Our ReVolt Pub

nero @ Sep 11 2014, 06:26 PM wrote: At this point all I'm asking for is one new patch that will please everyone to some extent.

Yes, ideally we should only have one patch for everyone. However its a fact that we can't rely on the current dependencies forever, especially if they are the biggest bottleneck regarding the implementation of new features or even bugfixes.
So if we need to update them at some point anyway, why should we keep postponing it until its absolutely necessary to do? (like when Microsoft drops support for old DirectX, its already a problematic situation with Windows 8)

Abc wrote:No, definitely new version will feel different.

And you know this how?
If you have some insider information, please enlighten me.

Abc wrote:Everyone who is wishing to wait is a f****ing retarded guy.

New version wont really please everyone.
EDIT: Yeah, Sure, we will wait for new version

Great way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Not to mention that I can pretty much guarantee you that you will have to wait longer for anything to happen at all if you insist that development should be done on 2 different versions at the same time.

Abc wrote:at least make up something to keep us happy while we wait, as you have your code already there. (you suck if you deleted that source code)

Seriously, like nevermind said, either develop the game yourself or stick with the original version, nobody forces you to use this patch (be it the newest one or any other 1.2 patch).
I'm not trying to specifically defend huki here but as a developer I know how hard and frustrating it sometimes can be, especially if you do it in your own time and for free.
Seeing statements like this, its no wonder that jigebren decided to abandon the project (hopefully not permanently but it might very well be the case).

Dolo wrote:Hey guys, you have not understood a thing, if you are against, what interest finally to post something ???

Not sure if that statement included me but in case it did, I was just giving my point of view. I'm not against anything but as I said, I don't see a problem with waiting for how the next version turns out.
If it really ends up being completely different to what we know, we can still all revert to the current (or previous) versions, no?

Kenny @ Sep 11 2014, 05:58 PM wrote: If it really ends up being completely different to what we know, we can still all revert to the current (or previous) versions, no?

Sounds good to me.

Kenny @ Sep 11 2014, 02:58 PM wrote:

nero @ Sep 11 2014, 06:26 PM wrote: At this point all I'm asking for is one new patch that will please everyone to some extent.

Yes, ideally we should only have one patch for everyone. However its a fact that we can't rely on the current dependencies forever, especially if they are biggest bottleneck regarding the implementation of new features or even bugfixes.
So we need to update them at some point anyway, then why should we keep postponing this until its absolutely necessary to do it (like when Microsoft drops support for old DirectX, its already a problematic situation with Windows 8).

Abc wrote:No, definitely new version will feel different.

And you know this how?
If you have some insider information, please enlighten me.

Refer to my other posts about it.

Kenny @ Sep 11 2014, 02:58 PM wrote:

Abc wrote:Everyone who is wishing to wait is a f****ing retarded guy.

New version wont really please everyone.

EDIT: Yeah, Sure, we will wait for new version

Great way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Not to mention that I can pretty much guarantee you that you will have to wait longer for anything to happen at all if you insist that development should be done on 2 different versions at the same time.

Haha, y'all suck

Kenny @ Sep 11 2014, 02:58 PM wrote:

Abc wrote:at least make up something to keep us happy while we wait, as you have your code already there. (you suck if you deleted that source code)

Seriously, like nevermind said, either develop the game yourself or stick with the original version, nobody forces you to use this patch (be it the newest one or any other 1.2 patch).
I'm not trying to specifically defend huki here but as a developer I know how hard and frustrating it sometimes can be, especially if you do it in your own time and for free.
Seeing statements like this, its no wonder that jigebren decided to abandon the project (hopefully not permanently but it might very well be the case).

Again, read my posts, developing re-volt is almost impossible, especially when huki did most of the stuff already.

Hmm, I've noticed that people just want the old physics back as an option because it 'feels' slightly different (and in fact it sometimes does). But they may not have proposed the right solution (developing two parallel versions).

So I want to propose two better options. If the first is possible, you may ignore the second one.

First option: Including both physics. The next alpha release would feature "Old physics - don't turn on unless you know what you are doing" as an option in the Game Settings, so both physics are into RV at the same time. The physics would depend on the option chosen (in Multiplayer, they would depend on the option chosen by the host). This scenario would suppose that both physics would be implemented in the game at some point and, once done, they would be left as they are unless someone decides to change the new ones, while the game is still being updated. This would finish in a single release instead of two.

I guess it is not an easy task, but it is probably easier than developing everything from last beta release again, and it is also more convenient for the developers once the task is done. If implementing both physics was an impossible task, then skip this option.

Second option: Releasing two versions of every alpha (or beta, or final) one that are from this point. The devs would work on alphas as usual, but when they decide to release one, they would split it in two - one with the new physics, and another with the old physics.

This should not be impossible. I do not know if changing the physics is as simple as copy-paste-overwrite or not, but it should be easier than developing two parallel versions. The trouble might be that joining an online game would require the player to choose the same version as the host's.



And that's it.

Again, read my posts, developing re-volt is almost impossible, especially when huki did most of the stuff already.

