• We have added Language Translations for French, Italian and Spanish menus, you can change your language at the bottom of every page, bottom left in the footer.
  • Spanish (Español, Latin American) translations have been added for the Forums and Resource Manager (Downloads). You can change your Language Here!
VP9.1.1 User Guide - Documentation & Help

VP9.1.1 User Guide - Documentation & Help 2020-01-28

No permission to download

Shockman

appropriate at this time
Why do I even waste my time replying to you when you can't even get what I'm saying right?
Maybe because you are a people person. I don't know. Maybe because you know deep down that there is really no reason not to.

We never referred to it as a 'cabinet build'. It's VP9 intended for use on desktops or cabinets ... period. What runs on one will run on the other. The only difference is the render.
I did not say desktops. Cabinets are running a desktop, just inside a box. the difference that matters is not the render, in fact there is no difference there. It's that some input works the cabinets, but not the keyboard. I don't blame you or your devs for that. I just think it is something you should want to change. It would be the top priority if I was in charge to make VP good for keyboards 'desktops' too.



Here's where your lack of foresight comes in. To have two versions would mean those building tables (most of them FS authors), would only build tables for one platform. I, for one, find it very time consuming to create two versions of every table. Make it inherently difficult by having two versions of VP?

Foolish.

Why? Why would a version of VP9 be incompatible with VP9? Why would two tables have to be made? If the code was put the hell back then users could make nudge work as it should, even if the authors did not even go to the trouble to add keyboard nudge to the table. I have ran tables that have been made for cabinets on my desktop. I'm not setting a mandate, I am in no position to. I am merely pointing out a great courtesy that I think, even if you don't, that the rest of the community (desktop users) deserve, if not is owed.



Submitted changes are always accepted. Whether or not they make it into our version is based on review.

That's not my point. The point is that something wonderful like keyboard control might not be worked on because of that attitude. I'm not suggesting anything be put into your version that breaks your version. Only suggesting that you should be open to a keyboard version. Even if you were submitted a version that had keyboard control, without breaking analog nudging, and accepted those changes, as I'm sure you would be happy about, what about evolution of either? A keyboard version could evolve much easier without worry about keeping analog working, as it would be the other way around. You might not like the idea, but it makes sense. It is clear that it is hard to work on the code without breaking it. Look at how many times just the deadzone for analog was in the worklogs, not always because there was a problem with it, but the work caused new problems. And I just don't buy right off hand that there would be any reason for two table builds.



What part of my previous statement is too difficult for you to grasp? By allowing the user to decide whether to use shake, force, or shake AND force, everyone will have what they want for nudge. Do I need to break out my crayons and spell it out for you elementarily for you to understand?

The part where instead of having a logical tie between the action and the perception, that it is intentionally made to work where the table could appear to move an inch and the ball 3. Separation of the equal and opposite reaction, is intentionally misusing a simulation that should strive for realistic physics. If the difference was restricted to a minuscule and negligible amount, I guess to could use it to simulate the stiffness of the legs, or the looseness of the leg bolts, or something, and that would be good, but that is a feature, not a fix for physics simulation. If VP was using just shake without force, something I understand where you are coming from, then that will entail much more I think than you realize. You say just a setting that would separate them would be nice. But it would not make the situation we are in any better. The ball is not going to stay put when the table is moved. There is going to have to be a algorithm written to make that happen. You surly would not want the ball to move with tha table which is what a simple separation would give you. It sounds like a lot of un-needed work to me to set of a simulation that's purpose to defy physics.



Only in your own delusional little world did those words ever exist. In response to the remaining drivel, see previous answer.

I did not say they did. Read again, and read when as if, which is correct usage.



Blah, blah, blah. You STILL hang on to that imagined slight. It wasn't untrue then, and it's not untrue now. VP8 will ALWAYS have the ball-through-the-flipper bug, and there is nothing short of recoding it that can be done about it ... sorry.
Increasing the down swing is effective and far short of recoding ... sorry.
It not that you said it was limited. It is that you said it did not exist, when you know it does and virtually ended the plethora of posts on the matter that occurred on a continuing basis before it, so who are you trying to tell it don't work? just him and me, or everyone. Well everyone knows that it does, so save your breath.
But it's not about that. It's about you setting me up as someone that can be disrespected, and attacked openly, and it continued after that, with the same reaction. "The other guy started it but he has not been in trouble before" But you are banned. And you said I could say fuck in the junkyard, or whatever you call it, and I assume the last ban was for calling people that was attacking me personally motherfuckers. Banning based on a single word, but not the content, and certainly not on a level field. How could you? I was by told by a mod that he was going to ban me and then resign, because I brought up a issue (not personal in any way). UW posted in that last thread too, was personal, and it does not matter. I just don't understand why you would want only members that agree with you, or keep ideas under their hat to avoid response. If you can mention just one thing I did that I was not just one half of the same then why don't you? I can mention events where it was personal against me. Can you mention just one where I was personal against anyone? It would explain why I am banned from a group of people I have been around for a great part of my life. I was told I was going to be banned, even before I said fuck, so you can't really use that. That was just a reaction to something that should never have been said anyway. I'm asking about anything I started.




