1. #21
    KnockoffNate's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    England UK
    Posts
    99
    Originally Posted by ZZZZZZach Go to original post
    There needs to be a new (or at least refined) rating system to track central. The more difficult a track is, the more it's hurt by dislikes. If someone makes a difficult ninja track, all it takes is 1 dislike to completely ruin its rating due to the current algorithm.
    This is a must for me, i made a thread about it a few weeks back, over on the main forum... really don't like the current rating system at all.
    Share this post

  2. #22
    Hi all !
    I totally agree with the jonny's ideas to make the in game money usefull. The ability to share some custom objects would be really cool ! Some people (like me) are not so good at building entire track with a good drive line, but are loving to build decorations and atmospheres. Sharing custom objects and codes is a very nice way to collaborate on peoples tracks !
    Another thing, it would be great to have some pre created "humans" easier to animate. I really don't have idea of how it should work for now but it would be great to build the zombie track i always wanted to
    Scalable objects is the best feature we all need, but it would be better if the size is connectable to a data source !
    Thank anyway to ask us what we want, it's not so often in the actual gaming system !
    Share this post

  3. #23
    VEGASTRASH's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada USA
    Posts
    659
    My 2 cents, plus 3 for Track Central:
    Jonny had some great well thought out points. I particularly liked the custom object depot...where players can trade in game currency for items/logic chains.
    I've spent a "little" amount of time in track central, so this a good topic to expand on for me.
    Track Central is the heart of the game to me, as echoed by the initial post here. Implementing more of it into the game is a great idea by the developer.
    The glaring thing I come back to in TC is the rating system. Evo seemed much more balanced with the occasions "Don't Move"/"Impossible Stairs" making it's way to the top. We forget that the majority of ratings, especially within the first year come from casuals. Most who can't appreciated a quality line or well done themes, etc. I've said it before, but will reiterate it again. Track Central could very much use moderators...much like a forum. You can isolate the true trials builds vs. floating object hacked up uploads. All tracks would be viewable, but what I'd consider a real trials track...to other sections. Here are a few bullet points...to avoid a further ramble
    -You can implement the ability to block certain creators.

    -Upload limits that are more realistic and actually impact the amount of spam on TC (2 tracks a week....MAX) Any good builder will usually never upload more. (this does 2 things...limits spamming, increases quality of overall tracks. If you know you're allowed 2 per week...you will probably put more time in on a build to make it count)

    -A stronger system (as mentioned first) Decor rating 40% Driveline 40% Addictive quality/Fun factor 20%. This takes all of 5 seconds to rate. If someone can't take 5 seconds, they don't care much about ratings to begin with. You will have more true ratings.

    -All track object should be accessible for season pass holders...decent selling feature? (if possible to create objects at once...unrealistic, I'm sure...tinfoil hat status?)

    -Scalable objects...keeping textures scaling with them...beautiful

    -Track "testing feed" similar to what Jonny said. A timed upload, lasts 2 days...with a way to leave constructive feedback

    -Sounds funny but...fewer feeds. Top week, top month, 48 hours, recommended. Unlimited custom feeds sure. Friend favorite feed.

    -Easier to use animation...similar to an After Effects timeline. Choose point A, choose point B...time from A-B. All done with prompts or inside ONE window/tile. Easier said then done, I'm sure.

    -It was mentioned in the initial post as being perhaps too time consuming, but a multiple person editor option...2-3 people building at once...or at least a way of allowing people on your friend list to access the same track on the cloud (probably the easier route?)

    -Video tutorials built right into the editor. I think Evo used a youtube link and Fusion did something else, but why not have it directly in the editor. I can see many going in, then never going back.

    Last one and slightly off topic...for RL weekly streams speaking about the picks of the week, etc. Why not have a 10 minute constructive critique segment? Many tracks are quite good that don't get picked...maybe site specifically what issue were found with tracks high on the feed and were not picked? This could be a positive thing for new builders to the game.

    Eno had some good things to say. We all want what is best for the game, but when you're an armchair quarterback like myself...you just don't see the time involved in carrying out certain things. It's easy to say...just make the pig fly, team reply: ok, that will cost X amount and take 3 years.
    I hope the open conversations here will help the future release. It would be great to know roughly how far into development the game is, but I suppose it's irrelevant to the topic.
    Share this post

  4. #24
    Rudemod 69's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Derbyshire, England.
    Posts
    4,962
    TC is what I love the most about Trials. This is a great Garage feature by RL, and interaction between developers and community can only help future titles.

    Congrats to all the guys hired by RL.

    @Trash, irrelevant but yes, it would be great to know.
    Share this post

  5. #25
    I just wanted to add something :
    For the primary objects, it would be great to get the possibility to change the textures. the white base is nice , but it would be lot better if we could aply different textures like metal, rusted metal, concrete, old concrete, wood, etc...
    this would be perfect for creation of custom objects !
    Share this post

  6. #26
    onesimpleclik's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    103
    Originally Posted by yarivpa Go to original post
    I just wanted to add something :
    For the primary objects, it would be great to get the possibility to change the textures. the white base is nice , but it would be lot better if we could aply different textures like metal, rusted metal, concrete, old concrete, wood, etc...
    this would be perfect for creation of custom objects !
    Nice idea, this would be pretty awesome.
    Share this post

  7. #27
    Surrur's Avatar Trials Developer
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    29
    Originally Posted by mrjorts Go to original post
    Really cool interviews on the podcast. I'm looking forward to hearing more.

    One thing I'll say on the editor objects topic is that I think it's cool to assemble a wish list to see what objects are the most requested, but I think it will always be important to be able to re-envision the objects in the editor to fit your theme, and that was one of the biggest differences between Evo and Fusion for me. In Fusion all the objects were smooth and glowy and futurey in a way that was hard to work around. Objects in Evo were more "generic", but they didn't draw attention to themselves so it gave track creators more freedom to make subtle suggestions if they wanted the track to feel one way or another.

