I don't think you're understanding the underlying problem here. There is only so much a computer can do, and the time step being to large. Like Dajmin said, at 100mph at 100hz the car moves HALF A METER every 'step'. You can't always place the car where contact initiated, because the barriers are thin the contact could have initiated on the left side and also the right side all in the the same time step; that is where things will go wild. One solution is to speed up the rate physics are run; so that the car can't go more than 1mm or something small enough, within a single time step; this of course is not quite possible with current CPU speeds although I believe there will come a day.
Exactly, my explanation was not only for the barrier issue, it was with all physical objects; Although I did also mention some things more specific to the barrier, the physics timestep example; as Dajmin points out, applies to all aspects; including car-to-car collision.
I don't know where it was discussing other things but I was under the impression of the barrier bug as well. Not only from JasonJ's post, but also because I briefly read what the "5yr old" thread was about and the first post told me; barriers. I don't know, but it didn't sound like it was about car to car collisions. Maybe they did later on, in which the original post here should have specified.
From my programming experience in physics there can be huge challenges that are rarely solved; like the red and white barrier. I think Dajmin was correct in saying 'lag' is the issue, however not internet based lag. Running a game (or physics engine within a game) at 100fps (100hz) means that the physics will update once every 0.01 seconds. Which is a substantial amount of time.
Two objects that collide at time = 0.014 will not be colliding on the first update (time = 0.01), but will already be into eachother by quite a lot by the second update (at time = 0.02). This impurity in computer simulations is brings huge issues all around. Why it happens only to the red and white barriers, likely because the barriers are placed as objects rather than being part of the track; An object that doesn't move yet is not considered static - just a guess. It could also have to do with the fact the collision model is thin for the wall, meaning when the car is halfway through the wall at time = 0.02 the wall will apply forces in all sorts of directions because the car is on all sorts of directions from the center of the object.
Kinda hard to describe what I mean without pictures that I am too lazy to draw at this moment. But saying this is a difficult problem is an understatement.
Two objects that collide at time = 0.014 will not be colliding on the first update (time = 0.01), but will already be into eachother by quite a lot by the second update (at time = 0.02). This impurity in computer simulations is brings huge issues all around. Why it happens only to the red and white barriers, likely because the barriers are placed as objects rather than being part of the track; An object that doesn't move yet is not considered static - just a guess. It could also have to do with the fact the collision model is thin for the wall, meaning when the car is halfway through the wall at time = 0.02 the wall will apply forces in all sorts of directions because the car is on all sorts of directions from the center of the object.
Kinda hard to describe what I mean without pictures that I am too lazy to draw at this moment. But saying this is a difficult problem is an understatement.
From my poking around I heard the ideas you talk about above; I haven't seen any evidence that this stuff was; physically based or simulated, nor that it actually happened. I will say I found where they stated they wanted that level of detail in the simulation; but I haven't seen any form of physical update including a moving car; let alone one based on the high details they aimed for. or are aiming at.
My point is "ooh, nice renders". But where is the rest of everything that matters?
----------
Also I am very late on this response but way way back up above there was some iRacing talk going on where feelings were felt that iRacings slower cars were better than LFS physics. . . My opinion, (with only a month of experience in iRacing - single player at that; so take as you wish), LFS has far better physics as far as 'feeling' goes, but iRacing has MUCH higher density tracks that are far beyond LFS. Tire sounds were better in iRacing though I would give LFS the better tire feeling/physics overall as well as LFS is more polished for stalling, clutch-temp (simulated accurately with real values? IDK) and more features overall; where as iRacing can't even stall the car.
My point is I think LFS car feeling and features added to an iRacing track environment with iRacing's tire sound feedback would be superb - I am waiting for the laser scanned track in LFS to see the differences.
Agreed; there have been plenty of threads arguing that the development is too slow.
How many games do you know constantly get developed after you buy them? Not many. People should be happy they get updates and play something else while they wait - OR - quit complaining and deal with it like the rest of us. It is what it is, it won't change.
How many games do you know constantly get developed after you buy them? Not many. People should be happy they get updates and play something else while they wait - OR - quit complaining and deal with it like the rest of us. It is what it is, it won't change.