If someone has made it, then it is NOT impossible. The definition of 'impossible' tells you that.

nevermind @ Sep 11 2014, 03:30 PM wrote: Hmm, I've noticed that people just want the old physics back as an option because it 'feels' slightly different (and in fact it sometimes does). But they may not have proposed the right solution (developing two parallel versions).

So I want to propose two better options. If the first is possible, you may ignore the second one.

First option: Including both physics. The next alpha release would feature "Old physics - don't turn on unless you know what you are doing" as an option in the Game Settings, so both physics are into RV at the same time. The physics would depend on the option chosen (in Multiplayer, they would depend on the option chosen by the host). This scenario would suppose that both physics would be implemented in the game at some point and, once done, they would be left as they are unless someone decides to change the new ones, while the game is still being updated. This would finish in a single release instead of two.

I guess it is not an easy task, but it is probably easier than developing everything from last beta release again, and it is also more convenient for the developers once the task is done. If implementing both physics was an impossible task, then skip this option.

Second option: Releasing two versions of every alpha (or beta, or final) one that are from this point. The devs would work on alphas as usual, but when they decide to release one, they would split it in two - one with the new physics, and another with the old physics.

This should not be impossible. I do not know if changing the physics is as simple as copy-paste-overwrite or not, but it should be easier than developing two parallel versions. The trouble might be that joining an online game would require the player to choose the same version as the host's.



And that's it.

Again, read my posts, developing re-volt is almost impossible, especially when huki did most of the stuff already.

If someone has made it, then it is NOT impossible. The definition of 'impossible' tells you that.

Seconded, and i'm not talking about parallel versions, just give something to people while they wait for the better version. maybe also release a closed beta to the users willing to taste it.

And yes, having huki source code will make revolt development 100 times easier than starting fresh with only XBLA leaked source code.

Physics could be made an option, and probably on the fly (or requiring a game restart with a prompt)

Abc @ Sep 11 2014, 07:15 PM wrote: Haha, y'all suck

Good point.

Abc wrote:Again, read my posts, developing re-volt is almost impossible, especially when huki did most of the stuff already.

You seem to have overlooked my second option which you can choose in case you are either unable or too lazy to develop it yourself (both seem to be the case).

nevermind wrote:Hmm, I've noticed that people just want the old physics back as an option because it 'feels' slightly different (and in fact it sometimes does)

Thats assuming that 1) the different feel is due to a change in the physics code and 2) they know what that change was that caused this difference.

Regarding 1), as far as I can tell it turned out that the different feeling is not because of a change in the physics but in the networks code (though it could be that during the attempts to "fix" the physics code, something has changed there as well).

As for 2), obviously it is not know where the issue lies, otherwise it would have been fixed a long time ago. So until then they can just keep searching for the needle in the haystack.

It seems the users of this forum live in 2 different parallel worlds or something.

Some people can't see the differences between Beta and Alpha, while it takes me 2 minutes of my time to open Beta and see how differently the car reacts to steering, contact with surfaces and impact of weapons. If you guys can't see that yet you probably lack of sensibility enough in your hands or something, I don't know.

Another thing I can't understand is how some people deny the fact that there are already 2-3 versions being used now and not 1. We don't live in a One-Patch world anymore.

This is a problem of course, but why did this happen? Maybe it's because new features are being introduced without consulting the users who are going to use the patch. Maybe it's because the online players do not want to accept and embrace with open hands and smiles every new thing that comes out in the new patches. And maybe it's because there's already a lack of feedback here in this forum, both from users and also developers.

Whatever it is the cause, some people here are thinking how this can be solved.
And we are desperate looking for ideas on how to solve it, even if we don't get the desired answers from our developers sometimes.
Best idea was to implement the old physics into the new patch. That didn't work.
Second idea was that we users simply ignore the new patches and we go back to Beta and keep playing online with it. That didn't work aswell because the Beta crashes more often than alpha, it still has some important bugs to fix and lacks of full custom track support and late joining.
Third idea was that developers go back to Beta and implement the new things and bug fixes into the Beta. Jigebren didn't want. So it is normal if people come with ideas like Dolo's now. In our desperate try we keep looking for ideas to fix the current situation. I would support Dolo's proposal because it's not much different from what we already have now.

Denying the fact that there are already a variety of versions nowadays and that people have to downgrade because the new versions don't please them is a bit blind behaviour. And expecting we all accept and embrace every new things coming out of the new project without a previous discusson is aswell.

My suggestion would be to let them work on the new version in peace and if it turns out to have some major issues/differences compared to the current version we can still revert back to older versions and/or request support for older versions.

My dear Kenny.. I think that you won't disagree that is what we users have been doing since the beginning on this forum... letting them work peacefully until users started to downgrade or not like new patches. Reverting back to older versions is already a tradition for us.
I am personally hopless about that future thing called RV, and that is why I prefer one final 1.2 version, in case we need to revert back again like I've been doing with the last patch.

Ofcourse that the real thing we all want is to have only 1 final version that makes everyone happy. But at least this time we are playing safe and being prepared in case that future project never happens or ends up in something very different from Re-Volt.

Phantom @ Sep 11 2014, 08:01 PM wrote: Some people can't see the differences between Beta and Alpha, while it takes me 2 minutes of my time to open Beta and see how differently the car reacts to steering, contact with surfaces and impact of weapons.

