Or you could have just made a poll request.

Also, I don't think you understand what you want. Do you want the jump hight to be at level of OSP with 125FPS or do you also want all the buggy shit that goes with it?

the topic is the overall gameplay and feeling

regardless of what the result is, im sure idsoft will improve the code as much as they can either cpma vq3 code or original one.

If you want the poll, you need to specify. CPMA Vq3 is precisely the result of improving osp/vq3 code. The jump height you get in CPMA Vq3 is a bit higher than the precise jump height people were supposed to have in Q3 and all the maps, jump pads, etc, were made for.
So you have three choices. Bugged movement: variable height depending on FPS. Debugged vq3: Consistent height set at what you get with 90FPS in OSP. Debugged osp: Consistent height set at what you get with 125FPS in OSP.

poll:
there is a noteable difference in feeling and ingame impact of movement and general physics behavior between the osp/original vq3 and cpma vq3.
in case both codes would be optimised and bugfree as good as it is possible for idsoftware and the cpmateam, which feeling do you want to see in quake zero ?


cpma vq3 code

osp/original vq3



###################################################
reply:
125 or 90(85) gameplay behavior thats right.
about unstable fps i dont talk because every quaker should try to afford a system which can play q3 @ stable 125fps in low resolutions or play on emulated physics servers for that time (pmove or another solution then). quakezero should be no exception and highly downscalable.

No, that poll is total bollox. You don't understand what the hell you're talking about and consequently what the hell you really want, not to mention what is within the limits of common sense and reason.

out of obvious reason i dont reply to yeltsin.
i dont expect more quakers to behave like him but to show him
that we dont support people with such behavior in the quakecomunity unless they are able to show alittle bit of respect.

for me its about working together to make q0 a good game.
therefore i provide my experience which i have gotten since the comparison of the early cpma versions and osp.
im taking this seriously since then, and know some others
are doing it the same way.

"out of obvious reason i dont reply to yeltsin."

Out of obvious reason you reply to yourself instead. You like talking to yourself. I see how it is.

"i dont expect more quakers to behave like him but to show him
that we dont support people with such behavior in the quakecomunity unless they are able to show alittle bit of respect."

Yes, I should respect you not understanding the very nature of the subject you're talking about by making up nice metaphysical constructs just to put forward the idea that you don't understand what you're talking about.

"for me its about working together to make q0 a good game."

Hello. Please allow me to inform you, Mr, S1k, if I may so, so obtusely, call your highness, that you are not working on q0. As much as your immense insight and deep understanding of the finest intricacies of the virtual battlefield craftsmanship are valued and worshiped on by every single living being in whole world, they are not necessarily going to be called upon in this quest to develop the next iteration of id Software's Quake. I'm sorry if I crushed the dream of a 12 year old here. Practically anybody else on this site, besides me, is more help, simply by being able to speak English.

"therefore i provide my experience which i have gotten since the comparison of the early cpma versions and osp. im taking this seriously since then, and know some others
are doing it the same way"

Wow, thank you so much sir, for informing me how serious this is. How could I forget, the fate of a poll and a forum thread might depend on it. This is seriouse business.
Please than, describe to the very polite and modest "quakecommunity", if not me, your humble minion, how exactly is your experience relevant, if you show lack of any clue by saying "unstable fps i don't talk about because every quaker should try to afford a system which can play q3 @ stable 125fps" ? Are you saying FPS dependant physics are fine because everyone should be running quake at 125?
Do you realize that what you're talking about here is having those particular "unstable physics" in QuakeZero, which is pure buginess, and no one will ever deliberately do that? If not, you simply have to pick a certain speed/hight value. Hopefully you will think some, do some research(5 seconds), work on your English, and stop taking games seriously. Good luck with that. Ha.

complete p4 or athlonxp setups with 2ghz and gf3,radeon9000 are available in stores or ebay around 100-140euros.

quakezero is based on quake3 and on the quake3 engine - idsoft has stated in one interview that " We really want it to play at 60 FPS or higher on EVERYONE's system"
and thats what we can expect when talking about an improved quake3 engine - that it approximately has the same speed in low gfx settings as q3.

independent fps are a solution as long as they feel and look good.
e.g. in ezquake they have tried to achive the goal that independent physics feel and look the same way as the 77fps.
it is no 100percent solution too, but it is not bad to be able to play with 250, 500 oder 1000fps and set the physics behavior with another command (72fps,77fps,100fps) at the same time.
but it has cost some accuracy on lower fps counts like 77,100, 125
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
simplified poll suggestion, maybe you like to open it now:


which physics feeling do you prefer ? (dedicated server):

cpma vq3
osp

you dont get it do you?

you sir, are an idiot oder a FUCKWHIT

lol

impression of that guy from scrubs? :D

no idea who it is

that guy is an impersonation of Yeltsin..

cpma vq3.

