74 replies to this topic

[jpsalas]

I have been trying to find the best way to simulate a nudge in VP9.
I have seen and use Noah's workaround in my tables. But Still I'm not happy with it.
I have seen what Shockman did with his efforts about using a counterforce (I guess it never got out of Pinball Nirvana).
I tried the new core.vbs 3.33, still not official, and it also uses a similar counterforce.
I feel the nudge in VP9, as it is now, is not as good as the nudge as was in VP8, at least nodoby tried to do anything with the nudge in VP8.
All the efforts I can see it to try to simulate a better nudging using the nudge in VP9.

But my question is, what do you actually prefer the nudging in VP8 or the nudging in VP9?

And if it is possible, could you explain why do prefer one over the other?

JP

Edited by jpsalas, 06 March 2011 - 06:31 PM.

[Noah Fentz]

VP9's is way better, as the ball behaves much more like it should, at least in one direction.

When I came up with the concept of counter-force, I envisioned it being coded right into VP9. Any scripted use of counter-force would mean the table would also 'shake' in the opposite direction, making it unrealistic. If it were to be coded right into VP, it could be applied more realistically.

I haven't looked at your counter-force script yet, JP, but did you use nudge for counter-force or did you apply velocity to the ball? The latter would be the way to go, IMO.

Any time you nudge, the table moves under the ball, and can affect the overall trajectory of the ball after the table returns to rest in many instances, since the table returns with less velocity than it was nudged. This can't be achieved in VP8. Yes, some will argue this isn't possible, but of those I've talked to, even some world-ranked players, it IS. So, let's keep this discussion about achieving more realistic nudging in VP, and not about trying to prove me wrong ... again. (You know who you are )

[jpsalas]

I applied a smaller nudge to it in the other direction. It felt a little better, but not quite like I wanted That's why I started this poll, to see what people prefer. So maybe I stop trying to fix something that maybe don't need to be fixed. And if many people like better the VP8 method maybe it should be something for the coders to take in consideration. Maybe the new core.vbs 3.33 is the answer for now, since it has a counterforce built in.

But as Noah said, let's not start a discussion, simple say what you prefer. No more, no less

[Noah Fentz]

I applied a smaller nudge to it in the other direction. It felt a little better, but not quite like I wanted ...

I'll have to play around with using velocity change over opposite nudge today. In all of the tables UR and I did together, we'll be using the collision and ball-rolling sounds, so all the balls will be individually named. Should make it easy. Using hit events on most every object, like Breakshot, will cancel out the countering velocity change. Will certainly be interesting to see how it goes.

And if many people like better the VP8 method maybe it should be something for the coders to take in consideration.

Changing it altogether to VP8's nudge isn't an option. With all the accelerometers used out there, it would make their purchases obsolete. If I spent $150-$300 on a nudge device, I would be very unhappy about that. Providing both nudges in a checkbox selection could be the way to go, though.

The thing I didn't like about VP8's nudge is, no matter how hard you nudged, the ball path never changed, just the objects moved. This isn't realistic.

[ta2686]

Sorry, but I have to vote for NEITHER!!

To me, both nudges seemed overdone, one way or the other. VP8 is definitely overdone, VP9 is too subdued to the point where it doesn't seem to affect the ball at all.

Edited by ta2686, 06 March 2011 - 07:09 PM.

[Noah Fentz]

Sorry, but I have to vote for NEITHER!!

To me, both nudges seemed overdone, one way or the other. VP8 is definitely overdone, VP9 is too subdued to the point where it doesn't seem to affect the ball at all.

This is where coding VP9's nudge to have the two elements separate would make it ideal. Anyone could increase the force without altering the shake to suit their preference.

To be able to control the 'shake' and the nudge force using two functions is what I've been DYING for!

[Bob5453]

I'm all nudged out. I voted VP8. I prefer the objects moving and not the ball. Casual pinball players rarely shove machines hard enough to produce ball movement when the ball hasn't even hit an object, every time they nudge the table.

[rob046]

what am I missing here? we talking VP9 by default or VP9 with your guys' customized nudging code? Cuz VP9 by default has the crazy overdone nudge that defies gravity, you can nudge a ball from the bottom to the top of the table!
In that case VP8 is certainly better.
If VP9 with customized scripting, which code/tables are we talking about?

