PDA

View Full Version : About Shortcuts in Pure ..



zargz
31st December 2004, 12:21 PM
Judging by the pics the Buildings look pretty Solid :roll:
I hope they are solid enuff to prevent ppl flying thru them! = ShortCuts! :evil:
That way we (wipErs) won't have to Argue about that sh^t Anymore! :!: :!: :!:
There's been pertty Bitter bickering about that around here :?
Hopefully infoxx can use whatever influence he got to better this aspect of the game
that btw was (is) non existing on wo1.

<out of topic>
Together with no autopilot it's some of the reasons i Adore wo1!!!
also the reason y wo1 is so Hard (well, harder than 2097 & wo3) to complete.
Now that i'm counting them here are 2 more: the music And the Track design of wo1-
imo by Far the Best in the series! _ (underscore) imo!
</out of topic>

Bottomline - wish there won't be Any shortcuts in Pure!

Any other wipErs agree with me?
Let me, us (rest of wipErs) AND ppl @ Leeds Studio know right here! 8)

yawnstretch
31st December 2004, 01:35 PM
I enjoyed shortcuts in Wipeout 2097 - when I found my first one years ago I was psyched! (Then I came on here a year or so ago and saw the other shortcuts and felt like a noob!)

Anyway - Id actually prefer to see a Wo1 job on this to be honest. A solid, well-designed game with lots of lovely bounciness! (once they dont make it feel stupid or anything - hopefully these 'new aerial maneouvers' we've been hearing about will be tastefull and not childish).

Interesting thing to note about the PSP though - bright colours look fantastic on it so this may be the reason they're steering away from a dark Wo1 style. I must admit I prefer the more realistic polluted, brown grimly lit wo1 tracks, but if the track downloads thing is decent hopefully 'noir' tracks will be introduced.

What Im concerned about is how all these tracks will be monitored - personally I think the more the better - but it may get a little confusing when people all play on different tracks. (WiFi?) Still I suppose we'll be able to tell people where to get the cool tracks we've downloaded. Man I cant wait!! I just know the PSP is gonna soar over here (I've been waiting for handhelds to be mass-popular for sooo long) and playing wipeout on the train with strangers would rock my world :D

So, to conclude *ahem* - shortcuts, though loved may be present in some downloadable tracks but hopefully not in the default ones. (Unless theyre deliberately there and hidden - not glitches)

Lance
31st December 2004, 01:57 PM
.
i definitely prefer no shortcuts; make the game as if it were 'real' racing, where shortcuts are not allowed
.

lunar
31st December 2004, 02:28 PM
Well I don`t mind a few daring turbo leaps occasionally - but only if they aren`t through buildings, and if they are planned and obvious to everyone. So overall I second, or is it third, that: NO to shortcuts. Whether they`re glitches or cheesy switches - no thanks.

Lance
31st December 2004, 03:34 PM
.
if a shortcut is obvious to everyone, then presumably everyone would use it in order to make the fastest time possible; so the portion of the track that was always bypassed would pretty much serve no purpose and ought not to be there IMO. the shortcut iS the track and is therefore not a shortcut at all. a shortcut obvious to all wouldn't give that delicious feeling of having discovered an advantage that no one else knows about. granted that some shortcuts require even more skill than the real trackway, but i am a purist; i think that the track should simply have a standard part of it that is exceptionally difficult, such as the big jump and landing in the curve leading to the tunnel at P-Mar in WO3. that skill is enough; no such thing as going high up through the mountain to the pit lane without driving through the tunnel should ever be possible.

a weakness in WOXL, for instance, is that first sharp right hand curve after the start of Talon's Reach; it is possible to take off at the rise in the straight and just fly to the right while avoiding the track altogether for a long distance. admittedly, the ship slows down so much in the flying process due to missing the double and single and double boostpads that flying that high may not gain time, or may even lose a bit, really
.

lunar
31st December 2004, 04:47 PM
What I mean is that I would like to see them preserve the extreme jumps of 2097 and 3SE, but make sure they are part of the official route.

Dimension
31st December 2004, 04:51 PM
yeah, I think it would be way too disputed, problem would be that even if peeps on WOZ decide not to use the shortcuts, peeps on these official Intahweb boards might use them, a problem indeed :?

zargz
2nd January 2005, 03:20 AM
What I mean is that I would like to see them preserve the extreme jumps of 2097 and 3SE, but make sure they are part of the official route. well, both 2097 and wo3 tracks are pretty flat so probably 95% or more of these extreme jumps Are shortcuts!
P-mar proj, Gare d'Europa and Vostok island r the trax with jumps that come to my mind fr both 2097 & wo3
think now about the variety in hight and jumps in these tracks--> AltimaVII, Terramax, Korodera, Silverstream,
Arridos V and the track on Mars! and None of them was a shortcut!
btw even the track in japan has a pretty steep downhill after the tunnel
and with that1 we got ALL the trax in wo1!!! only 1 thing i can say (or do) -----> :clap

rejj
2nd January 2005, 12:12 PM
felt like I'd reply, since we could do with some differing opinions in this thread... ;)

I have absolutely no problem with shortcuts.. they are almost universally more dangerous and/or harder to do than take the long way around the track, so they are a risk/reward payoff for the adventurous. If you are good enough to pull them off, you go faster. If not, you get wuss-wagoned or smash into a wall, both of which are far slower than taking the track.

Also, I don't agree with the argument that "if a shortcut is always taken, then the segment of track you are shortcutting shouldn't be there in the first place". It is a way of catering to different levels of ability in the same track, and a way of catering to the different types of gamers that are playing. Not everyone is after the absolutely fastest time ever... so the game caters to all sorts.

Seems fine and balanced to me.
(the main problem with it I see is that people want to compete whilst imposing unenforceable artificial limitations on themselves.. but that is a different story, for a different time)

G'Kyl
2nd January 2005, 01:06 PM
Albeit artificial, these limitations are necessary to have some equal ground that makes competition is as fair as possible. Other limitations could include HAVING to take shortcuts... You need SOME rules.
The problem that stands out from the rest is that Wipeout makes it difficult to decide whether a shortcut was intentionally put into the game or whether it is possible because the game engine couldn't afford to render another invisible wall. On the one hand you CAN fly through some buildings and on the other there are walls were no objects stand. What do you do with that when you decide how real the Wipeout world is going to be for you and everyone else?

Ben

rejj
3rd January 2005, 04:13 AM
Albeit artificial, these limitations are necessary to have some equal ground that makes competition is as fair as possible.

I could not disagree more strongly. Imposing these sort of things leaves things to interpretation and misunderstanding - and lead to unfair competition. How can you prove that I took an "illegal" shortcut, rather than just getting a really good time? How can I prove I didn't?

