834 replies to this topic

[tufduck]

 

The Future of VP looks bright, lets concentrate on that.

 

Couldn't agree more. To all the ones involved in developing VP10: please don't bother with backwards compability. It's a new era now. Focus on the new better physics, realistic lightning and great 3D DX9 graphics, to make VP10 the best pinball simulation there is.

 

When VP10 finally is out, I reckon all the table authors / modders out there will start recreating the tables in VP10 anyway.

[faralos]

the future is so bright that we gotta' wear shades now?

okay

and PLEASE make it backwards compatible for us who own the older computers with crappy on board ram

[Slydog43]

please don't worry about ancient hardware, you have to abandon older stuff at some point to move forward.  There needs to be a min hardware specs given I think.  If you can't run VP10 you can always run vp9 with hundreds of tables until you upgrade your hardware.

[mukuste]

I guess the hardware requirements will rise a bit; in the end it will depend on the table authors how complex they make their tables and how many features they use.

 

On the other hand, the new physics engine actually reduces the load on the GPU since you can now run the graphics at 60fps and have smooth gameplay, while in VP9 you typically needed 200fps or so for it to feel smooth. The CPU is taxed a bit more, of course.

[unclewilly]

I think the authors are going to use plenty of the new features. I know my tables will be loaded up with primitives and anything else you guys come up with.

Btw, any progress updates on this or the physics modifications

[aupton]

I'm still running a dual core AMD Opteron from 2004 and an Nvidia GTX 560 + Vishay DMD... I'm fully prepared and excited to upgrade to a modern i7 CPU and new GPU. Bring on all the beautiful new hardware demanding changes, I can't wait! 

 

9.9.0/DX9 was such a huge improvement, I've been playing nightly since. Thank you!

 

One thought though about nudging. I can understand if this isn't a popular idea, but one feature from Future Pinball that I'd like to see implemented in VP10 if possible is the visual jolt of the table you see when nudging left or right. The current way nudging is handled in VP9x works, but at times on certain tables its questionable if it had any impact. Perhaps this is mostly relevant to cabinet/FS table users ?

 

Thoughts ? 

[Mitchell]

I have no problem redo Centipede from scratch. I gonna wait on the VP 10 get release before doing so. Need more goodies anyway.

[mukuste]

I think the authors are going to use plenty of the new features. I know my tables will be loaded up with primitives and anything else you guys come up with.

Btw, any progress updates on this or the physics modifications

 

For myself, the main thing I have to finish before VP10 is the new physics. Unfortunately I haven't had much time to work on it recently since I just moved to a different country and all that. But I hope to get back to it soon, and anyway the hard parts on that are done, it's mostly tweaking and fixing bugs at this point IMO. As well as GUI support, which is always my weak spot

 

You also mentioned that you had some observations on the new physics you made while modding CFTBL -- is all of that already in the physics thread? I'm always happy to get more feedback.

 

 

I'm still running a dual core AMD Opteron from 2004 and an Nvidia GTX 560 + Vishay DMD... I'm fully prepared and excited to upgrade to a modern i7 CPU and new GPU. Bring on all the beautiful new hardware demanding changes, I can't wait! 

 

9.9.0/DX9 was such a huge improvement, I've been playing nightly since. Thank you!

 

One thought though about nudging. I can understand if this isn't a popular idea, but one feature from Future Pinball that I'd like to see implemented in VP10 if possible is the visual jolt of the table you see when nudging left or right. The current way nudging is handled in VP9x works, but at times on certain tables its questionable if it had any impact. Perhaps this is mostly relevant to cabinet/FS table users ?

 

Thoughts ? 

 

A visual table shake was in the DX7 versions, but it had to be thrown out during the DX9 port since the way it was done wouldn't work directly in DX9. The thing is that most people here seem to be cab users (where shake is not a desirable feature), and so unfortunately the desktop features have fallen by the wayside a bit... I don't have a cab myself, so I'm actually interested in bringing the desktop experience more up to par again.

[unclewilly]

I'm actually fairly happy with how the physics are shaping up. The bowl test on cftbl showed me they are behaving close to identical to the real machine.

At first I was thinking there was too much gravity, ball being pulled too hard downward, but with the adjustable slope gravity and friction I can achieve the experience I'm looking for.

You've done a great job.

And aside from any remaining bugs and re enabling scatter and friction for certain table objects I think the physics are good to go

[The Loafer]

I'm actually fairly happy with how the physics are shaping up. The bowl test on cftbl showed me they are behaving close to identical to the real machine.
At first I was thinking there was too much gravity, ball being pulled too hard downward, but with the adjustable slope gravity and friction I can achieve the experience I'm looking for.
You've done a great job.
And aside from any remaining bugs and re enabling scatter and friction for certain table objects I think the physics are good to go

Pretty much agree 100% with your comments UW, I would say for me it's moved beyond "potential" into the land of the better solution right now. The only bad issue is that ball jumping issue when the bAll is cradled on phys3, but no big deal I just stick with phys2 for now. Even the registry request to be separate from 9.9.0 is not a big deal for me, since I am starting to only play with the new physics lol.

