Jump to content

» «


4 replies to this topic

    Square Civilian

  • Joined: 28 Nov 2008


Posted 14 December 2008 - 11:09 PM Edited by JORDAN_BENNETT, 15 December 2008 - 12:59 AM.

Indubitbaly I'm fully aware that this is not modding section, but I just want ta get this message across!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who would want to mod Gta iv's cars? After all Gta iv''s cars look and feel better than any other vehicles in the series......

But if one wanted to install new cars, one would have to recall the instance that Gta iv's cars experience a new level of physics, where instead of .col files "simulating" damage, GTa iv's cars are damaged based on a cornucopia of environmental conditions in game, which is to say that based on how crashes transpire, damages are synonymous with such crashes or damages will be as an absolute result of particular crashes in game; If I decide to lay my baseball bat down on the bonnet of a coquette for exemplary example, the damage formed on the bonnet will mirror the shape of the bat, and will consider my distance in relation to such a coquette, as well as the exact location where I lay down the bat on/smacked the coquette.

This is my assumption, and such an assumption is indubitably open to criticism. My assumption of how rockstar accomplished this dead on damage physics is as follows:

Utilizing their "Rockstar Advance Physics Engine" my perception is that in the process of creating the game, they would have predefined conditions and parameters, that contain information about real world materials, and as such with those instructions and codes they could say program a piece of material to "act like" metal in game. Let me try to obviate or make myself more clear here. Say you have a coquette. It is pretty obvious that there are different parts and materials on such a coquette; glass-windshield, rubber-tires, and metal-coquette's shell. So say in the process of creating car, they had codes which entailed/contained information about real world glass. They could program or implement such a code in the windshield part of the coquette, and so if such a coquette were to be bulleted/shot by a policeman while Niko is desperately trying to escape, the fact that programs of code relating to *****glass***** properties were implemented in the coquettes glass parts, the windshield would subsequently shatter as though the real windshield of a corvette in reality would shatter. Of course, probably the glass types and reactions to elements would vary in the game, like say the coquette's windshield would probably shatter differently than the coquette's front, and rear lights. And of course, probably, that is, the same would go for codes and their relation to other materials all throughout the game, like program codes for concrete in game, and so on.

A clear example of my theory is below:

Variable name is "Rockstar Program Code for metal" = rough=90, breaking point parameters=50, etc etc (of course this is just a forecast and may not actually be this simple, but rather a billion times complexed in coded nature)

Input "Rockstar Program Code for *****metal***** " into warehouse walls in specified area (and ofcourse while rockstar programmers were implementing these property codes into material througout the game, there may be different varieties of cement, or glass, and as such variation in specific codes-like say variations in a metal code)

So that pretty much summarizes my theory.

So, despite my theory, I'm not sure what rockstar did to certain building materials; whether they just made certain material be primitively breakable in game like say they would have a wall in game, and based on how many brick sections they have when I hit that wall, It would break differently each time, but not crack, but rather separate in segments to the ground. All together they could have possibly used the "breakable method" method above, and go ahead and set wall to break down, then crack into predefined "more broken down" segments, to simulate cracking.

So either they used the Breakable object method, or used the physics engine method with rather predefined codes and an ever spontaneous environment which don't follow the .col file streak/ "non rag doll approach" to environment.

To figure out their theory would require "a while" of testing in game to see how a wall for example would break based on how one crashed a car into it in game.

But i am more sure that a"rag doll approach was take towards car damage physics though.....and that's pretty obvious why; car damages differently each time one crashes, or smashes it etc.



***************************Any who, the purpose of this theory being revealed to you modders, is that I wanted to evoke in your minds approaches to take if one were to consider creating car mods or even other objects in game.

That being typed, we would have to create a program, with predefined codes with properties of real life materials or something of that nature, so that such codes could be implemented into mods which we may create, which would react like "real life" in game, or something close to what rockstar has accomplished.

So essentially I am not requesting that one builds an engine, but a "small" program which will be the passage way or "garages" where one could equip his mod with real life properties, as I am not sure whether the old .col file manipulation method can work.


Other wise my other theory is that if we find a program that can view dff files or whatever file format gta iv now utilizes, if we install new cars or objects such objects will automatically be updated with real life material properties. Either that or they would be totally non-responsive in game, not receiving damage, and "dissing" rockstars work of art.

Hope you guys can see eye to eye with what I've typed here.............

  • Pixelated


  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Aug 2007


Posted 14 December 2008 - 11:16 PM Edited by Pixelated, 14 December 2008 - 11:18 PM.

Some people just like to be creative and it makes them feel good to share cool stuff with others. I agree that the cars are the best ever in any GTA games but wouldn't it be cool to say, have an old 60's Ferrari or 80's Lamborghini?

Also I'm not entirely understanding what you're trying to say in the rest of the post.

  • camdean


  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2004


Posted 14 December 2008 - 11:21 PM

A ford escort cosworth would make my day icon14.gif

It's my favourite all time car

user posted image

The cars are amazing in this game but car mods are always a cool feature (for me)

  • johncage


  • Joined: 10 Dec 2008


Posted 14 December 2008 - 11:22 PM

i agree, but please don't use words like cornucopia and indubitably where it doesn't really fit. it's distracting.

and "exemplary example"? seriously, you're not very good at flowery language, so please stop trying.

just type normally please. you would not talk like this in real life, so why would you do it on a forum? be yourself.


    Square Civilian

  • Joined: 28 Nov 2008


Posted 15 December 2008 - 12:55 AM Edited by JORDAN_BENNETT, 15 December 2008 - 01:01 AM.

"johncage", you should change your username to "ignorance"

Actually "johncage" I do speak "like this" in real life.....it's a gift and a curse......and "Pixalated" All I'm saying or rather typing is that they (Rockstar) use real life properties, of real life materials, and program them into objects in the game, why do you think this game occupies so much space?
For example, "pixilated" If I hit a car on the bonnet in real life, it will dent exactly where I hit it. If i hit an infernus' bonnet in gta san andreas, it will dent the entire front end. What the artist/programmer does here is that he has two versions of the object/bonnet in this case. The "artist" creates a bonnet which appears normal, and one which appears damaged. When I hit that bonnet, it swaps from normal version, to damaged version. So I could hit away at that bonnet for an entire eternity, but it will damage the same way.

Gta iv changes this. based on where and how you hit an infernus' bonnet in gta iv, it will recieve subsequent damage which is to say it will be damaged based on how and where it is hit.

Got it pixilated?

And by the way indubitably means undoutably

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users