The only way to be fair is to allow whatever the game lets you do. This may not end up being the same game you thought it was going to be when you first started playing, but you can gurantee that everyone is playing the same game.

Please see this thread from 2003 (http://www.wipeoutzone.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=871) for prior discussion on this topic.

G'Kyl
3rd January 2005, 06:44 AM
Fair in the sense of a compromise most players can agree on - in spite of the different attitudes towards short cuts. Now, if someone thinks flying through buildings is, sort of, unrealistic and therefore doesn't do it (so "his Wipeout world" would be a more coherent place), forcing him to do so seems more of a foul agreement to me than saying: "OK, no maybe-unwanted-be-the.designers shortcuts at all." After all, as long as most players agree on that I don't think it can be called unfair.
Proving your times is a different matter. However, most pilots here seem to stick to the rules, so the systems, at the least, works well enough. And by the way, one could still play Wipeout on an emulator and thus have an unfair advantage, inspite of all the other efforts to keep the competition clean. And since you can never be sure, why not trust people from the start? ;)

Ben

zargz
3rd January 2005, 02:40 PM
Guess it all boils down to how serious / real this game is for us wipers.

I dont mind shortcuts in games like Maro cart, Crash team racing or Speed Punks
I'd even say Speed Punks imo is the 2nd best racer for the psx having also a Great 4player mode!
With goofy characters, voices, music, bright colors and so on
shortcuts belong there and even look like an alternative part of the track, just a bit harder to find.

Now, with the looks and feel of All the Wipeouts as well the Music and Even the Names of the different Leagues -
F3600, F5000, F7200 and F9000 that suggests to me they are the successors of the F1 of today,
the world surrounding the races, however futuristic or dark(2097), showing me a Real world with buildings,
train stations, ship docks, oil drills and so on that look Real and not cartoonish to me.
All of this makes the game feel to me more like a F1, TOCA, RALLY or NASCAR game with all that follows in terms of
rules points seasons ect for example in nascar heat shotcutting gives you an extra lap, in F1- drive through
Another thing ofcource is how seriously wipers take their Wipeout racing seeng many of us are between 25-35! 8)

I know that there's nothing to do about shortcuts in 2097 & wo3. However eliminating or ensuring there are as few
as possible of them in woPure will obliterate Any kind of similar disscutions and make the zone a better place to be! :D

Thus laying the responsability where it belongs - with the programmers and designers of The Game.
A good idea we had in another thread for keeping the handling of the ships and making sure of no shortcutting
was the one where the checkpoints are not used just as the oldfasioned ones that eliminate you
if you dont get there before time runs out but used on corners that are probably going to be cut and if you
dont pass through them u get an extra lap or something. Another thing, now i'm getting inspired here,
would be to use checkpoints like in rally or motoracing games showing how many seconds from the leader, craft infront
or craft behind you are! OR make these make-sure-no-shotcutting-checkpoints invisible and use another checkpoints for the above.

Bottomline :arrow: No shortcuts, Cheers! 8)

Rapier Racer
3rd January 2005, 08:03 PM
I like your checkpoint idea, I don't like shortcuts seem a bit unfair, and it should be one way for all! Do you think it would be fair say if one person discovered a sneaky shortcut and used it every time thus putting themselves at then top of a table? No one else could catch them unless they too knew of the shortcut, well basically in my opinion there should be none

JABBERJAW
3rd January 2005, 08:33 PM
There should definitely be jump shortcuts, But not through walls. Checkpoints are crap because sometimes if you jump so high it picks you up before you hit the lowest point on the track, where you would have landed safely. Just design the tracks so you cannot cut off half of the track.

lunar
3rd January 2005, 10:40 PM
Do you think it would be fair say if one person discovered a sneaky shortcut and used it every time thus putting themselves at then top of a table?

I think its possible to say that its quite fair to do this, in the strict sense of the word, as everyone has the same game and therefore the same opportunity to explore its limits and find shortcuts. However, to do what you described would be highly unsporting (and ungentlemanly), and if you topped a table with a new shortcut I feel you ought to reveal your method to everyone else. Furthermore, unless you`ve beaten everyone else on the same route you can`t really take any pride in it - unless you think the skill of wipeout is in finding shortcuts rather than flying the route as fast as possible. Only a muppet would believe that. Finding shortcuts isn`t as big and clever as flying faster than a load of people all trying to beat you on a level playing field, metaphorically speaking. Revealing the shortcut to other pilots, and them using it, is the best way to keep the playing field level and to compete with honour.

I think the checkpoint idea would work very well - if the checkpoints were clearly visible and if in order to pass through them you had to penetrate a light beam at and near to ground level. It would be up to you to make sure you pass through it, and if you don`t - "contender disqualified"...... simple and effective with the rules of play coming from within the game and not artificially from the people playing it. There could be no more arguments about whether a particular jump is legal or not. This system could also have cured the respawn cheat problem in WOF, and saved the official times tables from meaninglessness.

rejj
4th January 2005, 10:32 AM
Fair in the sense of a compromise most players can agree on - in spite of the different attitudes towards short cuts. Now, if someone thinks flying through buildings is, sort of, unrealistic and therefore doesn't do it (so "his Wipeout world" would be a more coherent place), forcing him to do so seems more of a foul agreement to me than saying: "OK, no maybe-unwanted-be-the.designers shortcuts at all." After all, as long as most players agree on that I don't think it can be called unfair.
Proving your times is a different matter. However, most pilots here seem to stick to the rules, so the systems, at the least, works well enough.

First, please note - I never said that imposing your restrictions is unfair. I simply stated that I think it is silly, and works against the spirit of competition.

Now, in reply to your post... let's assume that we all agree to impose a restriction on our competition that we won't fly through walls. I play the game using the nosecam, many/most other people use chase cam. In my world, if the viewport does not collide with a wall texture, I haven't flown through the wall. What if, however, upon review in chase cam it turns out that the tip of my wing actually did go through the corner of a building I believed I had skillfully avoided? This narrow margin allows me to go 0.01 of a second faster. I never thought I did anything wrong (I probably never even knew!).

That is the main problem with this approach - it is totally unenforceable, even by those playing with the best of intentions.



I like your checkpoint idea, I don't like shortcuts seem a bit unfair, and it should be one way for all! Do you think it would be fair say if one person discovered a sneaky shortcut and used it every time thus putting themselves at then top of a table? No one else could catch them unless they too knew of the shortcut, well basically in my opinion there should be none

Of course that would be fair. Someone just found a new fastest route around the course, and set a new fastest lap. It is up to everyone else to compete.
Whether or not you think this game should have shortcuts is immaterial. The game(s) we have so fare do have shortcuts. Maybe Wipeout Pure won't - it is entirely possible that they will design the game in a way that stops you flying through the roof of a tunnel, or the side of a building. I have no problem with that at all. I'm not saying that a game needs to let me do these things to be fun. What I am saying is that since it is a part of the games we have presently, in order to compete they should be used. Otherwise you aren't playing the game.