Just for clarification, you're talking about offline play, right?
And if its that easy for you to identify the difference then it should also be no problem for you to pinpoint the version that introduced this difference or? (its a legitimate question, not sarcastic or anything)

Phantom wrote:My dear Kenny.. I think that you won't disagree that is what we users have been doing since the beginning on this forum... letting them work peacefully until users started to downgrade or not like new patches. Reverting back to older versions is already a tradition for us. I am also hopless about that future thing called RV, and that is why I prefer one final 1.2 version, in case we need to revert back.

Again, I never said that I'm against them doing a "final" version before working on/releasing the new version.
Also, what makes you think that this "final" version is exactly how you want it to be? Because considering that they have been unable to fix the problems you are talking about in the alpha versions so far, its very unlikely that they'll "figure it out" for this final version.
Which would mean that they need to base this "final" version on the beta and thats also assuming that they can (easily) revert to that version and are willing to do that (I guess the latter depends on how many features you want to have re-implemented).

Phantom wrote:But at least this time we are playing safe and being prepared in case that future project never happens or ends up in something very different from Re-Volt.

I can see your point regarding the case that the new project never happens though I still think (or rather hope) that in such a case huki either informs us about it and/or passes the code on to someone else.
And not to sound rude or anything but if you are used to reverting the new versions anyway then why are you so afraid from a possible "big change" with this one?

Comme à chaque fois, c'est lorsque le sujet est hyper brûlant comme il l'a été il y a quelques jours qu'on peut constater la passivité à laquelle se prête ces chers monsieurs les développeurs...

As always, this is when the topic is super hot as it has been few days ago, that we can see the passivity that lends these dear gents the developpers...

L'unique chose qu'on peut constater, c'est le fait que Huki n'a pas apparu depuis la 5ème de septembre, comme indiqué dans le forum.

The only thing that we can see is the fact that Huki has not logged in since the 5th of September, as shown in the forum.

nevermind @ Sep 12 2014, 12:00 AM wrote:Hmm, I've noticed that people just want the old physics back as an option because it 'feels' slightly different (and in fact it sometimes does). But they may not have proposed the right solution (developing two parallel versions).

So I want to propose two better options. If the first is possible, you may ignore the second one.

First option: Including both physics. The next alpha release would feature "Old physics - don't turn on unless you know what you are doing" as an option in the Game Settings, so both physics are into RV at the same time.

Second option: Releasing two versions of every alpha (or beta, or final) one that are from this point. The devs would work on alphas as usual, but when they decide to release one, they would split it in two - one with the new physics, and another with the old physics.

@nevermind, thanks for the suggestion, but I'm afraid there is no "new physics". The physics in every 1.2 version, whether beta or alpha is just the same. Please refer to the changelog, and you can see nothing about physics and collision has changed. There were two fixes for collision bugs that were added in old alphas, and they were reverted in subsequent builds. What makes you think we worked on a new physics engine, btw? That was not the goal of the 1.2 project...

Kenny @ Sep 12 2014, 12:55 AM wrote:

Phantom @ Sep 11 2014, 08:01 PM wrote: Some people can't see the differences between Beta and Alpha, while it takes me 2 minutes of my time to open Beta and see how differently the car reacts to steering, contact with surfaces and impact of weapons.

Just for clarification, you're talking about offline play, right?
And if its that easy for you to identify the difference then it should also be no problem for you to pinpoint the version that introduced this difference or? (its a legitimate question, not sarcastic or anything)

Exactly.. these problems were being reported for so many years now and we still don't know,
1) in which build the changes were introduced
2) whether it affects online or offline or both
3) whether it affects arcade only or simulation also
We don't even know these three simple answers after all these years, yet according to Phantom "it takes 2 minutes to see the difference". Are they really that lazy while expecting us to fix it?
So you can imagine I'm no longer interested in working more on this problem, or any other "original feel" sort of problem. But for a final 1.2 version I'll consider any one request...

So can anyone clearly mention, what is the request now? I should use beta 11.0208 as the base, and add back which features? Can someone list all the features and fixes that need to be added back?

Some weeks ago Dolo and Me made a test with Beta, 13.0820 and 14.0306

We start with 13.0820
1st race : arcade race like usual (not so good ping for me and good ping for dolo) and when i use rocket dolo fly away like hell (and dolo feels bad gameplay)
2nd race : Dolo simulate a bad ping and straingely he feels good gameplay and stop flying at all rockets from me
According to me driving and weapons from dolo work the same way in both races

After we did the same with 14.0306
gameplay and weapons impacts change in the same way according to good/bad ping for dolo

BUT with beta : we don't notice ANY differences about gameplay and weapons impacts from good or bad ping

Yes you should use beta 11.0208 as the base, without to add any optimizations, changes or news features about connection management in first...
Then, a team, composed of some players who know what they are talking about, will test each build in private way...
The list of all the features and fixes that need to be added back must be decided by this team...
This team is here only to have the best version for "Online scene", so for the others who don't like this idea, they have the current 1.2...
I can compose this team if you want...

He said he wants the list of features to be added..so compose ur team or whatever ... its a big chance to prove the things you were saying all this months ...

