Clearly I was wrong, thanks for showing me. (yes I mean it)
Dawson24 wrote:There will always be people that complain. That's just how it is.
I appreciate it that you guys take the time to put on an MXGP series. Hopefully you guys continue to do so next year.
Atom6246 wrote:That money should be motivating you because I'm sure someone else will be gladly willing to take your guys spot.
There was a 2 year absence with GP's, no one seemed even remotely close to wanting to take it up, Aaron Hall was the only one who showed any sort of interest (that I saw) with a few guys building like 1 round. If others want to put in time and dedication (each and every week), I'd be happy to see that.
Atom6246 wrote:I don't have any track making experience so I can't help there, only thing I feel like I could is by testing the tracks but I don't see how that would work.
We've decided that only we in the crew are testing the tracks, no one outside are supposed to have them, that way no one should get them in advance. Personally I'm not very fast and I can't hit lines super fast. This surely holds me back a lot when testing the tracks. Another point I guess more or less no-one not making tracks know of is the (potentially) huge change in visuals. I make the track looking one way, often without decals or with a super shit overlay that's more or less one color. This was I can often see each and every bump, for me causing a placebo effect, feeling each and every bump, making them more severe than they really are. When the decals are added, up to 90% of the bumpiness I saw before can be gone, hence no placebo is left and all the sudden I can just hold it open over that section, that I couldn't before. Super strange phenomena, for me at least.
Russia in particular is my fault for poor testing. That track was made at an unbelievable pace, Tizz had about 0% faith in that I would finish it in time with how far behind I was on the terrain part. (My) next track should at least be tested more as I hope to have more time.
Atom6246 wrote:Thing is I feel like you guys aren't even trying to help yourselves. Like you already got the money so lets do fuck all who cares about the show up. I'm sure people are willing to help just have to ask.
We're definitely not doing that, we want to make tracks that people like. We like our style, so does at least quite a few more riders do. I like challenging replicas that challenge your skill and makes you think twice. Funtracks are supposed to be fun, and perhaps a bit easier imo. I just feel like aids if there are super big berm-ruts that you can just lay it over and rail. That's my personal style, for a funtrack, ok, but I personally don't want that as replicas. I haven't had time to test any rF tracks this year, so I can't compare them to the mxgp tracks, also I have too little time on last years rF tracks to make and sort of qualified comparison.
Aaron Hall wrote:Also some of you need to remember that of course there will be some tracks you do and don't like but just leaving comments saying 'traction' etc doesn't actually help anyone, if all the people who complain about the track left feedback then am pretty sure tracks would improve every week too suit what everyone would like.
As Aaron says, the more you explain your points, the more we understand and can try out new things. Saying "traction" is just no help at all. We know a lot of people want sticky traction, but at least I don't see that sticky traction being any close to a "real" traction, therefor I choose not to use it (when I decide). The example Atom showed some page back was a great
example of how feedback is useful. Took an image, used paint for a minute or two and explained it. I immediately understood what he wanted to say and what could be improved. "plz fix this turn" doesn't tell you anything."Just add more people and you'll have more time/less to do per person"
I would really like to explain and debate this.
As of right now, the crew looks like:
- Storken, terrain, placing objects, timing gates, flaggers, cameras etc
- Gabriele, terrain, placing objects, timing gates, flaggers, cameras etc
- Justin, terrain, some object placement and other misc stuff and trackmaps.
- Alecee, not sure as I haven't talked to him directly, but he made Ernee terrain wise (may be based on Hagg's previous heightmap) and might have added statues etc.
- Tizz, places objects and decals as well as works on the visuals
- Bruno, places objects, sometimes decals
- Ruben does some 3d modelling
- Vincent (at least did in 2016) some 3d models
- Logan helping with hosting
This is the guys I know of, the we have a new guy Tizz is sort of teaching, hosting etc. Barrington might help somewhere too. Sorry if I forgot anyone. Mainly I myself talk to Tizz, Gab and Justin in our chat so I may have some things wrong or completely missed.
We got a few guys, but not all of us have time all the time, so there's mainly 2-3 guys working on one track at a time. So why don't we get someone else added?
Short answer: Hard to find someone.
In a project like this, we need to add people we trust, to 100%, people who hold their word. At the moment I feel like the people in the crew stick to their word and contribute as much or often as they can. If I ask Gab to do "thing x", he does "thing x" on the time he set it out on and vice versa. Last year we had a creator set out to do 2 rounds from his request. 1st track was delivered in time as planned, then we asked about the 2nd one (months in advance), he said he started looking at it, the new layout etc. Month or so went by, we got told he would start "this weekend". Same for the next while up until 1 month prior to the race on that track. 1 month before we got "no problem, I'll fix it". 2 weeks before the race we got the message "Sorry guys, can't make the track
". We asked if he had done something that we could finish, but the track wasn't even started...
So that's an example of unreliability. Just from committing to my stream, a lot of people are "HEY LETS DO IT IM IN FOR THE WHOLE SEASON", they come on twice and then never gets back to me, or just loses interest. With some people, I can almost guarantee that this would be the scenario without bringing them on, judging from prior experiences with the person.
Also one thing is that we have to sort of share the same vision. We that makes the tracks do. We want them a bit more realistic, no funtrack big ruts or asphalt traction, but trying to make people have to take risks and really practice their skills. Seemingly quite a few guys disagree with our style, I can understand that. However when I speak to people that prefer other tracks, a common theme (not for everyone) is that they "these days" have less time to practice and just wants something a bit easier to mess around on, as they don't have to practice the traction or the lines in order to do half-decent.
So, if we feel like we have people we can trust, that stand by their word and do what they say, we're going to give them a chance most likely, but we need to feel 100% confident. There needs to be a connection on a personal level so to speak.
I hope this can provide somewhat of an insight in the way things are. Keep in mind that visuals are probably at least 5-10h per track, statue/billboard placement 3+ hours, timing gates + cameras + flaggers 2h, terrain 20-40+ hours depending on how easy the track is to make. So a track is easy 60 hours of work. This is spare time that needs to be put in. I've more than once spend countless of hours just making a base terrain elevation, counting it up to over 24 hours on Loket just to make the parts you ride in somewhat resembling real life due to all weirdly angled surfaces at all places.
I'm very open to discussions or if you have any questions. Again, go back a page or a few and look at Atom's feedback. That kind of feedback is very useful for us. Hope we can all move towards understanding each other and what goes into making this happen.