That's a shame. The 'aforementioned' point is hardly a reason to behave the way you did. You need to get a grip, Phil.

You did not keep your word. I was attacked and lied about to such a degree that that people were just writing to dis. Don't you think so, or do you think increasing the flipper swing to a typical up swing speed makes it instant? Don't you think so, or do you believe that flipper return is governed in the real world by gravity? Don't you think so, or do you think everything said against me become true on that basis? You told me you would not allow this to happen, then you lead it, and jabbed again when it was agreed to be dropped. WTF did I do or say, that lies about me and my contribution became acceptable and irrefutably How would you have me react to personal attacks? Not as you would have others that attack is it? Obviously not. I think you just don't feel powerful enough if you can not ban someone, so why not someone that disagrees with you. We both want VP as good as it can can be. I just don't think it can be if you think it already is, or switching settings, or separating settings should be good enough for the keyboard users. Bugs should have priority over new features in any software development. I hope that is just a tad easier to read here, for you, than it was there.


PS: Not ONCE did I ever say VP8 was dead. It was not being currently worked on, sure, but dead, no. I even invited you to take part in a VP8 dev team.

Not once did I say you did. You are not the only one that says things. That is why it is in a sentence all by it's self, to intentionally separate it from you. There is no VP8 development team. I said I thought I might be able to make the ball solid in VP8, just to lay that to rest. But I really don't have a desire to develop VP8. A ball through the flipper fix in the code would be nice, as a send off, or flowers on the coffin, but what would be the point of a VP8 development team?
.
 
Last edited:

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
"If the code was put the hell back then users could make nudge work as it should ..."

You mean as you believe it should, right?

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

"A keyboard version could evolve much easier without worry about keeping analog working..."

Dude, that right there just begs the question, "What village is missing their idiot?"

With that statement, you are suggesting different advancement rates in the builds, and therefore, two distinctly different versions.

The result would be the devs having to implement features more than once and in different ways between versions, possibly resulting in authors needing to build two versions of tables, and one group having to wait for what the other version currently has to be implemented in their preferred version. It's just not the way it should be done.

Do you even pay attention to what you post?

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

I really don't care to take further part in this.

For those of you who actually care about others, those involved in bringing us VP9 in the first place, and VP development for both desktop and cabinet users, you're welcome to continue this discussion at VPF.


Later.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
Yeah. Fuck me for suggesting that keyboard users have a working solution to nudging one way or another from your product. I was obviously out of line.
 

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
Yeah, and fuck me for suggesting fixing it OVER and OVER until I'm sick of discussing it.

Sorry if making the force and the shake user definable doesn't meet your standards or expectations, even though it's exactly what you're asking for, just translated into something comprehensible.

BTW, as far as I can tell, you've been out of line since at least 2006.

Link


:D

My favorite part ... "...just a bunch of trolls crying about something that happened at another site."

Ironic, isn't it?
 
Last edited:

druadic

Scotland 2021!!!
Yeah, and fuck me for suggesting fixing it OVER and OVER until I'm sick of discussing it.

Sorry if making the force and the shake user definable doesn't meet your standards or expectations, even though it's exactly what you're asking for, just translated into something comprehensible.

BTW, as far as I can tell, you've been out of line since at least 2006.

Link


:D

My favorite part ... "...just a bunch of trolls crying about something that happened at another site."

Ironic, isn't it?
Paul,

I'm druadic so I can become a troll if necessary. Yes, us druids can transform into any creature or being we desire at will.
(Can you figure out there is sarcasm behind the above statement?)

Honestly, calling everyone trolls is nonsense. Concern over the nudging matter is important. Where is Randy Davis through all this?

