...
...As for VP development ... I'm not a developer, nor do I dictate the direction in which VP is developed. Any of the devs can confirm this as fact.
The reason I suggested otherwise, is that you are using not the last version Randy was working on which was merging the UC version with the general version, but instead went with the proprietary derivative which totally hacked VP up with only certain niche hardware mattering.
Then said two versions would be more confusing, when the idea of two versions had nothing to do with confusion but function. It could certainly be that VP will NEVER have the keyboard function when niche hardware takes president. Using a cabinet version or a desktop version would avoid not only confusion, but disappointment. Would a MAC and PC version be too confusing?
Then said that no other version would be allowed to be hosted, linked to or talked about there. I don't think this is a conspiracy, but a poor and selfish policy made by you. I think everyone else would like full function, even if it meant a version for each platform, be that PC and Mac, or PC and cabinet based hardware, because that is two separate platforms, and requires separate support routines in either the same same build, or increasingly obvious, two builds.
You also said VP8 is dead, and it may be, but no more than VP9 if it is not further worked on, and VP8 is just as open to further work as VP9 is.
This sounds like dictates to me. You choose to work on UCVP if not directly (personally) and for all I know you have the rights to, and as far as I'm concerned as well, you have the right. But for general use, you know this is missing basic function that any pinball simulator should have, and VP has always had until now. I believe you hampered work in restoring basic pinball simulating function to VP by saying stuff like no ones work could be put up, linked to, or talked about at your site. Also by saying that nudging should not be restored to how it was, but instead a complicated system where the force is unrelated to the reaction would be the only sensible way to go. This takes physics out of the equation. Not that there would be anything wrong with having the ability, as long as the default is a nudge that is physically calculated to the jolt, but it is an expansion, a refinement, not a basic function.
You even said VP9 nudging is better that VP8 nudging ever was, even for keyboard use. This was a foolish statement, one that you can not possibly believe, and expect respect of your intelligence. You said that the lack of recoil is more realistic than a recoil and that it would be significantly less that a full 100% reaction (equal and opposite). I agreed, but said this would be negligible in terms of a digital simulation. You said Prom players can steer the ball, again in defense of VP9 physics as simulated by a keystroke. I again agreed, but pointed out this amount would again be negligible in VP. The plunger has what? 40 power positions, not counting the extended length, and flippers seem to be far less as far as possible trajectories possible. We are talking about elements that have infinite scope in the real world. But still, nudging should not have 100% recoil in the scope of VP? Direction however, anyone can fix that, and on any given day. I can fix that, and I am not a C++ developer.
You said that the core.vbs that addressed most, if not all the issues, to some, if not a realistic degree was a bad idea, and further cause for confusion. You should have jumped all over that in my opinion.
There is a certain amount of confusion inherent in setting up emulation and running simulations. You can not avoid that. You can only avoid a working solution for those that don't want to (not many) or can't afford (many indeed) your cabinets and hardware. And you seem to be dead set to. Not because you are not a developer, but you confuse the issue with bogus statements about what nudging really is, not allow alternatives to be shared, and claim that VP works outside your niche, and that nothing was or will be taken from one platform to support another. It already was. And if after well over two years it's a problem to restore basic function that all pinball simulators have, and VP always has has until now, then that is not a problem with the program, but the stewardship, because you have been given alternatives. The core.vbs file, the suggestion of a build that restored the function with only keyboard control is addressed, as yours has only the niche hardware addressed.
If you are doing the best you can do for the community, then you KNOW that you are. I don't believe you are doing the best you can for the community, but I DON"T know that. Perhaps we just think very differently. Perhaps there are logical reasons to not embrace these ideas and solutions for the other people in the community, and I just miss the logic.
You put yourself in this position, taking stewardship, and having commercial interests. That is a conflict of interest, only if you then claim to be community minded.