To all those still wanting BeamNG!

[Johnny Playert]

 

And since R* DGAF about PC BeamNG is impossible right now, NG = Next Generation.

For even considering it a possibility that it goes into V, you are an idiot. Congratulations.

Prove that im an idiot?

1. You already imply that you know this is only possible on PC and not consoles, and considering V is multiplat, you think they'd make soft body physics for a PC version and give consoles an inferior feature.

 

2. You have to ask for proof that you're an idiot when it's apparent enough for a borderline idiot to see.

 

Good day.

lol, this x10. You people shouldn't be fooled so easily, OP already knew it was for PC only, he just wanted to rub it in. And lmfao for crying to the moderators. Never seen so many warnings hahah

 

but nvm, i'm being off-topic, yall enjoy your discussion

Edited November 20, 2012 by Johnny Playert

[faizanali]

Compare this

 

to this

 

BeamNG is a lot more satisfying than RAGE, Despite both have the same collisions.

Copyright R* and that was an InsaneGaz's video.

Edited November 20, 2012 by faizanali

[Knife]

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

[Adriaan]

@faizanali

I don't think anyone is disagreeing on that. Of course next-generation tech is going to surpass that of current-gen...

 

There's just more pieces to the puzzle here, i.e. technical limitations. It's not something they can just readily throw in. Euphoria is already taking up a lot of memory and processing power and that is sort of more important than having a more advanced damage system.

 

This video was also brought up a few months ago when it was uploaded, and everyone basically said what Knife is saying: Sometimes cool tech isn't really a good idea. Game design is more important. From a game design perspective, having your car totaled with one hit is not good.

[GRINCH ASS BITCH]

Realistically speaking, I don't see how something like this would work in a GTA game. I think that BeamNG is incredible (although as someone had previously mentioned, the vehicle bodies/meshes seem to be a bit too soft), but in a game like GTA where your vehicle is constantly coming into contact with other objects, it just wouldn't fit. Remember all the people that complained about IV's vehicle handling physics? Imagine that x10.

 

Now, I personally think that BeamNG would be fu­cking incredible in a game like Forza or Gran Turismo. The realistic nature of those games, coupled with the fact that you rarely (if you know what you're doing, lol) collide with other cars/objects would be well suited for the type of physics that BeamNG is pushing. In a game like GTA, though, where tiny little bumps can send your car flying, smashing into light poles to get through them is a common occurrence, and AI drivers randomly change lanes/crash into you at any time, it would add more frustration than anything else.

[faizanali]

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

Thats why it is realistic and Next Generation.

[sSiL3NZz]

good start, but this engine needs to be polished a lot more

[Adriaan]

 

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

Thats why it is realistic and Next Generation.

I think Rockstar have learned from all the realism criticism and from a game design perspective will never go to something this realistic.

 

Sometimes game design is more important.... like being able to respawn at the hospital if you DIED in an explosion. Similarly, having your car totaled with one hit is not good game design.

[MosquitoSmasher]

I'm all good with how it looks in GTA IV man, and i bet it will be much improved so i'm good.

[zalanith]

...the physic is good (the only part i like about it , when another vehicle fall to another vehicle )

 

but the vehicle look extremely soft (ridiculously soft ) , and to much unwanted realism . thx god it not be on GTA V

[Knife]

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

Thats why it is realistic and Next Generation.

There's avenues I imagine Rockstar will go down to be more realistic in the future, but that's not one of them. People would fail missions with car chases over and over for one mistake. Hell, many of the crashes shown in the demo video should outright kill you. Just like a single bullet in real life would kill you, games HAVE to take unrealistic routes for the sake of gameplay.

[5000 Staples]

I can see it working with games like driver and racing games... something that is heavy invovled in cars and have meaning... risk to it lets say. look at race driver grid.

 

But for GTA? it really wouldn't work. I want real with mixed fantasy... something that GTA4 did pretty well, the physics were nice, not great but nice.

 

and I'm sure they would have improved them in GTAV.

[faizanali]

 

good start, but this engine needs to be polished a lot more

Not even the Public Beta is arrived yet.

 

@Knife

I think you are right, But lets wait and see how devs handle Next Generation of Gaming.

Edited November 20, 2012 by faizanali

[Androyed]

 

This video was also brought up a few months ago when it was uploaded, and everyone basically said what Knife is saying: Sometimes cool tech isn't really a good idea. Game design is more important. From a game design perspective, having your car totaled with one hit is not good.

There you have a good point.

 

Edit: I now see you are Adriaan. Sorry for pointing out it's a good point. It should be obvious.

[chuckberry04]

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

Thats why it is realistic and Next Generation.

There's avenues I imagine Rockstar will go down to be more realistic in the future, but that's not one of them. People would fail missions with car chases over and over for one mistake. Hell, many of the crashes shown in the demo video should outright kill you. Just like a single bullet in real life would kill you, games HAVE to take unrealistic routes for the sake of gameplay.

I think many people were compaining about the fact that GTA IV was too easy, so it doesn't matter. You can always learn to drive better. In my opinion, the fun of crashes like that will far exceed the downsides of it.

[faizanali]

So do you think this will be implement in the Next Generation Open World Games, EG: Watch Dogs?

[Knife]

I think many people were compaining about the fact that GTA IV was too easy, so it doesn't matter. You can always learn to drive better. In my opinion, the fun of crashes like that will far exceed the downsides of it.