Can I add Pinball Nirvana's logo to my signature at VPF? Let me know. I'd like to please as long as it doesn't get me banned again.

Overall, this topic has gotten slightly out of hand. Enough for me.
 

druadic

Scotland 2021!!!
You missed the whole point of the post, Will, but that's okay. I didn't call anyone a troll.

So is adding the logo to your sig. I've never stopped anyone from doing that.
Paul;

I realize Shocky has a BIG mouth. BUT, PacDude was the same way. I also realize that only one person (Shockman) seems to have a vendetta against all this so I can understand the majority of folks want the nudge to be the way it is. All folks have to do is add a few lines of script to fix this.

I'm not trying to be difficult; I just find this topic (over here) is way overboard. I also appreciate the help you have given me. Thanks! I also appreciate that I can add the logo to my sig. That's also appreciated.

Don't know what else to say. Just thanks for your honest information and keeping us updated on the topic. Of course there are the few of us that were used to the "old" nudge but you've stated this can be fixed using the StartShake statement. Good enough for me as long as it works. ;)

Thanks Noah.

d
 

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
Any time, dude.

It's my sincerest hope that we can have both nudge effects user definable. This way you can go only 'shake', only 'force', or anything in between.

The simplest solution to trying to make everyone happy.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
You missed the point of that old thread as well Paul. I think it was obvious that it was sarcasm.

It might work, I'm not exactly sure, separating shake and force. In VP8 though it was tied together in a logical way. I don't know why you would think that having them made to be set in illogical ways would make it any better, and you have not explained it that I have caught. You just say it is all that is needed.

I understand what I want. And I understand what is needed. If just shake alone would move the table and not the ball, then you are absolutely right. I could not know, because we would have to have both shake and force working, as well as counter force to know. I really don't care if the these things are tied together in a logical way or not, as long as they all can be set by the user. I would hope of course that the default was logical.

Cabinet users would not want the ball to move, but the table to, and I don't know if you can add what would be very small amounts of recoil difference to the nudge or not. But keyboard users might prefer it either way. They might prefer the table to move, or they may prefer the ball to move, and perhaps a little of both. The table moving would be the ball moving too, just at a point of view where the pov is set to the ball, so if you could focus on only the ball it would appear not to move.

Regardless if the separation would work or not, when someone hits the nudge button and the ball starts rolling, and hits the nudge button again and the ball rolls faster, including from the bottom of the table to the top, what is obvious is not that separation is needed but, but that the counter force is needed. Only if you would want some unrealistic reaction in ball movement, can I see a need for separation though. Separation is an idea, and I'm not saying it is a bad idea. Counterforce needed on the other hand is an axiom. If someone wanted ball movement without table movement, they have it, with startshake not being used. If someone wanted table movement without ball movement, then they need something like VP<9 has, and would have it with startshake set to on if the counterforce was put back. Don't you understand that we would already have it both ways without separation if the recoil was put back? What would you suppose this separation flag be called? startshake2? Separation may be nice as a feature, but it is not what I want, like you keep saying it is. Why would I want to have to make a reaction equal and opposite to a reaction? I would expect a very simple algorithm to do that automatically. VP2 did this. Probably VP1 as well.
And what if someone wanted the ball only to move? Imagine that, wait, you don't have to, your version does that by design. Counterforce would be needed then and separation of what we have wouldn't do shit.

It would probably be easier to understand if I knew how VP in relation to the cabinet hardware behaved. Shake is not used, and ball movement is reversed, so the only thing needed is to sync the ball movement to the actual real table movement, in such a way that the ball is at least pretty much staying on the same spot on the table. Is this correct? Does it work well? If so that is pretty much what VP has always did for the keyboard. Always, until VP9. I think UC's biggest mistake was not modifying the key code to do their deed, but leaving any part of keyboard interaction at all. Then just one single sub-routine would now need to be written to do nudging for the keyboard. Something that any of us would be able to do.
 
Last edited:

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
You missed the point of that old thread as well Paul. I think it was obvious that it was sarcasm.
Oh, I didn't miss anything ...

You were banned, blaming everyone else, and even complaining about people 'crying about something that happened at another site,' which is so pot meet kettle ... all too familiar, Phil, and very ironic.

But that aside ...

If just shake alone would move the table and not the ball, then you are absolutely right.
That is EXACTLY what I've been saying all along!

Cabinet users would not want the ball to move, but the table to
Incorrect. Cab users want no shake, just ball movement. It makes no sense to have two playfield movements. The cab moves already, so just the force need be applied.

