3889 replies to this topic

[toxie]

Yup, this is what i meant.. I understand the need for stuff like this, but at the same time it can harm implementing new features later-on..

[unclewilly]

What about making a shapable flasher variant. One that was basically like a wall. So bends could be applied to it?

[fuzzel]

You mean a somewhat flasher-wall element?

[unclewilly]

Yes. Something we can shape that is verticle but has the properties of the flasher object

[Shockman]

The usefulness of something like that is beyond measure. So is the need, and the absence.

[fuzzel]

Well ok but that would break the current flasher object in some way I guess

[Shockman]

Not necessarily. If a light that is along one plane could be considered a useful complete object, then why couldn't one on another plane be another object. That may sound condescending, but so does a suggestion of one dimensional lighting being broken in an attempt to give it another dimension. One dimensional light is broken by default. 

[toxie]

something completely else: the next build will fix FXAA and stereo3D. so now everything can be enabled with everything again like in VP9. 

(also there is now a third FXAA mode)

[freneticamnesic]

Be careful, I think something getting lost in all of this is how reflections actually work..............

[Toxy]

Looks absolutly stunning so far......Thanks guys!

 

[freneticamnesic]

*double take*

 

Looks absolutly stunning so far......Thanks guys!

 

[unclewilly]

Well ok but that would break the current flasher object in some way I guess

If its going to break the current flasher ill figure out another way.

[ClarkKent]

 

 

Try 32 csaa, looks good IMHO.

I think all these AA methods (AA, MSAA, CSAA) should be configurable in the video prefs of VP. If I set it in the Nvidia control panel it effects all applications - I do not want this.

You can add the vpinball exe to nvidia control panel and make the changes specific to the exe.

 

No 32csaa option in my Nvidia control panel. That's an additional reason why MSAA and CSAA would fit into the video setup in VP10 very well...

[toxie]

apart from that these modes cannot work currently from within VP, due to various technical reasons..

[Slydog43]

I'm curious on how the Dev Team thinks the Beta is going so far?  Are the problems that are coming up, along with requests, close to what was to be expected?  Are there too many requests/feature being asked for?  Really love watching all things coming together for VP10, thanks for releasing the beta when you did.

Edited by Slydog43, 27 February 2015 - 08:54 PM.

[The Loafer]

Was there ever an official request put forth to consider supporting vp in portrait mode on cabinets? I am not asking this, my sore neck is

[Shockman]

 

Well ok but that would break the current flasher object in some way I guess

If its going to break the current flasher ill figure out another way.

 

I agree with that. But I think at this early stage breaking method without breaking function for the purpose of more function is all good. Example, If a light (or flasher) that is living on a horizontal plane would need a flag because we got now light living on a vertical plane and it has a flag then it is certainly worth it.

 

I feel I am debating decisions. If It is instead a matter of capability, then it is indeed another matter, and not debatable.

[Shadowsclassic]

@lolo33: thanks! FXAA and stereo3D are currently not top priority as they need a restructure (they don't cooperate currently with AO and Bloom), so i didn't test these, sorry for that. maybe over the weekend i'll work on these again so that they are fully functional.

 

EDIT: but at least this brought up another potential bug i just found, so overall no work wasted..

 

@shadowsclassic: seems like lolo33 found the issue, could you also try with FXAA off?

Yep, FXAA is the problem!  Looks like optimal for me is No FXAA, AO=off, FPS limiter =0, Max frames=3, Force anisotropic texture filtering, max. textures =1024, detail level=max

[jimmyfingers]

Was there ever an official request put forth to consider supporting vp in portrait mode on cabinets? I am not asking this, my sore neck is

VP does already work with portrait mode on cabinets / 16:9 screens in portrait mode.  However, if in portrait mode the FS settings / parameters will need to be altered totally from how they're currently configured especially and obviously with the rotation setting as 270 (needing to be changed to 0 or 360).  In portrait mode from Windows the editor is then editable / used in a portrait style and as long as the table parameters are configured appropriately you can get the same for your playfield monitor.  

 

I currently use VP in portrait mode for the newer HV view style cabinet for all VP 99x, PhysMODv5, and VP10 (single screen with backglass in view). I also used it way back at the beginning (2010) in portrait mode in a typical cab style setup.   This is all though outside of any element of combining with a front end / independent of what that situation brings. 

[kruge99]

 

Was there ever an official request put forth to consider supporting vp in portrait mode on cabinets? I am not asking this, my sore neck is

VP does already work with portrait mode on cabinets / 16:9 screens in portrait mode.  However, if in portrait mode the FS settings / parameters will need to be altered totally from how they're currently configured especially and obviously with the rotation setting as 270 (needing to be changed to 0 or 360).  In portrait mode from Windows the editor is then editable / used in a portrait style and as long as the table parameters are configured appropriately you can get the same for your playfield monitor.  

 

I currently use VP in portrait mode for the newer HV view style cabinet for all VP 99x, PhysMODv5, and VP10 (single screen with backglass in view). I also used it way back at the beginning (2010) in portrait mode in a typical cab style setup.   This is all though outside of any element of combining with a front end / independent of what that situation brings. 

 

 

Like JF said, the front end programs are built expecting the default view to be landscape whilst the final rendering via VP is rotated to portrait mode.  It's a bit of a catch 22 at the moment because all sides from the programming perspective are attempting to create a compromise to the end user on all fronts... whether it is desktop mode or fullscreen/cabinet mode... I think that's what perplexes folks like the Farsight group and the PinballFX group is how to manage - albeit - easily to switch between the two formats.  I don't think that a large portion of the end user base understands the underlying complexity of building 'useful' user interfaces understands this and heaps a huge amount of criticism on the above mentioned companies because of this complexity...

 

 

Best Regards,

Todd.