Our ReVolt Pub

Skarma @ Feb 4 2013, 10:44 AM wrote:

Balint12 @ Feb 3 2013, 08:52 PM wrote: If anyone wants to play Battle Tag, I'm available!

Completely offtopic.

Skarma, go hug Norm.

Platform @ Feb 3 2013, 04:39 PM wrote: Options To Add Battle Tag Mode (If No One Join Battle Tag Game) Appied Single Player Only

I wholeheartedly support this!

This would be like the duck shoot-out mode in Wacky Wheels!

bonz @ Feb 5 2013, 08:34 PM wrote:

Platform @ Feb 3 2013, 04:39 PM wrote: Options To Add Battle Tag Mode (If No One Join Battle Tag Game) Appied Single Player Only

I wholeheartedly support this!

This would be like the duck shoot-out mode in Wacky Wheels!

I would actually like to have this too since I never really played battle tag as a moreless pure offline player and therefore missed all that content of the game.

But if this is going to be implemented a whole new AI must be created and the nodes must be set as well in the already existing levels, not sure if thats worth the trouble (I mean if I had access to the source it totally would be )
Also this would make Battle Tag tracks more attractive for level creators (there are almost no custom battle tag tracks and even those are somewhat hard to find).

Maybe it's time to implement some kind of AI system in revolt that can switch between different settings of AI?
That would also give us the possibility to have the old AI back if properly implemented.

Is it possible to make all tyer marks on track to last 3 laps?I ve noticed that sometimes when u are last (dolo should know much more about this) in some point,tyre marks are dissapearing in front of me.How does that work?It would be realistic that they could last for 3 laps cause thats is our usual lap limit,and in the end it would looked good to see the track ruin from marks...
1 more thing i need to ask.Totally new phyics in revolt?The thing is,how time is passing,
i actually like the new pshycis,they look realistic to me..not sure only why are weapons overpowerd but..i thought that skeleton of revolt would never be changed.This last patch mode that we are playin is somethin between arcade/simulation and im afraid that original arcade mode would be lost in some day
So wouldnt it be a good idea that you deveolp tthis new mode in simulation mode? Then ofcourse arcade mode would be bring back to default?Or dunno,make a totally new mode called 'online mode' or 'realistic mode' or whatever

tyer marks and oil stay only 30secondes (from revolt 1.0 to last 1.2)

i understand oil marks,but tyer marks?That is not realistic,specially when u are driving and 1 metar in front of you tyer marks are disapearing

Cosmo_Kramer @ Feb 11 2013, 09:13 PM wrote:i understand oil marks,but tyer marks?That is not realistic,specially when u are driving and 1 metar in front of you tyer marks are disappearing

I believe it was made for better game performance, especially on old games. If you get more "tyer" marks, game can start to be laggy (remove fps). Ofcourse, it won't really mess up on todays PC hardware, but this thing is used on all racing games as far as I know. One game can hold marks longer, other less.

I think re-volt uses tire mark *limit* instead of *time*, but not sure. When there are too much marks, the first ones will start disappearing.

Cosmo wrote:i thought that skeleton of re-volt would never be changed. This last patch that we are playin is something between arcade/simulation and i'm afraid that the original arcade mode would be lost in some day.
So wouldnt it be a good idea that you develop this new mode in simulation mode?
Then ofcourse arcade mode would be bring back to its default?

This, for the Love of Jesus Christ, this.

Phantom @ Feb 14 2013, 03:33 AM wrote:

Cosmo wrote:i thought that skeleton of re-volt would never be changed. This last patch that we are playin is something between arcade/simulation and i'm afraid that the original arcade mode would be lost in some day.
So wouldnt it be a good idea that you develop this new mode in simulation mode?
Then ofcourse arcade mode would be bring back to its default?

This, for the Love of Jesus Christ, this.

Hmm I don't know if there is still any misunderstanding among users, because I thought we clarified this a lot of times previously: we haven't made any physics / collision changes... at all. It's important to remember that this is an unknown and unconfirmed bug, and there isn't much we can do without clear info on how we can reproduce the issue here. The reports so far have also been inconsistent: I heard everything was back to normal in a recent build (was it 1102?), and then when did the problem resurface, only after updating to a newer build?

