scratch again?

Whatever the reason, I personally think it would be a good move to make, even if he continued to work on his other projects to keep the money coming in while working on GPBikes to make the move to UE4? So what better project to reignite interest in the GPBikes project again and not lose anything cause of the initial development time to get it into UE4? After all Piboso has said that GPBikes doesn't really pay for itself, so nothing to lose but try.

It's inevitable that he's going to have to make that leap of faith change to one of the leading SDK's(UE4 or Unity) at some stage in the near future anyway the way the indie-dev market is going or he'll soon find himself standing still in the industry unless he confines himself to developing very simple kiddies games or the like, or finds the money to invest in a large team to work on his projects with him? Chances are that anyone he does find these days will want to be working with either UE4 or Unity anyway.... It's just the way games development has evolved now and for good reasons unless you've come up with an idea that is going to take a very specially dedicated way of doing things to achieve it, and even then these SDK's are well modifiable for ones needs, and some do that now, so it's still a no-brainer to use them, in my opinion.

I mean why stick to using a horse and cart when you can be chauffeured in a limousine or driving a super-car? ;)

WALKEN

June 25, 2019, 06:13:46 pm #46 Last Edit: June 25, 2019, 06:16:44 pm by WALKEN
Isn't there a disconnect between simulation and reality?

I remember going to universal studio and going on some virtual rides, although amazing and heart pounding they where not reality by far... And those virtual rides back then were miles beyond the best VR we have in our homes today...

No software can ever replace reality. It can only represent it by its creators.

I will say this- just the risk taken in a simulation oppose to real life is a big disconnect all in itself...

How one feels connected to reality through virtual reality is personal. DD's controller is modeled after a real motorcycle and brings you closer to the feeling of being on a real motorcycle, but isn't it best to just enjoy it for what it is, a controller!

Like electric drums, you can trick the listener into thinking they are hearing a real kit but the drummer is challenged by touch sensitivity. So the listener is only using one sense where the drummer is using many. Companies are getting closer to bridging the gap.



I think what Hawk is saying is PiBoSo isn't taking advantage of the available tools to bring GPBikes to another level, PiBoSo is making his own tools, hence the pace of the projects.

Isn't the important part of development creating an engine?   

         
Help me, help you!

Myst1cPrun3

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 06:13:46 pmIsn't there a disconnect between simulation and reality?

I remember going to universal studio and going on some virtual rides, although amazing and heart pounding they where not reality by far... And those virtual rides back then were miles beyond the best VR we have in our homes today...

No software can ever replace reality. It can only represent it by its creators.

I will say this- just the risk taken in a simulation oppose to real life is a big disconnect all in itself...

How one feels connected to reality through virtual reality is personal. DD's controller is modeled after a real motorcycle and brings you closer to the feeling of being on a real motorcycle, but isn't it best to just enjoy it for what it is, a controller!

Like electric drums, you can trick the listener into thinking they are hearing a real kit but the drummer is challenged by touch sensitivity. So the listener is only using one sense where the drummer is using many. Companies are getting closer to bridging the gap.



I think what Hawk is saying is PiBoSo isn't taking advantage of the available tools to bring GPBikes to another level, PiBoSo is making his own tools, hence the pace of the projects.

Isn't the important part of development creating an engine?   

         

I will say, that some games have a very blurred line between reality and the game, and that you can get so engrossed into a game it is very easy to forget the world around you completely.

It's happened to me a few times, although never, in GP Bikes sadly.

The first time I remember wasn't even in VR, but in R3E, in the Group 5 cars at the NorisRing. (The german street circuit) They were just so good, I completely lost any sense of being in my bedroom, despite being in a simulation.

The second, was in iRacing, when enjoying a close Skip Barber Race, wheel to wheel all the way around. This was In VR, and was the most fun I've ever had in VR, GPB included.

Thirdly was in a VR game called Zero Caliber. Its a military 'simulator', and I utterly crapped myself as the sounds sights and involvement was quite 'convincing', especially for me.

