GPL shifting in replay

Hi, Has anyone else noticed this? If you take the in car view in replay mode, the gears shift by themselves. The driver's hands remain at the steering wheel. I think this looks pretty weird. Why did papy do this? I can't think of any good reason. Can you? // Johan

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:43:48 +0100, Johan Foederer >Has anyone else noticed this? If you take the in car view in replay >mode, the gears shift by themselves. The driver's hands remain at the >steering wheel. I think this looks pretty weird. Why did papy do this? I >can't think of any good reason. Can you? Yes I noticed this, but I can't understand why. Maybe it's because this way they don't have to move the driver's arm in the various views in which it remains visible, so to lower the work for the CPU... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Home-page : http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7917 "All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain." "E tutti quei momenti andranno perduti nel tempo, come lacrime nella pioggia" Roy Batty, Blade Runner ---------------------------------------------------------------------

: >Has anyone else noticed this? If you take the in car view in replay : >mode, the gears shift by themselves. The driver's hands remain at the : >steering wheel. I think this looks pretty weird. Why did papy do this? I : >can't think of any good reason. Can you? : Yes I noticed this, but I can't understand why. Maybe it's because : this way they don't have to move the driver's arm in the various views : in which it remains visible, so to lower the work for the CPU... But they could have included it as an option, much like what they should have done for force-feedback support. George

We didn't make the arms move the shifter in the replay because we didn't have time to do it. Nothing happens on a computer unless you spend the time to program it (except program crashes, of course, which follow exactly the opposite principle :-) Randy > : >Has anyone else noticed this? If you take the in car view in replay > : >mode, the gears shift by themselves. The driver's hands remain at the > : >steering wheel. I think this looks pretty weird. Why did papy do this? I

Quoted text (10 lines)

> : >can't think of any good reason. Can you? > : Yes I noticed this, but I can't understand why. Maybe it's because > : this way they don't have to move the driver's arm in the various views > : in which it remains visible, so to lower the work for the CPU... > But they could have included it as an option, much like what they should > have done for force-feedback support. > George

But isn't it already programmed? I mean, it works during the race and since the***pit is fully 3d there shouldn't be any problems with viewpoints or anything. I suppose there is some sort of function that takes care of the arm movement during the race. Why can't this same function be used during the replay? Is the replay based on a different engine? Please clearify this, because I'm confused. Thanks, Johan. > We didn't make the arms move the shifter in the replay because we didn't > have time to do it. Nothing happens on a computer unless you spend the time > to program it (except program crashes, of course, which follow exactly the > opposite principle :-) > Randy

>But isn't it already programmed? I mean, it works during the race and >since the***pit is fully 3d there shouldn't be any problems with >viewpoints or anything. I suppose there is some sort of function that >takes care of the arm movement during the race. Why can't this same >function be used during the replay? Is the replay based on a different >engine? I'm not sure the***pit IS fully 3D in replays. It certainly is not when viewing someone else in in-car view during an online multiplayer race. I noticed that the***pit doesn't move around at all, and there's no arm movement to the shiter ... Hena

> > We didn't make the arms move the shifter in the replay because we didn't > > have time to do it. Nothing happens on a computer unless you spend the time > > to program it (except program crashes, of course, which follow exactly the > > opposite principle :-) > But isn't it already programmed? No, not for the replay, as you've noticed... :-) Right; it's programmed to work during the race. Doesn't mean it's programmed to work during the replay. A very similar function could be used, but that doesn't happen "all by itself" as Randy points out above. IMO, it doesn't detract from the game's overall appeal because the replay doesn't have the driver's arm moving to shift the gears... So, just about ANYTHING else they did while working on the game was a better investment of time than getting the arms to move in the replay. It's clearly somewhat different, because the data comes from a spooled replay instead of directly from the physics world. (So, depending on your definition of "engine", the answer is "yes", "no", or "sort of".) ---Jim

What he said... :-)

Quoted text (8 lines)

> But isn't it already programmed? I mean, it works during the race and > since the***pit is fully 3d there shouldn't be any problems with > viewpoints or anything. I suppose there is some sort of function that > takes care of the arm movement during the race. Why can't this same > function be used during the replay? Is the replay based on a different > engine? > Please clearify this, because I'm confused.

during race situations where time can only move forward at a rate of 1 times normal speed, it's easy to show a gear shift arm animation triggered when the driver hit the shift button. During replay where a viewer could pause at any moment, rewind, etc, the position of the arm at any given time would have to be stored in every frame of the replay in order to properly show the arm's movement down to the stick and back, etc. That would take a bit of time to code, check that it works, test, etc, and i think they were on a pretty tight schedule as it was. of course, i didn't write GPL so i'm only guessing :) Grant.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > We didn't make the arms move the shifter in the replay because we didn't > > > have time to do it. Nothing happens on a computer unless you spend the time > > > to program it (except program crashes, of course, which follow exactly the > > > opposite principle :-) > > But isn't it already programmed? > No, not for the replay, as you've noticed... :-)

Good point :-) True, Only wasn't thinking of a similar function, but about the SAME function. If this were the case it would only mean adding a few lines of code. But this is clearly not the case. I totally agree on this one! It's just that I didn't really see the difference between the movement during the race and the replay and thus I never thought about is as taking a lot of time programming. Okay, this is where I stop. I'm not going to try and give a definition of engine. Anyone want to try? And just a final remark... GPL is the BEST racing sim ever. Of course it has its little things that aren't 'right'. But even if it had 100 of these little things, it wouldn't make the sim less fun. I'd rather race now without e.g. a moving arm, than having to wait for another few months. In short... Great job papy! // Johan

: during race situations where time can only move forward at a rate : of 1 times normal speed, it's easy to show a gear shift arm animation : triggered when the driver hit the shift button. During replay where : a viewer could pause at any moment, rewind, etc, the position of the : arm at any given time would have to be stored in every frame of the : replay in order to properly show the arm's movement down to the : stick and back, etc. That would take a bit of time to code, check that : it works, test, etc, and i think they were on a pretty tight : schedule as it was. Since Papyrus is capable of monitoring all flying parts in the replay, e.g. tires, there is no reason why it would be so difficult to monitor the gear-shifting hand. To be consistent with the immobile driver notion, they should not have the driver show his raising hand in replays, too. Tight schedule? Maybe, but they should have considered that the delay would have been well worth it, for the release date by then would have been Christmas '98. It's a pleasant feeling having to open a GPL box under the tree, even if you bought it and wrapped it up yourself. George

Are you saying that you would've gladly waited another 2-3 months for GPL if they only had included a hand motion to change gears in replays!?!?! Gee, you are without a doubt the most patient guy I know ... Hena :-)

That is indeed VERY VERY patient. And even wrap it yourself? Oh man! If I had to wrap GPL up my self it would be an empty box! I don't believe I would be able to leave the CD in box, and I certainly couldn't put it back! // Johan

: > : >Tight schedule? Maybe, but they should have considered that the delay : >would have been well worth it, for the release date by then would have : >been Christmas '98. It's a pleasant feeling having to open a GPL box : >under the tree, even if you bought it and wrapped it up yourself. : Are you saying that you would've gladly waited another 2-3 months for GPL if : they only had included a hand motion to change gears in replays!?!?! : Gee, you are without a doubt the most patient guy I know ... : Hena :-) Yep. I am still delaying my purchase of GPL, considering that I am still waiting for a sale on a nice set of driving wheel/pedals (probably wail until Christmas). Too bad Papyrus didn't delay till 'xmas, unless of course they plan to release a patch by that time. I would have been one happy camper. :( George