    To add to the scaleable parts idea, which is really useful, I think it would be neat if primes could be parameterized in more ways, like being able to put a length and separate diameters for each end of the part so that cylinders could become cones and squares could become pyramids of different dimensions. Kind of like the Kerbal Space Program Procedural Parts mod, if anyone is familiar with that.
    Currently only uniform scaling is doable in the game engine. The engine doesnt go that far you could scale then to any direction as much as you want. Every object in the game is made from 1-70 collission boxes. Those collissions objects may be boxes, cylinders, spheres or cones. The boxes you can scale to any XYZ direction but if you scale any other it will brake. Meaning that if you scale sphere into ellipse form, it will still be a perfect sphere.

    Calculating physics is heavy, but keeping them in simple shapes as box, sphere or any other with object which uses π for creating the form makes the calculations easier.
    So even if sounded easy to make cylinder into cone, it would brake the physics and there isnt any support for it in the game engine editor.

    Scaling is still super awesome and the LD guys love it. But there are other stuff what makes the engine better
    Share this post

  8. #28
    Originally Posted by Surrur Go to original post
    Currently only uniform scaling is doable in the game engine. The engine doesnt go that far you could scale then to any direction as much as you want. Every object in the game is made from 1-70 collission boxes. Those collissions objects may be boxes, cylinders, spheres or cones. The boxes you can scale to any XYZ direction but if you scale any other it will brake. Meaning that if you scale sphere into ellipse form, it will still be a perfect sphere.

    Calculating physics is heavy, but keeping them in simple shapes as box, sphere or any other with object which uses π for creating the form makes the calculations easier.
    So even if sounded easy to make cylinder into cone, it would brake the physics and there isnt any support for it in the game engine editor.
    I think it would be a nice compromise to allow complex scaling but locking the physics type to deco-only as soon as you do it on an object. When using objects with more complex collision boxes in the driveline, it is usually necessary to smooth it out with custom collisions anyway. So having this option for pure visual purposes while shaping the collision manually would be just fine.

    Anyway, some great suggestions already. I will try to limit myself to one additional suggestion, which I think would be a better solution for the beta/test feed stuff and for general feed improvement:

    Grouping tracks and applying a status/type flag to each track within the group that can be changed by the creator post-release.

    Possible status/type flags:
    • Main version (= either initial version or later uploaded fixed version)
    • Obsolete (= status of initial version after upload of fixed version)
    • Difficulty variant (= for example easy version of a ninja track or vice-versa)
    • Fragment (= single CPs of a ninja track)


    This can cover several use cases: "beta" period (set initial version to "obsolete" after fixed version is uploaded), easier access to different versions of a track, avoid spamming the feed when a bunch of single CPs are uploaded... maybe more.

    • Only the main version (and maybe difficulty variants?) are shown as a tile in the feed and in search results. You can access the rest of the group after navigating into the tile/item.
    • Obsolete versions do not have to be deleted anymore, but collect dust at the bottom of a group, while they can still be accessed by anyone if they want to, for example for comparing it to the fixed version or looking at the old leaderboard and replays or whatever.
    • You can only set a track to obsolete when/after uploading a new main version.


    Being able to delete tracks (not everyone is an experienced creator and will necessarily use that feature reasonably) or not being able to manage tracks after release at all can become messy, and I think it could be avoided if this gets implemented properly (good usability in regards to publishing, feed, search function etc.).
    I'm not in favour of an explicit "beta" status since it might encourage casual builders to spam unifinished stuff right after placing the first ramp.
    If there is an upload limit/cooldown (maybe a more strict one as suggested by Vegas) it should only affect new individual tracks/groups, not variants. So people who want to spend the weekend uploading "viper on rocks" part 1-10 can still do it but need to group them as fragments so the feed stays readable.

    Example:

    MyNinjaTrack (group)
    • MyNinjaTrack FIX2 (main version)
    • MyNinjaTrack FIX (obsolete)
    • MyNinjaTrack (obsolete)
    • MyNinjaTrack +CPs (easier version)
    • MyNoobTrack (even easier version)
    • MyNinja CP1 (fragment)
    • MyNinja CP2 (fragment)
    • MyNinja CP3 (fragment)
    Share this post

  9. #29
    StormPsykoz's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    272
    ^ While this seems like a good idea, I strongly doubt such a feature will be implemented, because few people actually build ninja tracks, and even fewer people will probably use this feature since it mostly applies to high-level ninja tracks. Besides, it also seems pretty complicated.

    Most of those "few" people that play ninjas just want to play ninjas. They don't really care about any clarity. And to be honest I wouldn't want to go through groups or whatever to find a track I want to play.
    Share this post

  10. #30
    I Totally Agree with ZZZZach 1 Dislike & it decks your overall rating to 50% drop decrease, it should be evened out between score ratings & The Ninja category is fine maybe adding a Ninja level 1 - 7 TAG would solve this problem & have a clean menu, Since I only create 1st person modes which 99% of other creator don't do I really can't complain if i find a stupid bug within the editor that's really bad, With my really high editor skill i usually another way to replicated but not as good, so i'm good maybe having a resize function increase & decrease in a new section like object variation, under that in advanced properties like different size variations or a on the fly vector scaling system, but i don't know how it's how to effect to vertices or ployees of the current assets or model render from ether program, maybe an wide range update for little adjustments & little added functionality & new models would help ! Since i'm a video game indie developer i know my way around this area, I'm currently developing my own video game too. But I will always love the trials engine
    Share this post