The point that's in there somewhere, is that the graphics of each of these is top of the range for their field, although, they have distinctly different engines and design processes.

However these had one thing over my current GPB setup, and that was physical interaction, I have a TX base for driving and was using the Oculus Touch controllers for shooting, yet on GPB I'm using a gamepad.

Despite this, even in the comparatively low quality/res oculus, the graphics in these games were noticeably better than GPB, and a large graphical engine boost would be needed to achieve this.
Unreal engine is a huge engine that is well known in the gaming community, and has proven results in graphics, physics, and mods departments, so for me, and I think most of the community, this would be the logical way to go development wise. As I said it is well known, so it could also be used as a marketing tool.

As for creating an engine being an important part of development, I personally think that time has passed. As there are so many high quality engines out there that are easy to use, easy to run hardware wise, and free to develop, I believe that creating an engine is pointless in the current gaming climate, and takes a huge amount of development away from other areas, and slows development down.

I have the utmost admiration for anyone who wants to make their own engine however, and I also understand the benefits, and to be honest, at GPB's conception it was probably the meta to have a personal engine for a personal game, however that time has passed.



Hawk

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 06:13:46 pmIsn't there a disconnect between simulation and reality?

I remember going to universal studio and going on some virtual rides, although amazing and heart pounding they where not reality by far... And those virtual rides back then were miles beyond the best VR we have in our homes today...

No software can ever replace reality. It can only represent it by its creators.

I will say this- just the risk taken in a simulation oppose to real life is a big disconnect all in itself...

How one feels connected to reality through virtual reality is personal. DD's controller is modeled after a real motorcycle and brings you closer to the feeling of being on a real motorcycle, but isn't it best to just enjoy it for what it is, a controller!

Like electric drums, you can trick the listener into thinking they are hearing a real kit but the drummer is challenged by touch sensitivity. So the listener is only using one sense where the drummer is using many. Companies are getting closer to bridging the gap.



I think what Hawk is saying is PiBoSo isn't taking advantage of the available tools to bring GPBikes to another level, PiBoSo is making his own tools, hence the pace of the projects.

Isn't the important part of development creating an engine?   

       

Yes.... I think your absolutely right Walken. Though I think in DD's case his real motorcycle controller does give a massive added immersion factor that cannot just be dismissed as using any other type of controller, if this is what I understand you are suggesting?
The feel and added immersion of using real controller interfaces and applications goes far beyond just using, let's say, a normal game controller pad when playing a simulation, surely?

Yes, I am basically just saying that Piboso isn't taking advantage of the tools at his disposal in this modern era of games/simulation developments, BUT no I do not agree that in this day and age, specially for a one man band indie developer like Piboso, to even consider creating their own game engine, but to use the modern tools available so as to be able to dedicate all ones precious and little time to solely creating what it is you want to create..... That is the way games development has evolved because these modern AAA game/entertainment SDK's are SO good and professionally created and supported nowadays that creating your own indie developed engine is something that only exists in the dark ages of games development when these excellent resources were not freely available with the added benefit of excellent very cheap deals, in UE4's case, for the pro-devs to use..... It's time to move forward with the times or I fear Piboso will be left standing still.... Yes, this is what I'm saying.

I'll end by saying: Why do you think many of the major developers are making that move over to using the UE4 engine? Because they know that with all the advances that are happening, that even with their own team of resources available, they will never be able to keep up with the likes of a dedicated massive team of guys working soley on an SDK like UE4.... Like I said, it's a no-brainer decision for any developer nowadays to use these AAA game SDK's(especially for a one man team or a small dev team) and not even to think about developing their own dedicated engine unless there are very good reasons to do so, and Piboso's projects hold no reasons whatsoever, in my opinion, that require a self engineered dedicated engine at all. So I ask myself what's Piboso's thinking on this other than a possible case of ego or pride? Well, pride and ego ain't going to pay the bills is it?