So, by making shake and force two different, definable aspects of nudge, both are possible on the same platform! It's the easiest way to implement it, and offers a lot of flexibility for authors to create nudging effects as they see fit.

Regardless if the separation would work or not, when someone hits the nudge button and the ball starts rolling, and hits the nudge button again and the ball rolls faster, including from the bottom of the table to the top, what is obvious is not that separation is needed but, but that the counter force is needed.
Here's where inverting is part of the solution. When you nudge a table up, the ball would actually move into objects below it. Though there currently is too much force applied, having it nudge in the wrong direction only makes matters worse.


Only if you would want some unrealistic reaction in ball movement, can I see a need for separation though.
Keyboard users want shake, cab users want force, so it's the perfect solution. I personally would want a little force with my shake on desktop tables, with counter-force applied, of course.

So, I've been saying all of this ALL ALONG, and I'm tired of repeating myself.

If you could have just gotten past the conspiracy theories, blaming former devs, imagined slights, your constant negativity toward the project, and your nagging sensationalism, you may have seen what I've been saying all along much sooner.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
"If you could have just gotten past the conspiracy theories, blaming former devs, imagined slights, your constant negativity toward the project, and your nagging sensationalism, you may have seen what I've been saying all along much sooner."

Those thing are unrelated to my still seeing no explanation of why, or what good merely separating these two elements would do, but only a statement that it's needed. Counterforce is needed and separating it into a million parts is not going to give that. Are you saying that counterforce is part of shake, in that the table returns to position, and the ball acts accordingly correctly, and with the cabinet implementation that it does?

I can't test hardware I don't have. I can only analyze keyboard function, which not having start shake is not a problem, having the numbers reversed is not a problem. Both things that ideally it would. Stopshake should be part of your hardware code. Startshake should be there. Surly you have code that sets up those devices, that you can put stop shake into. Directions should be set up as your hardware requires of course, but adding a minus to the keyboard directions in the default table script at least should have happened day one. Both of these thing should have happened day one. Because these things are so simple that even I could do it, and it would make what little bit of keyboard nudging you do have work correctly with no effect to the hardware.

I don't have conspiracy theories, I have a inherent desire for courtesy towards the virtual pinball community as a whole, which these very simple changes mentioned above that could be done before the night is out would be.

I don't blame the former devs for making their build of VP (UCVP) work with their hardware. It was their job and to not do it would be pointless. To preserve keyboard control for some things would be pointless as well. I blame the current devs for some things though.

Paul, you used the name VPF to inherit the VPF community. If you don't feel any responsibility to it as a whole, you should spend the rest of the day changing the name. It is not too late to do that. I have builds of Visual Pinball that have startshake working and directions correct for keyboard users and no straight left or right either, as well as counterforce as good as it can possibly be scripted, that all has no possible way of effecting your hardware function. It's just that the scripting solution, while working needs timers that are not ideal. If I can do it then destruk or any one of the others can do it. It's simple.

You could have a version that works infinity better for keyboard without any possibly of effecting hardware one iota before tomorrow is here, if you wanted it.

Constant negativity? Constant is hardly the word. And negativity? Is suggestions about bugs that need to be fixed really negative in your opinion? In mine it is positive feedback. Keyboard nudging it different, but it's great guys. Is this positive? does something have to be false to be positive, or does it need to go un-mentioned to be positive. There is absolutely nothing negative about pointing out things that are wrong that would be an easy fix. I also requested that which you call layback, and ball size, and Alpha .png.And other than bug fixes that's about all that was ever on my list. These things too were all negative, weren't they? Good grief Paul. Why do you have to get rid of those that conflict with you? You can gain so much more from such people in a week than you can ditto heads in a lifetime.

nagging sensationalism? You mean a personality that irks you, don't you? We all deal with all types of personalities, unless of course we have the power to ban them. I have seen each of you with similar reactions to one thing or another, and you'll can be at least as nasty. I don't lie though, and that is a rare trait amongst those I have interacted with the most though. We have all cut you slack. With the name VPF which many thought was lame, with your paranoia about simple keyboard fixes destroying your hardware function, and we have weighed and measured, and you have come out on top, as everyone, but the evil should.
 