What might be easier to give us 2 tables to compare. Give us 1 table from VP8 and 1 table from VP9 that we can focus on & test, or just create a couple test tables, or for VP9 only what do you guys think is the best JP nudging example and the best Noah/UR example? That might help everybody be on the same page who wants to participate in this nudging evaluation.
I've got some real pins so I'm certainly down for getting the nudge better in VP & can do some testing. I've never been a huge fan of it either (VP nudging). I remember a while back also mentioning counterforce in a nudging thread so its great to see you guys tinkering with that. Its been long overdue for VP.

I like the more subdued, weaker nudging tables. Because in real life, nudging never seems to be as easy as its been in VP.
So many times it has primarily been flawed nudging that has allowed me to keep games going much longer than I could have in real life. Hell, some games I could seemingly keep going forever, & where is the fun in that?

It would be great to see VP9's default nudging system taken care of. Yeah advanced table builders can add the nudging code, but nudging shouldn't be something that a noob should have to deal with via code. & chances are they wouldn't know how to anyways. & I wouldn't want to dislike a new table just cuz nudging on VP by default is bad.
Hopefully we get to the point where nudging can be figured out properly & built into VP9, or at least make it easy to tweak per table. Maybe even have nudge settings in the editor somewhere.

As a note, nudging in real life can even vary between tables. I've got a couple real widebody pins here that are certainly harder to manipulate the ball on. At least side to side nudging. My HH pin can be tough to get enough torque on from side to side with the wider arm spread (& nudging on the upper or lower PF's? Forget about it! Damn near no effect whatsoever.). Then I play my EBD & its a little easier to have my way with it. Same with BK2K vs my JD pin. Both are more modern, high speed games. Yet I certainly find it harder to nudge JD. It is a 300+ pound behemoth widebody. Also very sturdy. So between the constant flow & speed of the game, the weight & sturdiness of it, & the wider body (harder to get torque behind nudges), there is certainly a difference just between widebody & standard pins of the same era. At least that is how it seems to me.
& in general older games seem more nudgeable than newer games, they are usually a bit looser with more give. The less extreme incline probably helps too.

So one thing that has always bugged me in VP is how size of a table never affects how easy it is to nudge. Would be great if VP took that into consideration. Safecracker will always be easier to nudge (as it is smaller) than standard games. Widebodies should always be harder to nudge than standard games.

[Noah Fentz]

Cuz VP9 by default has the crazy overdone nudge that defies gravity, you can nudge a ball from the bottom to the top of the table!

Invert the nudging, and it's a done deal.

When you nudge up, the ball is actually forced down, not up.

[EalaDubhSidhe]

If we're comparing the nudge defaults in each variant of the engine, then VP8's is hands-down superior. But it's because we can see and figure out room for improvement with VP9's system that the strides in that area are being made now. Counternudge is a terrific idea, and though it needs tweaking yet, the back-and-forth motion gives that extra little bit of realism, and most importantly, it *works*.

[Noah Fentz]

Something else that needs to be addressed ...

VP8's nudge will never work for cabs, as it's solely shake, with no change in ball path.

[druadic]

what am I missing here? we talking VP9 by default or VP9 with your guys' customized nudging code? Cuz VP9 by default has the crazy overdone nudge that defies gravity, you can nudge a ball from the bottom to the top of the table!
In that case VP8 is certainly better.
If VP9 with customized scripting, which code/tables are we talking about?

What might be easier to give us 2 tables to compare. Give us 1 table from VP8 and 1 table from VP9 that we can focus on & test, or just create a couple test tables, or for VP9 only what do you guys think is the best JP nudging example and the best Noah/UR example? That might help everybody be on the same page who wants to participate in this nudging evaluation.
I've got some real pins so I'm certainly down for getting the nudge better in VP & can do some testing. I've never been a huge fan of it either (VP nudging). I remember a while back also mentioning counterforce in a nudging thread so its great to see you guys tinkering with that. Its been long overdue for VP.

I like the more subdued, weaker nudging tables. Because in real life, nudging never seems to be as easy as its been in VP.
So many times it has primarily been flawed nudging that has allowed me to keep games going much longer than I could have in real life. Hell, some games I could seemingly keep going forever, & where is the fun in that?

It would be great to see VP9's default nudging system taken care of. Yeah advanced table builders can add the nudging code, but nudging shouldn't be something that a noob should have to deal with via code. & chances are they wouldn't know how to anyways. & I wouldn't want to dislike a new table just cuz nudging on VP by default is bad.
Hopefully we get to the point where nudging can be figured out properly & built into VP9, or at least make it easy to tweak per table. Maybe even have nudge settings in the editor somewhere.