There should definitely be jump shortcuts, But not through walls. Checkpoints are crap because sometimes if you jump so high it picks you up before you hit the lowest point on the track, where you would have landed safely. Just design the tracks so you cannot cut off half of the track.

I totally agree. I find big jumps to be fun. Often they are not easy to pull off, are highly rewarding, and are just plain cool. It isn't exactly hard to stop people jumping through walls ... just make them solid. Try to jump through and CLANG, you bounce off with your shields feeling rather angry.


I think the checkpoint idea would work very well
I'd much prefer a design that prohibited the silly things (flying through a building), and let the rest up to you. If you want to cover the course 5km in the air, good on you (if you can do it). That is, of course, just a matter of personal preference.

lunar
4th January 2005, 12:29 PM
In regard to checkpoints, I think its very likely that however well Studio Liverpool test the game, they won`t test it as thoroughly as us consumers when we actually get our hands on it: players will find shortcuts, glitches and opportunities to cheat that are missed in testing. These glitches could break the game, as was the case in Fusion, and checkpoints would help stop this happening. Even if all structures are made solid, there is a good chance that it will be possible to find easy shortcuts or respawning points that make a mockery of a track, unless the whole thing takes place in a fifty metre-deep trench, in which case there`ll be no crazy jumps anyway. The WO3SE shortcuts are all pretty hard to do, and are a reward for skilled pilots, but shortcuts aren`t necessarily so, and there could well be places where its easy to take shortcuts that miss half the track. Therefore I think shortcut-style jumps should be included, but only in planned places; and when you reach the end of a lap the CPU checks whether you`ve been through all the checkpoints, and if you haven`t it disqualifies you. I just find it hard to believe that the game will be tested well enough to get by with solid structures as the only defense against glitches. The tracks should be fun enough to fly without us needing to improve them by finding our own new routes, and hopefully will cater to those of us who like to race in the air as much as on the ground.

We don`t want a situation like they have on some SSX Tricky tables I`ve seen, where to get a top time you need to crash "off the world" in a very specific place, and go into a load of random colours and pixels, floating in this abstract cyperspace for a few seconds, then respawning further down the mountain, much sooner than you could have actually raced to the same point. The SSX team never intended anyone to do this I`m sure, and tested the game well I`m equally sure, but if there`s the slightest hole somewhere, someone will find it. A further defense against glitches might be to extend the respawn time to 10 seconds or more, if you happen to fly "out of the game."

Another problem with unplanned shortcuts is that the AI can`t use them - and therefore it becomes too easy to beat them. There`s never been a Wipeout game with seriously challenging AI competitors, and it would be good if Pure could provide them.

Lance
4th January 2005, 01:04 PM
.
''and when you reach the end of a lap the CPU checks whether you`ve been through all the checkpoints, and if you haven`t it disqualifies you.''
disqualification should happen immediately the checkpoint is missed so you don't waste your time finishing a race you've already lost and which will not produce a time.
.

lunar
4th January 2005, 01:21 PM
It would be difficult to have pilots disqualified immediately, because you surely can`t be disqualified for missing checkpoint C, for instance, until you reach checkpoint D without having gone through C. Until you reach D, how would the computer know that you missed C? If you see what I mean? But I agree, there would be no need to wait for the end of the lap, you could be DQ`d at the next checkpoint.

zargz
4th January 2005, 01:44 PM
spoken like a true programmer! 8)
of course you are right but i dont think lance attended those programming night courses! :D

JABBERJAW
4th January 2005, 01:54 PM
I don't mind checkpoints per se, but don't want to have to stay on the ground the whole race( I don't want wipeout to be fzero). Put them inside of tunnels or after the big jumps you can make. Also, NO Wuss wagon until you have passed below the lowest point on the entire track. Iv'e gotten picked up when I was going to land on the track just fine, That is annoying as hell.

Lance
4th January 2005, 02:33 PM
.
since the computer must already know your speed and the time since the previous checkpoint crossing as part of the data for running the game, it knows when you should have already passed the checkpoint. therefore, it can do an instant disqualification when the necessary time to reach the checkpoint has already passed with no trigger; there is no need to wait till the next checkpoint after the one missed. if you've crashed into a wall and slowed down before a checkpoint, the computer knows that too, and takes it into account.

no, i've not attended those programming classes; i've only written programs for my own private amusement. no racing games though, just database and sorting algorithms. also automobile horsepower requirement calculators for multiple speed levels, drag coefficients, etc.
.

Task
4th January 2005, 04:13 PM
8 D You're looking at it way too complicated! It's very simple: There's a timer, you have to cross the correct checkpoint before that timer runs out. If you take some shortcut and skip a checkpoint then something like a "missed checkpoint!" message would suffice and you'd probably only have another 5 seconds of play before you ran out of time.
If you wanted to, you could try turning around and going back to the checkpoint you missed. Or you could Start->Quit, as you choose.
Turn off checkpoints and suddenly you've got a free-for-all shortcutting game that some people might like. Turn them back on and (as long as the checkpoints are in the right spots) you've got the stick-to-the-track game that others love. Look at that, we can have it both ways with the already existing "checkpoints: On/Off" setting.

It's so simple that I'm amazed it was ever an issue.

DuraFlex
4th January 2005, 04:54 PM
Hmmmm, wouldnt it still be possible to cut certain tracks between 2 checkpoints?

I would prefer the solution where you cant fly trough buildings ect.. Still shortcuts intended to be shortcuts are very cool and also take some skill like said in here before so i wont remove them.

Task
4th January 2005, 07:43 PM
... Yes.

The idea here is that you place the checkpoints at the far reaches of the track, on the corners most likely. Any way you can get from one checkpoint to the next is good, but the track should be a more-or-less straight line between checkpoints.

So if there are any places where you could theoretically lop off a section of the track with some shortcut, no matter how ridiculous, that should be a sign that you need another checkpoint.

Put about 5 checkpoints on any track in the right places and the severe forms of shortcutting are made impossible, since if you cut a significant section of track you're skipping a checkpoint and lo and behold, you've hoisted yourself on your own petard.

The "freeness" of wipeout is still there though, since you can use any method you want of getting from one checkpoint to the next, it's just that the track is likely to be your best method. This means that you're still looking for ways to fly over chicanes and wavy track sections, but there's no point even looking for ways to get a 5 second lap time.

Truly, beauty is in simplicity. 8 )

Lance
4th January 2005, 07:49 PM
.
DuraFlex, that depends on where you put the checkpoints.

