[ScottFreeCapital]

I just get a quick search on Google and here on the forums and couldn't find it - is there an explanation from Freespace canon (or Volition) for the physics of the game?

Is it only really for gameplay purposes?

[AdmiralRalwood]

I just get a quick search on Google and here on the forums and couldn't find it - is there an explanation from Freespace canon (or Volition) for the physics of the game?

Nope.

Is it only really for gameplay purposes?

Your guess is as good as anyone else's.

We have people who adopt the "it's an abstraction for gameplay purposes" view and people who adopt the "it actually happens exactly the way it looks in-game" view.

[Mongoose]

Clearly it's the luminiferous aether exhibiting a drag force on the ships.

[mosshadow]

Freespace taken at gameplay value has some pretty insane physics compared to even things like Star Trek and Star Wars.

-A gun that can juggle fighters through kinetic energy
- Antimatter bombs that are in the 25 GT range. And that your fighters can survive being a few feet from.
- Fighters that can destroy asteroids with only their main cannons
- Psychotic asteroids that prey on capital ships
- Fighters with set speed values.
-FRICTION !
-EVERY GUN is like a nuclear weapon. The maxim is like hundreds of Hiroshima bombs per second.

[TwoCables]

I just get a quick search on Google and here on the forums and couldn't find it - is there an explanation from Freespace canon (or Volition) for the physics of the game?

Is it only really for gameplay purposes?

To give a more serious answer, I think that it's just for gameplay purposes, to maximize the compatibility with as many people as possible. Or, to be as playable by as many people as possible right out of the box.

A Wikipedia page says that there are some elements of Newtonian Physics, but I think that they designed it this way just to be as "compatible" with as many people as possible.

[ScottFreeCapital]

I did read something about how the float data type has certain limitations in terms of the number of decimal values that can be calculated with it.

The issues of float numbers are also common with most games and something that developers often have to contend with, including myself.
http://www.hobbygamedev.com/beg/float-and-int/

This might be one reason why they might want to limit speed... but there's a strong argument for gameplay as far as I can tell too, mainly because of ship sizes. It is fun to shoot at something that's 200 meters from you and moving 60 m/s, for example, but when it's 4km from you and within seconds could end up being 50km, 100km, 200km+ because of uninhibited inertia... now there's not much fun in aiming laser cannons at that.

I'm trying to imagine what a plausible explanation might be for the physics in the story, but perhaps it is best left unaddressed.

[The E]

In order to preserve floating point accuracy, we generally limit the size of the playing field, not the speed of objects within it.

In my opinion, the gameplay argument is the stronger one; by limiting the speed of all actors, we can ensure that fights will actually involve a few intricate maneuvers as opposed to the high-speed jousting that an unlimited speed would produce. The flight model in FS2 is set up to feel right, to meet the expectations players consciously or subconsciously have of how space combat works. A more interesting case study for this is Diaspora; BSG made an effort to make ship movement look right while actually playing it loose in terms of actual physics, which Diaspora emulates perfectly.

Also, as Star Citizen proves, making a completely accurate flight model that uses proper physics that is actually fun to fly is a nightmare of complexity. It's better to fake it well, and let it feel right, than doing it right and making it feel bad.

[TwoCables]

I did read something about how the float data type has certain limitations in terms of the number of decimal values that can be calculated with it.

The issues of float numbers are also common with most games and something that developers often have to contend with, including myself.
http://www.hobbygamedev.com/beg/float-and-int/

This might be one reason why they might want to limit speed... but there's a strong argument for gameplay as far as I can tell too, mainly because of ship sizes. It is fun to shoot at something that's 200 meters from you and moving 60 m/s, for example, but when it's 4km from you and within seconds could end up being 50km, 100km, 200km+ because of uninhibited inertia... now there's not much fun in aiming laser cannons at that.

I'm trying to imagine what a plausible explanation might be for the physics in the story, but perhaps it is best left unaddressed.

I've seen a few people here on HLP say things about how it's just super-advanced technology that enables the unrealistic physics. Personally, I love that explanation!

[ScottFreeCapital]

I've seen a few people here on HLP say things about how it's just super-advanced technology that enables the unrealistic physics. Personally, I love that explanation!

Haha, the only problem with that is that when it comes to the other races like the Shivans - it would give them a tactical advantage to be able to rotate their ships (or at least turrets) and fire at you while moving about in space. Avoiding friction and having free moving inertia could also be used in war battles for suicide missions, or to outrun interceptors.

I think for purposes of story, it is better to leave it unaddressed or at least just say: FreeSpace is a different universe with different laws of physics. In FreeSpace space: some amount of drag/friction exists, gravity does not act the same way. The end.

I do like the idea of advanced technology being the thing that automatically balances your ship, stops you when you turn off your engines, etc. but it is not consistent with the game world that Volition created, IMO.

[FrikgFeek]

But Shivans CAN glide(at least in FSO, can't be arsed to check retail). Not their capships, of course, that would be OP. Imagine getting glide-strafed by a Sath.

[BirdofPrey]

I don't remember the Shivans being able to glide.

