Let's play Game Designer

it's just the nature of the beast. You either get a megablurred messy blob or you get sharp shadows with some discontinuity. Shadows are one of the hardest thing in 3D graphics and always subject of great research. It's very unlikely AC will even see major changes in that area.

The 2 of 3 rules applies here:

Detailed
Dynamic
No discontinuity

You can only pick 2.

 

I understand, I appreciate the reply.

Is there any way to smooth the transitions between these shadow maps?

Thanks.

 

do you really think if there was a way it wouldn't be in the game already and I would wait for some forum user to propose that?

sometimes I really don't understand you people.

You start with "I understand" but then proceed to ask the very same question again, showing you do not "understand" at all.

BTW. I saw a nice post you did on RD about beta testing, would love to reply to that but sadly, RD doesn't feel my contribution can be useful anymore there

 

I voted for brake temp implementation, but I can't deny, looking at yesterday evening Blancpain GT qualify race, how nice would be to see some sparks during an online action in AC.

 

Ahh ok. Yep, my comments on RD about the testing weren't specifically aimed at AC at all, more a general view of what I experienced in the past. Testing is only worth it if the developers are actually listening to the feedback. In the case of the previous developer (who shall remain nameless), they were not.

There was often a disconnect between what the developers saw, what they read on forums and what the overall playerbase wants / needs. They would read something in the forums, then implement it, but then the playerbase would revolt because the forum isn't totally representative of what the entire playerbase is.

 

RD tolerates the same bunch of trolls sistematically derailing AC threads, and gives ban to AC lead dev?

 

ah good.. so now I can answer you here.

The big problem when it comes to beta testing is to understand what is expected from a beta tester.
Your comment is typical of somebody who does not understand what "beta tester" means.
Testers are expect to find and report BUGS with a clear procedure to reproduce them. Period! That's their "job" and whatever happens next is not their concern. Sometimes the bug is fixed, sometimes the bug is not fixed, sometimes (MANY TIMES ) the bug is not even a bug.
In my experience, a lot of guys don't understand this when they engage in betatesting.. and think that betatesters are there to help design the game.. and that is a BIG misunderstanding that can only bring the result of having people angry.
Your phrase "devs don't listen to feedback" is a perfect example of that misunderstanding.. devs didn't "hire" (most betatesting in race sim is voluntary but you're still hired somehow) you to provide feedback, but to find bugs.
Feedback is always welcome but devs are never under any obligation to take your feedback into account nor explaining their reasons to you.

So, after all, it's a good thing you avoid participating in beta testing programs because you don't seem to understand what a beta tester is.

 

well it seems this is the case.
I asked one of the mod there via private messaging (Chirs Stacey) to remove the "mod" content of Gui Cramer.. which is mentally unstable individual who believes we need to steal his ****ty textures and text files that he calls "mod", which created some fuss some days ago also thanks to the tabloid website we all love and support
He refused saying the content was not breaking any rule there and I proceeded to unload on him my... disappointment and he didn't appreciate that
So ya there you go.. every forum has the users it deserves and RD is happy with the cramer, blames and all the other characters making a fool of themselves daily in there but a developer trying to protect the interest of his company is not welcome nor supported.. good to know, at least we all know what's what now.

 

Oh my Dear Lord

I'll take profit of the fact you're very present on this thread to ask a little question.
Maybe an indiscreet one ?

I always wonder when a big update happens why there are so many little ones just afterwards ... 6 for this latest 1.5 in a 8 days time.
Is it because you're respectful for the promised date while everything is not yet perfectly ready ... or are they just corrections or fixes of discovered bugs afterwards ?

I appreciate of course the perfect follow-up of the game updates ... but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be better waiting one more week for publishing the perfect big update in one time ?

NB: I had to restart 2 used servers 3 or 4 times in the same week time. .... mostly for one or another data.acd modified file.

Please consider this question as asked from someone appreciating perfect organization and not a negative comment.

 

Like we didn't know that already!

Nice news though

Sent using Tapatalk

 

I'll reply to that if I may?

It does depend on what it is you are testing. The previous games I tested were far away from race sims, so the responsibilities and purpose of beta testing those titles I imagine was somewhat different to what the AC team is asked to do.

We were asked to test weapon and vehicle balance changes and also to find bugs. As a result of the feedback portions of maps got changed, so even if in some small way, you were kinda helping to "design the game".

Again, very different title, different expectations.

 

That is your definition of a betatester. Certainly many other devs (& publishers) share the same opinion than you but it is not a rule written in stone as you seem to suggest. I have participated in several betas (incl. hardware ones) where devs were listening to feedback and I have even read some in itw saying they needed that feedback because after months spent working on the game they end lacking hindsight.