If we write all the features we want, it will be a big "bordel" here.
Add all the features that we want at once is useless...
First, we need a team of rigorous beta-tester who work directly with developers...
Et j'aime pas parler dans le vent...

Dolo @ Sep 21 2014, 03:45 PM wrote: Yes you should use beta 11.0208 as the base, without to add any optimizations, changes or news features about connection management in first...
Then, a team, composed of some players who know what they are talking about, will test each build in private way...
The list of all the features and fixes that need to be added back must be decided by this team...
This team is here only to have the best version for "Online scene", so for the others who don't like this idea, they have the current 1.2...
I can compose this team if you want...

C'est bien Nero, tu communiques à l'aide d'images, c'est déjà beaucoup pour un petit esprit comme le tien.
Bon d'un autre côté, te lire serait encore plus pénible, donc bon....
En tout cas tu prouves une fois de plus ton inutilité habituelle...

Dolo @ Sep 24 2014, 05:07 PM wrote: C'est bien Nero, tu communiques à l'aide d'images, c'est déjà beaucoup pour un petit esprit comme le tien.
Bon d'un autre côté, te lire serait encore plus pénible, donc bon....
En tout cas tu prouves une fois de plus ton inutilité habituelle...

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote: So can anyone clearly mention, what is the request now?

My initial request was simply to use the 0820 as the final + the hard drive music support you made + the new track selector from jigebren but without the new time trial system.
That was enough for me because I was sort of losing hope back then.

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote:I should use beta 11.0208 as the base, and add back which features? Can someone list all the features and fixes that need to be added back?

But if you really can do this and you're seriously asking us this, that would be bloody wonderful, even better than I expected. If you really accept this proposal I will compile a list inmediately based on the changelog of the new features and necessary bug fixes that need to be added back and those that must not, but only of course if you accept we'll send it to you or post here in the forum so we can work as a team.

Phantom @ Sep 25 2014, 07:28 AM wrote:

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote: So can anyone clearly mention, what is the request now?

My initial request was simply to use the 0820 as the final + the hard drive music support you made + the new track selector from jigebren but without the new time trial system.
That was enough for me because I was sort of losing hope back then.

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote:I should use beta 11.0208 as the base, and add back which features? Can someone list all the features and fixes that need to be added back?

But if you really can do this and you're seriously asking us this, that would be bloody wonderful, even better than I expected. If you really accept this proposal I will compile a list inmediately based on the changelog of the new features and necessary bug fixes that need to be added back and those that must not, but only of course if you accept we'll send it to you or post here in the forum so we can work as a team.

At this point I'm not really contributing much in this thread... but I agree with Phantom here.

Phantom @ Sep 25 2014, 08:28 AM wrote:

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote: So can anyone clearly mention, what is the request now?

My initial request was simply to use the 0820 as the final + the hard drive music support you made + the new track selector from jigebren but without the new time trial system.
That was enough for me because I was sort of losing hope back then.

Huki @ Sep 21 2014, 10:10 AM wrote:I should use beta 11.0208 as the base, and add back which features? Can someone list all the features and fixes that need to be added back?

But if you really can do this and you're seriously asking us this, that would be bloody wonderful, even better than I expected. If you really accept this proposal I will compile a list inmediately based on the changelog of the new features and necessary bug fixes that need to be added back and those that must not, but only of course if you accept we'll send it to you or post here in the forum so we can work as a team.

Like i said before, we need a team (beta-tester) who will work directly with the developpers, with rigorous, step by step... Yes it takes time, but if developpers do not have much time, they should immediately say it...
Without that, there is no chance to lead a better version...
For me, the 820 is the worst version ever, and it is inconceivable to do this as the final version.

Dolo delete your last sentence if you want any positive answer from him. You are playing with fire and it seems you want to be burned.

C'est que Jigebren & Huki sont devenus maître jedi dans la catégorie vent, particulièrement à mon égard, chose que je peux comprendre...
Ou pas, puisque si on fait un petit historique des différents messages que j'ai pu poster, il est très rare d'y voir une insulte ou même un profond manque de respect envers eux, juste des agacements et de la provocation, des posts qui ont été souvent rédigés d'ailleurs après une partie de revolt en ligne à la sauce 1.2, donc un agacement tout à fait justifié
Donc Phantom, je ne suis pas là pour me faire des amis, ni des ennemis, je suis là pour dire ce que je pense réellement sans faire dans le détail, sachant que m'exprimer en anglais est de toute façon trop contraignant et frustrant pour une personne comme moi...
Donc désolé mais je ne supprimerai pas mon dernier message, c'est ce que je pense vraiment... Au final, ce qu'il faut retenir, c''est que j'essaie malgré tout d''apporter une solution, qui est, j'en ai l'intime conviction, la meilleure aujourd'hui...
Et quand je vois certains donner leur avis sur RV House à propos de cette version 1.2, et ce qui peut en ressortir ici, parfois j'ai juste envie de rire un bon coup

Un alpha version est comme un médicament non testé sur les animaux. Dire qu'une alpha version est plus mauvais que d'autres versions précédentes parce que <mettez vos motifs ici> c'est comme dire qu'un médicament non testé est pire que d'autres médicaments finis parce qu'il a tué plusieurs rats: ça peut être vrai, mais il est inutile de dire que c'est un projet et que les développeurs savent ce qu'ils ont à faire.

@Dolo: I said in my last post that I'm not interested in fixing your problem(s), but it seems you have conveniently ignored it. If you really have problems with the online gameplay, either you can revert to the last official v1.1, or you can follow the new RV project. Maybe it will please you, maybe it won't.

This topic is about the final version of 1.2. For this I'm willing to start from the 11.0208 Beta, and put back the list of all the good features decided by the community. That's it.

Phantom wrote:If you really accept this proposal I will compile a list inmediately based on the changelog of the new features and necessary bug fixes that need to be added back and those that must not, but only of course if you accept we'll send it to you or post here in the forum so we can work as a team.

Yes, please review the changelog since the 11.0208 Beta and compile the list of features / fixes that need to be put back and what should not. Feel free to open a new topic to post the list, so that others can review it too.

@Sebr: Thanks for the info about ping. We will see about it later in RV.

Huki @ Sep 26 2014, 08:55 PM wrote:@Dolo: I said in my last post that I'm not interested in fixing your problem(s), but it seems you have conveniently ignored it. If you really have problems with the online gameplay, either you can revert to the last official v1.1, or you can follow the new RV project. Maybe it will please you, maybe it won't.

This topic is about the final version of 1.2. For this I'm willing to start from the 11.0208 Beta, and put back the list of all the good features decided by the community. That's it.

Phantom wrote:If you really accept this proposal I will compile a list inmediately based on the changelog of the new features and necessary bug fixes that need to be added back and those that must not, but only of course if you accept we'll send it to you or post here in the forum so we can work as a team.

Yes, please review the changelog since the 11.0208 Beta and compile the list of features / fixes that need to be put back and what should not. Feel free to open a new topic to post the list, so that others can review it too.

@Sebr: Thanks for the info about ping. We will see about it later in RV.

Au contraire, nous donner la possibilité de finaliser la version 1.2 à partir de la beta, c'est nous donner la possibilité de rétablir le gameplay original, puisqu'on s'en éloigne grandement dans les dernieres alphas... (c'est pas faute de le rappeler)
C'est une très grosse opportunité... Et tu veux qu'une personne seule se charge de rédiger les fonctionnalités à rajouter ou pas... C'est clairement inconcevable...
Une équipe de plusieurs personnes doit être en charge de cela, une équipe représentative de la communauté qui en amont se consultera pour établir cette liste, une équipe dont les personnes ont un réel intérêt à concevoir une version finale qui prendrait un chemin légèrement différent des alphas actuelles notamment pour le mode en ligne...
Personne ne peut être contre à l'idée d'avoir une version 1.2 qui soit la plus fidèle possible de la version 1.1, puisque la plupart des personnes a su apprécier ce jeu en jouant à la 1.1 et bien souvent en réseau...

Dolo @ Sep 26 2014, 09:32 PM wrote: Omelette du fromage.

Seriously, no one's listening to you anymore man. Time to let it go. Also, stop speaking french, not everybody understands what you are saying. It's getting irritating. :/

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

... Anyways, came all the way from RVL (I was too lazy to sign in ORP all these years, ugh) just to congratulate you, the devs of the 1.2. project and all the outstanding work you've done (and hopefully will continue doing). The crap you've had to put up so far throughout this path would have made many give up - but you showed real love for this good old game, and managed to create something that snatched Revolt from the claws of oblivion and helped making it a game that is still played 15(!!!) years after it's first release. The original Acclaim devs should be proud to see someone following their legacy so many years afterwards, while facing so many adversities.

In this last effort to release a final version of 1.2. (and hopefully open the door to 1.3 or any other project you have in mind), I decided to make my way down here to give my two cents about what should be included in the final release. I won't ask much, hopefully.

So, here goes:

1) Make the options "Next Race/Track" available in the Single Player pause menu - if there's this option online, I don't see why not include it for Single player useage;

2) Enable a track/car search in the selection menu - it'd aid us players greatly, especially those who have prodigious collections with hundreds of cars/tracks;

3) Increase the number of cars - Kenny already managed to do this, a simple merger with his work would suffice, and it'd be greatly welcomed by many players. While it isn't something trully necessary, I still think it'd add more depth to the gameplay of Single players. Not to mention it'd be fun as hell.

4) Lastly, include the Dreamcast cars and tracks in the Championships (maybe even make Rotor selectable by the CPU), and hardcode them to the game - I know it's pretty darn improbable and hard, but I'm still hoping someday it'd be possible. Especially since this would be the last installment of 1.2. before a long, LONG pause.

...I know there's probably more I don't remember now, but so far, these are the ones I've always dreamed about, and be more than happy to see them in the ultimate compilation of all the RV 1.2. goodies you've provided us throughout these years.

Keep up the good work, and never stop!

Cheers, Mighty. ;P

Speak French here allows me to express myself as I wish even if only 2-3 people understand me, and these messages are not certainly not addressed to morons like you or to this 90% of community that don't respect the original version...

MightyCucumber @ Sep 27 2014, 07:32 PM wrote:1) Make the options "Next Race/Track" available in the Single Player pause menu - if there's this option online, I don't see why not include it for Single player useage;

Quite an easy task, will depend on developers.

MightyCucumber @ Sep 27 2014, 07:32 PM wrote:2) Enable a track/car search in the selection menu - it'd aid us players greatly, especially those who have prodigious collections with hundreds of cars/tracks;

It was done by Jigebren in few test builds. Huki doesn't have that part of code and can't communicate with him right now so we can only wait.

MightyCucumber @ Sep 27 2014, 07:32 PM wrote:3) Increase the number of cars - Kenny already managed to do this, a simple merger with his work would suffice, and it'd be greatly welcomed by many players. While it isn't something trully necessary, I still think it'd add more depth to the gameplay of Single players. Not to mention it'd be fun as hell.

It was told good amount of times why this wasn't implemented. If you use more than 12 cars, it breaks car startgrid. Sure, you can use Clockwork Carnage one, but it's only for small cars, it will be too crowded with normal size ones. Most stock tracks on start point don't even have enough space to hold 30 cars properly.
I could send you 30 car build in PM so you could see why this wasn't done. Build is not related to v1.2 whatsoever.
[Edit]: The build was only sent to MightyCucumber. It is barely playable and I have no intent to support it or share it for now. I will consider when the build will become more stable. Please don't send any emails asking for the build, thank you.

MightyCucumber @ Sep 27 2014, 07:32 PM wrote:4) Lastly, include the Dreamcast cars and tracks in the Championships (maybe even make Rotor selectable by the CPU), and hardcode them to the game - I know it's pretty darn improbable and hard, but I'm still hoping someday it'd be possible.

It was quite an outrageous discussion about this. Mostly from people who play online.
Main reason was with Purp XL car, simply because it is faster than *generic online car* - Toyeca.
More info: http://z3.invisionfree.com/Our_ReVolt_P ... topic=1872
_______________________________________________

If Huki is going to make the last v1.2 version from 11.0208 Beta, then these are my highest priority features:
- Late join
- Allow custom reversed/Battle Tag/Stunt Arena tracks
- Enable higher texture sizes
- Advanced track customization, full custom track features/custom folder
- Spectating/scrolling through players
- Look back camera (no, not F2 one)

I probably forgot something very important, some people will appreciate Split-Screen.
It would be nice to add some minor stuff from alphas too, the list would be too large to post here.

I just though since Kenny managed to do it (and even showed video proof), there wasn't any associated problem with it. I'll ask you that build later today then, thanks mate!

As for the inclusion of all the Dreamcast content (well, at least add Rooftops to the game!), I don't see why not (the poll even won, for God's sake). People that play online need to adapt themselves, just like today's online players adapt to constantly new releases and changes to the games they play. One example that comes to mind is League of Legends - though I don't play, I know that there are continuous updates and new aditions to the roster of characters (called champions, right?) to which people need to come up with new strategies and new forms to win. It'd be practically the same if a new bundle of cars would be made available for online use - players need to adapt to the new reality.

One solution for this (it's probably too late anyways) would be implementing an option to choose which cars can enter a certain game room. Then, the hardcore online players could keep the Dreamcast cars out of their races, while others could play with them, regardless if they're in the game or not.

But then again, everything's in the hands of the Devs, so ultimately, we'll just need to wait for a final decision.

MightyCucumber, I agree with you on everything except with your 3rd and 4th suggestion. Although those 2 changes look cool, they are too big and Huki and Jig don't seem interested in introducing new things on a final v1.2, only the minimum bug fixes and improvements required. Also it's true that this is not a good moment for such big changes that will change the re-volt gameplay. They are perfect suggestions for the future project "RV" that Huki and Jig are planning. I'm sure that they will will be added in the future.

Yes you should use beta 11.0208 as the base, without to add any optimizations, changes or news features about connection management in first...

@Vaid: Like mmud said once, the Late Joining is probably the best feature ever added to Re-Volt. But there is the risk that when it is added the gameplay differences will appear again, so we should leave it for the last and start with the bug fixes first to make the beta more stable like alpha is, and then the graphic improvements, and then finally if all goes okay, the late joining and spectating.

MightyCucumber @ Sep 27 2014, 06:32 PM wrote: 4) Lastly, include the Dreamcast cars and tracks in the Championships (maybe even make Rotor selectable by the CPU), and hardcode them to the game - I know it's pretty darn improbable and hard, but I'm still hoping someday it'd be possible. Especially since this would be the last installment of 1.2. before a long, LONG pause.

Rotor is dumber than Phat Slug, can't do a simply corner without go upside down.
Btw, I'm still for that DC cars aren't allowed in RVR races, but outside of these races it's okay.

That's because the AI is shity. Maybe at a future time, Citywalker can make a fitting AI for Rotor, it should be am easy task for her.

Regarding the Dreamcast cars, that would also be a valid option - make them available for single player use only. Though, like Phantom said, we should focus on easier stuff to implement for this final release. Though its a pity not to include such features like the extra cars and the Dreamcast content, guess it'll be something with which we'll have to live with.

Dolo @ Sep 28 2014, 10:30 AM wrote: Speak French here allows me to express myself as I wish even if only 2-3 people understand me

Those 2-3 people are not Huki.