So you're basically asking if the jump height will be modified?

another topic?
sandbox topic http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1478234

a link to this promode topic also would be fine.

i know the sandbox thread, i think this is important enough to have a single topic and vote as i saw many people talking about it in the last years. the result could be pasted in the sandbox topic to provide idsoftware a help when many people have wrote their decisions (the sandbox topic is already very big)
promode topic was :
http://www.promode.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3928

the "fixed" physics will be fine tbh. though i stopped playing q3 regularly around the time of the whole debacle, i imagine the only problem people had was that the cpma vq3 physics were different then what people had been used to for 10 years and it messed up their movement. q0 will be a new game with new maps etc so shouldnt be a problem to use the "fixed" physics.

My thoughts exactly.

Well, not necessarily. I guess they are counting on, that most of the existing Q3 community will move on to Quakezero and that would mean that cpma community would be very tiny minority when you count everyone playing all the crazy mods and baseq3 and whatnot. All these people are used to the "non-fixed" movement and will most likely be very unhappy about the change as everyone else has been. So they will have potentially thousands of unhappy customers on day one versus few happy ones if they will not emulate the original 125fps jump height..
Although, if Sync's team thinks that they can keep the suits at iD happy by catering to the small cpma community and make only tiny revenue with the portal, then go for it by all means. I just hope it wont mean we are never going to see this kind of project again, all because someone decided a piece of code is more important than the feeling that players have in-game.

I don't believe for a second that none of the "thousands" of the osp physics players will buy quakezero.

nobody will buy quakezero.

Have you considered that if they don't play CPMA right now, they won't even be able to tell the difference ??

cpma vq3.

btw, hör auf zu plenken.

ok werden wir tun !!!!

i liek mudkipz

Either is fine.

Well, I don't think it will be purely cpma physics. I am sure the cpma guys think so. No offense to arqon and the other people from cpma but if you ask them they will tell you they have perfected the Q3 movement and they get quite indignant when anyone disagrees. I have always believed that OSP felt better, and of course not being a coder has always negated that opinion in their eyes since it's difficult to put the differences into quantifiable terms.

Regardless, that is my opinion. With that said, I will point out that the movement from Q4 is nice (crouch sliding notwithstanding). If feels fluid and natural in the strafe and I suspect that what Quake Zero will end up with is something in between the two.

yes right.
i believe id will change some things to bring something new to the game.
but cpma physics would be a very great change to the game, i doubt that for quake zero.

so if quake zero is quake 3 then what comes after quake zero? a new quake4 called quake 1?

syncerror mentioned the other day that the game won't be called Quake Zero. They have another name for it I think that is still under wraps.

ye its called "ESReality" aka "whine-r-us" :P

on a serious note i dont think they should drop the quake name from it, it wouldnt be the same. if you get me

That would be blasphemy.

Blasphemy? this is Quake Town!

vq3 cpma

we'll have to practice that bridge to rail jump until we get it everytime :P

i don't really mind that the osp feeling will disappear but for ctf there should be extra gains in ups per strafe.

Didn't take that long when I switched. Just one of those knack things.

Am I the only one that likes CPM movement more then VQ3?

In any case, I'd vote cpma vq3.

I can live with the bugs.

for the loads of shit you get for osp's liiitle bit of extra jump height, I'd stick with cpma, ktx.

cpma

cpma vq3

bellend

cpma, cpm


































cunt

s1kor?

no, i think he has poland flag

good -s1kor is one of polis cheater who was catch some time ago :-)

i support the idea of fast and realiable anitcheats in pcgames.
cheaters have other reasons why they play than competitive players.
and no cheater i have talked with wanted the future of progaming or esports.
but ofc they would support it if their cheats remain unseen and they get money from winning a tourney.

no, never played with s1kor myself, but now i remember him playing in some q3 tournaments last year, thx

cpma vq3

Quick response that applies to all requests for "official polls".

You will not see me starting or directly supporting any polls. Make as many as you like. I love reading the feedback. But no poll will become "official" nor directly dictate a decision with any certainty. Many polls that could creep up may not even be relevant to the game or development process any longer.

So poll away, but do try to ask the right questions, in this case:

* Bugged movement: variable jump height depending on FPS.
* Debugged movement: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 85FPS in BASEQ3 (56units).
* Debugged movement w/ increased jump height: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 125FPS in BASEQ3 (64 units).

Questions like this are things that we've already had to address ourselves. And there are more than just three solutions in this situation. Go ahead and share your thoughts, but don't confuse this as anything but a poll by s1k, he's the one asking the question -- not me.

/me starts a poll demanding that id accept the input of the aforementioned poll and all other similar polls regardless of contradictory, illogical or down right stupid content.

i vote yes

I agree and propose the following poll:


1) Lower rail damage to 5
2) Lower rail damage to 10
3) Remove rail completely

Thank you.

"regardless of contradictory, illogical or down right stupid content."

pls change the formulation, i hope you see it.