Last edited:

Shockman

appropriate at this time
I have seen the same code, (well I have not seen the code because I can't even download new builds of VP from there. I have to wait for it to show up here or get the source, which the latest version I have yet to get to make) so function then in the form of script for keyboard feedback show up at VPF a couple of times and that is not the first stuff. That is just not right. I have always found solutions, if solutions were possible, even if they were believed impossible, and I think that is much more important than any personality could be. I could imagine actions, or even extreme personalities like bigotry, or virus spreading people, or site hackers that would have need to be rid of, but I am none of that.

I can not even try out any of these new tables like the Flintstones, and Roadshow because I can not finds links off site (VPF site) anymore. Not even at JP's own page because download links all lead to VPF. Not a conspiracy theory, a fact.

You should at least have the courtesy to allow an oldtimer a read only account long enough to collect some things to try out.
 

tiltjlp

PN co-founder
Either way, VP 8 nudging is a thing of the past, so what Noah has proposed about shake and force both being coded individually seems like a fairly decent compromise. I've begun to toy with the nudge force numbers, and in the game I'm working on now, which uses roughly half the force I usually have, I like the results. We all pride ourselves on figuring out workarounds, so rather than doing nothing but complain, I've decided to find a solution that works for my tables. And odd as it may seem, I prefer force alone.
 

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
...Counterforce is needed and separating it into a million parts is not going to give that. Are you saying that counterforce is part of shake, in that the table returns to position, and the ball acts accordingly correctly, and with the cabinet implementation that it does?
Implementing counter-force has always been part of my suggestion, Phil.

I can't test hardware I don't have. I can only analyze keyboard function, which not having start shake is not a problem, having the numbers reversed is not a problem. Both things that ideally it would. Stopshake should be part of your hardware code. Startshake should be there. Surly you have code that sets up those devices, that you can put stop shake into. Directions should be set up as your hardware requires of course, but adding a minus to the keyboard directions in the default table script at least should have happened day one. Both of these thing should have happened day one. Because these things are so simple that even I could do it, and it would make what little bit of keyboard nudging you do have work correctly with no effect to the hardware.
Separating them into definable characteristics would do away with StartShake/StopShake.

I don't have conspiracy theories, I have a inherent desire for courtesy towards the virtual pinball community as a whole, which these very simple changes mentioned above that could be done before the night is out would be.
Admins and Moderators are a big part of the community, Phil. Where does your inherent desire go when dealing with them?

I don't blame the former devs for making their build of VP (UCVP) work with their hardware. It was their job and to not do it would be pointless. To preserve keyboard control for some things would be pointless as well. I blame the current devs for some things though.
Does the keyboard not work at all? Seeing as how I know it does, then fixing the ball/table behavior is what needs to be focused upon.

Blaming the current devs for anything is quite disrespectful. You don't even know the current devs or how hard they work on what they're doing.

Paul, you used the name VPF to inherit the VPF community. If you don't feel any responsibility to it as a whole, you should spend the rest of the day changing the name. It is not too late to do that.
You have no clue ... I'll just let the site speak for itself.

Just be aware that I've been FAR from an 'absentee landlord,' and the community is growing, not dying a slow, agonizing death as it had been said to be in the past.

I have builds of Visual Pinball that have startshake working and directions correct for keyboard users and no straight left or right either, as well as counterforce as good as it can possibly be scripted, that all has no possible way of effecting your hardware function. It's just that the scripting solution, while working needs timers that are not ideal. If I can do it then destruk or any one of the others can do it. It's simple.
I don't even know what you're talking about on this one. The directions are correct, and again, separating them into definable characteristics would do away with any need for StartShake/StopShake.

You could have a version that works infinity better for keyboard without any possibly of effecting hardware one iota before tomorrow is here, if you wanted it.
You think it's that easy, it's not. If it were, you'd have already done it, no?

Constant negativity? Constant is hardly the word. And negativity? Is suggestions about bugs that need to be fixed really negative in your opinion? In mine it is positive feedback. Keyboard nudging it different, but it's great guys. Is this positive? does something have to be false to be positive, or does it need to go un-mentioned to be positive. There is absolutely nothing negative about pointing out things that are wrong that would be an easy fix. I also requested that which you call layback, and ball size, and Alpha .png.And other than bug fixes that's about all that was ever on my list. These things too were all negative, weren't they? Good grief Paul. Why do you have to get rid of those that conflict with you? You can gain so much more from such people in a week than you can ditto heads in a lifetime.
You don't suggest, you insist. You don't report bugs, you complain. If you had it your way, everything would be done your way. When it's not, you're relentless, and yes, annoying as hell. You take the fun out of it. You were making me not want to visit my own site, and taking up so much of my time with your sensationalistic accusations that I could get nothing of my own accomplished. When it got to that point, you had to go, Phil.