Now yes, stricly speaking beta should mean feature complete, so no additionnal feature should be expected. Just not all betas are pure betas. If you want your betatesters to only report bugs then just be clear about that from the beginning and I bet the majority (or at least "more") won't beg for features/adjustments then. But if in a given beta some devs and/or community managers give the impression they are listening to some feedback/suggestions, then obviously more and more betatesters will make suggestions.

One sure thing, I have NEVER seen a betatest where betatesters were clearly notified form the beginning that "you are here to report bugs and that's all, period guys". Expecting a volunteer betatester to act like a paid one seems a bit of a publisher dream. Offer betatesters the game they are betatesting then yes you'd be more legitimate to ask them doing pure bug reports (imho).

 

Racedepartment really ban you? YOU? YOU? Stefano from Kunos? Not a joke? I've never heard things like that before. Its not easy to react in the right way. But this is what I feel:

 

perfection in software simply does not exists. New features are tested by a limited amount of volunteer betatesters that simply cannot cover the diversity in hardware and usage type that the software has to face once released. So it's already part of our plan to be ready with quick fixes.

Maybe, in order to get a better idea of what it means to test a product like Assetto Corsa.. consider this, lets round the content to 100 cars and 20 tracks... let's say it takes 1 minute to test it all works (and of course it doesn't) you'll need 2000 minutes, which is 33 hours, which is (assuming 8 hours days) comes to about 4 days.
But we know pretty well that it doesn't take 1 minute to test something so the number is much higher.. then add these combinations to the mix:

- triple screen? single screen?
- PP off? PP on? every single PP effect?
- Auto clutch? Auto shift? Stability? TC levels? ABS levels?
- Online MP? Offline single player? Practice? Race? What AI level? What track conditions?
- Steering wheel? Pad? Keyboard? Mouse?

We've now introduced the single player pitstop.. a single test takes races of 30-40 laps if not more.. it takes basically hours just to test a single combination of track/cars.

As you can see the combination explosion is so huge that we're left with 2 options:

- Freeze the software as it is and fix what can be fixed without changes to the core
- Keep evolving the software knowing that things will get broken and we'll have to react to it as soon as possible

And of course, the first option is not an option as long I work on AC

 

yes that is called balance or gameplay test.. where testers are asked to express an option on the difficulty balance of a game.

Still, even in that case, the fact remains that devs are under no obligation to follow your feedback nor to provide you with explanations about their choices.

 

Nope.. that is THE definition of betatester... different projects and different phase of a project might require for a different type of betatesting.. ie, games with innovative gameplay in the early stages might be very interested in tester's feedback on the game itself.. games with an established gameplay in a later stage of development will simply ignore anything that isn't crashing the game.

The ones that decide what the game will be like are called designers and are one of the most sough after positions in gamedev (everybody wants to decide and design stuff right?).. beta testing and QA are the "lowest" and most dreaded positions in gamedev... for a reason.

Feedback and interaction is a good and pretty normal thing.. yet, do you agree that, if a tester is going on a tantrum because "stupid devs didn't listen to him" he's basically an idiot? And, sadly, especially when it comes to volunteer testers that is a very very common scenario.

 

I did some testing work with FSX addons and it was an interesting experience, but a lot of work, too. One was about a twin engine radial plane that would sometimes flood the sparks on the ground pretty easy so you had to use to much throttle to keep them running. Well, that was the first encounter of the anomaly. The work starts than, trying all outside conditions to make sure under which conditions it happened, including long flight before, short flights, hot/cold % dry/wet weather and all combinations of that. That is the essential part of being a beta tester, in my experience, not just playing around, and shouting out that something doesn´t work.
Finding out the conditions of the anomaly is just the things that develepors don´t allways have the time to, as explained is the calculation example by Stefano above. That time can be used way better to actually improve the game.

When I did these betas, you could add your opinion here and there, but most devs were pretty defensive about that, noting some good ideas maybe here and there, making sure never to promise anything. And that´s pretty wise in my opinion, as in development you need to keep a course for things to work out. Changing stuff to often makes it way to complicated. Better to think about those things another time.

 

Can't believe none of your beta testers told you how important it would be to include more than one light source. And rain.
Or maybe you just didn't listen to them.


/s

 

the ones who did are not able to walk without pr

I don't dispute the ban because it was deserved considering the language I used .. I don't expect nor request any special treatment. But I do question their decisions when it comes to "controversial" content from "controversial" users. Once their position was clear I lost every interest in a civilized discussion and ****s started to fly.