Author Topic: To infinity and beyond (game engine)  (Read 6095 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ziame

  • 28
  • ED ftw
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Don't turn this into a flame war, guys. QD just said his opinion about the engine, and i think he knows what he says.
Rabbinic Judaism had a good start with the Old Testament but kinda missed the point about 2000 years ago

ALL HAIL HERRA
/fan of BlackHole

 
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
We're not gonna agree and there's a long history/series of reasons as to why Newtonian (fake, pretending to be real, 'real') physics fail horribly compared to fake, "designed for games, to be fun, competitive, and intuitive to combat" physics in my mind.

As for the stills, they DO look a lot better, however the problems were not with the final phases, they were with the transition.
The surface of the planet ended up in Pixelation-Hell before he got down to the area where the last LOD took over, and his attempt at 'atmospheric fog' just looks like a cheap attempt to save processing power.

The last few screen shots including the lava/tree related ones look a little more 'alive' than a random ball of mud which is better, but he still has a long way to go, even with the stills.

Edit; forgot to throw in, the tidal effect seriously helps too.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2009, 10:51:17 am by QuantumDelta »
"Neutrality means that you don't really care, cuz the struggle goes on even when you're not there: Blind and unaware."

"We still believe in all the things that we stood by before,
and after everything we've seen here maybe even more.
I know we're not the only ones, and we were not the first,
and unapologetically we'll stand behind each word."

 

Offline Rodo

  • Custom tittle
  • 212
  • stargazer
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
It's been a long time since the last time I played the combat demo (in fact I think is one of the things I keep on my hard drive just in case)... what I can say is that I loved the Newtonian phisics feature, it makes it more realistic IMO... sure it's hard to play with that settings but it's worth it, you can do stuff you can't on a FS environment.

About the other stuff going on... I say patience (like obi), this game is still on development and it's looking good so far IMO.

release date... well probably the downside of all this project ^^
el hombre vicio...

 

Online Colonol Dekker

  • HLP is my mistress
  • 213
  • Aken Tigh Dekker
    • My old squad sub-domain
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
No-one actually linked to a site for the engine, all i can find is this..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_Engine

Different i assume :rolleyes:

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Booted to Gaming.

 

Offline Rodo

  • Custom tittle
  • 212
  • stargazer
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
No-one actually linked to a site for the engine, all i can find is this..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_Engine

Different i assume :rolleyes:


can be found here
el hombre vicio...

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Newtonian physics are not applied on roll rate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUZaFTGVPT8&feature=related (0:40-0:50)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NrJCkmDnr4 (Basically the whole video)

Yes they do roll that fast, and also stop the roll really quickly.

EDIT:
Actually, there is a lot more of that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4enCQOaSz8&feature=related

As a small exercise, think of the reason why the aircraft turns so quickly around roll axis but changes pitch or yaw a lot slower.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2009, 12:54:29 pm by Mika »
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
So spent a few hours with the community.
As far as I am concerned the game can burn in hell and they're all ****.
As are most people who prefer Newtonian physics because they can't handle fast paced, higher skill action.

But yea, so far, the trailers, the website, and the community has screamed "ButtHurtEvEOnlinePlayersHidingBehindTheyWantSkillInAGame." - When they're off to something that is mid-range skill requirement, at best.
"Neutrality means that you don't really care, cuz the struggle goes on even when you're not there: Blind and unaware."

"We still believe in all the things that we stood by before,
and after everything we've seen here maybe even more.
I know we're not the only ones, and we were not the first,
and unapologetically we'll stand behind each word."

 

Offline Thaeris

  • Can take his lumps
  • 211
  • Away in Limbo
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
As are most people who prefer Newtonian physics because they can't handle fast paced, higher skill action.

<Thaeris calls Shenanigans>

You just basically said you didn't like Newtonian physics because they're hard to work with. And now you call arcade physics "higher skill"? If you're not going to contribute to this thread in any way besides flaming the topic or anyone who has anything positive to say about the concept, please, refrain from posting here.
"trolls are clearly social rejects and therefore should be isolated from society, or perhaps impaled."