As a note, nudging in real life can even vary between tables. I've got a couple real widebody pins here that are certainly harder to manipulate the ball on. At least side to side nudging. My HH pin can be tough to get enough torque on from side to side with the wider arm spread (& nudging on the upper or lower PF's? Forget about it! Damn near no effect whatsoever.). Then I play my EBD & its a little easier to have my way with it. Same with BK2K vs my JD pin. Both are more modern, high speed games. Yet I certainly find it harder to nudge JD. It is a 300+ pound behemoth widebody. Also very sturdy. So between the constant flow & speed of the game, the weight & sturdiness of it, & the wider body (harder to get torque behind nudges), there is certainly a difference just between widebody & standard pins of the same era. At least that is how it seems to me.
& in general older games seem more nudgeable than newer games, they are usually a bit looser with more give. The less extreme incline probably helps too.

So one thing that has always bugged me in VP is how size of a table never affects how easy it is to nudge. Would be great if VP took that into consideration. Safecracker will always be easier to nudge (as it is smaller) than standard games. Widebodies should always be harder to nudge than standard games.

Yep. VP8 is SUPERIOR to VP9 by far. You can see which way the ball is deflecting to with a nudge. VP9 is way overboard and just outright silly. I can press the spacebar and that ball will float as far as it can till it stops. This isn't realism at all. Sorry, I find VP6 - VP8 had far superior nudging.

Perhaps I can ask this while we're one the subject of VP9; can we have an EMReel that can be used for the glass? Reason I ask is that if you want to put a decal on the glass you can't use the EMReel; you have to use those silly walls. Can this implemented? It's all I'm asking.

Thanks for letting me vent.

d

[Bob5453]

Something else that needs to be addressed ...

VP8's nudge will never work for cabs, as it's solely shake, with no change in ball path.

Yes, but a post like this will sway votes. Just as many of the current members probably don't even have VP8 or have even tried it will sway votes, you can't compare something you haven't even tried. Some of us used the early versions of VP for years, maybe we just got use to it, but it seemed much better than what we currently have in most tables in the VP9 download section.

As you posted above, "To be able to control the 'shake' and the nudge force using two functions is" something we need, but VP9 is 2 years old now, so it obviously isn't a priority of anyone who is capable of working on it in the source.

[Noah Fentz]

Something else that needs to be addressed ...

VP8's nudge will never work for cabs, as it's solely shake, with no change in ball path.

Yes, but a post like this will sway votes. Just as many of the current members probably don't even have VP8 or have even tried it will sway votes, you can't compare something you haven't even tried. Some of us used the early versions of VP for years, maybe we just got use to it, but it seemed much better than what we currently have in most tables in the VP9 download section.

As you posted above, "To be able to control the 'shake' and the nudge force using two functions is" something we need, but VP9 is 2 years old now, so it obviously isn't a priority of anyone who is capable of working on it in the source.

I speak for both Desktop and Cabinet users ...

If it breaks it for one or the other, it can't be implemented.

When you have a poll, you must make the voter aware of all the pros and cons.

Seeing as cab users are a minority, it's already bent in the final result. You can count on that.



And, yes, you did get used to it. VP8's is nothing like a real table. If VP9's were tweaked, it would better simulate nudge than VP8 ever could. That's not opinion, that's fact.

[kruge99]

Let me start off by saying, I never nudge "up" with the space bar in any VP software so I can't comment if "upwards" nudging works or not. (by the time my brain reacts and says 'nudge' I've hit either the left or right nudge key) but this is me, and I understand that everybody plays differently!

I have played most if not all the VP versions when I found out about it since early 2001 and I can say without a doubt, I like VP9 nudging better.

For me, I always felt like the VP8 side nudging was backwards. When VP9 came along I said to myself, Wow! it's working now, albeit, a bit over powered.

The nudging system that Noah, UR and JPSalas have been tweaking is much better than the default nudge in VP9 and should continue to be tweaked in my humble opinion.

I will be very disappointed if the devs switch back to VP8 nudging.

VP9 nudging just needs a bit of TLC to make it better.


Best Regards,
Todd.

[StevOz]

A topic that let's not discuss now, on a forum? Now that others have said their bit, seems a strange concept to me, and sorry I cannot abide by such.

Anyhows back to the real physics of it and I know who I am and I will exercise my right to reply.