Well I can't really confirm that there is a difference with physics and collision behaviour in the updates. However I have an advice for people that are convinced that things behave different and want to have it fixed.

As huki moreless pointed out, unless there proof that some things really have changed, there can't be done much about this issue.
Perhaps a comparison video between 1.1 and 1.2 would clarify things, however it should show a similar, if not the same scene and not just some random race where there might be reason to believe that things are different.

Ideally would be a scene that could (easily) be reproduced which would make it alot easier to find and fix eventual issues.

There is also a slim chance that people simply just focus on finding bugs in the alpha versions but they actually point out things that are existing since the release of the game.
Another possibility could be that there were some changes in the Xbox source we don't know about and therefore messed up some things.

Anyway, what we need is proof for this issue, if there is none it can't be fixed.

A suggestion that was rolling in my head for a while, though it may be too late, is wheel camber. It's present in both 1:1 cars and RC's.




It would consist in rotating the wheel model, collision and center (or some way to avoid wobbling) via a value for each wheel in the Wheel Details section of the car parameters, and finding some way to align the steering because it may end up turning the wheel diagonally up & down.

VaiDuX461 @ Feb 11 2013, 08:36 PM wrote: I believe it was made for better game performance, especially on old games. If you get more "tyer" marks, game can start to be laggy (remove fps). Ofcourse, it won't really mess up on todays PC hardware

There should be a setting that allows to increase the value of the tire marks time/amount (whichever applies).

For the sake of keeping system requirements low (i.e. 1999 low), keep it at the current value by default and define it as "short/low".
Then allow users to increase it to long/high and "forever".

If a setting in the the options is still not feasible, make it a setting in some config/ini file, where no newbie will go.

Oh yeah, I've completed the game car collection (completing championship, win races, collect stars), but there is text (CHEAT) beside my name while playing online (lan-pc to pc). Maybe should be removed?

------------------------------------------------------------

And, totally agree, collision was changed at 1.2 version....

Cat @ Feb 15 2013, 06:26 PM wrote: A suggestion that was rolling in my head for a while, though it may be too late, is wheel camber. It's present in both 1:1 cars and RC's.

So we can finally have something as ridiculous as the Kawashima Celica?

bonz @ Feb 15 2013, 09:33 PM wrote:

VaiDuX461 @ Feb 11 2013, 08:36 PM wrote: I believe it was made for better game performance, especially on old games. If you get more "tyer" marks, game can start to be laggy (remove fps). Ofcourse, it won't really mess up on todays PC hardware

There should be a setting that allows to increase the value of the tire marks time/amount (whichever applies).

For the sake of keeping system requirements low (i.e. 1999 low), keep it at the current value by default and define it as "short/low".
Then allow users to increase it to long/high and "forever".

If a setting in the the options is still not feasible, make it a setting in some config/ini file, where no newbie will go.

Where Is Single Player Battle Tag?

Skarma @ Feb 15 2013, 07:33 PM wrote:

Cat @ Feb 15 2013, 06:26 PM wrote: A suggestion that was rolling in my head for a while, though it may be too late, is wheel camber. It's present in both 1:1 cars and RC's.

So we can finally have something as ridiculous as the Kawashima Celica?

Even worse.



Despite the irrisory weirdness proportions you can reach with such setting, i think camber is one of the many "touches" that RV car customization is missing.

I quite agree, camber is a major tuning point in Forza, it'd be interesting to see what effect it would have in RV.

Skarma @ Feb 16 2013, 07:14 PM wrote: I quite agree, camber is a major tuning point in Forza, it'd be interesting to see what effect it would have in RV.

Probably a thinner skid mark (less tire contact path) and less grip in the altered wheels.

I'm not sure about less grip -- Re-Volt wheels are technically spheres. So there may not be a point for camber.
Toe-in, on the other hand...

