Extra Punctuation: Time for Gaming's Physical

[Chezza]

I like the game concept, I really do. The option to break through walls and cut off power source to eliminate security cameras/turrets/lights to effectively reach your objective undetected or simply ambush a room full of enemies is very intriguing. Dues Ex 4?

A complex and demanding game if you want to get the physics part right but boy does it tick off so many interesting features modern PC gamers want to see today! (Yeah PC ftw my friends).
- A form of feeling powerful
- Option of being stealthy and tactical
- Limitations giving rationale on why you should/nt go destructive crazy
- A possible sandbox mini-game out of it
- User created maps? A map editor!? Oh my...
- A new demanding game for PC lovers to test their skynet machines on
- Your limitations can become the enemies downfall if you have the know how. This is regarding tricks such as breaking water pipes from the above room and breaking long wires. Finally punching a hole to the floor and shoving the content down with it somehow. Then watch the combinations burn your enemies down stairs to crisp.

Ok I did enjoy Dues Ex despite some limitations and flaws but I think its about time the team decided to remake it under Yahtzees influence. Go! *claps hands twice*

That or just make a new game concept based on this, it doesn't bother me. (But suddenly thinks of Crusader no remorse).

 

[Chezza]

I'm just waiting for a game that allows me to blow up the wall around the door that I'm supposed to open with a key.

Sounds like you missed out on the original Red Faction my friend

 

[Skillswords]

its almost poetic how an artcle so concerned about buildings is also written as one, using references to previous articles as foundation and building upwards with infinite ideas.
i wonder if he planned for it to be like that or thats how the pieces FELL?

 

[Breywood]

Yahtzee, I love that last paragraph. It would be a great idea to implement.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Live in a sandcastle? Sounds like Minecraftian philosophy to me. :3

 

[somethingprofound]

Now my ideal game would be a fantasy warfare style game with:
Fully Destructable Environments (for the warriors... thieves get wall climbing, wizards levitate).
possibly FP perspective in an Eldar Scrolls Kinda way...

Basically my dream is town-wide melee's with multiple people, people charging through walls, stuff getting set on fire, thieves having rooftop skirmishes whilst the roofs are there... and if there are no more walls to hide behind, the wizard gets to mop up with fire and lightning... *sigh* a guy can dream though

 

[Aureliano]

I like to think that the reason people like destroying things other people have made is that other people are assholes. Odds are whatever complicated structure they built either has nothing to do with you or is designed to take stuff from you/kill you and take your stuff.

Office building? Either takes you time or shuts its door to you. DMV? Takes your money and your time. Any of the Vaults in Fallout? Um, yeah.

Otherwise excellent points. I would totally play a game where you're running out of a building with realistic physics that falls apart on its own rather than in a scripted way.

 

[Javarino]

I have a feeling that if Yahtzee was asked to game development meetings and developers actually LISTENED to his points, we'd be seeing a lot more unique and creative games on the market.

I very much doubt Yahtzee is the only one with unique and creative ideas. I'm pretty sure ideas such as these get left at the CEO of Activision's front door every single day, yet there's little money in what will always sound like a niche and potentially risky title. The masses want their bread and circus, and it's not a matter of offering them deep experiences that only the commited will follow, but of being the one to deliver what the masses want. However you look at it, there's losses involved in trying to develop the next Silent Hill 2 instead of the next Halo.

Well, one can always dream of alternate universes, where indie games make millions of dollars and Bobby Kotick was pummeled to death with Call of Duty CDs within hours of becoming CEO.

 

[General Vagueness]

However you look at it, there's losses involved in trying to develop the next Silent Hill 2 instead of the next Halo.

Ordinarily I'd apply what I've learned the hard way and let that drop (and maybe I still should because maybe you just picked a name at random), but Halo is... well not the solution to the problem, but there are some truly amazing things that can be done with Forge-- the "object editor" in the two latest major releases-- and the physics engine. Most of them could be done, and maybe done better, in things like Little Big Planet, but the detail possible, the added possibilities from being able to shoot things at a distance, and of course full 3D, make it a worthwhile space to play around in.

 

[Silva]

Physics engines are underused and abused, certainly. Yahtzee makes a good point when he says that games need to widen their horizons in how they apply these engines and diversify an experience. Not just how something blows up, but what we can do with it after it partially blows up, and even the proper dismantlement of objects and being able to put them together again.

As with all art forms, destruction is many thousands of times easier than creation. If we can build worlds which we can recreate and rebuild as easily as we can destroy them, then that will be a huge advancement in gaming. Not to say that it hasn't been touched upon already.

It is also a bit of a problem when we go from a game with a brilliant physics engine like HL2 then enter a later released AAA game that has little to no engine for this, like Fallout 3. So the increased integration and advancement of physics is an important part of improving games as an immersive experience in general.