-Nuke



"Look on the bright side, how many release dates have been given for Doomsday, and it still isn't out yet.

It's the Duke Nukem Forever of prophecies..."


"Jesus saves.

Everyone else takes normal damage.
"

-Flipside

"pirating software is a lesser evil than stealing but its still evil. but since i pride myself for being evil, almost anything is fair game."


"i never understood why women get the creeps so ****ing easily. i mean most serial killers act perfectly normal, until they kill you."


-Nuke

 
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
At NO point did I say Newtonian Physics were harder to work with.
I said (well, tried to, politely) that they were counter intuitive to competitive and skilful gameplay.
They don't in the slightest bit content with arcadey physics in that department.
And don't try and censor my opinion with a personal attack.
"Neutrality means that you don't really care, cuz the struggle goes on even when you're not there: Blind and unaware."

"We still believe in all the things that we stood by before,
and after everything we've seen here maybe even more.
I know we're not the only ones, and we were not the first,
and unapologetically we'll stand behind each word."

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
I said (well, tried to, politely) that they were counter intuitive to competitive and skilful gameplay.

Why?
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Newtonian physics can be a lot of fun, but they take a lot of skill to utilize effectively. It's far too easy to just boost into position and turn yourself into a turret.

Oh, and Thaeris: If you call expressing an opinion contrary to yours flaming, I don't want to know what you would consider trolling.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
    • Minecraft
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
What you guys keep referring to as "Newtonian Physics", aka Galilean Invariance, Newtonian Relativity, etc., is the realistic approach. Unless you want to start talking Einsteinian Relativity or something.

I for one would like to see at least one well-made game that gets the physics right, and this might turn out to be it.

Edit:

It's far too easy to just boost into position and turn yourself into a turret.

Ah, but if you do that, your trajectory is linear, and enemies can aim right for the lead indicator (provided one exists) and be guaranteed to get a hit.

 

Offline Thaeris

  • Can take his lumps
  • 211
  • Away in Limbo
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
At NO point did I say Newtonian Physics were harder to work with.
I said (well, tried to, politely) that they were counter intuitive to competitive and skilful gameplay.

No, they're not. If anything, you need to be more skillful. Flying around at 2,000+ m/s and making an attack run on a target is not that easy. Dodging a blast/projectile requires constant use of the RCS on the ship's x- and y-axes. Since thrusters aren't as potent as the main engine, you need to change the ship's entire direction to get a serious change in the flight vector. That's hard, down-'n-dirty space combat, and it becomes really competitive if you don't want to die. And if you're not going to die, you better have some skills.

The problem I've found with full-Newtonian sims is that the HUD symbology is often lacking, making what you're actually doing harder to get a grasp of. And, if you want something easier to get a grip on, you just give the ship an artificial stability system (which Infinity will have) which will make the ship go in the direction the nose is going. If you want it really simple, you limit turn and roll rates due to the forward velocity of the ship, etc., etc. In a way, TBP, which is described as semi-Newtonian, is EXACTLY the same way.
"trolls are clearly social rejects and therefore should be isolated from society, or perhaps impaled."

-Nuke



"Look on the bright side, how many release dates have been given for Doomsday, and it still isn't out yet.

It's the Duke Nukem Forever of prophecies..."


"Jesus saves.

Everyone else takes normal damage.
"

-Flipside

"pirating software is a lesser evil than stealing but its still evil. but since i pride myself for being evil, almost anything is fair game."


"i never understood why women get the creeps so ****ing easily. i mean most serial killers act perfectly normal, until they kill you."


-Nuke

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
True.
The other extreme would be a kind of continual jousting. A series of high-speed, head on passes trying to inflict damage on your opponent. Oh well. I'll have to play the combat prototype one of these days.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
I said (well, tried to, politely) that they were counter intuitive to competitive and skilful gameplay.

Why?
Well, lets see, changes in momentum(inertia) of your ship are sluggish, and predictable, no matter how good a pilot you are against someone who knows the mid-level skill range - they wont die.