[bumgahdna]

This may sound crazy, but maybe name 10 release exe pinballx.exe so people can keep all their 9 tables.

[unclewilly]

Bump.

How's this going. I know from the physics thread, that that part is moving right along.
Any progress on other stuff, like lights and whatnot.

Really eager to check out the new mesh ball

[fuzzel]

Well I didn't have much time lately and switching the lights system is something which touches every object. So I fear you have to wait a bit longer...

[mukuste]

Did you actually start on the lights already? I'd be curious what approach you are taking and how it's working out. In the initial version toxie and me were discussing for insert lights, only the light objects themselves would have to be changed (plus some postprocessing framework). Or are you working on per-pixel lighting?

[fuzzel]

well the inserts are the easiest part but the real problem is the whole infrastructure. I did some shaders for per pixel lighting but I think I have to redesign VP much deeper to make it easier using shaders and to apply postprocessing effects. So first the whole rendering must go into a texture, this way we can apply postprocess effects very easily. Then we must remove the entiere FFP and only use shaders. Then we can start to include bulb lights with per pixel lighting and maybe add soft shadows....

[DreamTrap]

I guess the hardware requirements will rise a bit; in the end it will depend on the table authors how complex they make their tables and how many features they use.

my cab is more than ready (check sig) so bring it!

[mukuste]

well the inserts are the easiest part but the real problem is the whole infrastructure. I did some shaders for per pixel lighting but I think I have to redesign VP much deeper to make it easier using shaders and to apply postprocessing effects. So first the whole rendering must go into a texture, this way we can apply postprocess effects very easily. Then we must remove the entiere FFP and only use shaders. Then we can start to include bulb lights with per pixel lighting and maybe add soft shadows....

 

Yeah. This is certainly something we have to collaborate on, it's a big project.

 

This is another place where using git would be great, since we could have it in a public branch and work on it together, but I already know your answer to that, so.... other suggestions? Should it just go into an SVN branch? They are a real pain to work with, but I don't see a better option if we don't switch to some more modern version control system.

Edited by mukuste, 16 May 2014 - 02:59 PM.

[freezy]

Makes me think of this. Always fun to watch

 

Git WILL change your life once you get to know it, not kidding.

[fuzzel]

well the inserts are the easiest part but the real problem is the whole infrastructure. I did some shaders for per pixel lighting but I think I have to redesign VP much deeper to make it easier using shaders and to apply postprocessing effects. So first the whole rendering must go into a texture, this way we can apply postprocess effects very easily. Then we must remove the entiere FFP and only use shaders. Then we can start to include bulb lights with per pixel lighting and maybe add soft shadows....

 
Yeah. This is certainly something we have to collaborate on, it's a big project.
 
This is another place where using git would be great, since we could have it in a public branch and work on it together, but I already know your answer to that, so.... other suggestions? Should it just go into an SVN branch? They are a real pain to work with, but I don't see a better option if we don't switch to some more modern version control system.

Well if git can help us there I won't block it. But I think this is not the core problem. We have to make architectural discussions and until these aren't solved I wouldn't release a test version. And even if we stick to SVN I would add any new stuff on the main trunk. I have already created a branch for VP9 DX9 so any bug fixes could be done there.

[mukuste]

Makes me think of this. Always fun to watch

 

Git WILL change your life once you get to know it, not kidding.

 

Haha, isn't it true, the only problem is explaining it to the people who HAVEN'T gotten to know it Interesting talk by the way, Linus is always fun to listen to.

 

 

 

 

well the inserts are the easiest part but the real problem is the whole infrastructure. I did some shaders for per pixel lighting but I think I have to redesign VP much deeper to make it easier using shaders and to apply postprocessing effects. So first the whole rendering must go into a texture, this way we can apply postprocess effects very easily. Then we must remove the entiere FFP and only use shaders. Then we can start to include bulb lights with per pixel lighting and maybe add soft shadows....

 
Yeah. This is certainly something we have to collaborate on, it's a big project.
 
This is another place where using git would be great, since we could have it in a public branch and work on it together, but I already know your answer to that, so.... other suggestions? Should it just go into an SVN branch? They are a real pain to work with, but I don't see a better option if we don't switch to some more modern version control system.

 

Well if git can help us there I won't block it. But I think this is not the core problem. We have to make architectural discussions and until these aren't solved I wouldn't release a test version. And even if we stick to SVN I would add any new stuff on the main trunk. I have already created a branch for VP9 DX9 so any bug fixes could be done there.

 

 

Yes, discussions and planning will definitely be needed. Nobody is of course talking about releasing any tests so far, I just think it's good if the code is somewhere out there.

 

I don't agree with putting everything into the trunk, however. As you said yourself, a lot of redesigning will be needed and this will be a longer-term project. I'm not convinced that we will be able to finish this for VP10.0 without taking months or even longer to do it. However, if we put the half-developed version into the trunk, then we don't have a "clean" version on which to base a release. This is why I'm a fan of developing large new features in their own branch; it worked very well for me with the DX9 port and with the physics overhaul. Once the new feature is polished and reasonably finished, you can simply merge it into the trunk, and you never leave the trunk in some half-working state.