Maybe there were some saying it was easy due to just staying in cover during gun fights for example but I think there's only a small minority of people who'd actually like cars to get totalled after just one crash. My worst nightmares for GTA would be a game where police chase you for speeding, single crashes ruin cars, 1 bullet kills you, being arrested puts you in prison etc etc. I am way way happier without those things.

[TenEightyOne]

Look at the performance of GTAIV on most PCs, even reasonably high-end machines aren't maxing.

 

I'm talking about the majority of PCs, of course... but some users do have the ability to streamline and refine their gaming experience but the majority don't.

 

Adding this kind of intense physics requires that the game does many many more calculations, many more variables will be created and maintained and the processor will be much more loaded. If you added something like BeamNG (which is an incredible bit of kit!) to GTAIV, what kind of performance do you think you'd get on the majority of PCs?

 

Consoles... I own both major types as well as a pretty high-spec gaming PC, I think most people are sensible enough to agree that the majority of PCs are better specced than the two main consoles. I think they'd also agree that something with the maths weight of BeamNG would be an unsuitable addition to any software on current console platforms.

 

To summarise; BeamNG would be useable in a PC game but it would still, at the current tech level, be to the detriment of some graphical provisions.

[faizanali]

That is not true, With the latest patch the game runs as smooth as Max Payne 3

 

System Requirements of BeamNG

 

taken from the site's FAQ

 

 

What are the system requirements?

Currently, we are running on a quadcore with a GeForce GTX 560 graphics card and 8GB RAM. However, the system is very well optimized and very scaleable. A much slower computer could still run our physics system well.

Edited November 20, 2012 by faizanali

[Cyfa]

BeamNG wouldn't make sense for GTAV because those cars are too soft. As soon as we would even bump into something our car would be ruined. It wouldn't make sense.

[rare.steak]

 

These physics are cool and realistic but surely it'd mean one big crash = unusable car.

Thats why it is realistic and Next Generation.

I think Rockstar have learned from all the realism criticism and from a game design perspective will never go to something this realistic.

 

Sometimes game design is more important.... like being able to respawn at the hospital if you DIED in an explosion. Similarly, having your car totaled with one hit is not good game design.

Pure bollocks. For a guy who gets these occasional tip-offs from R* themselves, you really think unlike how I hope that they (R*) do.

 

They've never even tried realistic crash physics once, so how are they receiving any criticism on it? Just being "realistic" doesn't deem it relevant to criticisms of other "realistic" aspects that people condemn.

 

If anything, most complaints on the "realism" approach is how limited IV was in terms of side-missions and features, a la "no planes since it's one city", "not many clothes because we want players to be limited to Niko's dull taste", "no side missions because we're trying to replicate IRL where you don't have these side missions on offer ot you", no jetpacks, no myths, less explosions (bar TBOGT), less out-of-this-world-awesomeness-because-we're(R*)-are-trying-to-make-GTA-like-the-realistic-real-world.

 

So, sorry. Whether or not BeamNG's industry-supreme crash physics are implemented into GTA or not, reception is yet to be received. We can't know for sure whether the general GTA fanbase will appreciate it or not. Anyone whining that wrecking your car because you want to smash it 150mph into a wall and keep going but can't are just being subjective to your own conformities.

 

In fact, much of the comments of those BeamNG videos are wishing that GTA has the same, or similar level of crash physics, and my mind is open and welcoming to this new feature, not just in GTA but any of the next-gen titles willing to give it a shot.

[faizanali]

Jetpacks IRL Yes.

 

In fact, much of the comments of those BeamNG videos are wishing that GTA has the same, or similar level of crash physics, and my mind is open and welcoming to this new feature, not just in GTA but any of the next-gen titles willing to give it a shot.

DAT IS DA EXACT SAME REASON I MADE THIS THREAD "To all those still wanting BeamNG!"

[DeadZombie]

I dient know that side mirrors wiggled like rubber when you crashed

[rare.steak]

Jetpacks IRL Yes.

 

In fact, much of the comments of those BeamNG videos are wishing that GTA has the same, or similar level of crash physics, and my mind is open and welcoming to this new feature, not just in GTA but any of the next-gen titles willing to give it a shot.

DAT IS DA EXACT SAME REASON I MADE THIS THREAD "To all those still wanting BeamNG!"

I said GTA, not particular GTA V.

 

Next, there's a difference between wishful thinking and speculative/realistic thinking.

 

lrn2read

[Killerdude]

Would look cool for awhile, but after awhile of playing and totaling my car completely after a slight bump, I'd get quite fed up with it.

[AceHigh11]

Would look cool for awhile, but after awhile of playing and totaling my car completely after a slight bump, I'd get quite fed up with it.

They can always tweak it: e.g. raising the minimum force impact to actually count as damage towards the vehicle. I was really amazed with that video. Reminded me when I first saw a Euphoria video.

[rare.steak]

Would look cool for awhile, but after awhile of playing and totaling my car completely after a slight bump, I'd get quite fed up with it.

While I agree that cars are way too soft on BeamNG, it's a work in progress, and I do believe it can be tweaked to match a desired level of realism or unrealism.

 

Of course, R* aren't going to make GTA cars feel like they're made from tissue, and no slight bumps is going to total your car. This kind of effect will be great when you completely smash it into a wall, head-on with another vehicle, under a trailer, into a train, etc though. For the spectacular impacts.

[Kifflom112]

 

And who the hell actually thought it would be in the game?