Hawk

June 25, 2019, 07:15:14 pm #49 Last Edit: June 25, 2019, 07:19:21 pm by Hawk
Quote from: Myst1cPrun3 on June 25, 2019, 06:45:11 pm
Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 06:13:46 pmIsn't there a disconnect between simulation and reality?

I remember going to universal studio and going on some virtual rides, although amazing and heart pounding they where not reality by far... And those virtual rides back then were miles beyond the best VR we have in our homes today...

No software can ever replace reality. It can only represent it by its creators.

I will say this- just the risk taken in a simulation oppose to real life is a big disconnect all in itself...

How one feels connected to reality through virtual reality is personal. DD's controller is modeled after a real motorcycle and brings you closer to the feeling of being on a real motorcycle, but isn't it best to just enjoy it for what it is, a controller!

Like electric drums, you can trick the listener into thinking they are hearing a real kit but the drummer is challenged by touch sensitivity. So the listener is only using one sense where the drummer is using many. Companies are getting closer to bridging the gap.



I think what Hawk is saying is PiBoSo isn't taking advantage of the available tools to bring GPBikes to another level, PiBoSo is making his own tools, hence the pace of the projects.

Isn't the important part of development creating an engine?   

         

I will say, that some games have a very blurred line between reality and the game, and that you can get so engrossed into a game it is very easy to forget the world around you completely.

It's happened to me a few times, although never, in GP Bikes sadly.

The first time I remember wasn't even in VR, but in R3E, in the Group 5 cars at the NorisRing. (The german street circuit) They were just so good, I completely lost any sense of being in my bedroom, despite being in a simulation.

The second, was in iRacing, when enjoying a close Skip Barber Race, wheel to wheel all the way around. This was In VR, and was the most fun I've ever had in VR, GPB included.

Thirdly was in a VR game called Zero Caliber. Its a military 'simulator', and I utterly crapped myself as the sounds sights and involvement was quite 'convincing', especially for me.

The point that's in there somewhere, is that the graphics of each of these is top of the range for their field, although, they have distinctly different engines and design processes.

However these had one thing over my current GPB setup, and that was physical interaction, I have a TX base for driving and was using the Oculus Touch controllers for shooting, yet on GPB I'm using a gamepad.

Despite this, even in the comparatively low quality/res oculus, the graphics in these games were noticeably better than GPB, and a large graphical engine boost would be needed to achieve this.
Unreal engine is a huge engine that is well known in the gaming community, and has proven results in graphics, physics, and mods departments, so for me, and I think most of the community, this would be the logical way to go development wise. As I said it is well known, so it could also be used as a marketing tool.

As for creating an engine being an important part of development, I personally think that time has passed. As there are so many high quality engines out there that are easy to use, easy to run hardware wise, and free to develop, I believe that creating an engine is pointless in the current gaming climate, and takes a huge amount of development away from other areas, and slows development down.

I have the utmost admiration for anyone who wants to make their own engine however, and I also understand the benefits, and to be honest, at GPB's conception it was probably the meta to have a personal engine for a personal game, however that time has passed.




+1 mate... Totally agree with that.  ;)

Very true what you said about if Piboso used the UE4 engine that it alone would be a big selling point simply cause of UE4's reputation in the industry and fans a like..... Well pointed out mate.

WALKEN

lol, Hawk :) I'm glad you agree. I'm not disagreeing with you at all.

There is this thing called- impulse resolution

Its not as simple as just changing engines. 
Help me, help you!

Hawk

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 07:53:09 pmlol, Hawk :) I'm glad you agree. I'm not disagreeing with you at all.

There is this thing called- impulse resolution

Its not as simple as just changing engines. 