Citywalker @ Feb 17 2013, 02:23 PM wrote: I'm not sure about less grip -- Re-Volt wheels are technically spheres. So there may not be a point for camber.

My idea was to use it for visuals and not for more or less grip. You can use spring setings, tire grip, static/kinetic friction and etcetera to alter the car's grip.

Hi !

Just a little question, not sure it have been discussed yet... Are conveyors gonna be fixed ? For now it's really messy, and since I have a new track using a lot this "conveyor" effect, it'll be great if this was corrected in RV 1.2.
Actually it seems that every tri. have one conveyor "direction", and it's a random one...

Killer Wheels @ Feb 19 2013, 11:06 PM wrote: Actually it seems that every tri. have one conveyor "direction", and it's a random one...

Are you sure you it's actually broken? Maybe you just don't know how it actually works so I'm going to clarify that point a bit.

In v1.1 conveyor direction was hardcoded, and the one you can find in the Museum track was not easy to re-use since it not simply going along one of the main XYZ axes. To use it in your own track your polygons had to have exactly the same orientation than in Museum...

In v1.2 these UP or DOWN conveyor effects simply use the direction of the greatest slope of each polygon. It means that no matter the orientation of the polygons, the UP conveyor will always goes up and the DOWN conveyor will always goes down. This way any orientation is supported.
In case you're facing a weird behaviour just ensure all the conveyor polygons are properly aligned (they have to have the same slope to push the car in the same direction).

Huki @ Feb 14 2013, 11:23 PM wrote:

Phantom @ Feb 14 2013, 03:33 AM wrote:

Cosmo wrote:i thought that skeleton of re-volt would never be changed. This last patch that we are playin is something between arcade/simulation and i'm afraid that the original arcade mode would be lost in some day.
So wouldnt it be a good idea that you develop this new mode in simulation mode?
Then ofcourse arcade mode would be bring back to its default?

This, for the Love of Jesus Christ, this.

Hmm I don't know if there is still any misunderstanding among users, because I thought we clarified this a lot of times previously: we haven't made any physics / collision changes... at all. It's important to remember that this is an unknown and unconfirmed bug, and there isn't much we can do without clear info on how we can reproduce the issue here. The reports so far have also been inconsistent: I heard everything was back to normal in a recent build (was it 1102?), and then when did the problem resurface, only after updating to a newer build?

I see,i thought u were developing some new phsysics..and i know that in recent time we imagine some changes...cause,i guess we didint drive for a while.. then u come back and try to drive and then bumping in every 2nd wall and u think something is diffrent in update... but the truth is that.. u simply suck

But this time im 100% sure...i didint have any big time outs!Evan if i dont thrust my eyes i know by hands,cause in some curves i always used the same keys...and that is just not workin anymore...As i noticed,weird stuff happens in full speed mostley..
And all wapons sims so powerfull,we dont have rockets anymore,they are torpedos!
Baloons?Very strong now,faster too...biggest change in weapons.im just sure that something is not right,and its not only me,at least 5-6 ppl agree with me,been talkin in house about this,dont know what to say,hope we think somethin out

Just integrate the late joining in the beta 0.208 and all players will be happy, when i host with the beta 0.208 in all version, it's just the real gameplay, the 1.1 gameplay, it's just nice. The alpha mutliplayer gameplay changed too many times, it's not stable, bug unknown may be but it's a bug for sure... and the driving, like example in museum 2 with toyeca, 1.1 gameplay on escalator = hard to take it without to do a head to tail in full speed with a wheel - with 1.2 = no head to tail, it's a proof that the reactivity is different.

jigebren @ Feb 20 2013, 06:24 PM wrote:

Killer Wheels @ Feb 19 2013, 11:06 PM wrote: Actually it seems that every tri. have one conveyor "direction", and it's a random one...

Are you sure you it's actually broken? Maybe you just don't know how it actually works so I'm going to clarify that point a bit.

In v1.1 conveyor direction was hardcoded, and the one you can find in the Museum track was not easy to re-use since it not simply going along one of the main XYZ axes. To use it in your own track your polygons had to have exactly the same orientation than in Museum...

