What do you think about physics
- Thread starter jamie5166
- Start date
Recommended Videos
A few years ago when Red Faction came out this was really a hot button issue, developers were touting engines like Geo-Mod and Havok as the future of programming, and there was a realistic arguement that top end titles were merely expensive tech demos.
However, games these days are typically marrying gameplay elements with sophisticated engines, and while they may fall down in many areas (design and writing I'm looking at you) I can't say that physics is a major focus in the current gaming climate. I think the industry is currently in flux, looking for a focus rather than actually pushing forward in a specific direction...
However, games these days are typically marrying gameplay elements with sophisticated engines, and while they may fall down in many areas (design and writing I'm looking at you) I can't say that physics is a major focus in the current gaming climate. I think the industry is currently in flux, looking for a focus rather than actually pushing forward in a specific direction...
I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."
Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.
Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.
I think Physics need to be in games because it can make things more fun , like the ragdolls in half life 2 or the physics in Gta 4... it's not imperative that you have the best physics in your game for it to be fun , but i think sooner or later it will be , because these days's games usually must have real like graphics , so why not real like physics , mess with them a bit and you get sci fi physics
physics are good. I don't care much for realism in games if I want realism I can go outside.
but it makes the game world more believable. but sometimes physics make small object react over the top and make them bounce all over the place. I mean most real things just fall and hit the ground and that is where the whole physics end. clay cups break or roll a little but they don't go on adventures on their own.
I think AI is a far more important thing for developers to focus on that would make gaming more interesting.
but it makes the game world more believable. but sometimes physics make small object react over the top and make them bounce all over the place. I mean most real things just fall and hit the ground and that is where the whole physics end. clay cups break or roll a little but they don't go on adventures on their own.
I think AI is a far more important thing for developers to focus on that would make gaming more interesting.
ahhh nothing like kicking back and playing with physics is there , i always played saints row and put the prat fall cheat on and spend hours running into wallsalygishere post=9.69748.670029 said:I think Physics need to be in games because it can make things more fun , like the ragdolls in half life 2 or the physics in Gta 4... it's not imperative that you have the best physics in your game for it to be fun , but i think sooner or later it will be , because these days's games usually must have real like graphics , so why not real like physics , mess with them a bit and you get sci fi physics
I think it's amazing what's been done with physics in games in the last ten years or so... I remember the first time I saw the famous ragdoll in action - some FPS game, Unreal Tournament I think. The guy showing me the game had just died, and the view zoomed out and showed his character as he tumbled down a pit and hit a bunch of stuff on the way down. It made a big impression, because it seemed terribly real.
There is certainly room for a bit more improvement - Oblivion's physics system in particular is famous for its quirks - but I would rather see more focus devoted to - as has already been mentioned mentioned - AI systems as well as emotionally engaging storytelling.
There is certainly room for a bit more improvement - Oblivion's physics system in particular is famous for its quirks - but I would rather see more focus devoted to - as has already been mentioned mentioned - AI systems as well as emotionally engaging storytelling.
I think it depends on what game you're playing if the physics should matter. a fighting game? as long as your character doesn't go through walls and stand in midair it's fine. But in like elder scrolls the physics should be really really good.
Physics can be good or really bad, depending on implementation. Take Oblivion for instance. The physics were great until you tried to set up a treasure vault to display your goods and realized that setting a sword near your stack of armor caused the whole pile to leap up into the air in a frenzy of metal that would likely kill your character if it were allowed to. Even if you got it right, you could never walk too close to the table again.
Compare the physics to something more like Half-Life 2. Still problematic at times (really, how many of you got beat down by that one guard for messing up when you threw the soda into the trash?) but overall much more subdued and better.
The overall problem with physics is that things seem to behave as if they've all coated in bouncy-ball rubber, and objects tend to either be light as a feather (walking gently by a knee-height crate full of supplies will knock it around) or simply unmovable. It's being refined and we're certainly getting there, but we've got a ways to go yet.