nagging sensationalism? You mean a personality that irks you, don't you? We all deal with all types of personalities, unless of course we have the power to ban them. I have seen each of you with similar reactions to one thing or another, and you'll can be at least as nasty. I don't lie though, and that is a rare trait amongst those I have interacted with the most though. We have all cut you slack. With the name VPF which many thought was lame, with your paranoia about simple keyboard fixes destroying your hardware function, and we have weighed and measured, and you have come out on top, as everyone, but the evil should.
No paranoia here, just respect for a company's hardware and all of those that have purchased it.
I have seen the same code, (well I have not seen the code because I can't even download new builds of VP from there. I have to wait for it to show up here or get the source, which the latest version I have yet to get to make) so function then in the form of script for keyboard feedback show up at VPF a couple of times and that is not the first stuff. That is just not right. I have always found solutions, if solutions were possible, even if they were believed impossible, and I think that is much more important than any personality could be. I could imagine actions, or even extreme personalities like bigotry, or virus spreading people, or site hackers that would have need to be rid of, but I am none of that.

I can not even try out any of these new tables like the Flintstones, and Roadshow because I can not finds links off site (VPF site) anymore. Not even at JP's own page because download links all lead to VPF. Not a conspiracy theory, a fact.

You should at least have the courtesy to allow an oldtimer a read only account long enough to collect some things to try out.
Dude, over 100 emails in what, a week? Skyping with you, calling you on the phone, and giving you three chances isn't courtesy? Really?

You should have thought about all that when you were insulting me every hour, on the hour, for days.


So, this has taken up enough of my valuable time, and I always feel like I'm intruding when I post like this over here, so I'll be off.

My apologies to Jon and staff.

Have a nice day.
 

StevOz

Administrator
Staff member
Site Supporters
Shockman should open his own forum.
We tried that once here. :D

Still all said, I'm still thinking a separate shake vs nudge codec is not the solution, as I've said over there, the nudge I feel needs another parameter called friction to address both the VP9 wildly exaggerated ball movement and allow for no movement at all in a desktop scenario. I just feel it would be a more elegant solution with greater possibilities and flexibility.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
"Does the keyboard not work at all? Seeing as how I know it does, then fixing the ball/table behavior is what needs to be focused upon."
For nudging? Are you serious? This is exactly the kind of comments that have me wondering if you really give a fuck, or understand .

"You should have thought about all that when you were insulting me every hour, on the hour, for days."
When I was banned for something I didn't even do, but I understand why you would want leave that out.

Separating is definitely no solution, as all the other fixes will still have to be done, and with separation, re-coded entirely differently. I don't know about friction though, it just does not sound right.

The way I see it, the counterforce that VP users have always enjoyed until this current dev cycle is needed, because the is what nudging is. What we have is driving. Friction nor separation is going to produce that. If it just had what it needed, then discussion would make sense as to where it can go from there. Separation and anything else is pointless until nudging is not the same and moving the ball along.
 
Last edited:

StevOz

Administrator
Staff member
Site Supporters
Yeah friction is not really the right terminology and jolt is a more correct term, referring to the amount the ball moves and changes trajectory upon a nudge.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
Paul
That totally wipes out any chance to have both shake and nudge, in varying portions, to have a really realistic nudge!

It seems like you guys just aren't getting it ...
Not getting your hardware? No we are not.

Getting that a separate shake will have to still have force applied or the table is going to move a well into the ball but not bat it. Getting that setting the nudge amount always was the way of changing the "varying portions", that it seems we alone are getting.

This makes no sense at all. You want to totally screw up nudging for only keyboard users. VP nudges the ball, or at least it did before you got a hold of it. WTF do you think nudging is is not a "shake". If it were two different things then VP would have already had it, and you would be beating the drum to take one away from us. People that went to all the trouble to make their tables work, in VP9 and don't have nudging, but some surreal driving mechanism are not going to want a solution mean they are still not going to work. Nudging is the term in real pinball, and it is a shake. Nudging is the term in VP, besides yours, and involves shaking. This only fucking worked because they are tied together. A shake without a nudge means the ball and the table are moved the same, from our perspective, the ball not move at all by the table's perspective, but either way would not account for ball movement.