For the most part space 'sims' that are attempting to be 'true to life' have a 'low ceiling' on their skill levels, that can't be broken.
FS2-style DOES have a ceiling, but it is significantly higher, insofar as that it took people +-5 years to actually 'master' it in an extremely competitive environment, and those that did 'truly' master it were absolutely untouchable, unmatchable and indisputable gods of the game, the difference between them and even people only very slightly below them was incredibly dramatic.
In Newtonian games, this doesn't happen SO.

-> Newtonian games, not noob friendly, but not elite friendly either.
-> Non-Newtonian games/Pseudo-physics games, noob friendly AND with greater distinction between skill levels.

They want that game to be a non-skill grinding competitive PvP-MMO vaguely based on the concept of the EvE universe, using a skill set that doesn't cater to the upper echelons of the gamer community, and then 'claim' to be better than EvE because their game requires skill?
**** that.
"Neutrality means that you don't really care, cuz the struggle goes on even when you're not there: Blind and unaware."

"We still believe in all the things that we stood by before,
and after everything we've seen here maybe even more.
I know we're not the only ones, and we were not the first,
and unapologetically we'll stand behind each word."

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Quote
As are most people who prefer Newtonian physics because they can't handle fast paced, higher skill action.

What does "skill" mean in this context? Do you mean something like hand-eye coordination?

The most challenging and action packed games I have played are actually combat flight simulators. They have turned out to have a really long lasting appeal, being interesting for years. Their requirements being understanding of strategy, tactics and capability of doing split second decisions (and in bad cases, reactions). The key difference here is that you really need to think quickly. And the adversary is likely very, very, good.

If done right, a space combat "simulator" could be really interesting arena for the simulation oriented folks. I'd be interested in seeing if they have modelled some kind G-onset in the Infinity (deducing from the turn rate of that demo tape they haven't). I really liked the head-on approach speed in that game. The planetary entry speed was hopefully enhanced by an order of magnitude. Would have been fun if they had also given the window for entering the atmosphere in the HUD while having a bumpy ride and windows burning...
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
Quote
Well, lets see, changes in momentum(inertia) of your ship are sluggish, and predictable, no matter how good a pilot you are against someone who knows the mid-level skill range - they wont die.

For the most part space 'sims' that are attempting to be 'true to life' have a 'low ceiling' on their skill levels, that can't be broken.

About the sluggish changes in momentum, this is a game design decision. There would be several ways to make these unpredictable: weapons have weight, and affect the momentum of inertia, as does fuel. Turning more would burn more fuel and make the ship more manueverable, the downside is that at some point when fuel runs out there is nothing by which to steer the spaceship. The other factor is the human G-tolerance. I'm not trying to defend Infinity here, just saying that there is also a lot of potential in that video. I'll be waiting to see if that potential comes into existance at some point.
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
One more comment: there is something wrong with how that Saturn type planet  behaves as the ship turns. The bank angle of the rings should really not change, neither should the size of the planet (unless the cockpit window had some optical power). I think I have seen something like that in FS2, but the effect was not that pronounced. I don't know why, but these kind of details irritate my eyes so much that the gaming illusion breaks.
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Thaeris

  • Can take his lumps
  • 211
  • Away in Limbo
Re: To infinity and beyond (game engine)
The ICP uses a skybox and has a speed cap. The full game won't have those things. You'd be able to fly to the planet.

The responsiveness of a ship is the question of how massive it is and where/how powerful its thrusters are. In that sense, Mika is right. With any combat sim, you better be aware of what your enemy can do. If anything, FS, using a fixed table, is more easy to predict than a properly modeled Newtonian sim.
"trolls are clearly social rejects and therefore should be isolated from society, or perhaps impaled."

-Nuke



"Look on the bright side, how many release dates have been given for Doomsday, and it still isn't out yet.

It's the Duke Nukem Forever of prophecies..."


"Jesus saves.

Everyone else takes normal damage.
"

-Flipside

"pirating software is a lesser evil than stealing but its still evil. but since i pride myself for being evil, almost anything is fair game."


"i never understood why women get the creeps so ****ing easily. i mean most serial killers act perfectly normal, until they kill you."


-Nuke