Huki don't work alone and now "ferme-la !" I don't want to be quoted by a noob like you...
Forget me, ignore me, like u do on RV House & KMA seriously...

Dolo @ Sep 29 2014, 07:13 PM wrote: Huki don't work alone and now "ferme-la !"

Thats not correct, the current official state of the project is that Huki does work alone (in case you forgot what happened with jigebren).
So unless you would just use Google Translator for your english posts, using your native language won't make you any more heard/understood, at best other users and/or even the dev(s) will get annoyed by them and ignore anything you write at all.

Anyway back to topic, considering the beta is lacking a lot of features from the alphas that I would like to have I don't think it would be constructive for me to just put a giant list here, especially since it would just delay the whole RV project even further.
The list Vaid put together sounds fine enough for me, assuming its not already too much work to implement all of it (I would assume that Split-Screen is one of the more "demanding" features).

And as Phantom said, I don't think its a good idea to additionally add some new features to this final patch, these are better off for future discussion.
Speaking of new features, I don't think we would have the discussion about Dreamcast cars/content anymore if there would just be an option to allow/deny specific cars in the multiplayer, like "Stock Cars only" / "Stock+DC cars" / "Free for all".
Of course the customization for multiplayer shouldn't stop there, there's still a lot of room for improvement (disable specific pickups, add support for championships, include AI for multiplayer, etc) but as I said, this should be better discussed when the new version is ready for release (I just wrote it here now for reference).

Kenny @ Sep 29 2014, 10:09 PM wrote: Anyway back to topic, considering the beta is lacking a lot of features from the alphas that I would like to have I don't think it would be constructive for me to just put a giant list here, especially since it would just delay the whole RV project even further.

Actually, I'm not sure, so I'm just going to ask... Do you, Kenny (and for me you represent a small group - the offline players, who actually know much about Revolt) have any problems with the latest alpha builds?
I mean, there is every feature that has been already made, and obviously not all of those will be in this "final" build. If you don't have any problems with physics/lag management, most probably for you, the latest alpha build will be much better, than this final version.
I think this is going to be a build exclusively for online players, I don't see any reason why someone who plays offline, and doesn't notice these changes, would play the "final" version instead of the latest alpha, with many many more features.

Balint12 @ Sep 30 2014, 11:18 AM wrote: I mean, there is every feature that has been already made, and obviously not all of those will be in this "final" build. If you don't have any problems with physics/lag management, most probably for you, the latest alpha build will be much better, than this final version.

I never said I would be (extensively) using this planned final build. Sure, I mostly play offline but in case I might ever want to join some online matches I would need the most used/compatible version as well.

Also, the reason I mainly play offline is that I consider the network system (DirectPlay) and how its implemented in the game to be rather unenjoyable (its not only with the latest alphas but always has been the case).
So thats just another reason why I'm looking forward to the new version and if that turns out to be better than the original then I'll gladly play online more frequently.

Besides, I merely agreed to the suggestions of another user (Vaid), I didn't request anything in addition to that so I'm not sure what your point is.

And of course I'm always looking forward to the next, improved version (which would be the planned RV project) so permanently sticking with the latest alpha is not really something I'm planning to do either.

Huki, just how much of the code has changed from the source leak to the beta build?

Depending on the answer to that question, would it be possible for the members of the community that have managed to compile working versions of RV to help implement some of the top requested (and agreed upon) features for this "final release" by implementing aforementioned features into their own builds and sending you the relevant portions of the code for you to implement in the "final build," as to possibly reduce the work that you would have to do?

Kipy wrote:Rotor is dumber than Phat Slug, can't do a simply corner without go upside down.
Btw, I'm still for that DC cars aren't allowed in RVR races, but outside of these races it's okay.

Adding DC cars is something I dont really like. It's the PC version and Acclaim probarly had a reason to not include these cars in the PC version. But making the AI able to select Rotor, Panga and Mystery would be fun IMO.

Dolo wrote:Huki don't work alone and now "ferme-la !" I don't want to be quoted by a noob like you...
Forget me, ignore me, like u do on RV House & KMA seriously...

Seriously Dolo, you sound like some child who doesn't get some candy. I have nothing against you,but quotes like this won't solve anything.

Mightycucumber wrote:Increase the number of cars - Kenny already managed to do this, a simple merger with his work would suffice, and it'd be greatly welcomed by many players. While it isn't something trully necessary, I still think it'd add more depth to the gameplay of Single players. Not to mention it'd be fun as hell.

Except for some 'fun', it adds nothing to the game but chaos.

kajeuter @ Oct 8 2014, 11:15 AM wrote: Adding DC cars is something I dont really like. It's the PC version and Acclaim probarly had a reason to not include these cars in the PC version. But making the AI able to select Rotor, Panga and Mystery would be fun IMO.

So? Just because they're there doesn't mean you'll have to use them (assuming we're speaking about online play, offline is still up for discussion regarding how they should be implemented), why vote against a feature if its only optional to use?

I assume reasons for not including the DC cars in the PC version were mainly exclusive content for another version and not because they were "not meant to be in the game".
Especially considering the DC version was released a few months later compared to all other versions, so they had to offer something to make people buy this one over the PC version.