Jay, you're looking at it too simply ;)
there is an additional component of the problem not being addressed. i hate timer driven checkpoints. the goal here is just to make sure that the pilot is following the track, not to annoy the f**k out of someone who is just learning the course. a beginner in any game has a hard enough time learning a new physics engine and track without suffering the frustration of being shut down because he/she was one hundredth of a second too late to avoid a checkpoint timer triggered 'power cut'. one should be able to complete the course at any speed as long as one is not bypassing sections of track. since the computer/console knows what speed and direction the racecraft is travelling, it knows when the vehicle should arrive at the checkpoint. for that matter, since the computer knows what course is actually being followed compared to what the course of the track is, a checkpoint wouldn't even be necessary.

as an example of that kind of control, look at N_Gen Racing; you are allowed to go offcourse to take a shortcut, but only for a very limited time, so you must have a feel for exactly how much you can get away with, and large portions of the course can simply not be bypassed, not to mention that flying a shortcut may mean that you are not properly set up to make best speed through the next gate or canyon. also, flying higher up to go over restrictions results in lower speeds. also, none of the boost gates are offcourse, so extra speed from afterburner thrust is lost.
.

edited a couple of times by lance

G'Kyl
4th January 2005, 08:00 PM
Now, in reply to your post... let's assume that we all agree to impose a restriction on our competition that we won't fly through walls. I play the game using the nosecam, many/most other people use chase cam. In my world, if the viewport does not collide with a wall texture, I haven't flown through the wall. What if, however, upon review in chase cam it turns out that the tip of my wing actually did go through the corner of a building I believed I had skillfully avoided? This narrow margin allows me to go 0.01 of a second faster. I never thought I did anything wrong (I probably never even knew!).

I too fly with cockpit view, but I wouldn't know of any part of any track were a wall can be cut while sticking to the track. So what you describe, I think, won't ever turn out to be a problem if you don't do any major shortcutting in the first place.


I totally agree. I find big jumps to be fun. Often they are not easy to pull off, are highly rewarding, and are just plain cool. It isn't exactly hard to stop people jumping through walls ... just make them solid.

I agree, to a certain degree. Cause in XL, for instance, there are in fact invisible walls that, I suppose, were put there in order to remind people to not fly over the edges of the course at any place (why else make walls were no buildings stands?) Which in turn is why I think shortcuts should not be allowed in a competition such as we find on this site. That's my point, really. :)

Ben

DuraFlex
4th January 2005, 08:46 PM
I'm somewhat unsure about this. When you cut a track in F1 you get a black flag or penalty. To me its a flaw in the game, something the designers didnt forsee.

On the other hand, combos in beat-em-ups where born because a flaw in street fighter where it was possible to activate a move before the previous one was finished.

In fusion there are some "pre-made shortcuts" and i like that concept. Maybe there should also be some controlled fly zones in the game (valid air checkpoints?). It just has to be impossible to fly trough buildings, landscapes, ... imho.

lunar
4th January 2005, 09:12 PM
There`s nothing like a debate over a hypothetical method of operating a hypothetical checkpoint system in a game that doesn`t exist yet.
:wink:


quote="Task"]

8 D You're looking at it way too complicated! It's very simple: There's a timer, you have to cross the correct checkpoint before that timer runs out.
[/quote]

I agree with Lance about the lack of merit in a fixed countdown timer between checkpoints. I also think its unnecesary and might not even work.

The only system you need is this: sequential checkpoints. When you pass through checkpoint C, for example, the next checkpoint must be D. If you touch any other before D you are instantly disqualified. The start finish line is also a checkpoint subject to these rules. You can`t be timed out, you can`t shortcut or cheat if the checkpoints are well placed and its incredibly simple.

With any timer, whichever way you look at it, the computer is going to have to keep track of what was your last checkpoint and which one you are due to arrive at next in order to know which is the "correct checkpoint" and give you a time limit in the first place. So its already done the work and doesn`t need to add a timer. Also a fixed timer would have to allow plenty of seconds for you to get between checkpoints. Its quite possible for what would usually be a 20 second checkpoint interval to become much much more if you crash, then get shot off the track and respawned, shot again, crash again, then have to take it easy because your shields are low and you still want to finish the race. To take into account this sort of scenario you would have to be given lots of time to make the next checkpoint - which allows a window for cheating. In the time allowed it would be hypothetically possible to complete an entire extra lap of the course, with the use of a glitch or shortcut, and still make it to the required checkpoint in time. Anyone who was around the Fusion boards at the time of release will remember the lengths people will go to in order to cheat their way to the top of the tables. To stop this you would need a system like sequential checkpoints - so why bother with the timer anyway?

A sequential checkpoint system would be totally uncheatable, and very simple, as far as I can see. The only thing left would be to locate the checkpoints sensibly at frequent intervals - anywhere a shortcut seems possible. This would be a quicker and simpler solution than a timer when playing the game too. Because of the long time that would have to be allowed between checkpoints, it would be quicker to disqualify pilots because they broke the sequence of checkpoints than to wait for the timer to run out.

As Lance said, you could have a timer that can stretch the allowed interval allowed between checkpoints by taking account of your speed and any crashes or incidents or wussbot encounters you might have had, but, apart from being a lot of work for the cpu, when you think all of the various scenarios it would have to take account of in order to work properly, this seems very complicated compared to just ensuring the correct sequence of checkpoints is maintained throughout the race. A varying timer might easily contain glitches and ways to fool the computer tracking your race, in certain situations. This cheat-prevention system would still have to keep track of what checkpoint you are at and where you should be going next, so why bother with it? Its also an unnecesary strain on the cpu - just making people take checkpoints in the right order allows them to still take as long as they like, and would be much simpler to put into effect, so it would be better to ditch any form of timer altogether with regard to shortcuts. Same goes for any complicated system of allowing you off route for a certain amount of time - people would spend ages just testing how much they could get away with and possibly finding glitches. Its not needed if you just rely on correct checkpoint sequences.

I really can`t think of any way this system could be broken down. In theory you could go from C on your first lap to D on your second by hopping over all the light beams, and shortcutting huge chunks of track, but that would take ages and where would it get you? Nowhere but back where you should have been a long time ago. As far as the cpu is concerned you`re still on lap 1, your extra lap wouldn`t even have counted - and if you touched the start/finish line checkpoint in the wrong order you would be DQ`d also. I suppose it would be possible to shortcut between checkpoints, but this could be easily overcome if the checkpoints were thoughtfully placed. It wouldn`t take many checkpoints to bring the wildest 3SE tracks back down to earth, and I`m sure they would work with Pure. Any oversights would just be the few shortcuts left in the game.