I know both; not together though that could likely be learned quick enough;
Problem is I won't be doing this task anytime soon as I don't have a mac to develop on, test with etc. . .
Problem is I won't be doing this task anytime soon as I don't have a mac to develop on, test with etc. . .
I can type without looking- but not with my hands on the "homerow".
The act of typing isn't really a problem, its the way I go about it that is. I could be wrong about the accuracy part but I was thinking that if I trained my fingers to hit the keys the 'proper' way I might gain more accuracy...
By the way; why does the middle finger on the left hand hit the 'C' key- That is very unnatural and hard for me to do...
EDIT: typing the way I type I am getting consistent ~55wpm and 1 word wrong via pressing space before I was able to reverse... However like I am concerned, my accuracy is still affecting this because every 4 or 5 words I misspell, backspace and spell correctly. 323 characters per minute, though I don't know how that is computed... (if it subtracts the extra presses from 'typos'.
The act of typing isn't really a problem, its the way I go about it that is. I could be wrong about the accuracy part but I was thinking that if I trained my fingers to hit the keys the 'proper' way I might gain more accuracy...
By the way; why does the middle finger on the left hand hit the 'C' key- That is very unnatural and hard for me to do...
EDIT: typing the way I type I am getting consistent ~55wpm and 1 word wrong via pressing space before I was able to reverse... However like I am concerned, my accuracy is still affecting this because every 4 or 5 words I misspell, backspace and spell correctly. 323 characters per minute, though I don't know how that is computed... (if it subtracts the extra presses from 'typos'.
Last edited by blackbird04217, .
I don't crash into people from not knowing where they are- as I said it takes trust in the other driver, and not swaying side to side as you drive...
Why would I look into your ass at all?
Seriously, a little practice driving straight is all it takes; and leaving room for the other car. I'm sorry if there are people out there who do not practice driving straight or leaving room for others, but in real life you do not have all these displays; you look left or right, and very briefly. I've found its usually those who look left/right for a long time whom fly into the car they look at. It's harder to judge your turning forces while looking perpendicular to your movement direction; ie if I look left its harder to judge how close I am rather than if I just gave 'a car width + half' for some extra space while racing on the stretch...
The knowledge a car is on your left or right or both is all the driver needs. You don't need to know how close to the car you are. Occasionally you need to know if they are far enough behind so you can close the door; it's called mirrors. Seeing if they are far enough ahead to get back on the racing line is easy...
I don't see any need for unrealistic things that really don't help because it gives your mind so much more to try focusing. To many movements in different directions. The main part of the screen moves like it does now, then you add 2 cameras that would have images moving outward from the center (being the left side and right side camera at the bottom of your image). Confusing, and what is the purpose when like I said; people just need to practice; driving straight without wobbling side to side, and giving enough room for a car.
Extra views won't help the problem you describe.
I do not aim this at any racer in particular not even you gxgung. But when racing it is important to race with drivers who can handle this. That said I am annoyed that your claiming I crash into people from looking briefly... I know how to leave space and race wheel to wheel/side by side with competitors.
Why would I look into your ass at all?
Seriously, a little practice driving straight is all it takes; and leaving room for the other car. I'm sorry if there are people out there who do not practice driving straight or leaving room for others, but in real life you do not have all these displays; you look left or right, and very briefly. I've found its usually those who look left/right for a long time whom fly into the car they look at. It's harder to judge your turning forces while looking perpendicular to your movement direction; ie if I look left its harder to judge how close I am rather than if I just gave 'a car width + half' for some extra space while racing on the stretch...
The knowledge a car is on your left or right or both is all the driver needs. You don't need to know how close to the car you are. Occasionally you need to know if they are far enough behind so you can close the door; it's called mirrors. Seeing if they are far enough ahead to get back on the racing line is easy...
I don't see any need for unrealistic things that really don't help because it gives your mind so much more to try focusing. To many movements in different directions. The main part of the screen moves like it does now, then you add 2 cameras that would have images moving outward from the center (being the left side and right side camera at the bottom of your image). Confusing, and what is the purpose when like I said; people just need to practice; driving straight without wobbling side to side, and giving enough room for a car.