Any time you nudge, the table moves under the ball, and can affect the overall trajectory of the ball after the table returns to rest in many instances, since the table returns with less velocity than it was nudged. This can't be achieved in VP8. Yes, some will argue this isn't possible, but of those I've talked to, even some world-ranked players, it IS. So, let's keep this discussion about achieving more realistic nudging in VP, and not about trying to prove me wrong ... again. (You know who you are wink.gif )

The above is true but unfortunately the VP9 nudge greatly over exaggerates this effect by at least 10 fold, rendering it's implementation totally incorrect. The effect is so subtle that to not include it, is vastly closer to reality. Also the counter swing because it is not a nudge for the most part returns the ball to almost it's exact same trajectory and we are talking about almost unperceivable amounts of trajectory change here.

Edited by StevOz, 06 March 2011 - 11:07 PM.

[Noah Fentz]

A topic that let's not discuss now, on a forum? Now that others have said their bit, seems a strange concept to me, and sorry I cannot abide by such.

Anyhows back to the real physics of it and I know who I am and I will exercise my right to reply.

Any time you nudge, the table moves under the ball, and can affect the overall trajectory of the ball after the table returns to rest in many instances, since the table returns with less velocity than it was nudged. This can't be achieved in VP8. Yes, some will argue this isn't possible, but of those I've talked to, even some world-ranked players, it IS. So, let's keep this discussion about achieving more realistic nudging in VP, and not about trying to prove me wrong ... again. (You know who you are wink.gif )

The above is true but unfortunately the VP9 nudge greatly over exaggerates this effect by at least 10 fold, rendering it's implementation totally incorrect. The effect is so subtle that to not include it, is vastly closer to reality. Also the counter swing because it is not a nudge for the most part returns the ball to almost it's exact same trajectory.

See post #6 above.

[StevOz]

Well I still think the only way to go is to have the VP8 nudge code put back into VP9 with a selectable check-box and I cannot understand why this would be very difficult to do? The source for VP8 is available, surely it's just a matter of adding the VP8 nudge code and a few lines of code to add the check-box and upon a nudge use either routine depending upon the checkbox preference that is set.

I feel adding extra parameters is not going to provide a single solution for cabinet and desktop players, the 2 scenarios are completely different, one is digital, the other analogue, in one the table actually moves with the other the screen image moves. There cannot be a one nudge routine that addresses both situations, that is why two different types of nudge routine is the only practical solution.

[druadic]

Well I still think the only way to go is to have the VP8 nudge code put back into VP9 with a selectable check-box and I cannot understand why this would be very difficult to do? The source for VP8 is available, surely it's just a matter of adding the VP8 nudge code and a few lines of code to add the check-box and upon a nudge use either routine depending upon the checkbox preference that is set.

I feel adding extra parameters is not going to provide a single solution for cabinet and desktop players, the 2 scenarios are completely different, one is digital, the other analogue, in one the table actually moves with the other the screen image moves. There cannot be a one nudge routine that addresses both situations, that is why two different types of nudge routine is the only practical solution.

Steve Oz;

Thank you! You must have read my post at PN. It wouldn't be hard to place a "tick box" or "check box" to choose which one to use. I don't use those bloody cabinets so I could careless about them. I'm a computer user and VP was NEVER used for cabinets until after VP6.

Of course VP can be used however it needs to be used. Not my issue, but it would be nice to have this run right.

Thanks again Steve.

d

[Noah Fentz]

From what I've been told, it would be VERY difficult to do, since the nudge routines are scattered all over the code.

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp, but the simplest method of implementation would be as suggested ...

Separate the shake from the force, so shakers can have just their shake, and those that want realistic nudge can tweak the settings to their liking.

Throw in counter nudge, and all will be right in the world.

It will be the best way without ruining it for either 'niche' in our hobby.

Once you go messing with that much code, there's BOUND to be problems. By creating variables and leaving the code entirely intact as it currently is, the risk of problems is lessened greatly.

I don't use those bloody cabinets so I could careless about them. I'm a computer user and VP was NEVER used for cabinets until after VP6.

Who cares if you use a cabinet or not. We strive to make VP optimal for all users.



This is where this discussion always goes south. When members who don't consider the masses important, and those that are so hung up on the 'how it used to be', can't seem to accept it's not that way anymore. The above solution is exactly what you're asking for ... get rid of the force, and use nothing but shake for nudge.

Problem solved.