I too fly with cockpit view, but I wouldn't know of any part of any track were a wall can be cut while sticking to the track. So what you describe, I think, won't ever turn out to be a problem if you don't do any major shortcutting in the first place.


But when does minor shortcutting become "major"? If we don`t allow shortcuts, where the game allows them, the tables are not a real competition at all. A vague gentleman`s agreement about the route simply would not work where so much pride, and sometimes naked ego, is involved. Even sunday league football matches, which are simply for fun, need referees - which means equal and consistent application of rules (ideally), or you`ll get a scrap. So in the absence of a referee we have to go for the only constant rule we can get: you can take any route the game allows. Therefore we end up going through buildings, which is a shame in some ways, but unavoidable imo.

Lance
4th January 2005, 09:30 PM
.
if you want to be really extreme about it, don't forget, as i said in my previous post, the computer already knows if you are off the track. if you do not want to allow even timed shortcuts as N_Gen Racing does, then disqualification would occur the instant one goes off the track to either side. almost no extra cpu load at all, just one extra statement to branch to a game stop. that would still allow vertical displacements, jumps, but jumps would be awfully tricky to keep within the lateral limits of the track when one is far above that edge, which makes it sensorially difficult to judge where you are. i'm for allowing some past-the-track-edge flying time.
.

zargz
10th January 2005, 04:21 AM
On this one I'll go with the sequential checkpoints - The Game (the fysics) as we know it would't have to change alot! :D
Last week I took my pirahna for a ride through All the classic tracks on Phantom and what did I find?
Each and Every One fo them has at Least one shortcut! What a great way to ruin a game! :evil:
Anyway I dont move in those speeds alot - got my hands full trying to keep stin from taking over whatever medal i got on vector and venom :robot
So I turned off the checkpoints and looked arround on the tracks for hypothetical Disqualifying-checkpoints (what a dedication huh! :roll:)
and actually found out that most of the tracks don't need more than 1-2 of them exept for Terramax that needed 3 to make them shortcut free!
(Just back from another short TT session. 2-3 races)
Now let's talk about a shortcut we all know and probably will be able to do afetr 4-5 attempts!
Laydies and Gent's I present to you the Jump at Porto Kora!
Before the jump take the double speedup and keep left. Just before getting of the jump turn the ship to the right, about 45, lift the nose
and Boost a bit - voila! Right through the building on the right you go!
After a couple of times you'll be able to land on the downhill before the tunnel. If you boost more you'll be flying throug the roof and land
in the middle of the tunnel. And if you boost even More you'll end up landing on the downhill before the Last turn heading for the straight!
You won't have a lot of shield left but fun to do once or twice. Won't get you a high place on the time tables either! :)
Back to the jump! If you jump straight you'll see on your left side a 3 stories high, round, white building just after a AG sys advertising Board!
Look now at the shadow of the house (a kinda blue square) it's just before the fence begins. Imagine there a checkpoint :!:
Now go on and try cut that corner knowing you'll get an extra lap or desqualifyed! You'll go 'I can break here! or Boost on the straights in stead!'
This 'checkpoint' could be B and the two already existing - A(start) and C the1 just after B and before the downhill to the tunnel.
:idea: B could be invisible! A and C can be used as normal checkpoints - distance to leader and so on.
But if you cross C without been through B then you are out!(or drive through or extra lap)
And thus the sequential checkpoints!
Only this little thing and you can keep the game as it is! (^__^)
Have to sleep now! See ya damora! (g_g) zzz zz z

rejj
10th January 2005, 09:23 AM
Each and Every One fo them has at Least one shortcut! What a great way to ruin a game! :evil:
That's entirely subjective. I quite enjoy it.. it is not like successfully landing them is easy - and in fact not all of them even gain you anything.


Laydies and Gent's I present to you the Jump at Porto Kora!
I posted this link about a year ago or so, but here it is again since you are discussing this:
http://www.flapdoodle.org/rejj/shots/w3se/porto_kora_hyperjump.avi
(btw please note - I don't fly through the buildings you mention, and never see the roof of the tunnel - would this be considered an "illegal" jump in your eyes?)


(... lots of stuff about checkpoints ...)
You just described pretty much every other racing game, ever. The beauty of wipeout is that it is not a traditional racer.

.. but then as the cliche says, you can't please all the people all the time. We just have different tastes.

G'Kyl
10th January 2005, 11:17 AM
(btw please note - I don't fly through the buildings you mention, and never see the roof of the tunnel - would this be considered an "illegal" jump in your eyes?)

If I may, this could indeed be considered an illegal jump. After all, you do use some sort of a glitch by flying through the, even if invisible, roof of the tunnel. In my world, doing this sort of thing destroys the illusion of the world the game creates and so I personally wouldn't do that - except for having some strange sort of fun every once a decade or so. ;) Also, it looked like you were flying in some off-map area.


.. but then as the cliche says, you can't please all the people all the time. We just have different tastes.

Yep, quite right. Whoever likes shortcuts please take them. :)

Ben

JABBERJAW
10th January 2005, 06:08 PM
the game does not need checkpoints if it's programmed as well as wipeout xl or wipeout 3. All you need to add is not being able to go through the walls and these games would still have large jumps, but no jumps that cut off more than a second or two. Also as I said before. wuss wagon sucks when you are still in the air, wait until hitting the ground before engaging(no respawns aka fusion, yuck.

Dimension
11th January 2005, 02:20 AM
i agree with Zoolander, I honestly can't see a point in checkpoints, they just annoy the hell out of me. You go through one, it blips, displays lots of numbers above your ship and you can't see the next corner coming, gee that's nice! As far as I see it, there's nothing there that cannot be solved by putting a big wall to the right of right angle shortcuts, think Manor Top (since it's in pure), put a wall to the right of the exit of the jump that you can't fly through and the shortcut is no more, besides the problem of hyperthrusting cheats is gone, that removes another little part of the problem, with just a little clever design shortcuts won't be a problem. Besides, how are they going to put checkpoints on these tracks, we've all seen the videos where the tracks split in two, you can't pass through checkpoint B and then take the left route since Checkpoint C is on the right route, that's what you call a flaw in the plans of checkpoints. Well there's my 2 cents :)

G'Kyl
11th January 2005, 06:52 AM
with just a little clever design shortcuts won't be a problem.

But it is, I assume. I don't want the game to have walls behind walls of buildings placed everywhere near a possible jump. I think this would look silly. Especially on more bumpy and hilly tracks. So, why not leave the track design at its best and put a very minor annoyance like checkpoints on track? :)


Besides, how are they going to put checkpoints on these tracks, we've all seen the videos where the tracks split in two, you can't pass through checkpoint B and then take the left route since Checkpoint C is on the right route, that's what you call a flaw in the plans of checkpoints.