- J
Compare the physics to something more like Half-Life 2. Still problematic at times (really, how many of you got beat down by that one guard for messing up when you threw the soda into the trash?) but overall much more subdued and better.
The overall problem with physics is that things seem to behave as if they've all coated in bouncy-ball rubber, and objects tend to either be light as a feather (walking gently by a knee-height crate full of supplies will knock it around) or simply unmovable. It's being refined and we're certainly getting there, but we've got a ways to go yet.
- J
you do know that they have something better than ragdolls now its caled endorphin check it out its what GTA IV runs on thats why it looks so human when u get hit by a car and go whirling off into the nearby old lady also you know the pepsi advert the one with the orange blobs and he sticks down the side of the building they made that on endorphin aswellmGoLos post=9.69748.670135 said:
see im full of crap
Hopefully, we'll see a lot of these issues going away very soon. The big flaw of graphics and physics is that the CPU can't get feedback from the game world very well.tiredinnuendo post=9.69748.670122 said:
That's what Intel's new chip-thingy is trying to solve, moving graphics and CPU onto the same die should allow them to share data more easily.
So, your issues might be things of the past soon.
Sigh...Endorphin doesn't handle the human physics.jamie5166 post=9.69748.670281 said:you do know that they have something better than ragdolls now its caled endorphin check it out its what GTA IV runs on thats why it looks so human when u get hit by a car and go whirling off into the nearby old lady also you know the pepsi advert the one with the orange blobs and he sticks down the side of the building they made that on endorphin aswellmGoLos post=9.69748.670135 said:
Painkiller was a game that really made me appreciate physics. It made me look back on games like doom, but with havok implemented, killing things was really really fun with physics.
You know I would far rather in games they had less physics and made it so when you look down you see the front of your shoulders, body and legs. When you pick something up to throw it your arm actually goes back etc. This for me would make alot of games far more personal. Although I do think that the games industry needs a big boost of more powerful processors. To me we're still in the vector era of physics and there is so much more that could be done but just need the processing power.
Although by the time that comes out they'll have found a new fad
Although by the time that comes out they'll have found a new fad
Am I the only one here who actually likes the physics in Half-Life 2? Maybe it's less their actual physics engine and more the fact that they actually use it and/or let you play with it - plenty of objects around to mess about with and the gravity gun makes that a lot of fun. The occasional physics puzzle to remind you that they "do" physics... I like.
Realistic physics are definitely making headway with destructible environments and the like, what would be nice is more ways to interact with stuff - in a lot of FPS games the only thing you can really do with your hands is hold a weapon, would be nice if you could grab a random piece of shrapnel, metal pipe, plank of wood or whatever and use that as a bludgeon, or put things together and build some simple stuff... could be interesting. The trick is writing the game to be openended enough to allow for innovative solutions to problems, without it becoming too easy because you can just toss rocks at every obstacle until it breaks instead of playing the game and doing what they expected you to.
There are more pressing things though - good AI could really add to a game and make it great, whereas good physics is just... nice to have. Oh, and above all games could do with more effort applied to the storytelling. A compelling plot will allow players to overlook a lot of other flaws, a crappy story can be annoying and immersion-breaking even with the best graphics/physics. Still, any progress is good progress...
Realistic physics are definitely making headway with destructible environments and the like, what would be nice is more ways to interact with stuff - in a lot of FPS games the only thing you can really do with your hands is hold a weapon, would be nice if you could grab a random piece of shrapnel, metal pipe, plank of wood or whatever and use that as a bludgeon, or put things together and build some simple stuff... could be interesting. The trick is writing the game to be openended enough to allow for innovative solutions to problems, without it becoming too easy because you can just toss rocks at every obstacle until it breaks instead of playing the game and doing what they expected you to.
There are more pressing things though - good AI could really add to a game and make it great, whereas good physics is just... nice to have. Oh, and above all games could do with more effort applied to the storytelling. A compelling plot will allow players to overlook a lot of other flaws, a crappy story can be annoying and immersion-breaking even with the best graphics/physics. Still, any progress is good progress...