You have to understand, because this is not a real physical world, that no physic simulation in a matter of implementing real physics, not in the digital world, perhaps with the cabinets to a more degree. However, You say cabinets use force and not shake, and you assume we, because you have said a dozen times "That is exactly what you want", but it isn't. To nudge a pinball anyway you go about it, is to use force. Shaking without force? come on. Shaking with force if you set the force too (separate)? come on. You have proven by going on this nonsensical "change nudging to shake for keyboard users, it's what they want" kick that shake is not what we want if no force is tied to it. You even have me saying that now when in fact, the fact is that it has been always shake being tied to the force, because when nudging, force is king, not the motion.

You have to learn that nudging has more than a motion element, and you should already know that with cabinets that have that motion. How about taking force out of VP? You have the shake, and a real world version of the motion. You have made it real. Wait, you still need the force settings to make it work, don't you? Hell, just moving the table under the ball involves force, or the ball is not going to move (in relation to the table surface, not space), nor is it going anywhere if a wall slaps up against it.

Nudging is going to have a force on the table that is not going to have much to any noticeable degree on the ball due to the lack of friction due to the one mass being vastly more insignificant to the other. If you want to weigh a ball, and weigh a table, then subtract table weight from the ball weight, believe me, you are going to come up with a very small number. a negative number that will let you know the number of zeros to put to the right of a decimal to determine the actual amount of driving the nudging should do, and in my opinion, the sum of exactly how much better VP9 nudging is than VP<9 nudging is (a very large negative number).

I think someone that says there is significant delineation of the ball as a result of the nudge, VP9 nudging is better in any way (keyboard of course), action and reaction should not have a logical tie, or suggest reversing numbers, is in no position to make suggestions as to how a group they have no understanding of and seemingly no use for, should have these physics implemented. Work on getting your analog deadzone perfected, and leave the digital nudging to someone that cares about digital nudging. Please.

Shake and force have got to be tied together, there is absolutely no option there. If having visible table movement, that remember, is what we want, as you let us know. You are right, but we really have no wants here that matter. We have needs, just as your cabinets do.
 
Last edited:

Noah Fentz

'Rasslin' Fan
Customizable shake, customizable jolt ... you can have the nudge do whatever the hell you want, and that's not good enough?

VP8 applies ZERO jolt to the ball, it simply moves the table, so by setting the jolt to ZERO, you'll get the same result.

So, apparently, you just don't get it, and you never will, so I'm done with this.
 

bob

Add-a-ball specialist
Site Supporters
Customizable shake, customizable jolt ... you can have the nudge do whatever the hell you want, and that's not good enough?

VP8 applies ZERO jolt to the ball, it simply moves the table, so by setting the jolt to ZERO, you'll get the same result.

So, apparently, you just don't get it, and you never will, so I'm done with this.
Is this in VP9.1.2?

Is it being worked on by someone who is a real person?

I don't want to get excited if we are just pissing in the wind here.

:flower:

The VP9 nudge totally sucks, I play around with it for amusement, but I haven't played a table yet where it was of any use. I would say it's about as worthless as having no nudge.
 

Shockman

appropriate at this time
VP8, pro pinball, real pinball, everything has 'jolt'. You must be confused because Jolt does have a table movement tied to it. You must be confused because it has a realistic recoil. You must be confused because it has the counter force. Counter force is what your "better" VP9 does not have. You must be confused because you said the ball should delineate from it path. You must be confused because a balls weight is insignificant compared to the tables mass, to expect it to be driven by jolting.

VP9 nudging does not in the first way simulate a pinball sitting on a pinball machine, So no, I don't get it, Paul, and I never will. Customizable shake, customizable jolt. You said what we want is shake. Separation and adjustable shake and Jolt, is not even the same subject. You said what we needed was shake. No you said what we wanted is shake too.

A 4 year old could understand what I am saying on the other hand, and everyone does get it. I knew you would too. Customizable shake, customizable jolt. That's a big step forward from all we want is shake separate from jolt. What I and others want is customizable jolt and shake, there is no reason to type customizable after both. There is also no reason in my opinion to not have one tied to the other. Who want's to figure how much they need the table to move and program that to match a number they pick for the force of the nudge in the computer age? Since reaction is always an equal and opposite to an action, then I have a radical idea you could, borrow from real life, other pinball sims, including VP, for VP9. How about we let the computer figure that out for us. Why don't we have to adjust both the force of a pop bumper and the force of the ball's reaction to it? Because they are one and the same. Actually they are two parts of a whole. Action/Equal and opposite reaction. I did not just make that up. It is a part of VP, and everything else. Let's have a table that is nudged half way across the room and make people have to find a useful nudge power to go along with that. Maybe have the wall that slams into a ball at 15 mph move the ball a quarter of an inch before it rolls down the drain, or not, if we can get it right by some amount of effort we might, will surly get it to act better than that! Instead, why not do what everyone else does and use the damn computer for calculations. That's my thought, that's what I would want, if you are interested in logical suggestions.