I can't see what you mean. As soon as the track splits you take either route and have to pass checks C1 and D1 OR C2 and D2 before going through the next regular one. I only messed with some "BASIC" and "Turbo Pascal" stuff back in the early 90s, but programming what I described is going to be managable. :-)

Ben

jospicy
11th January 2005, 11:53 AM
having only really played WO i kinda got used to the fact that shortcuts were basically non existant, id be perfectly happy if you just had to fly through consecutive check points and who says they have to be at ground level surely they can be just wider than the track but cutting the plane of the checkpoint (at any height) should be sufficiant to remove shortcuts

Dimension
11th January 2005, 02:30 PM
I would be fine with checkpoints, if they were invisible, if i didn't get silly time updates, if they didn't make silly noises, so basically if i didn't know they were there. Funny, I feel the same way about ghost saves sometimes too

Rapier Racer
11th January 2005, 02:57 PM
so why not just have invisible walls that dont let you shortcut

G'Kyl
11th January 2005, 04:33 PM
Invisible walls always take away some of the illusion of reality, because earlier or later you are gonna hit one of those and realize 'OK, so this is were the designers had to intervene." I never liked that.

JABBERJAW
11th January 2005, 09:49 PM
force field walls that you can see through until you hit them, then they light up. There is a solution, but no invisible walls, that is worse than flying through walls you can see

Rapier Racer
11th January 2005, 10:21 PM
yes thats a good idea kinda reminds me of Stargate SG-1 when you run inoto a Goa'uld sheild

G'Kyl
12th January 2005, 05:20 AM
Force fields are a good idea, but I'm afraid they also wouldn't work in places were they had to meassure a few miles in each direction in order to prevent us from flying around or over them.

Sausehuhn
12th January 2005, 02:33 PM
@ ZOOLANDER

Yes, that would be good! I also would like to see the same when a weapon is crashing into a buildingl. So the building wouln't have any damage because those "enery-shields" would save it. :D

zargz
15th January 2005, 02:42 PM
i agree with Zoolander, I honestly can't see a point in checkpoints, they just annoy the hell out of me. You go through one, it blips, displays lots of numbers above your ship and you can't see the next corner coming, gee that's nice! I agree with you :arrow: in the 2097 times I remember how annoyed I was when I just managed to do a Perfect Lap
then it was written in the middle of your screen with huge letters (or so they seemed :) ) and then BANG in the wall! Oh man :x !
this is why I luv how wo3 displayes it, also the final lap, in the lower right corner :clap
There's an easy solution to this :arrow: numbers can be displayed in the bottom/top left/right on the screen then in video/grafix setup menu
you decide if you want them at all! same with the rest of the hud 8)

Colin Berry
20th January 2005, 12:18 AM
ok its 1am and having got home 2 hours ago I'm still on here thinking about the game.
such is life.

Anyway, Shortcuts, if I had a pound for every time me and Foxy had debated the pros and cons of having short cuts in Pure over the past year, well... i'd have at least 3 pounds :D

Rob and I share similar ish views, personally I'm not a huge fan of shortcuts, I like them in theory, I think once in a while they can be ace, but for the most part, they arent.
I think my all time favourite was on ghost valley in mario kart - you had to use a feather to land on that really thin section - nail it and you gain a second or two, fail and you are in trouble. I played that game to death, I played THAT level to death and I could nail it most times, but not EVERY time, that was its beauty - risk reward.

In pure there are no (hopefully) cheat shortcuts - passing through buildings, coming down through a tunnel roof etc - these are things we have worked hard to avoid having in the game. There is a brief risk / reward style shortcut in one of the tracks that will be available for download (its not finished yet, but its there.. sort of) aside from that there arent any I can think of. It might be the case that through feedback we do a few more download tracks with short cuts, but a this moment I dont know. There arent any in the tracks that ship on the UMD (as far as I remember - hey its late !). The decision behind this was primarily (ok entirely) mine, like I said, early on I consulted the other designers and Rob for their views, and generally when the views match on something Wipeout based, then thats good a good sign, if they dont... well we just fight :lol: heh just kidding. Like I said they arent compeltely ruled out for download levels, it depends on feedback - some people at work have suggested them a few times but we've resisted so far (aside from the one I mentioned, which is really rather cool).

I must sleep soon, more work to be done tomorrow

Lance
20th January 2005, 03:15 AM
.
Colin, i really appreciate the time you take to answer our members' questions; it makes us feel a part of the process. even when we haven't been! :D
but yeah, if you've been reading these forums for the last year, then we have been part of it even when we didn't know. thanks!

__ Lance
.

jospicy
20th January 2005, 09:48 AM
now that shortcut in Mario Kart was brilliant along with the 3-4 others that were well hidden and only gave a slight advantage but it was rewarding because skill was required to get the shortcut but it's great news that there are no\Few shortcuts
<off topic>
by the way Colin whats ur best time round ghost valley 1?
and how about rainbow road?
<end of off topic>

zargz
20th January 2005, 12:38 PM
Skills are also required to take the 90 turn on hi-fumi with no brakes also on hi-fumi
to make the turn inside the narrow tunnel with/without breaks! 8O ( .. trying hard to beat stev's ghost :evil: )
or the u-turn at silverstream and also there the s-turn (chicane) after taking the third left split! 8)
.. most turns on terminal and mega mall .. :roll: hmm .. well, skills are required on all tracks! :D
as I mentioned before here and on another thread I think there's a big differance between Mario Kart and wipEout series
mainly in the perception of how 'real' and credible the world is. :)
Anyway, it makes my wipEout heart good to see that the developers have made the effort to rectify some details of the game
that even pro-shortcut wipErs find not that good like flying through building, mountains and signs!
Doing that and at the same time keeping the feel of the old wipEouts! Great!!!

The main reasons for shortcuts, imo, are the higher speed + floatiness, boost(R1) and track design.
Higher speed meaning the adition of phantom class (wich is not a bad thing!) from 2097 onwards that together with the higher floatiness
enabled crafts to fly higher, further and longer than before coming of small bumps, hills or jums.
To higher speeds goes also the piranha of 2097 with the double speed compared to the others.
Boost(R1) self explanatory - the same effect as above.
The Design of a track perhaps the most impotant part!
AltimaVII on wo1 - even on Rapier and with a boost you can't make it through the mountain because you allways land before the turn!
AltimaVII on SE - some boost and even in the lower classes you make it through the mountain and land on the bridge!
A part of it is that most tracks on wo1 had lap times around the 1 min mark.
Obviously Altima was shortened for SE as was Arridos. Why? don't know :roll:
A great thing with wo1 fysics is that when your craft gets too high in the air it stalls
and you can see the speedometer run down quick and you craft almost drops straight down 8)
That's when you press down the nose to gain speed again.
Another good thing from wo1 is the ships are floaty but in a different way - they feel heavy and solid like you are driving a big NASCAR!
In 2097, wo3 and especially SE on the other hand, it feels like ships have little weight like a plane made of papper (assegai)!
Not really but like a very light mini convertible/cabriolette/corvette then! 8)
The exeption is :arrow: Qirex!