They have always had lateral thrusters, though

[Kie99]

I don't think there's much rationalising it other than to say that the FS universe works on very different principles to our own.  I think it has to happen more or less as it does in the game, if the Freespace universe had realistic physics even the most basic elements of the universe as presented such as fighters existing and being piloted by humans and capital ships vulnerable to bombs fired from human piloted bombers being feasible would be utterly absurd.  That's without even going into the implications of subspace travel.

[qwadtep]

The original Pokedex entry for Charizard says that its breath melts boulders, but you don't see it leaving a trail of burning cities and charred skeletons in its wake. Take anything Freespace says about its physics as technobabble.

[BirdofPrey]

Gameplay and story separation.  Simple as that.

The majority of starfighter sims play like a WWII dogfighter for two reasons:
1. It's somewhat expected.  That's how we've tended to be exposed to it in other media, the most prominent probably being Star Wars.
2. it's what's fun.  Fighter sims are fun, but being in space adds an extra element to the 3 dimensional aspect in that there's no ground to hit and you can have capital ships around where you are rather than just on the surface of an ocean, or just gunning down zeplins.  Not to mention, neutonian movement is somewhat non-intuitive for most, and actually trying to control that with the standard HOTAS has its limitations.

[ScottFreeCapital]

Gameplay and story separation.  Simple as that.

The majority of starfighter sims play like a WWII dogfighter for two reasons:
1. It's somewhat expected.  That's how we've tended to be exposed to it in other media, the most prominent probably being Star Wars.
2. it's what's fun.  Fighter sims are fun, but being in space adds an extra element to the 3 dimensional aspect in that there's no ground to hit and you can have capital ships around where you are rather than just on the surface of an ocean, or just gunning down zeplins.  Not to mention, neutonian movement is somewhat non-intuitive for most, and actually trying to control that with the standard HOTAS has its limitations.

Yeah, I think from a design perspective there's an important question - do you provide real physics or do you make it simple and fun (like Star Wars)? I think there's a little bit of a contrast - FreeSpace, in my interpretation, has a very serious tone to it and is meant to be kind of a dark story. It has all the elements of a dark story: conspiracy, humanity being threatened, severing ties with a species' homeworld (actually two species if you count Vasudans), politics, and so on. The contrast is then created by the fact that that's a really serious universe where as Star Wars is meant to be space fantasy. I think FreeSpace leans more toward the actual science fiction side, or at least, it's kind of meant to lean that direction.

FreeSpace, as a universe, follows a lot of rules. Star Wars doesn't necessarily, especially when comparing the prequels to the original trilogy (though if you prefer to imagine only the original trilogy exists then I'm right there with you). Star Wars can change on a whim using the Force as a plot device. The Force is everything - it's telekinesis, it's telepathy, and then in the Expanded Universe it's omniscience, it's sensing things from across the galaxy, and all kinds of ridiculous fantasy things.

FreeSpace, on the other hand, has rules to subspace, weapons, movement, explosive force and lots of other things that are demonstrated in the game. One alternative to having the player compensate for Newtonian physics would be to have the ship automatically compensate for it. As I understand it, this has been done before. I think a game called Eterium actually tried to do this, though I haven't actually played it.
http://rogueearth.com/eteriumgame/

I guess for the purpose of the FreeSpace universe, these pieces were intentional and should be left there to stay. Changing it up would dramatically change the experience of the game and maybe not add a huge amount to the story.

[TwoCables]

Yeah, I think that it just makes FreeSpace playable for a wider audience.

[deathspeed]

Gameplay and story separation.  Simple as that.

The majority of starfighter sims play like a WWII dogfighter for two reasons:
1. It's somewhat expected.  That's how we've tended to be exposed to it in other media, the most prominent probably being Star Wars.
2. it's what's fun.  Fighter sims are fun, but being in space adds an extra element to the 3 dimensional aspect in that there's no ground to hit and you can have capital ships around where you are rather than just on the surface of an ocean, or just gunning down zeplins.  Not to mention, neutonian movement is somewhat non-intuitive for most, and actually trying to control that with the standard HOTAS has its limitations.

As one of Robert Heinlein's characters said in "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls":
 "One minor difficulty -- Right-angled turns are about the most no-good piloting one can do. You waste delta vee something scandalous -- your boat probably doesn't carry that much fuel. (``Delta vee'' -- pilot's jargon for ``change in velocity'' because, in equations, Greek letter delta means a fractional change and ``v'' stands for velocity -- and please remember that ``velocity'' is a direction as well as a speed, which is why rocket ships don't make U-turns.) "  So basically, with Newtonian physics, a space fighter battle would really just be a one-time jousting match.  That would not be nearly as much fun as "WWII in space".

[TwoCables]

Yeah, and it would also be like learning how to walk because you're constantly having to remember that you won't slow down until you use your ship's thrusters.

[mosshadow]

Yeah, and it would also be like learning how to walk because you're constantly having to remember that you won't slow down until you use your ship's thrusters.

It would be like playing Orbiter. Which for the inexperienced is a terrible, soul crushing experience.

[TwoCables]

Yeah, and it would also be like learning how to walk because you're constantly having to remember that you won't slow down until you use your ship's thrusters.

It would be like playing Orbiter. Which for the inexperienced is a terrible, soul crushing experience.

I'll have to remember that: if I ever see the game 'Orbiter' and think that it would be a good idea to try it, DON'T. hehe