In v1.2 these UP or DOWN conveyor effects simply use the direction of the greatest slope of each polygon. It means that no matter the orientation of the polygons, the UP conveyor will always goes up and the DOWN conveyor will always goes down. This way any orientation is supported.
In case you're facing a weird behaviour just ensure all the conveyor polygons are properly aligned (they have to have the same slope to push the car in the same direction).

Hi again !

Thanks for the info ! It all makes sense, now Anyway, I did my track so it works well in v.1.1 as I aligned these to re-use the hardcoded direction... That's when things get more complicated : I made these conveyors flat (why must I make these up or down, after all ?), and to make things worse, I added a small noise to the surface, it's fairly unnoticeable but it fits the theme... Since I spend hours modifing multiframe and other things I don't really want to go back into editing...
Could you add some kind of parameter so I can swith back to the hardcoded direction (or maybe allow to choose one) ?

Do u can stop to talk in this topic about useless things ? it's important to decide which version can we take or not, the last alpha is bugged, BUGGED, it's not the first time...
You make a good job developpers guys, but u don't play in rvhouse... and in multiplayer, this gameplay SUXX. Alpha developpement is a good thing... but it should not be official version in rvhouse, or make all alpha builds mutually compatible. (rv1.2a11.0426 was a very good version)

Dolo @ Feb 22 2013, 07:57 PM wrote: Do u can stop to talk in this topic about useless things ?

No, we don't can stop...

Killer Wheels @ Feb 21 2013, 10:04 PM wrote:Could you add some kind of parameter so I can swith back to the hardcoded direction (or maybe allow to choose one) ?

I'm afraid we're not going to add an option for this. I agree the hardcoded direction can be use as a special effect but it does not make much sense otherwise. Simply having to set a UP or a DOWN direction and letting Re-Volt automatically compute the acceleration vector is an easy and convenient solution for track makers, and it remains compatible with the v1.1 regular conveyor effect without the need of an extra option.

But feel free to discuss that subject further via email (you have my address, don't you?). That way you could send me your WIP track so I can have a look, and we can speak our native language.

It has already been suggested, but here it is once again:
Enable saving replays in multiplayer games! A replay is much more than a video, as you can change players to your will, you won't miss anything.

(maybe someone have been requested)
I suggest to delete (CHT) (in MP (Cheat)) tag beside player name (for MP game)/car selection, for players who just completes collecting stock cars...

Balint12 @ Feb 24 2013, 09:59 AM wrote: It has already been suggested, but here it is once again:
Enable saving replays in multiplayer games! A replay is much more than a video, as you can change players to your will, you won't miss anything.

And it will save us tons of gigabytes of diskspace.

Phantom @ Feb 26 2013, 03:22 AM wrote:

Balint12 @ Feb 24 2013, 09:59 AM wrote: It has already been suggested, but here it is once again:
Enable saving replays in multiplayer games! A replay is much more than a video, as you can change players to your will, you won't miss anything.

And it will save us tons of gigabytes of diskspace.

WolfR4 Has Saving Replays But You Dont Need Enable Saving Replays

A new suggestion plus some reiterations:

1) An option for switching between 1.1 and 1.2 AI. As said by ZR, the new AI does good in certain tracks, and bad in others.
2) An option for disabling SteerRate, SteerMod and EngineRate when using an analog controller, for more direct car control.
4) Fixing the -noforce command. Re-Volt is the only game i play with the keyboard, and I'm sick of it.
3) Letting the game autodetect the car's drivetrain as in 1.1, instead of using the Trans value in the parameters.
4) Adding "foot brake" to the controls, for full-stop, instead of direct reverse. NOT E-BRAKE, RC cars don't have them.

Cat @ May 15 2013, 07:06 AM wrote:1) An option for switching between 1.1 and 1.2 AI. As said by ZR, the new AI does good in certain tracks, and bad in others.

Hmm we already removed the AI changes last year. In the latest alpha the car AI parameters are handled the same way as usual, same with the AI nodes...

