3889 replies to this topic

[toxie]

i screwed up walls and flashers while optimizing, sorry!

but the fix is already commited..

 

let me know if there are still problems when fuzzel releases the next build.

[fuzzel]

yes new build rev1823 is online.

[toxie]

 

btw, at all table authors: always adapt the ball mass, too, if changing the ball size!! (see new core.vbs, changelog at the very beginning of the file)

 

 

so ballsize = 55 would be ballmass = 1.1 ???

 

 

Nope, the formula is mass=k*(size^3) (k seems to be 1/125000 for the default VP ball), so mass=(55^3)/125000=1.331

Edited by toxie, 09 March 2015 - 07:27 AM.

[chas]

ii have not been here that much for over a year since 916.

asking the forum team and members that have been here awhile over 2yrs.

any improvement to the slings physics with the new physics update?  anybody?

 

the first post said the old tables will load but not play in 10...

i thought the idea was to keep everything compatible.

ok, do i need to create a new PB folder for the new program?

 

what about the PC resources needed to play the new program....

my PC is not a high performance PC.

its a 06 XP modified to a 2.4 dual core 4500 AM2 socket and 4gs of DDR2 6400 ram and no gfx card.

it plays all or most VP.....it kind of struggles with pinmame 91x and up.

will it work or will it have slow CPU and graphics problems?

im updating from 915/916.

do i need dx9 and 9.91?   will that do it?

update links please from 916?

 

btw, what are the 4 small dots under my profile pic?

Edited by chas, 09 March 2015 - 07:40 AM.

[toxie]

gfx card is now pretty much a must, or a recent intel cpu as they have at least a decent built-in GPU.

 

with your setup you should rather stick with 9.9.1 or 9.2.1.

[chas]

gfx card is now pretty much a must, or a recent intel cpu as they have at least a decent built-in GPU.

 

with your setup you should rather stick with 9.9.1 or 9.2.1.

yeah, thanks toxie....i knew it might be like that....this PC did not do well in 91x,,,,i would like the links to the new updates so i can copy it to my storage for later when i do update to a new more modern PC...or just tell me th name of the update and i look for it in essential files.

what about a good AMD multicore 3ghz to 4ghz. or is intel better for this?

i can get an AMD 3.5ghz and 16gs of 1600DDR3.

Edited by chas, 09 March 2015 - 07:50 AM.

[Talantyyr]

I've started to upgrade the Tales from the Crypt table from LoadedWeapon to VP10 yesterday as it says "Permission to MOD?: Yes, without approval" After a few hours of tinkering i figured out mostly how the editor works myself, but i still have a few questions. In this table there are pictures of rings using transparency in the image. How do i set a material to use graphics with tranparency, the transparent part just gets black? I guess i'll replace those rings with a 3d model from blender anyway...

Do i have to set a material for each color i want to use? 

[fuzzel]

You need a material where you activate the opacity flag and set the opacity itself to 100. Otherwise the whole image gets transparent. In VP10 you can't define a specific color to be the transparent/masking color as it was in VP9. Instead you have to create an alpha channel to the image if it's not already there and set the alpha value to 0 at those areas of the image you want to be masked out.

[randr]

i screwed up walls and flashers while optimizing, sorry!
but the fix is already commited..
 
let me know if there are still problems when fuzzel releases the next build.

Seems good now!

[bent98]

Can you guys put in the build # in the VP programs about tab? Its hard to remember what version I am running on my computers and now way to tell.

Edited by bent98, 09 March 2015 - 02:22 PM.

[freneticamnesic]

 

 

btw, at all table authors: always adapt the ball mass, too, if changing the ball size!! (see new core.vbs, changelog at the very beginning of the file)

 

 

so ballsize = 55 would be ballmass = 1.1 ???

 

 

Nope, the formula is mass=k*(size^3) (k seems to be 1/125000 for the default VP ball), so mass=(55^3)/125000=1.331

 

This feels heavy........

[toxie]

Didn't people always complain that the ball feels too light/floaty for them? 

 

I also didn't look at the underlying code that much, but given that the term "mass" does what it says, this is the way to go..

[Shockman]

What is the default ball size? 50?

[toxie]

Yes, default size is 50, default mass is 1.

[vampirolatino2]

All tables should have the same ball/mass ... well at least 99% of them right? There should be a norm. And yes, some of the tables do feel floaty or the ball have too much momentum (well at least in this setup I'm running/testing)

[bodydump]

Here's something a bit odd. In my bugs bunny wip, I've noticed that insert lights on the upper playfield (which is a wall) will reflect on the ball when it is below the playfield on the lower playfield.

Attached Files

•  ballreflect.jpg   72.21KB   14 downloads

[vampirolatino2]

Here's something a bit odd. In my bugs bunny wip, I've noticed that insert lights on the upper playfield (which is a wall) will reflect on the ball when it is below the playfield on the lower playfield.

 

The ball is been marked/target to kill? Lol very odd indeed.

[Shockman]

All tables should have the same ball/mass ... well at least 99% of them right? There should be a norm. And yes, some of the tables do feel floaty or the ball have too much momentum (well at least in this setup I'm running/testing)

They probably should, but it would require the same ball size, and that would require exact table dimensions. We should have that, but we don't. mmpac for example, when it was started the best guess in relation to the ball was 1000x2000 but it should have been 952x1974 according to the dimension manager which did not exist back then. The difference is not enough to change in my opinion because everything would need redone. The aspect ratio is correct, or close enough, so an adjustment to the ball size is in order, therefor a new mass. I may have overdid it at 55 though, It should probably be between 51 and 53 somewhere.

[toxie]

Also, the problem is that some authors prefer certain settings for the physical material properties (friction, etc) and table parameters (gravity, etc), and then retweak the ball size/mass somehow to match these. Its all a bit magical/trial and error-based currently (IMHO) how parameters are chosen by the authors, i guess until people find settings that fit the "real" games and then most people will use these.

[Shockman]

The ball size was increased without the table dimensions changing, so there must have been a consensus that the ball size was wrong all along. I think that change was 5 units. And I think it was a VP9 change. Depending on how long ago a table was made, and if it conforms with the dimension manager, which the older, the more unlikely that is, The ball sizes will be many. Though not enough to notice. The ball size has always been the same and will continue to be if it is not changed. Whether it fits is a table size issue. 

 

I see no 1000x2000 in the dimension manager, but that is the default table size. If uniform size relationship is ever going to be achieved, not only ball/element relationship, but true overall size, the dimension manager has to be a first step in creating a table.

Edited by Shockman, 09 March 2015 - 05:39 PM.