Your suggestion is not bad Paul, but without a logical tie in, it's missing the boat. I hope to God that the lack of nudging gets improved. If we HAVE to calculate a shake to go with our force, then some of us can do that. I sure hope we are not called upon to do it though, not when we all have computers that can, as they always (until now these days) done that kind of crap for us. VP9's nudging set VP's nudging back to before the release of VP. Things should be getting better, not worse. Without keyboard nudging, as far as I'm concerned, your team can take out keyboard plunging and keyboard flippers and it would no longer matter. Of course if they could be set separate, but defaulted to a logical tie into each other, the that would be good. There is no getting around the fact though that if you separate, it would still be crap. It has got to have counterforce, or it will remain crap. Good lord man.

These physics don't you know are similar to many other things like tennis rackets/balls, ping pong, golf club/ball, on and on. It would be important for a simulation of anything to keep any action/reaction tied together. The force (assuming we are as usual referring to that terminology as the balls part, and shake to the tables part which is the true action, because we are not nudging a ball, we are nudging a table, but again, with a logical tie it does not matter, because without one there is one in an infinite chance it will be right) anyway the force setting is programming the reaction, but that is the beauty of this, if done right it works both ways and setting both would always be redundant, unless the goal is to defy physics. Jolt? what is that? I thought we used shake and force. You appear to use it for the ball. For movement direction, or force, I don't know. The table jolts the ball though and the ball reacts to that jolt so jolt should replace shake if you want to throw in new terminology.

If VP8 had zero jolt to the ball, which is not the case (you are just confused by this opposite reaction aspect of physics), then no matter how much the table moved it would have no effect on the ball, and if the table moved the ball would not. Please quit telling people they can divert the ball on an open table surface to the point of delineating the ball by some significant amount, because they can't. VP8-= can't. Real pinball can't. Pinball simulations can't, and none of these would if they could. VP9 can though. VP9 is not pinball physics for ball interaction. Are you slowly converting VP to a sports game like hockey, and not telling us about it, or is having cabinet's analog nudging all it takes to be keeping it on track.

VP8's nudging is not perfect, but it works well. And it works better out of the box than VP9's does with scripting. Out of the box, VP9's nudging, if you insist on calling it that, is a piece of shit. It makes VP9 a piece of shit in just one little aspect, HUMAN INTERACTION with the TABLE and PINBALL.

I just got a idea. If you do end up separating it, separate it into three pieces. Jolt, shake, and force. Jolt would be the player hitting the table and shake will be the reaction to being jolted, or the action of shaking, and the force can be some arbitrary number that sends the ball in some direction, or jump or something, maybe. I know if I got to set the ball movement arbitrarily, then I might as well send it to the jackpot regardless of the nudge spot. Or do you agree that the direction at least, (lets just start there) has got to be logically tied in?

I use to think Black was being a butt by beating the drum for getting rid of unrealistic settings opportunities in VP, but now I think he might have been a visionary.
 
Last edited:

sleepy

Pinball Wizard
Site Supporters
From an operator's standpoint, the nudge and shake should be a matter of liberal vs. conservative settings with the old VP 8 nudge and shake in the middle of these extremes.
This is because in real world tables, the maximum nudge and shake are dependent on the tightness or looseness of the leg mounts on the machine as set by the mechanics on the job per bolts.

Loose legs = max nudge and shake and are part of a liberal setting when the tilt sensitivity is set low or off.
Loose legs also = max nudge and shake on a conservative setting when the tilt sensitivity is set so high that just looking at the machine or a sneeze will tilt the game.

The VP8 nudge and shake was like a machine with solid tightly bolted legs.
 

sleepy

Pinball Wizard
Site Supporters
And I think the term Jolt probably should belong to something like push sliding the machine on the floor where the push grates the leg footings against the floor and the ball is jolted vertically up and down against the playfield surface (z-axis).
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    Top