Cat wrote:4) Fixing the -noforce command. Re-Volt is the only game i play with the keyboard, and I'm sick of it.

We already added the -noforce command, but we're yet to release it. If you check one of the test builds in the collision bug topic, they should support the -noforce command line.

Cat wrote:3) Letting the game autodetect the car's drivetrain as in 1.1, instead of using the Trans value in the parameters.

Not possible as re-volt does not read the body, wheel and other info of all the cars at game start (that's just a waste of memory space). We just read the necessary details to display the car info in frontend.

@Cat: this build:

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/104051213/revolt.exe

Hi every1!

I have an (little) idea, I write it down:

I wonder whether it is solvable to play a race, where is 12 AI cars, and I am in spectating mode. Here I could see the car's weapons, the times etc, like in a real race.

It can be achievable..?

Try -dev mode, with -gazzasaicar switch.



Hint: hold Right Ctrl key if you want to control the car yourself for a while, otherwise the AI will race your car like all others.

I find it, and it's work, but i need a little more
--> I'll can choose another AI cars' camera view (spectate maybe)
--> Hide the text and the driving line

Nope, can't change the car.

But I think you can hide the text and the HUD, but I don't remember how...

SHIFT + F5 hides the HUD

Thanks, but I will change the view.. for example: I watch yeca, and I will watch adeon, i can't.. that's why i will this..
Not for new patch, just for me..xD

I received a suggestion from the guys I am playing Re-Volt with over LAN - they say it's annoying that they have to press Arrow down Inside Multi-player -> LAN to Join the game - in 90% of the cases they want to join a game and not host one themselves, so they want to suggest that Start game is the secondary option and not the primary option. That way they can just press Enter all the way into the game.


The only other thing they argue over is lack of replay features in multi-player, other than that we're fine.

urnemanden @ May 28 2013, 01:58 PM wrote:in 90% of the cases they want to join a game and not host one themselves, so they want to suggest that Start game is the secondary option and not the primary option.

I came exactly to the same conclusion during my LAN tests for the collision bug... I agree we'll probably have to change that.

jigebren wrote:I came exactly to the same conclusion during my LAN tests for the collision bug... I agree we'll probably have to change that.

My friends will be glad to hear this

Another small thing. We have been playing Re-Volt in split-screen a lot recently and we are three players. Two players use controllers and the last player is on a keyboard. However, since me and my friend rarely plays with controllers we have to switch controls during the game quite often. I was wondering, since Re-Volt can detect which player pauses the game, perhaps the Controller Slot in the Controller settings could automatically be switched to that player's controller slot then?

For example if Player 3 press 'Pause' and goes to Controller Settings, the Controller Slot would indicate 'Player 3' so he doesn't have to switch that over.


I was also about to write about how annoying it is that we have to set-up the controls every time. Then I remembered that I could just create a new profile for this specific player-setup. Profiles just got a lot more useful for me.

EDIT: One thing came to mind. Since I own two controllers of the same brand and model, we cannot distinguish between them in the controller settings. So we don't know which controller is assigned to which player. Perhaps we could use a color indicator or something else to make them distinguishable from each other when assigning controllers to each player?

Also, do you know if the controllers always will be assigned to the same players (do they have a unique ID)? or will that depend on which was plugged in first? I looked at the *.ini file in the Profile's folder but didn't get much more clever (values range from -1 to 3 ).

urnemanden @ Jun 5 2013, 10:38 AM wrote:For example if Player 3 press 'Pause' and goes to Controller Settings, the Controller Slot would indicate 'Player 3' so he doesn't have to switch that over.

This has been added. The default controller slot will be the one used to enter the Controller Settings menu (for info, if a player has paused the game, he controls the menu, but if the game is paused using the Esc key, they all players can control the menu).

Since I own two controllers of the same brand and model, we cannot distinguish between them in the controller settings. So we don't know which controller is assigned to which player.