Imagine Minecraft 2000 but rather than sticky blocks it was actual particle physics like From Dust. It could allow for realistic metalworking like building of arbitrary molds from sand and clay then pouring in molten metal to make various useful objects. Or a before a bridge could be built it would need to be buttressed to prevent collapse. Or you could be in danger of caveins if you dug the support out from under a hill.

Your idea here is brilliant, and well done on that. However, you'd have to give it thirty years before it's viable on the kind of scale that people would really like, assuming that technology continues its advance as it has been (it may yet run into some concrete walls of improvement).

 

[ThunderCavalier]

I do agree with everyone here in this thread, and Yahtzee most of all. His Extra Punctuation columns proves that he is more than a troll... or maybe he's just a very professional one, I dunno.

But yeah, implementing physics engines like this would be a bit of an innovation to both linear and sandbox games where levels where you're required to kill a target, progress through a level, avoid dying, etc. can have environments drastically altered by your very actions. Of course, in missions that require precision timing, I can expect doing too much damage would be detrimental to the efforts, but it would be nice seeing this kind of destructive physics engine be used more often, as well as it being used in stealth games such as Assassin's Creed.

 

[internetzealot1]

"...as much as games like Assassin's Creed might refute this, the last thing an infiltrator should want to do is draw attention to himself."

God, I've been waiting to hear that from you.

 

[Bostur]

I think there are generally two ways to add player interaction.

One way is to map out every action that the player may want to attempt and design each an every one individually.

The other is to create a coherent world and then interactive options simply may appear automagically.


The first approach is far the simplest when only a low level of complexity is desired. But at some point the number of options become so great that the second approach becomes viable.
Comparing the first Deus Ex to DE:HR seems obvious. DE:HR uses individually designed choices, if there is a vent it will probably lead you somewhere beneficial. The original DE makes use of the second approach, it maps a complete building with ladders, vents, walkways etc in a logical layout. Some of the pathways may lead somewhere beneficial but the player needs to decide the best approach.

I think the same goes for physics. At a certain stage of world building the environment may reach a critical mass where stuff simply reacts as we would expect, without the need to specifically design for it.

This is of course obvious for sandbox games since they are designed for making use of full worlds, but structured games could make more use of it as well.

 

[Collins254]

However you look at it, there's losses involved in trying to develop the next Silent Hill 2 instead of the next Halo.

Ordinarily I'd apply what I've learned the hard way and let that drop (and maybe I still should because maybe you just picked a name at random), but Halo is... well not the solution to the problem, but there are some truly amazing things that can be done with Forge-- the "object editor" in the two latest major releases-- and the physics engine. Most of them could be done, and maybe done better, in things like Little Big Planet, but the detail possible, the added possibilities from being able to shoot things at a distance, and of course full 3D, make it a worthwhile space to play around in.

No i think you missed his point, i think he meant there are losses trying to develop a deep interesting game for a low number market(silent hill 2) vs devolping a standard FPS that thousands will buy and make millions.

 

[Strazdas]

well, gta 4 made a "Realistic" physics. see where that went.

on the other hand, a hitman with red faction guerilla physics engine would be a fun thing.
physics in games were made very well available by the nvidia due to thier physx engine that radeon is still trying to replicate (tee-hee). Problem is that due to the trend of "no optimization is cheaper" games with good physics loose most of its audience simply because they cant run it anymore.

P.S. capcha: seanse above ???

 

[CrawlingPastaHellion]

Extra Punctuation: Time for Gaming's Physical

Realistic physics have come a long way, except for how game developers use them.

Read Full Article

Good point, Yahtzee, good point.

 

[HaraDaya]

Yup, I love games with realistic physics, but no way to interact with them aside from bumping in to them. At least in Half-Life 2 you could pick things up.

 

[KDR_11k]

I think RFA was right in not demanding anything smart, it's a fine mindless shooter but I wish it had used those destructo physics to model large enemies where destruction is actually a challenge instead of something that happens so quickly that it doesn't matter. Strategically picking bosses apart bit by bit would be much more interesting than just leveling random buildings.

Of course the "pig escape" example has been done thousands of times, the first time I've seen it was in Boom Blox (those two games are really designed to do everything that can possibly be done with physics) where I had to slowly disassemble a stack of blocks without having the people on the top platform fall too fast. That's not my kind of gameplay though, I preferred checking large constructs for weak spots and then demolishing the whole damn thing in 1-2 throws.

Also there's the good old bridge builder/pontifex series and who doesn't remember The Incredible Machine?

 

[2xDouble]

Reading this article, especially the second page, I'm suddenly having visions of the Minecraft Adventure update and the possibilities therein. Minecraft may not have "realistic" physics, but that's a game that knows how to break things (and how not to do so) for a reason.