Extra views won't help the problem you describe.
I do not aim this at any racer in particular not even you gxgung. But when racing it is important to race with drivers who can handle this. That said I am annoyed that your claiming I crash into people from looking briefly... I know how to leave space and race wheel to wheel/side by side with competitors.
I rarely ever abbreviate on the computer, during instant messages, e-mail (abbreviated there though!), and general writing. I usually try paying attention to spelling as well. The problem is I think my finger placement. I agree 40-60 wpm isn't bad, but my error rate is what is killing me. I constantly reach for the backspace;
I don't know if learning the home-row will correct my accuracy problems or speed my typing; but it is better than nothing.
By the way, I have been searching google; just wondering if anyone knew of some good ones. Very funny with the "Let me google that for you" - I had to google LMGTFY to put 1 + 2 = 3... But in all seriousness I do know how to use google, just wondering if anyone had a particularly good one, as it is I've tried 4 of them out in the last hour.
I don't know if learning the home-row will correct my accuracy problems or speed my typing; but it is better than nothing.
By the way, I have been searching google; just wondering if anyone knew of some good ones. Very funny with the "Let me google that for you" - I had to google LMGTFY to put 1 + 2 = 3... But in all seriousness I do know how to use google, just wondering if anyone had a particularly good one, as it is I've tried 4 of them out in the last hour.
Know of any FREE Typing Games/Lessons
Hey guys,
I can't say I am exactly a slow typer; though I could improve and want to improve both in accuracy and speed. I don't use homerow at the moment, although I still type between 40 and 60 words/min. I want to see if I can't aim for 80 word/min and am looking for some good typing games and lessons that are available for free.
I would rather it use real words as examples; although it's lessons can have any random combos if that is the way it works and helps. This goes hand in hand with one of my goals to write more, and thus I want to be able to write as fast as my brain comes up with stuff. I know practice makes perfect; but obviously I need to start practicing correctly vs allowing the closest finger at the time hit the key needed.
Thanks for any help!
I can't say I am exactly a slow typer; though I could improve and want to improve both in accuracy and speed. I don't use homerow at the moment, although I still type between 40 and 60 words/min. I want to see if I can't aim for 80 word/min and am looking for some good typing games and lessons that are available for free.
I would rather it use real words as examples; although it's lessons can have any random combos if that is the way it works and helps. This goes hand in hand with one of my goals to write more, and thus I want to be able to write as fast as my brain comes up with stuff. I know practice makes perfect; but obviously I need to start practicing correctly vs allowing the closest finger at the time hit the key needed.
Thanks for any help!
Buttons are more than enough, I would hate to have my screen cluttered with tons of different renders of the game; that left/right view at the bottom is sickening and that doesn't even have motion on it yet.
I guess its because as it is I use the subtle motion to detect a car on my side, and I look once to the left, briefly, and know where he is. It's not too hard to give each other space once you know there is a car on your left, make sure there is room for a car on the left. The other driver needs to have the skills to know there is a car on his right and that he should leave room on the right.
A little practice goes a long ways.
I guess its because as it is I use the subtle motion to detect a car on my side, and I look once to the left, briefly, and know where he is. It's not too hard to give each other space once you know there is a car on your left, make sure there is room for a car on the left. The other driver needs to have the skills to know there is a car on his right and that he should leave room on the right.
A little practice goes a long ways.
Make sure that the final IS_RES is sent for each player, this is how I detect it in H2H.
(Side note, this may only work with 1 lap qualifying; I don't remember if the H2H system used this method back when I allowed 20 minute free for all qualifying.)
Worst case scenario you add a button for your Administrator's to press.
EDIT- I now read that you tried using IS_RES. Sorry; you could try just adding a timer to your application?
Edit2:
(Side note, this may only work with 1 lap qualifying; I don't remember if the H2H system used this method back when I allowed 20 minute free for all qualifying.)
Worst case scenario you add a button for your Administrator's to press.
