Physics

[meson1]

 

Rage but people should be less clumsy and vehicles should be faster and less clunky.

Off balance people was a little over done. But the cars were great. Not clunky at all.

 

I know some people prefer the driving handling from the III era. Perhaps this is what the OP meant when he posed his question. In my view having every single vehicle cornering like it was on rails no matter how fast you were going was totally unrealistic.

 

GTA:IV had nicely realistic handling. I found it to be intuitive and was able drive quite quickly in a wide range of vehicles. I suspect that many players were having problems because they were trying to drive as they did in GTA:SA, which just doesn't work, because you just can't take a 90 degree corner at 80mph+, just like you can't in real life.

Edited February 14, 2012 by meson1

[reform]

Rage but people should be less clumsy and vehicles should be faster and less clunky.

Off balance people was a little over done. But the cars were great. Not clunky at all.

 

I know some people prefer the driving handling from the III era. Perhaps this is what the OP meant when he posed his question. In my view having every single vehicle cornering like it was on rails no matter how fast you were going was totally unrealistic.

 

GTA:IV had nicely realistic handling. I found it to be intuitive and was able drive quite quickly in a wide range of vehicles. I suspect that many players were having problems because they were trying to drive as they did in GTA:SA, which just doesn't work, because you just can't take a 90 degree corner at 80mph+, just like you can't in real life.

Oh god no I don't want III/VC/SA handling back ever. But I found IV to be a bit too far in the other direction - I think the weighty handling in IV is fine for some vehicles, but others it just isn't fun.

 

Sports cars need to feel lighter and nimbler, and big vehicles need to be able to at least get up to a decent top speed on long roads. Where's the fun in huge trucks when you can't get them up to a high enough speed to make big crashes BIG? The only vehicle that was satisfying in that respect was the securicar.

 

 

[senor_huevos_benedicto]

Who would want III era graphics? Why?

[reform]

Who would want III era graphics? Why?

He's talking about the physics, not the graphics. Kind of an arcade physics vs. real physics debate.

[lol232]

GTA IV physics, It woulb be much more fun that way, III Era Physics truly sucker, well, didn't give much fun as in IV Era Physics.

[AB0333]

This is the stupidest poll i have seen in a while.

 

What the f*ck?

 

Course it will be IV'ish one, more developed and better.

[boxmonster]

Is this a serious question? HELL NO I DON'T WANT THAT OLD PHYSICS ENGINE FROM THE III ERA. Even Saints Row has better physics than the III era games, at that's saying a lot.

You better just be talking about the ragdoll physics because Saints Row car physics are fail.

[GrandTheftAuto101]

VC III and SA are more realistic, while IV is unrealistic. You pick

[pez555]

worst question ever?

[monsterjamp]

Little bit of both but mainly GTA 4's

[Slamman]

If you have PC and a new gen GPU or PC using nVidia's PhysX, lets hope that benefits Euphoria, but I think Euphoria classed as Middleware benefits such things, in some capacity at least

[Patrizio]

IV's of course! Think were scraping the barrel a bit here. RDR's even - an improved version of course - bullet holes especially.

[meson1]

 

If you have PC and a new gen GPU or PC using nVidia's PhysX, lets hope that benefits Euphoria, but I think Euphoria classed as Middleware benefits such things, in some capacity at least

Euphoria isn't a physics engine. It's an AI and procedural animation engine. That said I believe it does a small amount of physics processing for animation purposes, especially for the rag doll effects.

 

The principle physics engine used with RAGE is an open source engine called Bullet.

 

At this time neither of the above is Physx compatible. That is not to say that in the future that they won't be. But we don't know anything about that at this stage. I imagine that it's most likely that they will continue to rely on CPU power.

 

As far as CPU power goes, GTA:IV failed to scale properly when presented with more than three processing units. So if it can't do that when there is spare processing power going begging on the CPU, I'm not sure they will prioritize making the changes required to offload the physics to a GPU which is a feature only a small percentage of users will be able to take advantage of.

 

I think they will be better served making GTA:V run properly on PC which is something all PC users would benefit from. Furthermore they need to ensure that it properly scales to make use of all the available processing power the more cores it is presented with.

Edited February 15, 2012 by meson1

[Wannabe in LS]

I think the cars in IV were highly satisfying, so improvement on those will be good enough for me. When I went back to play SA, none of it felt like a very good game anymore.

[K-Malo94]

neither. i want it to be BETTER than IV's

[DeconstruKt]

Max Payne 3 physics.

[dc_ae]

I want saints row 3 physics!!!!

no.

Improved GTAIV physics

[ArienMC]

No offense but what a dumb question. Why they ever go back to PS2 physics? God seriously they need to release new information so people stop asking dumb questions.