Page 1 of 1
Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:38 am
by tobz173
I realise development has moved on to other things, the mediocre multiplayer is great, and some of the tracks coming out now are getting slightly closer to the caliber that we used to see back in the day, but are the physics done as far as development is concerned? They're definitely a good thing, and absolutely love the hint of realistic handling, but is there a big white elephant in the room when it comes to talking about how overly sensitive the front is to being washed out? or how these things handle is the simplest of whoops sections? sure you can swap out in real life, but it's honestly luck of the Irish if you can make it through a set of whoops at anything near full speed, it's almost as though the rider doesn't have legs holding onto the bike, allowing it to swap ridiculously. Please post if you agree, but I'd love to hear why you would disagree.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:40 am
by gordy
jlv wrote:There are changes I plan on making that will affect cornering. The current traction is done with Coulumb friction. That is close to correct for dry sliding surfaces like concrete, pavement or hardpacked dirt. When the tires actually dig into the dirt there is a viscous drag effect that isn't modeled with the current traction system. In future versions it will be possible to give a different coefficient of friction for each slip rate. That will allow for much closer modeling of softer soils. That should help prevent the unexpected washouts because it will slip some before it gives out entirely.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:46 am
by DJ99X
Was gonna quote that too.
But I'll post this image
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:19 am
by tobz173
Not exactly white, is it?
Excellent, thanks gordy! guess i haven't quite sifted there every post yet, cheers.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:00 pm
by tobz173
So that explains the qualms with the sensitive from end. No comments on the pogo-like backend?
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:01 pm
by DJ99X
Pogo-like backend? Just turn the rear rebound down
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:06 pm
by tobz173
thanks mate, helps a bit.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 3:34 pm
by Garasaki
Um it might be less confusing to say "turn the rear rebound up" (make the number higher = more damping)
Good bike setup makes this game a lot less frustrating.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:48 pm
by DJ99X
Oh really, I though increasing Shock Rebound reduced damping, in effect quickening the suspension's return. I just associated those sliders with how quickly it worked, so I have had it round the wrong way this whole time.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:52 pm
by ShackAttack12
DJ wrote:Oh really, I though increasing Shock Rebound reduced damping, in effect quickening the suspension's return. I just associated those sliders with how quickly it worked, so I have had it round the wrong way this whole time.
The suspensions adjustments are damping adjustments, not spring adjustments.
Higher the setting = prevents "that action"
higher rebound damping = prevents rebound more.
... in simple terms.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:56 pm
by DJ99X
I see. Well, that would probably explain why suspension settings I think should work, don't
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:51 pm
by Garasaki
Having descriptions on these settings is one of those things on JLV's honey-do list.
Re: Are the physics done with development?
Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:28 pm
by jbob23
welcome to like 4 weeks ago DJ!!! gah. lol we had a big discussion about it. it helps alot once u get it set up right. feels alot more realistic.