Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /home/customer/www/neverforum.com/public_html/fmpbo/include/parser.php on line 756

1

Topic: Stunned

So I posted a random comment on an old record and received a response that left me speechless:

I wrote:

Try doing it now, though. smile

Elviz wrote:

Now? The level hasn't changed, and I don't think you've uploaded a new technique...? If you're referring to the modified Chase camera, Nuncabola offers an option to restore the previous behaviour, and I use it all the time. The r2931+ camera just isn't responsive enough for me.

Take a moment to think about what this means.

2

Re: Stunned

You're being overly cryptic here, parasti.

3 (edited by parasti 2010-05-16 22:13:34)

Re: Stunned

I don't think I am.  In order for me to be able to compete with you, I have to be using Nuncabola or an old version of Neverball.  There is no option to change the view behavior in the latest Neverball, just as there isn't an option to disable any other behavior-altering change that has been made over time.  I realize there's a loophole on the Nevertable (allowing pre-1.5.2 replays), but you are exploiting it, and what surprises me is that you either failed to realize this or didn't think it was worth bringing up.

4

Re: Stunned

The ability to use movement on the y-axis to propel the camera had been a part of the game for many years. Changing an important gameplay aspect without giving users a choice doesn't seem right. The modified behaviour does not only have benefits, but also drawbacks (sluggish control while flying), so I made it optional for Nuncabola. This is documented here and here. We're not talking about fixes for actual physics bugs but about something that comes down to personal preference. (You'll find that changes like r3111 were always ported promptly, without an option to disable them.)

Actually, for some time now I've been thinking about going even further and adding a preference to have the camera behave as in 1.4.0 (just have to figure out what the difference on the code level is; it appears to come down to a normalize call). I never liked the lockstep camera, and the claim that there hadn't been a change at all just added insult to injury. The resulting ticket #146 was a request for restoring the old behaviour. Why there was a need to spend a "ridiculous amount" of time thinking about this instead of simply doing it, I don't know. In the end the camera change was only partially reverted.

This is also where the two threads tie together: One of the points cited in favour of the r2931 camera was that it improved the behaviour in BuD's "bar-jump" level (jumpers.map). That's undoubtedly true, the Chase camera no longer freaks out when the player hits the first chrome bar. But what's also true, I think, is that that level was already quite playable with the pre-lockstep camera, even if the behaviour was slightly less predictable than it's now. The idea, then, is that with two orthogonal preferences (camera_vertical to control the use of vertical velocity and, say, camera_smooth for 1.4.0-type smoothness at high speeds), all situations could be covered.

parasti wrote:

I realize there's a loophole on the Nevertable (allowing pre-1.5.2 replays) [...]

Or put differently, turning on the camera_vertical option in Nuncabola simply gives you the same behaviour you would have by recording your replay using Neverball 1.5.0 or 1.5.1. (And nowhere did I hear of any demands that these versions suddenly be banned or any pre-1.5.2 replays deleted.)

5

Re: Stunned

So... does this mean that players that use Nuncabola do have a software advantage on the Table?

Would you say that disabling angled acceleration would remove that advantage? Or is it because the camera allows the player to react more quickly?

Quite interesting altogether...

6

Re: Stunned

It's not so much interesting as it is simply depressing.  What I get from this, is that 1) view/tilt behavior is untouchable, no improvements can ever be made to it, and 2) fair game takes a back seat to Elviz's own convenience.

7 (edited by Elviz 2010-05-18 06:03:22)

Re: Stunned

parasti wrote:

1) view/tilt behavior is untouchable, no improvements can ever be made

I value stability, especially with regard to levels that rely on specific camera behaviour. Still, I don't think your statement is necessarily true. First, let's distinguish here. After the lockstep change, auto-rotation was too lazy for slow movements and too harsh for fast ones. No reason was given why this constituted an improvement. In fact, no reason at all was given for the change.

With r2931, it's different. I actually don't have any hard feelings about that one; it was a reasonable attempt to address a valid complaint. However, much as I tried to like it, way more force seemed to be necessary now to turn the view while flying, taking the fun out of quite a number of levels. So instead of forcing the change on players (including myself), I decided to implement a preference. With Nuncabola, you get a choice.

If the vertical-exclusion camera is an all-round improvement, then surely I am the one who puts himself at a disadvantage by sticking with the 1.4.0-1.5.1 behaviour. If, on the other hand, it's an improvement only in some situations and detrimental in others, then perhaps it should be configurable in Neverball, too. Whether in the config file only, or through a new entry in the options screen, or as a dedicated camera in the F4 slot, or something else, is open to debate. If I had the ideal solution, I'd have posted about it by now.

2) fair game takes a back seat to Elviz's own convenience.

I'm afraid we don't share the same view of what's "fair". If you believe that the r2931 change should have caused a reset of the Nevertable, with new conditions for uploading and invalidation of existing replays, then you should have said so at the time of the 1.5.2 release. Killing the renascent contest at that stage would have been pretty daft if you ask me, but I'm sure it would have been discussed and some kind of decision reached. However, you didn't say a thing and neither did anyone else.

If anything, I'm doing the right thing by providing an application that lets you compete with every replay on the 1.5 table, old or new. And frankly, in the end general success on the Nevertable depends on entirely different factors.


Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/customer/www/neverforum.com/public_html/fmpbo/include/parser.php on line 814

8

Re: Stunned

All same options available to change in both Nuncabola + Neverball = fair
All same options NOT available to change in both Nuncabola + Neverball = fair
Different options in different programs = UNFAIR.

my 2c

Currently Playing:
Celeste and Electronic Super Joy

9

Re: Stunned

Seems like an intrinsic problem with Open Source and Players who know how to Program... big_smile

If you're certain that it is an advantage, it could be a good idea to write it on the front page of the table.

I think it is astonishing that there are not more differences between NuncaBola and NeverBall for the high-end players.

The only really fair resolution to this issue in my opinion is to ask the people who are actually competing on the table.