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

lunar
20th January 2005, 03:18 PM
AltimaVII on SE - some boost and even in the lower classes you make it through the mountain and land on the bridge!



yes - but I can`t land this one without coming down like a fridge - so I`ve always found it quicker to stick2track on this one. there`s no fun to that shortcut so I probably wouldn`t attempt it again.

Overall good news about shortcuts in Pure.

even so.....

Aliquando et insanire iucundum est

JABBERJAW
20th January 2005, 04:56 PM
Do you mean you can't cut off the track at all!! or just can't fly through buildings. Hopefully the later. If I am restricted to staying completely on the track then I will consider this game a failure. there is no reason not to have some plain view shortcuts on the tracks, as long as you don't go through objects

zargz
20th January 2005, 08:20 PM
even so.....

Aliquando et insanire iucundum est :D heh!

do you mean like a madman flying through an entire hill? :wink:

btw I could give you an advise on how to avoid the fridge thing but I'd rather not! 8) .. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Preaterea censeo Cartagine esse delandam

lunar
20th January 2005, 10:02 PM
the quote was in regard to shortcuts in general. :wink:

Facta infecta fieri nequeunt

I won`t ask for smooth landing tips there - I`m done with Altima for now and I`m sure I could never take a first place on it. I would only allow myself to use that shortcut in order to get first place - I have very strong morals like that. :wink:

zargz
21st January 2005, 10:29 AM
:lol: so was mine! that and autopilot! 8)

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

rejj
22nd January 2005, 12:35 AM
Do you mean you can't cut off the track at all!! or just can't fly through buildings. Hopefully the later. If I am restricted to staying completely on the track then I will consider this game a failure. there is no reason not to have some plain view shortcuts on the tracks, as long as you don't go through objects

Agreed.. :?
The great thing about wipeout is that you float. Seems like they might as well put wheels on the craft, and make every race inside a tunnel.


.. I'll probably still play it, but I'll be sad.

lunar
22nd January 2005, 01:58 AM
I`ll be disapointed if there aren`t any big jumps, just because they are fun and can test a different set of skills. I`ll be disapointed if pitch control isn`t an important part of it and I`ll be disapointed if you can`t ride the walls a bit by bringing the nose up, but I don`t think shortcuts are necessary to make it enjoyable or a test of skill. 2097 is my favourite and I don`t use any shortcuts in that game. I use almost all of them in 3SE, but would still love it if there weren`t any shortcuts. I see why we should use shortcuts if they exist - what is done cannot be made undone - but I don`t see why they ought to exist in the first place.

The correct track, with one available route, should be good enough; and in most cases, in the past, it is. 8)

Would Manor Top be a no fun, no skill track if you couldn`t cut that one corner? Is a perfect race on Talon`s Reach boring if you don`t go through the wall at the top of the hill? Like Zargz said, there`s plenty of skill and thrill in just getting round the track. Most of the people, most the time, are flying on a single route with different racing lines and pitch control. That`s what the game is primarily about and shortcuts aren`t so big a part of it that the lack of them ruins the game. I don`t see any reason to get worked up about there not being any. Besides, there may not be any shortcuts in the game now, but once the more extreme pilots get hold of it there probably will be. 8)

Lance
22nd January 2005, 05:12 AM
.
lunar said:
'' Is a perfect race on Talon`s Reach boring if you don`t go through the wall at the top of the hill?''
through the wall? you can do that? hm... is that how Arnaud beat my Venom TT time? hm... one third of a second per lap. hmmmm....

;)

i can fly over the wall so far and for so long that it's ridiculous. slows me down though.
.

zargz
22nd January 2005, 12:00 PM
yeah, lance that's probably how he beat you :)
and imo that's probably the most 'accepted' shortcut - I thought everyone knew of it! :roll:
Dont fly too far, land on the downhill before the tunnel and if you pull your nose up when landing
you wont bounce at all and gain some time even on arnaud :D

and lunar about altima all u need is a f@(€n autopilot 8)

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

Lance
22nd January 2005, 03:23 PM
.
''..gain some time even on arnaud''
lol. now there's a doubtful statement if i've ever heard one. :D
.

zargz
22nd January 2005, 03:51 PM
If you beat your own time then in fact you are gaining on anyone infront of you! :D

Lance
22nd January 2005, 03:54 PM
.
till Arnaud picks up a controller again. 8O
.

lunar
22nd January 2005, 08:48 PM
Lance: I don`t think Arnaud uses the TR shortcut, which pains me. He, Al and Mano just have magic hands and don`t need shortcuts on TR. I have no idea how they squeeze the extra inches of speed out of the game.




and lunar about altima all u need is a f@(n autopilot 8)



Is that really quicker than storming along the correct route? I guess it might be. Anyway, if I have an auto-coward I always save it for the pit/tunnel, incase I feel myself f@(n it up. 8)

zargz
22nd January 2005, 09:44 PM
lunar: :lol: LOL You like the spelling? :D
and Auto-coward :!: Bulls eye! :lol: lmao

lance: Oops! I thought we were talking about PK! :oops: *looking in catalogue to buy glasses*

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

stin
22nd January 2005, 09:53 PM
Lance: I don`t think Arnaud uses the TR shortcut, which pains me. He, Al and Mano just have magic hands and don`t need shortcuts on TR. I have no idea how they squeeze the extra inches of speed out of the game.


Lunar, Me and cool lover did witnessed, Arnauld DID use shortcuts on two different shortcuts on one lap!. I`m so damn sure he does said to us, if he stay on the track which therefor lose nearly two secs.
Imo, he is addicted to shortcuts! just to beat Al`s records not us!.

stevie :)

zargz
22nd January 2005, 10:27 PM
Man! I been just playing a lot of wo3ntsc - downloaded sciences ghosts then got stuck playing a tournament and then some TT
and I just can't belive how big the difference is in floatiness between 3 and SE!!! I've been playing SE for couple of years now exclusively! :o
Yesterday I noticed I was losing ground on the PAL tables so I did some TT on vec PK and was surprised I couldnt pull the shortcut :!: :?:
Now after some damn hard ghosts :evil: courtesy of science. I thought let's see if it's the same on ntsc and not even on phantom I managed to do the shortcut!
Man I realised that if SE wasnt so much floatyer than 3 then many fo the shortcuts in classic league wouldn't exist!!! 8O

Lance
22nd January 2005, 10:37 PM
.
stevie said:
'' if he stay on the track which therefor lose nearly two secs.''

hmm?!?!! he only beat my time in Venom TT by ONE second, [though he's probably talking about Phantom in that comment] and i didn't use shortcuts. of course, i didn't use Piranha, either. my Piranha time was 2.2 seconds slOwer than my Qirex time. how the hell can he dO that 1:17.0 with a Piranha?! theoretically my three best laps with Qirex would give me a time only 3 tenths slower than his, but i've never got all three together in one race. love that Qirex, though. but in all other classes, i can't get anywhere near Piranha with it, though the big Q is more fun to fly.

even so, shortcuts or not, the Big Three pilots do indeed have the magic hands. my Piranha times on TR in both TT and SR on the first three classes are second only to Arnaud's [but one tied with Stevie], but that's cause Al and Mano haven't posted times in the lower classes. truly amazing talents they all are
.