EDIT- I now read that you tried using IS_RES. Sorry; you could try just adding a timer to your application?
Edit2:
bool UpdateIsQualifingFinished(const bool bFirstUpdate)
{
static unsigned long ulStartQualiTime;
if (true == bFirstUpdate)
{
ulStartQualiTime = timeGetTime()
}
unsigned long ulTimeNow = timeGetTime();
if (ulTimeNow - ulStartQualiTime > 60.0f * QUALIFY_MINUTES)
{
return true; //Qualifying is done.
}
return false;
}
Last edited by blackbird04217, .
Reason : Added a code snippet for C++ using timeGetTime()
$350 vs $220 is not called competition.
$235 vs $220 is probably called competition, at least its in the ballpark; but even then; used vs new. . .
$235 vs $220 is probably called competition, at least its in the ballpark; but even then; used vs new. . .
can't sell your S2 License, but good luck selling the G25.
EDIT: $350 USD! Are you out of your mind, or am I behind times and my G25 is worth more now that the G27 came out? I only paid $240 brand new for my G25 and that was 3 years ago. i can understand markup to some degree but yea - good luck selling a used G25 for $100 increase!
EDIT: $350 USD! Are you out of your mind, or am I behind times and my G25 is worth more now that the G27 came out? I only paid $240 brand new for my G25 and that was 3 years ago. i can understand markup to some degree but yea - good luck selling a used G25 for $100 increase!
I don't think so - I never heard the world was going to end in 2000, only that we could lose a lot of electronics while problems were sorted out; and almost all of those problems had been sorted out before the year 2000 anyways.
Haha - I think everyone should use a 10 based number system, and I'm not talking about decimal.
Are you trying to go for point in circle collision to see if the car hit a radius? Or are you trying to find the angle between the direction a check point is and the direction the car is heading.
I do assume you know a bit about vectors here, but as follows;
and also the dot product of two vectors gives you the cosine of the angle between the vectors;
All my code is untested and I may be off on something, although I believe its good.
Hope it helps.
I do assume you know a bit about vectors here, but as follows;
bool PointInCircle(const Vector3 &vPointPos, const Vector &vCirclePos, const float fCircleRadius)
{
Vector d = vCirclePos - vPointPos;
float length = d.Magnitude(); //Or Length()
if (fLength > (fCircleRadius * fCircleRadius)
return true;
return false;
}
and also the dot product of two vectors gives you the cosine of the angle between the vectors;
bool NearDirection(const Vector &vCarDirection, const Vector &vCheckDirection)
{
float fDot = DotProduct(vCarDirection, vCheckDirection);
if (fDot > 0.98f) //,98 is a made up number that you will play with
return true;
return false;
//Other cases that might be useful to know if you don't already.
if (fDot > 0.0f) //We are somewhere within 180 degrees of the check direction
return false;
if (IsZero(fDot)) //IsZero checks a range; return true is (abs(fDot) < 0.0001)
return false; //Heading perpendicular, 90 degree angle fron check direction.
if (fDot < 0.0f)
return false; //Heading backwards, against check direction
}
All my code is untested and I may be off on something, although I believe its good.
Hope it helps.
If shit happens I won't be able to stop it. So I really don't care I am going to live my life normally and laugh at all the idiots who plan to spend all their money to have fun 'before the end' racking up tons of debt only to find out; now they need to pay it back because the world didn't end like it was supposed to.
As far as the blackhole never heard that one before, and I am sure I would have; though I did hear the Mayan Calendar and other calendars, as well as your 'predicting things that happened today that are impossible'. Well, thats a matter of words.
"Something groundbreaking will happen tomorrow."
I am probably pretty accurate with that prediction. It doesn't say WHAT will be groundbreaking WHO will do it or even what consists of 'groundbreaking' Meaning I could write some amazing algorithm that saves 2 CPU cycles while searching through a database, and on some levels that is considered groundbreaking...
My point is the statements people seem to think are predictions are simply to vague and not taken in their context IMO. I will not say that there couldn't be truth in anything, I like the idea that people could accurately predict things, but until they start actually making predictions that I feel are not vague I will not go jumping on board.