Your right mate, it's not as simple as we are likely making it sound. Just that in my opinion, the transition to a AAA SDK engine to do his work on will have to be realised by Piboso at some stage..... The days of indie-devs creating all their own bespoke code for everything they need to develop a game are now gone and Piboso needs to realise this in my opinion. The job to do that for modern games/sims is just too great for a one-man band without using these SDk resources available nowadays, that's why everyone is using and developing on them; that's why all these game development students at universities are being taught on them, right? Surely using an SDK is no different to using a 3D app to create the models to use in a game.... So what's the big issue with some of these old school indie-dev guys.... I just don't understand their stance on this matter? :o  :)

It would help shut-down this debate if Piboso would explain his thoughts on the matter in more detail so we could understand better why he doesn't seem to think it would be a good direction to take with his projects, or to find out whether it is definitely something he has and is indeed considering for the future, near or far? ;)  :)

matty0l215

Quote from: Hawk on June 25, 2019, 08:46:52 pmIt would help shut-down this debate if Piboso would explain his thoughts on the matter in more detail so we could understand better why he doesn't seem to think it would be a good direction to take with his projects, or to find out whether it is definitely something he has and is indeed considering for the future, near or far? ;)  :)

This...

Maybe it's time for another state of the Union, Piboso.

WALKEN

Physics!

Impulse Resolution... Maybe UE4 sucks in this department? GPBikes isn't call of duty...

Name one racing game physics better than GPBikes? GP19 physics are not on par with PiBoSo, its a game not a simulation...   
Help me, help you!

guigui404

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 08:51:57 pmPhysics!

Impulse Resolution... Maybe UE4 sucks in this department? GPBikes isn't call of duty...

Name one racing game physics better than GPBikes? GP19 physics are not on par with PiBoSo, its a game not a simulation...   

iRacing

Hawk

June 25, 2019, 09:08:05 pm #55 Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 12:11:24 am by Hawk
Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 08:51:57 pmPhysics!

Impulse Resolution... Maybe UE4 sucks in this department? GPBikes isn't call of duty...

Name one racing game physics better than GPBikes? GP19 physics are not on par with PiBoSo, its a game not a simulation...   

You are not set to what the default physics(NVidia PhysicsX) Epic provides for you in the UE4 engine, it's just a base to work from and adjust to your needs, if indeed you even want to use the PhysicsX system at all, it's not compulsory and something which I doubt Piboso would want to use given he's already coded his own dedicated physics code.

Piboso could integrate his own current physics engine code into whatever he wanted to create within the UE4 SDK, it's not a problem. :)

Myst1cPrun3

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 08:51:57 pmPhysics!

Impulse Resolution... Maybe UE4 sucks in this department? GPBikes isn't call of duty...
   

UE4 has the capability of extremely good physics, as demonstrated in sims like assetto corsa, which is highly regarded as one of the best, of both physics and graphics.
It is also well known to have very good collision models, and adaptive physics (Ie terrain changes etc).

Quote from: WALKEN on June 25, 2019, 08:51:57 pmName one racing game physics better than GPBikes? GP19 physics are not on par with PiBoSo, its a game not a simulation...   


If you're going for general racing sims, I'd say something like RF2, AC, and Automobilista for physics.

If I had to compare GPB's current physics to any Car racing Sim atm, I would choose iRacing.
It is in general a very good representation, but there are some tyre related issues, and unsavable slides, that prevent it from going next level. Hell that could even be dragged up into graphics as well, as iRacing, although fairly good looking (like GPB) has an engine from NR2003, and its beginning to show, again like GPB.

In terms of bike games, there really aren't many on the market physics wise, however, I would say that the old TT Superbikes games from jester felt really good, and simluated possibly the best racing event the world has ever seen, as well as a tonne of awesome road races, and I still play this game series on a PS2 Emulator, Love it.
Possibly GP500 could fit here as well, although I must confess I've never played it, due to not being able to have it working on Windows 10.

The 'Un-Official' Daddy Of Motorcycle Sims:



Side note: If anyone knows any links or fixes for Win 10 GP500, please can you share them with me, even if its in a PM, as I really want to try it.

Return to Topic:

The Jester TT Superbike games had some of the best physics around, certainly some of the smoothest, most real feeling physics I've felt, where the rider seemed to actually have some input, and the bikes didn't seem like they weighed nothing, but still had decently quick steering.

Granted, the physics felt a little 'floaty' at some points, however it was very predictable, and satisfying to use, with decent elevation registry, and bump registry too.

GPB's physics aren't too far off, however the 'beta 15 front enders' are beginning to make the sim very difficult and unpredictable to use, and regardless of what engine, development path, or marketing pib, or anyone else suggests, sorting the front end out should be the ABSOLUTE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR THE 'WHATS NEXT', as in a beta 16 release needs to fix this.

Hawk

Apologies..... A quick off-topic here:

@Myst1cPrun3: Are you sure the front end issue is a core GPBikes physics issue?

It could well be down to the mod-bikes physics/geom files/settings which are the modders responsibility not Piboso's; as I understand, many of the mod bikes have still not been properly updated by the relevant mod teams for the latest GPBikes beta release, although I understand they are still rideable in sim?

Myst1cPrun3

June 25, 2019, 09:44:29 pm #58 Last Edit: June 25, 2019, 09:48:33 pm by Myst1cPrun3
Quote from: Hawk on June 25, 2019, 09:33:25 pmApologies..... A quick off-topic here:

@Myst1cPrun3: Are you sure the front end issue is a core GPBikes physics issue?

It could well be down to the mod-bikes physics/geom files/settings which are the modders responsibility not Piboso's; as I understand, many of the mod bikes have still not been properly updated by the relevant mod teams for the latest GPBikes beta release, although I understand they are still rideable in sim?


Off topic Reply:

Happens on the stock 2017 M2 at Victoria.

Pretty much highlights a core GPB issue to me considering its Pibs content ;)
It can be especially noticeable in the 'Not at all' MG Hairpin.

Happens a load on the new Mugello, front just goes, without any warning.

You can ride around it a little, but it seems that if its going to go, it just goes, no matter what you change the next lap. Could probably be nulled by setup changes, but its not obvious enough as to whats wrong to try and dial it out if that makes sense.

Some bikes perform better in this regard, and actually feel really good, the WSBK 2017 pack, and the WSSP 2018 pack are among the best.
While I find that the SuperStock 2014 bikes, and the M2 bike is among the worst for it. (The 2017 M2 is a little better compared to the 2019 Mod but still not ideal)

If I had to guess, I'd say its related to tyre pressures/temps, and a little bit of how soft the suspension spring is. Seems reduced with harder springs, and less pressure in the tyres, but still.

WALKEN

June 25, 2019, 11:32:29 pm #59 Last Edit: June 25, 2019, 11:34:19 pm by WALKEN
Mystic- GP500 runs perfect in WINE in Linux, (that is an option)

I guess I'm lost? If Physics are the most important thing about GPBikes and PiBoSo is coding his own engine (physics code) then the only real advantage to using a different engine would be for graphics? No? In that case we are back at the beginning of what out weighs the other.

So suggesting UE4 would be for graphics? And how would using say Havok or PhysX be better suited than PiBoSos own physics code?

IMO it would cause even more delay and frustration for PiBoSo.

Physic translation from reality to virtual may not always reflect in a positive manner due to input, hence the ultimate challenge of balance. Meaning if physics are written properly they may make the sim unplayable without a proper controller, the missing link.. So IMO there are bigger fish to fry in this matter than just a facelift to stay relevant....

PiBoSo said it himself that his models are not up to his standards as is! I fell through the ground on KRP yesterday, lol...

The biggest disagreement I have come across over the years is handling, I love the handling in MotoGP URT 1. It feels like a remote controlled motorcycle, i love it! Best physics ever! Real? not even close! So we as sim/gamers are the input of what feels right or wrong. Maybe if someone developed the perfect translation on motorcycle physics without argument we would still say its wrong?                     
Help me, help you!