Ok. I've modified it to display "Joystick 1 (the name of the joystick)". It easily becomes a bit wide, but since the joystick slot number is what is actually assigned to a player (in the profile), it was consistent to display this number instead of the name only.
BTW that should answer you last question as well. If you add / remove joystick or modify the favorite one in in the Windows Control Panel, Re-Volt may use another joystick since only the slot position is used. But this is probably not worth a more elaborated code.

This has been added. The default controller slot will be the one used to enter the Controller Settings menu (for info, if a player has paused the game, he controls the menu, but if the game is paused using the Esc key, they all players can control the menu).

Great! That will be useful.

Ok. I've modified it to display "Joystick 1 (the name of the joystick)". It easily becomes a bit wide, but since the joystick slot number is what is actually assigned to a player (in the profile), it was consistent to display this number instead of the name only.

Great!

BTW that should answer you last question as well. If you add / remove joystick or modify the favorite one in in the Windows Control Panel, Re-Volt may use another joystick since only the slot position is used. But this is probably not worth a more elaborated code.

Windows Control Panel, what is that?

Anyway, I think WINE assigns the controllers as primary/secondary after which one was plugged in first so I'll keep that in mind next time I get to play split-screen.

I'd like to suggest a way to uninstall a car or track directly from the game, preferably by selecting the car and pressing the Delete button.

After this, a dialogue box can ask the player 'Do you really want to delete this car?' Yes - No.

When selecting Yes, the car's folder will be removed and for the tracks, the level's folder and the gfx if present (bmp and bmq).

This will make Track & Car Management so much easier.
And I think it's not hard to implement. Afterall, it's what Christian Dandoy's manager used to do, and others organizers out there like KDL's.

@Phantom: Wow I can't believe I didn't think of such a suggestion earlier

Such a feature would indeed extremly simplify track and car management and make the whole track and car testing a quicker process (where you don't actually end up with several forgotten car/track files that you don't like).
The user would need to have the required access rights for the levels/cars folders though but I guess that should not be a problem for the average Re-Volt user

In fact I would like to use the opportunity to suggest an earlier idea of making a secondary car/track selection screen which is designed to browse and search through the cars/tracks a lot faster (I'm having a multi-column sized alphabetically sorted pure name list in mind where one can browse up/down, sideways and over multiple pages if there are more cars/tracks for one page to show).

This screen could be activated by pressing a special button on the car/track selection screen and in this screen you could also directly delete the cars/tracks as Phantom suggested.

Yes I think we got a possitive feedback from Huki about the Track and Cars Search, but instead of columns I was thinking of something simplier. Predictive text.

In the track selection menu you could start typing the name of a track and the menu will show tracks with that convination of letters. Similar to what Google Search does.

For example if my Selection menu shows Toys in the Hood 1 right now but I want to find RV Temple, I would just type "R" to show tracks starting with R or "RV Templ" to go directly to where RV Temple is located. This will avoid the need to make extra menus or special buttons.

If the user doesn't press any letter key during the selection menu he can browse tracks the normal way, with arrow keys. The searching will only start if a letter key is pressed.

This will be very intuitive I think. For us having so many tracks installed the process of finding one in particular will be simplified.

Check this and suffer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6j3d9IbFfQ

I love both these ideas, Phantom!

Phantom @ Jun 6 2013, 12:59 AM wrote: In the track selection menu you could start typing the name of a track and the menu will show tracks with that convination of letters. Similar to what Google Search does.

For example if my Selection menu shows Toys in the Hood 1 right now but I want to find RV Temple, I would just type "R" to show tracks starting with R or "RV Templ" to go directly to where RV Temple is located. This will avoid the need to make extra menus or special buttons.

Yes I was thinking of something like that too but such an implementation would require the user to know the full name (or at least the first letter) of the track he is looking for and not just a keyword.

Also it would only work well for the first letter, if you want to search a track that begins with "RV" you would have to go through all the tracks that also begin with R first (or you go to the track that starts with "S" but that would require additional thinking ) because the game doesn't know when you want to start a new search or delete a letter.

Sure, one could add something like a timeout that would enable the user to go to a track using more than the first letter but I think something like that would be more annoying than useful (for users that can't type fast enough or want to check out multiple different tracks).