Dimension
23rd January 2005, 12:11 AM
Auto-coward, I love that :lol:

Downloading ghosts zargz? How do you get them on your memory card (in other words, point me in me way of wherever the topic is you've done this lot in plz)

Reading your posts, kinda glad I don't have 2097 now, beating David Pegg's times to get to Al and Arnaud on W3O is bad enough, never mind throwing Mano into the mix 8O

Are the physics in Se really so different to allow for many more shortcuts? While i've no real idea how different it is, I can't see anywhere other than the famous one on Porta Kora where floatiness would change anything :|

And for all you who have studied the physics of each of the games in depth, judging by the videos of pure, how do you think it will handle when in the air? Fly over everything as I guess you can with SE or more land before you've taken off kinda thing?

[/bored post]

zargz
23rd January 2005, 01:19 AM
here's the topic about shareing ghosts :arrow:
http://www.wipeoutzone.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1143

well I'm not so sure about the ' in depth' part :D ..
But all I can say is I can't make the jump at PK in wo3pal not even in phantom with Icaras!
As in wo3se on rapier I dont even need thrust to make it and not even icaras! 8O

Man! Did you have to ask that?
3am you have me running between two sets of TVs and psx' 1 with SE the other with wo3ntsc :lol:
Did TT on phantom PK ntsc with all ships exept 2first (too slow) just incase there were some
'floatier' than others and :arrow: can't make the jump!!! 8O
now will check on SE ..
or perhaps tomorrow?! .. (-_-) zzz zz z

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

zargz
23rd January 2005, 11:55 AM
ok. on SE the jump can be done without any boost with all the ships on venom
and on vector with boost with all the crafts!!! 8O

Dimension: Do you have SE?

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

yawnstretch
23rd January 2005, 02:32 PM
Interesting to note the discrepancies between PAL and NTSC versions of the games. I had long suspected that there would be differences but one great thing about Pure is...

No PAL or NTSC!

Does this mean the Wipeout Pure game released around the world for the PSP will be the exact same game (handling wise)?

If so - EXCELLENT :D

Mobius
23rd January 2005, 03:08 PM
well there isnt a region lock on the psp so i would guess so.

zargz
23rd January 2005, 03:27 PM
Interesting to note the discrepancies between PAL and NTSC versions of the games. I'm not talking about diferences between pal and ntsc, although they do exist,
but between wo3 (PAL+NTSC) and :arrow: wo3se :!:
8)

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

zargz
26th January 2005, 11:08 PM
In 2001 I made this racing game in Director for two players :arrow: zargzRally 8O
Made it 2players coz it's hard to program the AI 8O It's best of 5 (first to 3) wins.
It's 50% done and never finished it but is good example of how checkpoints work. :D
Anyway I showed the game to a friend so I could test it and never realised he was such a cheater -
on the 4th track he just cut half of the track! :evil: But was a good experience for an innocent rookie programmer! 8)
So I put some checkpoints and next time he cheated he was devostated and told me it was unfair! :lol:
After putting the checkpoints right, they were supposed to get on the lowest layer so they'd be invisible
but as i said before da game's about 50% done so you can see them. To see the last track it has to be 2:2 in races!
If 3:1 or 3:0 then you won't get there. Be warned :arrow: Don't expect wipEout grafix nor steering :lol:!!
:idea: If I find the code I'll fix the game and ask a designer friend to make the cars look like wipEout ships!
( got a version with 3 cars .. but will need 2 more tracks .. :roll: .. :idea: :!: can have him make an auricom, piranha & assegai :D )
You'll notice that on the last track ther ought to be an extra checkpoint .. somewhere .. :oops:
Best to try the game with a friend. Otherwise you'll have to win 2 races with each car .. boring!
If you dont cross a checkpoint you have to make another lap! :D heh!
:!: It's the simplest of games so don't get your expectations too high :!:
If the game don't fit on your screen press F11 for fullscreen! Knock your self out! :arrow:
http://hem.passagen.se/pael/spel/zrally.html

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

yawnstretch
26th January 2005, 11:35 PM
Amusing 8)
Reminded me of the old micromachines days...

(that advertisement kinda sticks over a chunk of the track on my screen though.. even after f11... what do I pay you for zargz DAMNIT!) :twisted:

Dimension
27th January 2005, 12:45 AM
Oh yeah, great fun! :D Nicely done zargz, s'got wipeout Pure research material written all over it :P J/K, cool game and yeah, very micro machines... or maybe circuit breakers :)

zargz
27th January 2005, 01:24 PM
http://www.geocities.com/zargz/leenden/lol.gif Thanks, guys! I just wanted you to see about the checkpoints -
on the last track after the 2nd checkpoint you can cut a big part of the track!
There should be a 3rd checkpoint in the bottom right corner of the screen ..
Will put it there whenever i find the code if I can remember how to do it .. :?

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

Dimension
27th January 2005, 07:19 PM
heheh, maybe you could get Mano to draw and scan you some tracks and work on those, that would be pretty mint, fun whatever though :P

zargz
27th January 2005, 08:22 PM
1 thing's for sure though :arrow: I need help from a designer not for design tracks but to make track and suroundings look niiice! :mrgreen:

Preaterea censeo Carthaginem esse delandam

lunar
28th January 2005, 01:54 AM
Very nice - a real stick2trax fundamentalist game.

I love Micromachines (on megadrive) - but it could have done with your system.

zargz
28th January 2005, 03:55 AM
fundamentalist!!? :mrgreen: LOL coz of the slower speed outside the track i guess?
man! I'll really try'n find that code - now i'm getting some cool ideas :idea: :idea: :!:
and also get hold of my designer friend :radar
make two more trax and make it 3players! http://www.geocities.com/zargz/leenden/phm.gif hmm!

Preaterea censeo autopilotum esse delandam