You want I change regardless to irregardless?

hehehe

true.

downright is written in one word. get to it ix.

Two words, hyphenated, one word, who cares?

I thought s1k does :/

I mean I couldn't see anything else that needed correcting.

You can be a permanent translator with s1k!

hell no!

* Bugged movement: variable jump height depending on FPS.
* Debugged movement: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 85FPS in BASEQ3 (56units).
* Debugged movement w/ increased jump height: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 125FPS in BASEQ3 (64 units)

finally someone gives real exact numbers
there is a huge gap between 56 and 64 units, no wonder the cpma/osp war
why didn't cpma emulated 125fps physics instead of 85 ?

It doesn't work that way. And they've done their best to emulate the 125fps physics.

<ramble>
The correct movement is that which you experience at 85 FPS in BASEQ3, so once you correct the code error present the physics run at the 85 FPS behavior (meaning the player accurately jumps 56 units high as they are supposed to). Once you fix the error, the only way to emulate the 125 FPS physics is by altering other aspects of the physics and movement system to mimic what happens with the bug, such as increasing the jumpheight.

The point is, that when fixing the physics bug, you don't have the luxury of choosing between the 85fps and 125fps behaviors. You just have to fix it, accept the 85fps correction and then alter your game from there if you choose to do so.

Very few jumps become impossible under the 56unit jumpheight model. Many become more difficult. The most well known jump to not work of course is the q3dm13 mh jump, because the ledge is 64 units high. (Btw, maps like nodm9 actually lowered the ledge to 56 units -- which is also an option we have in QuakeZero as we can make any maps as we like).

I have always played with com_maxfps 120/125. So I have naturally always preferred that over the 85 default. When talking about the differences the two most common things to be said would be that the 125fps feels a bit faster and a bit floaty compared to the intended base movement. The player movement isn't any faster, but as you are in the air longer you feel a bit more like you're flying around the map. After having played quite a bit on both systems during testing, I actually prefer how strafe jumping feels under the 85fps / 56 jumpheight model. Its much more solid and you feel like you have better control. The 125fps seems to be better primarily for trick jumping (which can lead to shortcuts in-game which make your player traverse the map faster).

I do see why it has been such a heated debate between OSP 125 and CPMA 125. And once you throw in a third or fourth option of the original intended movement and another method of correcting the bug and altering the movement, well... I don't want to even continue the conversation atm. =)

What I do suggest though is that everyone who thinks that they have an opinion actually make sure that they know what they like. Perhaps try out all 3, baseq3 85fps, osp 125fps, cpma 125fps. Focus on how it feels while jumping, what jumps are possible under each system, and what it feels like just moving about the map. Then take in consideration that we're talking about a game where the maps haven't been released yet and can be designed for whatever system we have in place.
</ramble>

Not to mention the snowball effects of every decision you make...

such as increasing the jumpheight means that:

1.) Its easier to jump over items and miss them (armors, flags, etc)
2.) Its easier to jump over explosions, avoiding more of the splash damage
3.) ...

All of these can be fixed by altering the effected systems (increasing item sizes, increasing splash sizes or damages), but then of course each of those changes have further impacts on the game.

I'm personally quite used to jumping on items.
Second one makes people move a bit more so can't be that bad :)
I would be quite fine with debugged movement with increased jump height.

Now about those 56 and 64 units, how much do you get with 12FPS?
I noticed that 12FPS in BASEQ3 was the value that produced the correct height as set in the map editor when using jump pads. Every other value in baseq3 and cpma was too high.

Due to the buggy nature of the code, you cant ever actually get exactly "right" with baseq3, you just get "close to" (at some framerates the errors cancel themselves out so theres only relatively small errors, while others, such as 125 and 300, they massively build up).

this explanation has a big chart with framerate + accumulated error which shows which framerates are "good" and "bad", although it doesnt go as low as 12.

Btw, in addition to your attempts to jump on the item, in the mods that have increased the jumpheight, they have increased the size of the pickup boxes for items in most cases.

"1.) Its easier to jump over items and miss them (armors, flags, etc)" jeee! I hate when I do that!

You missed a few other issues BTW, e.g. the distance you can fall without taking damage.

that one is most notable but i see it as a feature not a issue/bug. we've been playing like that for ages now.

maybe i'm totally misunderstanding something here... but these "issues" you mentioned are like quake3 has been played for years now. higher fps changed a lot more than jumpheight alone. so i agree on rather changing gravity than jumpheight if that is what you meant.

btw if i prefer something it's the 333fps physics that were possible for a short period of time :p

Jumping over items is not a bad thing, think tdm.

I'd guess the original intention was to test the movement with those numbers and see what the players would want, but as all the testing was done with the bugged code, to start taking the 56 unit jump limit, after 7 years, as strict "correct" or "intended" value, without consulting the playerbase is, in my opinion, wrong. And when you think of it, when you make a change in the game, and 90% of the people who try the change think it sucks, and even after many years, atleast 50% think it still sucks, as a developer, you know something went horribly wrong.

That being said, what would it actually mean, if you would use the fps dependent movement?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but I would think the original game testing in q3 and it's maps was done with 85 fps and not 125 fps and there lower jump heights.

Yes, the maps were tested with the 85fps / 56 jumpheight. You are not supposed to be able to jump up to the mh ledge on q3dm13, you're supposed to have to fall down onto it from above.

The 125fps also affected a lot of jumppads, causing you to overshoot your intended destination, but with 85 fps you land where you were supposed to land.

The maps were also tested without any kind of strafe jumping too, I assume?

What i ment was, that the "FPS dependent" physics were well known by them/you (did you work at id at that time?) at the time of Q3test, as they were tweaking them, and capping the FPS, just as they were working with another bug, strafe jumping. So from an outsiders point of view, one can only assume that both of them actually ended up working as intended.

no. As another outsider I feel it's quite possible to assume they did not know about about the fps bug during the mapping phase.
However I do believe they knew about strafe jumping after all those kinds of movement "bugs" have been around since Q1.

And only because strafe jumping was probably intended (and I'd go as far as to call it a feature not a bug, as it is in q4 and et:qw) doesn't give any reason to believe that other bugs are intended.

I though sync just said that they did not know about the fps bug when making the maps or did not test them with higher than 85 fps. Thats not even relevant.
What i'm talking about is the Q3test, where people who really matter finally had the chance to test it out. Which i'm assuming you never tried, because else you would know that at that point the fps bug was obvious and that Carmack himself said that strafe jumping is an "exploitable bug". Infact later on there were builds where you could do two or three jumps in a row and then had to wait couple seconds untill you could jump again. Luckily they let that bug slide in the end, as fixing it would have obviously done more harm than good. Question is, is that the same case with the physics "fix".

None of the bugs were intentional, but in few cases, in fact a lot of the cases, some of the best gameplay features have come from bugs in code, so the whole "intended" and "correct" rhetoric sounds to me as something the coders like to throw around, when it saves them from doing some work. I'm using strafe jumping as an example to demonstrate the double standard applied in this case, as none is talking about fixing it, even though it was never "intended" to be in the code either (but was left in it because majority of the players liked it).

I think at the time Q3 was being worked on, it would be amazing to get above 70 fps, and I'm sure no one would consider 'bastardizing the game' with picmip 5 :)

I'm not sure if you are talking about the early development cycle or the Q3test time, but atleast in the Q3test period, people with high-end machines were getting easily over 80 fps if they tweaked their config. I believe they capped the fps to 100 in one of the builds, when they started to have problems with people, who had high fps, getting stuck in the stairs and stuff like that.

Obviously that was the time they did any development, which is relevant. Q3Test, being a test, didn't yield anything but major bugfixes like the timescale hack. Even at 100 fps it's not quite easy to tell as when you fly around like fazz at 333 FPS in an online tourney 5 years later.

Well, as we are talking about the bug fixes, in my view, the Q3 test era is the most relevant. Infact, as we are talking about multiplayer only game, that is the most relevant era period. And didnt they cap the movement to 125 fps in one of the point releases, because of the 333 madness (I could be wrong about this, this is just what i remember but have no time to check it out), thus cementing the "intended" movement to 125fps not to 85 fps?

That's a votable setting in OSP (introduced in 1.02 at 142 fps, then fixed to 125 in 1.03).

However, id flip-flopped with fixed movement physics in the 1.25 PR which caused lots of flaming.
1.27 reverted to the broken model, but with pmove_fixed added as an option (off by default). If enabled, the default pmove_msec 8 gives "fixed" 125hz movement.
(pmove_fixed 1 feels jittery and overbounces consistantly anyway, so it's not a big loss).

you and your assumptions...

I didn't try every single build cause the whole download was a pain in the ass with a 56k modem but yeah I played q3test. Next assumption please.

And I do believe there is a difference between saying strafe jumping as a whole was considered a bug and strafe jumping beyond 2-3 jumps was not intended.

Also i don't think "both" bugs are as comparable as you are trying to make it look.

After all strafe jumping as it is is stable in itself and the same for everyone. On other hand the fps bug is not. Because of it you have to set your framerate to specific levels, and can't chose freely for example to sync with your screen's frequency. Also those with more money had an advantage cause they would get those 125 always while others sometimes had drops.

But the arguments have been repeated over and over and if you haven't found them to be true yet I guess you never will.

My next assumption is that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Why are you even trying to troll me, first I decided to be nice to you, and let you first idiotic comment about people buying Quakezero slide. But the rest of your 'info' is about as accurate as that gem right there, so do yourself a favor and stop the self-owning.

You're right the buying part was a mistake on my part didn't really think about the word.

However claiming that if someone makes one mistake everything else must be wrong two is just pathetic.

Btw ever read this quote?

"We really want it to play at 60 FPS or higher on EVERYONE's system, "

Yeah I'm sure they intend everyone to run their games at 125 because they capped it there. You know because things become really fucked at higher setting like 333 fps.

Well, I guess I'm gonna be as "nice" as your are and simply assume that you made up your mind about the physics 6 years ago and ignored every further developement. And now you are holding on to every straw you can find.

id never capped movement to 125 fps. They tried to make it fair for everyone with pmove_fixed but that was a pretty bad fix, before that fix OSP had already introduced cl_125hz 1 that was sort of the same, im not much code genious but most of these fixes of movement you know about comes from OSP/CPMA.

hmm, actually i think you're right :/

It was a reply to part of another post from him (Comment #94). Should've checked.

Yes, the maps were tested with the 85fps / 56 jumpheight. You are not supposed to be able to jump up to the mh ledge on q3dm13, you're supposed to have to fall down onto it from above.

The 125fps also affected a lot of jumppads, causing you to overshoot your intended destination, but with 85 fps you land where you were supposed to land.

it doesn't really matter what how we're supposed to play a game when most of us have been playing something different and liking it. that's the whole point of the debate. players > coders if it comes down to gameplay.

Abso-fuckin-lutely. I mean doom/quake gameplay is sort of based on aload of lucky coding errors. I don't want people to come along and cross all the T's and dot all the I's (tying to improve it) when the game is pure Graffiti!

Where do you get these percentage statistics?

So what you are basically saying is "Quake Zero" will probably be 56units but the maps designed around that :P

yea, thats what i read between the lines to:)

i explain now a possible solution and another way, as there are too many replys in here that doesnt help q0 in the end and the comunity.

the physics feeling of osp is better.
the code in cpma is more secure.

both options are not near perfect, even if we have the osp feeling and secure cpma code combined.
cracy ?
people are telling how good crt was, then telling how good 2ms tft was(wth). first 125hz mouse, now 1000hz.
---------------------------------
this is all not good enough if idsoft want to make AGAIN a groundbreaking! game.
--------------------------------
i told people from beginning that 125hz is not 1000hz.
and 2ms tft is not crt, and crt 150hz i still see many faults in it.
neither is even the best netcode today with sv_fps 30 perfectly smooth and fluid at all.
ofc all steps has to be made.
hardware too.
and physics and netcode too !


i talk about a feeling that is MINIMUM as responsive as the 125fps in osp on dedicated servers. and min. as safe as the cpma code.

i talk about a solution that has e.g. 150fps physics and no bugs, and is working on everybodys pc. i know idsoft is thinking a similar way. because thats what i see when playing though old titles like wolf3d, doom12 or quake123 (sometimes in newer titles too, but not often enough)

idsoftware has always pushed the limits back with the old games.
now its time to bring back the old flow and make quaking big.

if this sounds too demanding for some people - i am thankfull for the idgames, the modteams and the players who have played with me so far !!
if most quakers disagree with pushing the limit and want the cpma or osp code copied, hey i can live with democracy in this case. (k maybe with some beers to calm down the pain :)))
but im sure idsoft, modteams and the quakers will make the right choices united this time.

Um. I have no idea what you just said.

seriously, you should just adopt the CPMA way of fixing this issue, its such a small and unimportant issue even for VQ3 players with new maps that small issue is even less important. Hanging on to bugs like these for 8 years is stupid, its not like they are disabling strafejumping or rocketjumping.

you mention the dm13 mega health

am i missing something here but that jump is possible in cpma anyway?

cpma isnt 85fps equivalent

I would just cap FPS at 125. If people want CPMA VQ3 style physics they can play a CPMA mod. Otherwise, I strongly suggest leaving it VQ3 (baseQ3). Most people play baseq3 and will be disappointed if QZ attempts other solutions. If you have to change the maps then that means less likely to be backwards compatible with the 100's of current custom maps for Quake 3, which would be a major disappointment as well.

If QZ is moddable, someone will eventually make a competition mod no matter how much you work on it, so I say leave it up to them to tweak the physics that way. It really won't split the community negatively because all mods do that to a degree, but the core QZ assests will still be used.

On the other hand, if this is all client-side, would it be possible to just give the client the option on how it 'feels'?

Thank you. :)

http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Quake3/FAQFPSJumps.html

I've ran a bit in baseq3 using these binds :
bind b "com_maxfps 85"
bind g "com_maxfps 125"
to switch with ease the two physics

so from an non-old q3 player point of view :
on straight lines strafejumping I don't feel much difference between the two physics ; 125fps feels a bit more floaty, but far from obvious (furthermore I knew it before testing)
on ledge catching it's obvious 125fps jump a bit higher than 85, e.g. on q3wcp9 ; but this would be kind of irrelevant in q0 since maps are gonna be scaled to fit chosen physics anyway
gap crossing is imo where the difference get clearest, e.g. still on q3wcp9 ; jumping longer is kind of obvious in this game, even scaling maps won't really do the trick
another example : one circle jump get the mh on cpm11a, with 125fps then 85 in baseq3

so the choice seems to be :
a bit more floaty and longer jumps, or a bit more grounded gameplay with shorter jumps

personaly so far I'll only go with what seemed obvious to me : baseq3 feels slow in comparison to cpma ; 125fps baseq3 emulated physics with cpma acceleration (or whatever actually makes it faster/nervous than baseq3) would be the best of it all, imo

The last one seems the best of both worlds, if I am catching its drift.

Debugged movement w/ increased jump height: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 125FPS in BASEQ3 (64 units)

seems to be the only right fix? imo..

let's get a few things straight, since people are throwing around numbers.

baseq3 at 85fps = 44u jump height

baseq3 at 125fps = 48u jump height

cpma at any fps = 47u jump height


in each case there is an 18u stepsize which allows you to jump on objects up to 62, 66, and 65 units in height respectively.


the player height is 56u, which is what syncerror must be quoting.

Damn, everyone is going to be so confused now with the poll. Are you sure?

yes, but the actual numbers don't really matter for this discussion - as long as the programmers at id know what they are doing.

as far as this discussion/poll is concerned, its a choice of 3 options, like sync said:

1) broken, fps dependent physics

2) fixed physics (cpma)

3) fixed physics with jump_velocity and/or gravity tweaked to give a feel similar to 125fps broken physics.

Another notable nitpick is that we're talking about the vq3 part of CPMA only, since it should be independent from cpm.

SyncError said :
jump height at 85FPS in BASEQ3 : 56 units
jump height at 125FPS in BASEQ3 : 64 units

(with or without stepsize ?)


and you say :
baseq3 at 85fps = 44u jump height
baseq3 at 125fps = 48u jump height
in each case there is an 18u stepsize which allows you to jump on objects up to 62 and 66 units in height respectively

where the truth ?

i'm afraid sync's wrong on this. there are a number of ways to get the values:

1) viewpos

2) defrag actually has a jump height ouput

3) in the past i've made a map containing different sized blocks, and tried jumping on them etc.

all 3 experimental methods agree the numbers i gave.

Are you kidding me? VQ3 crowds want to lynch arqon for 1 unit difference? Either you're in error here or I want to nuke the vq3 people.

lol :)

although the jump height has been maintained to be very similar (this is so things like the dm13 mh jump are still do-able) the fixed gravity (800) is significantly higher than osp125fps (750), which is the particular aspect that dictates how floaty you 'feel', and how long you spend in the air per jump.

so yes the jump height is only 1u lower, but that is only one part of the story.

you may fire when ready...

Hmmm. That cvar can be changed even now by the vq3 server people. Is it certainly 750? How did you calculate it?

its caused by (fps dependent) rounding errors. at 125fps anything between roughly 690 and 810 is effectively the same as 750.

yeye, just that i never thought of it in terms of gravity, it makes perfect sense, just wondering about how exact 750g is. The rounding error is about 56 something in something hm

750 is exact.

you cant just put this value into cpma and get osp125fps physics though because they tweaked the jump_velocity a little to give a 47u jump height using 800 gravity.

I assume lowering the gravity would make you drop downwards slower (than you should be)?

Or does changing it start to cause errors of some sort?

yes, and thats exactly what happens in osp: you are more floaty (than you should be) which is the reason you have such a high jump height. and like arq mentioned, one side effect of this is being able to drop from higher heights without taking damage than you should be.

Then I guess I don't understand why it isn't changed. However I won't whine as A) I don't know anything about the code at all and B) I actually like CPMA VQ3 movement....

i'm not sure i understand you, but would be happy to explain.

if you're asking why they didnt just use 750 in cpma, it's because the uber-floaty osp125fps gravity makes all the jump pads overshoot you, compared to what they were designed to do. thus the 800 gravity is the correct, intended gravity which is what cpma uses.

if you're asking why osp doesn't use 800, its becuase at 125fps it's *impossible* for osp to have 800 gravity. the value of the g_gravity has always been 800, but 750 is the actual value that you get.

Your first "reply" was what I meant :)

One last question :P

If I were to load up CPMA callvote all the VQ3 stuff then set g_gravity "750" would this give the closest to OSP physics settings?

Or are they still some way off because arQon tweaked some stuff to get it as close as possible while keeping g_gravity 800?

you cannot, that is correct, other stuff has been tweaked.

but if you really wanted to, 770 would give you the same air time per jump, which is one of the main aspects.

Its not exactly the same though, because the rounding errors apply in all 3 dimensions, not just vertically. Its not just about jump height.

although that is correct, the horizontal rounding errors are irrelevant for this discussion (and irrelevant in general). they depend on the horizontal acceleration which can be more or less anything depending on what the player is doing and where he is going.

therefore horizontal errors will sometimes speed the player up a bit, and sometimes slow him down a bit: over time statistically they cancel out.

vertical rounding errors are what are improtant because when accelerating vertically ( which is 99% of the time acceleration due to gravity) the rouding errors all have the same effect and accumulate with time, which does result in a problem.

Hm, I thought I replied to this earlier.... but here goes agian:

I dont see any good reason why the horizontal rounding errors should cancel out when the vertical ones dont. Especially when the player is moving along axially aligned corridors / rooms, which is how most quake levels tend to be laid out.

The horizontal rounding errors will also affect jumping too. They will affect the shape of the parabola, making you potentially miss/make jumps to ledges due to the fact that the highest point of the jump would be at a different point, even if "jump hieght" (launch velocity + gravity) are the same.

Dont get me wrong, IMO working and predictable physics is the only sane way forward, and tweaking gravity / jumpheight, or tweaking levels are an acceptable solution to stop whine. But it'll never be "exactly" the same as the buggy osp or baseq3 physics. Suggesting that it can be is just setting yourself up for whine when people realise it isnt.

1) i've never said it would be exactly frame by frame identical.

2) it would be close enough that no one would notice. most people only care about the time spent in the air per jump rather than the actual jump height (even though they dont realise it) as it dictates circle jump length.

3) the horizontal velocity rounding errors depend on how you are accelerating horizontally. therefore it would be possible to engineer 2 situations where you could directly see the shape of the parabola are slightly different horizontally, but you would only be able to tell by outputting a list of co-ordinates. for you to get velocity rounding error effects you HAVE to be accelerating. if your speed is constant then there will be no change in the velocity - nothing to be rounded.

4) you obviuosly havent thought about this properly or done any of the mathematical analysis. for example you probably wouldnt be able to tell me that at 125fps the acceleration angles are quantized into 28 axis-aligned non-equal intervals, the ones close to the axes giving slightly higher accel, and the ones inbetween giving slightly lower accel. and you probably wouldnt be able to tell me that these consist of 4 different accelerations of root 9, root 10, root 5, and 2 root 2 ups per frame either.

5) having said that, you HAVE to apply acclerations at large angles to your velocity, otherwise nothing will happen. doing so changes the direction of your velocity and thus your acceleration angle changes with it. thus your axial acceleration angle HAS to change with time, so you will WILL recieve a range of rounding errors. you can only accelerate up to 320ups in any one direction. after that you stop accelerating and thus stop getting rounding errors, and have to change the angle to continue.


6) if it's not obvious by now, here is why vertical errors are infinitely more important. the vertical acceleration (gravity) is constant in both magnitude and direction. furthermore it doesnt suffer from a 'speed limit' that the horizontal accleration does. therefore the effect is exactly the same at each frame, regardless of how fast (etc) the player is moving through the air vertically. thus the vertical rounding error is the same also. thus they accumulate giving an impression/effect of a different gravity constant.

the difference horizontally is there are 28 different angles of 4 different rounding errors (rather than just 1), and (if you want to experience them) you HAVE to experience a range of them, not just one chosen one.

7) AnthonyJ you have nothing but my respect for your work on q4max but dont waste my time and risk confusing everyone by debating something after giving it only a minutes thought.

yes it is possible that the horizontal effect could be noticeable, but it would be interpreted as a very small difference in the AirMove ability of the player, not as an unavoidable and HUGE universal effect like gravity errors.

good stuff

<3 anthonyJ for his work

but injx you are now one of my favorite persons:P

Perfection can never be obtained, and it exists only as an ideal. In Hamlet, Shakespeare sheds light on the tragic flaws of heroic characters; the tragedy that befalls Hamlet is the result of his unrealistic idealism, which is the cause of Hamlet's alienation and indecisiveness.

Does Quake Zero really have to be a carbon copy of Quake 3 which a lot of players have played to death? If you start with a fresh perspective on how the game should be, then the jump height in OSP at different framerates, CPMA fixed physics etc is irrelevant. Unless you directly port maps then the only question about jump height and physics is what will play good, not what was once upon a time.....

Trying to apply logic and reason to fps fanboys will fail 90 % of the time, and i didn't just pull that number out of my ass

Where else do you pull it out of?

afaik, q0 wont be another copy of q3. it is q3!
don't expect a "new" quake title :>

as for the topic. i want to play it as it was intended.
"Debugged movement: Consistent jump height set at what you get with 85FPS in BASEQ3"

If it's an exact copy of quake 3 with absolutely no changes at all and everything is the exact same, then it will fail miserably. Most are tired of Quake 3 and the majority of those are still playing it, play mods. Why would anyone want to log in when they can just use their original Q3 client and get the same experience on old servers? Doubt you'll get the Q3 community to move if there is nothing new.

However syncerror wouldn't be bothering with this thread if that was what they are making, and they also wouldn't need much of a dev team to move Q3 startup into a web browser. Afaik QZ is the learning process for the team to prepare for making Quake 5, which makes sense considering how badly Q4 flopped in MP. The game will most likely be Quake 3 based, but it doesn't need to be a carbon copy. By starting at QZ with a fresh perspective and looking at what works and what doesn't, they can make it a better game than Q3 was. Q3 is far from perfect even if a lot of fan boys think so.

Q3 players should move if only for the much bigger playerbase that Q0 is expected to have.

Thats depended on how the game plays.

It's supposed to be an updated Q3.

Thanks for the heads up, lets see how many ppl actually play it with broken physics vs fixed.

I want the broken physics, fvck you cpma!

fixed physics with slightly increased jump height.
I dont know why so many people complain anyway, its hardly much difference at all, and the fixed physics bring so much more benefit like better net code.

aha yes that relation is very clear, fixed movement which results in better netcode :s
you on drugs or smth ?

He means that the benefits to fixed physics are comparable in gooditude to the benefits of better net code. \0.o/

"gooditude"

XD

Never misunderestimate the English language.

ok, everybody plus the gooditude, this guy must be a superstar in 2 days.

I thought that was what Arqon's reasoning had been. I thought I read years back in OSP vs. CPMA debates that the corrected fixed movement allowed the game engine to know where a player would be drawn thus provide better net code.

I could be wrong though, was a long time ago :o)

well the biggest problem with these threads, you have so many people that have no idea about what they are actually trying to preserve(in this case a small unimportant movement flaw, gameplay wise). These people have no idea that stuff like this can have impact on everything else in the game. They would rather go on a crusade defending their precious meaningless bug that ultimately affects a lot of stuff they didnt think it would in the first place, i believe many of these whiners thinks that this movement bug is no big deal keeping, and is just like some feature you just tweaks a little and then you have the same old OSP movement again... But people that didnt accept the fix already are probably too ignorant to let this enter their heads.

To all VQ3 guys that lives in the past:
When Quake Zero or what it will be named will be released, just play Q3 OSP instead. Enjoy your bugs, enjoy the random physics, overbounces and stuff, enjoy maps where you jump too high to jump through corridors(pro-q3dm6) and seriously stop trying to induce buggy movement into a new game. It wont happen and you are wasting the devs time on an unimportant part and you should spend your time adressing the important stuff instead.

tbh i don't really care. the reason i don't like it in cpma is that we used 125fps so long in osp and i didn't like, or see a good reason for the change.
with a whole new release of the game there will probably be quite a few new things to get used to, and slightly different height and speed wont be a huge issue.

of course i'de prefer it if they pick similar to 125fps physics because it's faster and feels nicer, but it's hardly going to stop me playing the game if they don't.

important data from me on the topic.
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1491430#pid1491430

The irony of discussions like this is that the opinions of virtually all who post here are irrelevant.

When it comes to the jump height question:

Casual players (who make up the numbers needed for the game to be a success from a business perspective) don't care.

Therefore, the only opinions left to consider are those of the top, potentially professional players (cooller, toxic, czm, etc), because they will determine the game's success from an e-sports perspective.

The competitive players on the lower end of the spectrum (ie, everybody here so far) will not affect the success of the game to anywhere near as great an extent, and should take a correspondingly low degree of importance in the minds of the developers.

SyncError - if you and your team have a real interest in making Quake Zero a success (and you clearly do), please consult the players who matter. I, for one, don't give a shit which height you use, as long as the top players like it and play it as a result.

I'd rather play a game I like than play a game Toxic likes.

He likes to eat people.

Whether or not you play q0 won't have an impact on its success, that's my point.

hu.. it will too
who's gonna be the hardcore fan base of this game, sharing our love of this game to non-quakers, if not us ?
commercial advertising isn't all

Someone gets it.....

Us > Pros

You have it completely backwards. The low- and middle-end competitive scene is the most important thing for this game, besides the noobs, but they are both feeding from each others. Do you really think, that Painkiller or Q4 were great success storys, because all the pros were surely playing those. Infact, the pros will play anything, aslong as there is money to be made, so they are the last ones to worry about.

Luckily for us, when it comes to the movement, majority of the casuals coming from q3, majority of the low and middle-end competitive scene coming from q3 and pros coming from q3 are in concensus about what movement is most fun and their preferred one, so as long as id delivers, there should not be any major splits and we might see quakezero above q3 in gamespy statistics (I guess thats what the suits would call success).

The problem with the CPMA physics isn't the jump height. In fact it's the same as in OSP 125 fps (you can reach the mega in dm13). What completely fucks the movement is something different, I don't know if it's accel or whatever, it feels just so bad.

The same as the weapons, with instant hit weapons you can aim like in lan with 100 ping on whatever now, however they just feel like shit. Arqon is like the plastic surgeon of Michael Jackson, he says he fixed it but you don't sense it's right at all.

cpma vq3 sucks ass
cpma cpm sucks candy