GeneRally International Forum

jefcam wrote:Hopefully in the near future will have the sequel to Generally.

But every day I play Generally (the original) alone with the AI (5 drivers) I have a lot of good time and great fun.

The only thing that this game needs is to have the option to have more AI on track. This is not a feature like adding multiplayer which requires coding and re-coding and hard work.

I'm just asking if it is possible that we have this option added to have more than 5 AI drivers..

WHO SUPPORTS THIS IDEA?

Impossible - this means that on the proposed from you GR 1.3 with more than 6 drivers the tracks before the new release may not work as these tracks have only 6 start slots.

Impossible not - as with coding everything is possible.

If not mistaken the dev team which are working on genrally2, already tried this feature on generally1, but never released it.

For old tracks just some editing in the editor and more grid starts are created.

A variety of reasons really: from gameplay (where do we put all the grid slots?), to user expectation ("I selected 500 cars, why aren't they on the track?"), to performance implications (for each vehicle there is rendering, collisions, damage, etc. to keep track of), to UI concerns (where do we put all the in-game positional and driver information)! We had to choose a number and, after much scouring of years of posts here and elsewhere, the most common request was to up it to 10 or 12 cars... so that's what we went with. From some tests we did with GR1 and car numbers (a quick hack-job Hannu did a while back for fun), anything over 12 felt distinctly less GR-ish, so we went as far as we could whilst still trying to keep it feeling right

But Ivan's point is valid in that any tracks made before 1.3 would not be directly compatable with 1.3, as the user would have to modify any old tracks to allow them to work properly.

+ It wouldn't be good marketing move from our DevTeam. Because some people might wanna buy GeneRally 2 just due to increased maximum amount of cars on track, not because better graphics, new physics, etc. And if our DevTeam release GR 1.3, they might lose their motivation buying GeneRally 2.

just my

My

jefcam wrote:The only thing that this game needs is to have the option to have more AI on track.

I have better idea - track creator would decide about max number of players on the track and/or starting grids. AIs or human players - it doesn't matter.

E.g. on rally stages we set only one starting grid, on ROC-style tracks - two starting grids, on rwl tracks - 12 or how many starting grids and AIs we want to add on the track.

Gzehoo wrote:My

jefcam wrote:The only thing that this game needs is to have the option to have more AI on track.

I have better idea - track creator would decide about max number of players on the track and/or starting grids. AIs or human players - it doesn't matter.

E.g. on rally stages we set only one starting grid, on ROC-style tracks - two starting grids, on rwl tracks - 12 or how many starting grids and AIs we want to add on the track.

There are a million ways to fix the track incompatibility issue, for example just place extra cars behind the 5th and 6th grid slots... Even if there are issues, GR comes with the track creator and adjusting grid slots is quite possibly the easiest task it has!

It's a nonsense, the quote jafcam's own post says it enough well, I cannot get, what some people cannot understand on it (selective reading?).

One thing is to make a wild unstable test version just for a one-off test on certain track and another thing is to make it ready for general public use. It's not just about grid or about finding a mechanism, how the game would solve the grid order on its own while loading a random 3rd party track. It's also about whole in-game interface to be all reworked (to fit all AIs or switch to another concept?), to rework other menus etc etc (who knows, what it may do with game performance, loading or file sizes?). It'd mean simply to redo huge portion of the game and its code, to write it again from scratch and it all in the environment of messy code, which has not much sense, because doesn't follow many standards of programming, so one cannot predict what one change will crash elsewhere.

Summary? I'd take ages to do this all in a proper and stable way, which we could enjoy. If one chooses adding more cars into GeneRally as his own goal like James and co. did, it sounds really way smarter to reach the goal by making a sequel. Not to mention it opens room for improvements in other areas next to the number of cars alone.

BTW topic merged with proper GR requests topic.

Can you please put back the speed slider not everyone like cars that go 493mph!!!. Your older versions have the slider, but you cant adjust the screen res.. Is there a way to adjust the cars speed in the config file???

justbasicpainting wrote:Can you please put back the speed slider not everyone like cars that go 493mph!!!. Your older versions have the slider, but you cant adjust the screen res.. Is there a way to adjust the cars speed in the config file???

Post moved to this thread since you also posted this issue to another thread in the Help section.

Would you please release a version of GR that includes the over all game speed slider bar. Not all of us play GR with human opponents. Slowing down the drivers or picking slower cars does not have the same effect as the slider does. My friends all feel the same way that the new version does not include this feature. I dont feel I am offending people by asking this question lol, geeeess

Again I've moved your post to this thread, it's not a question for the help section. Believe me, your request has been heard already.

I´ve been playing around with different ideas to "punish" corner cutting.
I was looking for a way to stop cars from cutting the corners without having any objects liek sunk-tyres or cones at the apex.
Hmap-bumps can be a solution but they only work on smaller WS and are not appropriate for RWL-tracks.

I tried using the pit-limiters, as you can see in the picture.
All cars, wether they cut the corner or not, must go through the first limiter.
The second limiter serves as a "control". Cars that take the corner correctly will be released from the first limiter.
Those who cut will be punished.

The problem is, that even if the two limiters are directly behind each other, there´s a tiny but noticeable "limit-zone"
Also, the cars who cut the corner will not be able to accelerate again. They remain limited.
Finally, it´s only possible to set up two limiters, so this whole thing actually doesn´t make any sense...

Maybe it would be a good idea to have sometimg like "cutting-punishers" implemented in the track-editor that can be put at the apexes of corners tol slow down cars for maybe 3 or 5 seconds.

That's a good idea, it would be a good solution for compo organizers as well. It would make the cutting punishment automatic.

How about something simpler, with more backwards compatibility:

If the game detects that a car missed a checkpoint, it will kick in a forced speed limiter, whose duration is related to the distance and number between the checkpoints missed. So if you miss many checkpoints in a row, or a set of checkpoints very far apart, you get a much larger penalty.

Haruna wrote:If the game detects that a car missed a checkpoint, it will kick in a forced speed limiter, ....

I agree that the existing checkpoints are sufficient. However, I don't like the idea of the forced speed limiter. You don't want the car in front of you to slow down suddenly.
I prefer a time penalty applied to the lap and race time after the race if the driver has cut corners too often. Competition organizers can define number of allowed cuts and the time penalty. Seems more natural...