And lets not forget the fact that these cars are actually not DC exclusive (except for BossVolt and BigVolt) but also featured in the PS1 version which was released at the same time as the PC version.
Again, I assume the reason for not including these cars in the PC version at that time was to offer people exclusive content and make the version more attractive to buy since the graphics/physics were a lot worse in the PS1 version.

Besides, what makes the PC version so special (in the eyes of the people who disagree with including them) that it is actually not "allowed" to have the same content other version(s) had?
I mean its just another version of the game, 2 out of 4 versions had these cars and the only reason the N64 version didn't have them as well was due to space limitations on the cartridge.

Except for some 'fun', it adds nothing to the game but chaos.

Again, why vote against a feature that is completely optional and that you're not forced to use? Sure, the messed up startgrid is a valid argument against 30+ cars but if that somehow gets resolved one day I wouldn't see any reason not to make the game support an increased number of cars in one race.
You might never make use of it yourself but I'm sure quite a few people out there would very much appreciate having this feature.

Kipy @ Sep 28 2014, 02:32 PM wrote: Btw, I'm still for that DC cars aren't allowed in RVR races, but outside of these races it's okay.

I highlighted it.
If we'll be observant of the rules in RVR, I don't have any problem with other new features.
So I am still for that only RV PC stock cars allowed in RVR races. This is the most important for me in online races at the moment.

Kenny @ Oct 8 2014, 12:16 PM wrote: Besides, what makes the PC version so special (in the eyes of the people who disagree with including them) that it is actually not "allowed" to have the same content other version(s) had?
I mean its just another version of the game, 2 out of 4 versions had these cars and the only reason the N64 version didn't have them as well was due to space limitations on the cartridge.

Why not leaving the PC version's cars-selection as it was. I see no point in adding the DC cars.

And some of us see no point in not adding new content if we have the means to do so... :/

I'm pretty sure that if these new changes ever get implemented, there will be in-game options to disable such features for those who want their game as vanilla as possible - while others who want to enjoy them will also be able to do so. The online community is a big part of Revolt right now, but I think we should have a little more consideration for the single players and the features they may miss out.

Also, I agree with stoney1918, if his suggestion was possible, it'd be great for all parts involved.

i think we should let Huki concentrate on fixing what weve already got, before we end up with nothing.

Minor bug report:

People playing Battle Tag with Vertical Sync Off may experience a strange behaviour in their timer.
This is the first approach to the bug, video by Last Cuban:

[youtube][/youtube]

Then Santi727 discovers that it happens only when Vsync is turned off.
Cuban and Santi both have this problem, the timer gets crazy for them; but I tested myself and I don't. Maybe it happens only when certain hardware. Santi has a Pentium Dual Core with AMD Radeon HD 5670 GDDR5 512mb and his FPS are between 200-900 with VSync off. In my case I've got Core i3 with Intel HD3000 Graphics and my FPS is usually 80-100 with VSync off. Maybe the high FPS are the cause of the problem with the timer?

HI, i have big problem with Platina Cup .. when i click enter on platina cup, my game freezed and have only black background .. :/ i have RV1.2 newest alpha with many updates from: http://revoltfrontend.wordpress.com/downloads/

Any solutions ?

It simply shouldn't happen. The newest alpha 0820 and newer sub-versions are super stable and don't crash unless you have a custom car or track causing a problem. Maybe some of the add-ons you have installed is causing a problem with Platinum Cup.

Try this portable version of the game that doesn't include add-ons and compare if it crashes here: http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1040 ... rtable.rar

If this revolt that I am giving you crashes too, the cause of the blackscreen probably comes from your computer. Fragmented disk for example or incompatible graphic card, outdated drivers, etc.

jhs @ Nov 17 2014, 10:46 PM wrote: HI, i have big problem with Platina Cup .. when i click enter on platina cup, my game freezed and have only black background .. :/ i have RV1.2 newest alpha with many updates from: http://revoltfrontend.wordpress.com/downloads/

Any solutions ?

Try a single race on Supermarket1, if revolt crash too you may have a missing/corrupted file about this track ...

Phantom @ Nov 16 2014, 01:25 AM wrote:Minor bug report:

People playing Battle Tag with Vertical Sync Off may experience a strange behaviour in their timer.
This is the first approach to the bug, video by Last Cuban:
{Video link}
Then Santi727 discovers that it happens only when Vsync is turned off.
Cuban and Santi both have this problem, the timer gets crazy for them; but I tested myself and I don't. Maybe it happens only when certain hardware. Santi has a Pentium Dual Core with AMD Radeon HD 5670 GDDR5 512mb and his FPS are between 200-900 with VSync off. In my case I've got Core i3 with Intel HD3000 Graphics and my FPS is usually 80-100 with VSync off. Maybe the high FPS are the cause of the problem with the timer?

I'm definitely going to test this as i have a 4790 cpu and gforce gtx 760 where i get ~2000 fps in revolt...
i've seen the signals fade in slow motion or change too quick or simply dont appear.

It could be an issue with Math Co-Processor being too fast? (remember tuxabug among with other timer issues? i think its related, plus it may have to do with lack of HyperThreading (AMD CPUs dont have HT)

I dont have this problem in my netbook which is an amd c-50 apu, i have ~20-70 fps.