As far as the blackhole never heard that one before, and I am sure I would have; though I did hear the Mayan Calendar and other calendars, as well as your 'predicting things that happened today that are impossible'. Well, thats a matter of words.
"Something groundbreaking will happen tomorrow."
I am probably pretty accurate with that prediction. It doesn't say WHAT will be groundbreaking WHO will do it or even what consists of 'groundbreaking' Meaning I could write some amazing algorithm that saves 2 CPU cycles while searching through a database, and on some levels that is considered groundbreaking...
My point is the statements people seem to think are predictions are simply to vague and not taken in their context IMO. I will not say that there couldn't be truth in anything, I like the idea that people could accurately predict things, but until they start actually making predictions that I feel are not vague I will not go jumping on board.
Where as marriage doesn't mean what it use to to A LOT of people it does still hold a greater than it would seem. (I don't know how to answer this better, and am not going to ramble on about how I know this - it is a similar experience as Greg though)
- And Greg; You've never been a goal orientated person as far as I know and remember. I mean you did have a few goals for yourself back in the days, both dealing with LFS and your real life. I remember you being a happy as shit little punk about going to boot-camp to sort out your life; I'm sorry to see you did a complete circle as you say.
It's not always easy to break habits, and hang out with 'types' that aren't the typical 'type' you hang out with. What I mean by that, is if you always enjoyed hanging out with people whom are influencing you in a bad way it's not always easy to just hang out with new people - even after moving or something. Even if its not easy that is one part that needs to change to help you remove that part of your life.
---
As far as the girl problems; long distance to do or not to do, if you think or know it doesn't work; then don't try. Even when both parties have a good feeling it will break down and deteriorate slowly and painfully. About the 'one that got away' you will always love her in a special way. But like me you probably need to remind yourself to 'get over it' Well, I know from experience I will never get over it; even in the scenario I find someone 'better' or for me. She's had, has and always will have a special part - memories. That is all you and I miss. That and the opportunity to create more memories among other things.
---
About sleeping during the day and awake during the night; I don't mind it, although I am a programmer and it is part of my nature, I've never really cared when I am sleeping. What is more important than when is how much you sleep and what you spend your waking hours doing. Being productive is relative to your state of mind, a goal orientated person may be able to do said things above; but I have a feeling those won't work for you where they would for me or someone else.
I would say start a project, that is small and hands on. Something as simple as a popsickle stick structure, or fiddling with a car as you're very interested in that. Then each day go out and spend a few hours doing that project, it doesn't need to have a sight in end, although in my experience I like having the concrete goals. Just get out buddy, there is something that will be useful for you; and only you can decide that.
It would help if the link worked the first time around; currently a dot is missing between ahcrew and freeforums.
Best of luck though.
Best of luck though.
http://blog.ianuy.com/wp-conte ... s/2009/06/demotivated.bmp
Currently can't keep going with things that I *want* to do but can't be motivated enough to do them . . . It's almost just as much annoying as it is a loss of motivation.
Currently can't keep going with things that I *want* to do but can't be motivated enough to do them . . . It's almost just as much annoying as it is a loss of motivation.
I haven't quite voted as I am still watching the finalists. But I would like to say I enjoy you-tube more than Vimeo as far as bandwidth and other things are concerned; you-tube is more user friendly for my connection, and I don't like that I sit there waiting for vimeo to start playing only to :doh: myself and realize I need to hit the damn play button for it to start. . .
- This suggestion I suppose is all opinionated, since Vimeo allows you to download their video it is nice too. . .
On another note, congrats with the success, I tried a video editing competition a while back and it failed in complete disappointment but I am glad you found something that seems to have worked out quite well, good job!
- This suggestion I suppose is all opinionated, since Vimeo allows you to download their video it is nice too. . .
On another note, congrats with the success, I tried a video editing competition a while back and it failed in complete disappointment but I am glad you found something that seems to have worked out quite well, good job!
I don't know about the UIDs and stuff, but I noticed that the "Joined in 2000" changed to be corrected to; "2010"
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG