You'd think he would have been a regular on VROC under some alias. Did
anybody ever figure out who it was?
Papyrus netcode and cars flying after light contact
A joke question about Dave Kaemmer's online alias turned into criticism of how low-speed contacts in GPL and NR2003 online can launch cars into the air. Posters attributed it to warping and prediction code, while Bill Bollinger said N3's netcode by Charlie Heath was better and that he had reported the issue while beta testing NASCAR 4.
Automated summary.
Tony Jester wrote:
> You'd think he would have been a regular on VROC under some alias. Did
> anybody ever figure out who it was?
>
>
Indigo
Quoted text (7 lines)
>Tony Jester wrote: >> You'd think he would have been a regular on VROC under some alias. Did >> anybody ever figure out who it was? >> >> > >IndigoIndigo? wasnt that the turd who always got on and went backwards on the
tracks?
EldredP wrote:
Quoted text (11 lines)
>> Tony Jester wrote: >>> You'd think he would have been a regular on VROC under some alias. >>> Did anybody ever figure out who it was? >>> >>> >> >> Indigo > > Ouch...<g> > > EldredObviously he was researching online collision detection which improved
through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL!
john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]...
> Obviously he was researching online collision detection which improved
> through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL!
Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes sending
simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc.
JP wrote:
Maybe that was the intent after all? you know to make it so "anyone" could
enjoy it, NOT JUST THE HARD CORE SIM enthusiast? Hell I know my 10 year old
loves wrecking stuff, and tearing things apart... Hmmmmm <J/K>
Quoted text (8 lines)
> john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... >> Obviously he was researching online collision detection which >> improved through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes > sending simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc.
Plowboy2 <stingre.removethis_@yahoo!.removeit> wrote in message
news:yKtQc.6683$aR2.3714@okepread04...
could
> enjoy it, NOT JUST THE HARD CORE SIM enthusiast? Hell I know my 10 yearold
> loves wrecking stuff, and tearing things apart... Hmmmmm <J/K>
hehe
Quoted text (11 lines)
> JP wrote: > > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > >> Obviously he was researching online collision detection which > >> improved through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes > > sending simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc. > > Maybe that was the intent after all? you know to make it so "anyone"Yeah, I did a standing-still, in-place flip at Loudon 2 weeks ago.
-Larry
"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:D3tQc.6$[email hidden]...
sending
> simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc.
>
>
>
>
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > > Obviously he was researching online collision detection which improved > > through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes
"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:D3tQc.6$[email hidden]...
sending
> simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc.
That is because of the enormous amount of energy that can be released by
even the tiniest of warps. You won't see it in offline events (unless you
simulate warp like I did once for GPL, see
http://www.xs4all.nl/~westrab/gpl.htm#effects )
Bart
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > > Obviously he was researching online collision detection which improved > > through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes
Bart Westra <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:41129d9c$0$21106$[email hidden]...
Yeah, I know thanks. Must be something in Papys code too though, as this
type of thing never happened in Heat online, i.e.
Quoted text (21 lines)
> > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:D3tQc.6$[email hidden]... > > > > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > > > Obviously he was researching online collision detection which improved > > > through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes > sending > > simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc. > > That is because of the enormous amount of energy that can be released by > even the tiniest of warps. You won't see it in offline events (unless you > simulate warp like I did once for GPL, see > http://www.xs4all.nl/~westrab/gpl.htm#effects ) > > Bart >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:NSxQc.20$[email hidden]:
>
> Yeah, I know thanks. Must be something in Papys code too though, as
> this
> type of thing never happened in Heat online, i.e.
>
>
I race in a weekly full contact racing league that runs on Nascar Heat
(www.ukdirt.co.uk). Until we got a dedicated server to run "thick"
(default is "thin"- less data transferred between client and server), it
wasn't unknown for cars to go flying some 100 ft in the air after a good
hit. Even with the big server (jolt.co.uk "uberserver") For one of the Heat
mods, the makers had to increase the virtual weight of the cars tenfold to
stop them launching from a good hit.
Heat is by no means free from flying car syndrome online, particularly when
you consider that on our short ovals, cars will be reaching 90mph max at
the end of the straights, as opposed to 200mph in typical GPL/NR2003
tracks.
cheers
John
JM <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Heat
> mods, the makers had to increase the virtual weight of the cars tenfold to
> stop them launching from a good hit.
>
> Heat is by no means free from flying car syndrome online, particularlywhen
> you consider that on our short ovals, cars will be reaching 90mph max at
> the end of the straights, as opposed to 200mph in typical GPL/NR2003
> tracks.
>
> cheers
> John
<shrug> Never saw it myself in Heat, but thanks for the info. But then,
I'm meaning the 5-10 mph hits that send cars flying, not hard hits. That
what you mean too ?
Quoted text (15 lines)
> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:NSxQc.20$[email hidden]: > > > > > > Yeah, I know thanks. Must be something in Papys code too though, as > > this > > type of thing never happened in Heat online, i.e. > > > > > > I race in a weekly full contact racing league that runs on Nascar Heat > (www.ukdirt.co.uk). Until we got a dedicated server to run "thick" > (default is "thin"- less data transferred between client and server), it > wasn't unknown for cars to go flying some 100 ft in the air after a good > hit. Even with the big server (jolt.co.uk "uberserver") For one of theThen why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess is because
Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4.
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"Bart Westra" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:41129d9c$0$21106$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (23 lines)
> > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:D3tQc.6$[email hidden]... > > > > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > > > Obviously he was researching online collision detection which improved > > > through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes > sending > > simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc. > > That is because of the enormous amount of energy that can be released by > even the tiniest of warps. You won't see it in offline events (unless you > simulate warp like I did once for GPL, see > http://www.xs4all.nl/~westrab/gpl.htm#effects ) > > Bart > > > Yep.
Bill Bollinger <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
improved
you
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Then why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess is because > Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4. > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "Bart Westra" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:41129d9c$0$21106$[email hidden]... > > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:D3tQc.6$[email hidden]... > > > > > > john henry bonham <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:4111e85b$0$58816$[email hidden]... > > > > Obviously he was researching online collision detection whichQuoted text (9 lines)
> > > > through the NASCAR series, released post-GPL! > > > > > > > > > Hehe, except that the detection isn't any better. Ten mph crashes > > sending > > > simulated 3400 lb cars flying, etc. > > > > That is because of the enormous amount of energy that can be released by > > even the tiniest of warps. You won't see it in offline events (unlessQuoted text (9 lines)
> > simulate warp like I did once for GPL, see > > http://www.xs4all.nl/~westrab/gpl.htm#effects ) > > > > Bart > > > > > > > > We have a winner! :-)
Pete
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Then why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess is because
> Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4.
>
> Bill Bollinger
> www.gsxn.com
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
> Then why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess is because
> Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4.
>
> Bill Bollinger
> www.gsxn.com
My guess is because in Papy sims, cars were nailed to the deck up until GPL and N4.
:)
Regards,
Mark Davison
www.v8thunder.com
Mark <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:<[email hidden]>...
> > Then why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess isbecause
GPL and N4.
Then they need to be re-nailed, if what happens in gpl, etc. is the
alternative.
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4. > > > > Bill Bollinger > > www.gsxn.com > > > My guess is because in Papy sims, cars were nailed to the deck up untilQuoted text (7 lines)
> > :) > > Regards, > > Mark Davison > www.v8thunder.com>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Then they need to be re-nailed, if what happens in gpl, etc. is the
> alternative.
Prediction code is, unfortunately, a two-sided knife. It cannot be perfect,
it can only predict. If it's too soft, it can be as worse as if it was too
tight. Papyrus perhaps went a little too tight in their earlier multiplayer
release, and have loosened up to a level in NR2003 that is very satisfying.
You see, if you have a prediction code like in Nascar Heat, you have very
smooth cars that don't seem much warpy. Unfortunately, most of that
smoothness is due to the more heavy prediction code. When it predicts, it's
not always telling the truth. In NH and in I think ISI multiplayer, the
server relies too much on predicting, giving the whole experience a
ghost-like feeling of not really driving against other human beings, but
predicting of what they will do in the next split second (that action being
replicated each next split second after). Now that gives you the advantage
that since it predicts more, the solid mass of cars doesn't give you
impossible physics as much as in those Papy multiplayer crashes.
Because we need to remember that the graphic engine of those cars, the
physical appearance on screen has NO EFFECT on physics and crashes. It's
all done in "another reality" within the virtual reality of the sim.
Because of the more rough prediction code of Papyrus, you get a more real
sense of driving against other humans, because it predicts less. So you are
given closer to reality data of the other opponents. That unfortunately
makes it also more possible to have physics that go bezerk.
Until we start seeing physics that are done with the polygons themselves in
real-time (and not a reality within the virtual reality), things like that
will continue to happen. Only by putting "brackets" so that let's say, a
speed of a stock car cannot exceed 245mph or that it's velocity cannot
exceed X, or go below Y in a Z lapse of time, can we diminish it.
Of course when (and we already have in certain simulations) real-time
physics are done within the game engine itself, and with the advancing of
computer power, you won't have that anymore. Cars will be real entities on
the tracks, so if a collision arrives, it will be because of those polygons
hitting each other. They will not pass through each other, and the physics
won't go bezerk anymore. But those technologies are really crude compared
to the potential in the future, with real-time physics in the game engine
acting with all the entities on screen. From the wheels to even the simple
needle in the gauge or the pitroad wall, will be an entity with a mass and a
volume, not lifeless polygons that have specific hidden information like it
is nowadays. I've said a long time ago that we will have a regression of
the simulation with that transition, as it's so complicated that sims that
start using those techniques, will be seen as more crude compared to those
who predict.
I hope somebody still reads this ;)
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ltgSc.21047$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > Then they need to be re-nailed, if what happens in gpl, etc. is the
> > alternative.
>
>
> Prediction code is, unfortunately, a two-sided knife. It cannot beperfect,
> it can only predict. If it's too soft, it can be as worse as if it wastoo
> tight. Papyrus perhaps went a little too tight in their earliermultiplayer
> release, and have loosened up to a level in NR2003 that is verysatisfying.
>
>
> You see, if you have a prediction code like in Nascar Heat, you have very
> smooth cars that don't seem much warpy. Unfortunately, most of that
> smoothness is due to the more heavy prediction code. When it predicts,it's
> not always telling the truth. In NH and in I think ISI multiplayer, the
> server relies too much on predicting, giving the whole experience a
> ghost-like feeling of not really driving against other human beings, but
> predicting of what they will do in the next split second (that actionbeing
> replicated each next split second after). Now that gives you theadvantage
are
> given closer to reality data of the other opponents. That unfortunately
> makes it also more possible to have physics that go bezerk.
>
>
> Until we start seeing physics that are done with the polygons themselvesin
on
> the tracks, so if a collision arrives, it will be because of thosepolygons
> hitting each other. They will not pass through each other, and thephysics
> won't go bezerk anymore. But those technologies are really crude compared
> to the potential in the future, with real-time physics in the game engine
> acting with all the entities on screen. From the wheels to even thesimple
> needle in the gauge or the pitroad wall, will be an entity with a mass anda
> volume, not lifeless polygons that have specific hidden information likeit
All well and good, but when a simulated 3400 lb car gets put into the
stratosphere from a 5 mph tap, all the bells and whistles reasons don't
amount to squat. <g> It worked better BEFORE N4, it can do it again.
But then again, the damage model in N1 was better than 03 too, lol.
Yeah, progress.
Quoted text (9 lines)
> that since it predicts more, the solid mass of cars doesn't give you > impossible physics as much as in those Papy multiplayer crashes. > > > Because we need to remember that the graphic engine of those cars, the > physical appearance on screen has NO EFFECT on physics and crashes. It's > all done in "another reality" within the virtual reality of the sim. > Because of the more rough prediction code of Papyrus, you get a more real > sense of driving against other humans, because it predicts less. So youQuoted text (8 lines)
> real-time (and not a reality within the virtual reality), things like that > will continue to happen. Only by putting "brackets" so that let's say, a > speed of a stock car cannot exceed 245mph or that it's velocity cannot > exceed X, or go below Y in a Z lapse of time, can we diminish it. > > Of course when (and we already have in certain simulations) real-time > physics are done within the game engine itself, and with the advancing of > computer power, you won't have that anymore. Cars will be real entitiesQuoted text (16 lines)
> is nowadays. I've said a long time ago that we will have a regression of > the simulation with that transition, as it's so complicated that sims that > start using those techniques, will be seen as more crude compared to those > who predict. > > > > > I hope somebody still reads this ;) > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World...N3 and GPL/N4 physics are hardly comparable.
Having said that - yes I too think they can improve it... just look at LFS.
--
Ed_
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding
news:[email hidden]...
> Then why didn't N3 have the same type of wrecks then? My guess is because
> Charlie Heath did the net code for N3 and someone else did GPL/N4.
>
> Bill Bollinger
> www.gsxn.com
>
Ed, the joke is this. When I beta tested N4, I brought this problem up
almost immediately. You should have seen the skyrockets back then. The
same BS was shovled back then as it is being tried by some today. That it
is warp. blah blah blah. The network code in N4/N2002/N2003 is not as good
as N3. Physics or not.
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:411b80b5$[email hidden]...
> N3 and GPL/N4 physics are hardly comparable.
>
> Having said that - yes I too think they can improve it... just look atLFS.
because
