Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Thor, Aug 4, 2013.
RF2 Physics of Dreams! I refer only to damage!
Having the damage physics of this in rf2 would be great but i will stick with rf2's driving physics
Yes, Yes! I refer only to damage! : O
We should also mention that you can download the demo here Its pretty fun.
I remember like a year or more ago ISI mentioning the new damage physics/engine/model hasn't been implemented yet, haven't heard anything since, hmmmmm.
Perhaps optimization/performance problems caused then to scrap it or have to completely re-do it? Just takin a guess, hmmmm....
We can only guess, but it definitely wont be soft body type of damage model like in BeamNG. I am wishing similar what we had in Carmageddon 2, one of the best vehicular damage models
Omg its so realist !!!! include that on a simulation and you win the jackpot
omg!!! very nice!!
Edit - VERY impressive crash physics and possibly fun also if they decide to add wheel/ffb support and online multiplayer.
Should I or shouldnt I, I must admit it has me intreaged, this could possibly be the future of driving sim.
And they got occulus, think i will wait a few month not much time to play yet.
Just tried the demo...it's quite fun to see the realistic damages....the kind of fun i had when i was playing gta4. But that's about the extent of it's enjoyment factor. Not completely sure how relevant it would be to the enjoyment i get out of rf2 tbh. It's like when i watched the BeamNG DRIVE video and it made me go "wow...that looks cool, i want to play it". Then you come to the playing part and the fun soon dwindles as the reality hits you that their slow-mo demolition video is way more cool than the actual act of making the car crash yourself in real-time....and all for what?
I would be happy if rFactor 2 shows up some damage model soon. but this would be a dream of a simulator like rFactor. A very big dream. I'm just gonna buy this only for watching this video to support them. Oh I did this for rFactor 2 too : P
I do love a good damage model, no doubt. Just downloaded BeamNG alpha and am about to check it out.
These physics only apply to bad drivers.
The cpu load is really quite high running this demo, also using all 4 cores. I don't think there would be enough cpu resources available after all the intensive physics processing of the realistic tyre modelling that rf2 employs.
I would much rather have realistic car physics over unrealistic car physics with realistic damage physics (i.e. something like what p-cars employs).
This is not to say i don't appreciate realistic damage modelling....but you have to be realistic about what hardware technologies are capable of and then set your expectations accordingly. What is more important in a racing simulator? Car physics or visual damage physics? If you can have both, great, then have both. But if you can't....prioritise and compromise.
Sadly this is exactly how I feel about Project Cars, even still as of the very recent builds. Yes, I know, off topic, but your statement really reminded me about those exact same feelings I get when I keep trying Project Cars. You almost try to force yourself to like it, you try to convince yourself of how great the physics are, you try to wipe out RFactor 1 & 2, Game Stock Car, IRacing (enter sim of choice here) out of your memory to forget about their greatness, because you are just trying to force yourself to like the game all just because of the visuals you're looking at.
Like you said, then after a few minutes of playing the fun dwindles as graphics get old fast, they only go so far (and not far at all) in providing the experience, the fun, the epic moments, the concentration, the focus, the talent, the technique and skill ESPECIALLY in something so deep, visceral and physical (relative to other video games) as sim-racing where there is sooo much more going on then just click a keyboard button and slide a mouse.
It does not really make a physical engine rF. The huge difference in the physical principle. BeamNG this kinetic model of each object separately. In rF Shimma need to consider the inertia of each object. A large number of these objects rF engine does not stand up. Since a lot of resources spent on a miscalculation of one object, the machine itself. Even if the bots can not take physics player for bots to ask your physics.
If you want something like that in rF, the need to completely remodel the physical core of the rF . rF is a general simulation of what might happen, without going into detail.
Matter of time or secrets ? Why the last bit of tires and physics are still out of the sim or not implemented. Competitors could read out and learn or get an idea about how it could be ? What is the reason to keep fundamental things out of a simulator in dev for many years but still not complete ? Just curiousity.
This my friend can only be answered by the dev-team itself i suppose.
I bet we all would be happy to hear some news about the actual state of development, and future expectations.
Separate names with a comma.