Q: Will NS2 have physics objects?

WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Members
Hey, now that 183 is running nice a smooth for me, I have a question. Will the spark engine, once complete, have physcis objects like in source? (e.g. barrels, crates, boxes, small objects...that can be shot and moved around a bit.)

Currently, I fell like the game looks really nice but there is little interactivity with the environment. Everything is glued down to the map. Even wires just hang static rather than swinging back and forth (and they block your path like solid pipes).

I guess bulet decals will be added at some point. What about objects that you can shoot into pieces and destory? (boxes, glass, lcd screens, computer terminals that spark once shot etc.)


I really think that this increased level of interactivity makes the game world feel more alive and makes it more enjoyable just to interact with the map.

Comments

  • wulf 21wulf 21 Join Date: 2011-05-03 Member: 96875Members
    I hope, the devs will answer this, but based on the code I can do a little guessing:

    There already is a physics system in there (its even using Nvidia PhysX, I think). But currently it is only used for stuff like projectiles (flying curve of grenades and lerk spikes and the calculation of collisions like bouncing off a wall) items and ragdoll. Maybe you noticed that dropped weapons and ammo/medpacks have some physics behaviour, when getting dropped. As lerk you can actually have fun playing billard with that stuff XD.

    And you are right, much of the props in the map simply look like they should react to physics (tools lying around, chairs, boxes, ...).

    So summing it up, I guess this kind of thing will be implemented when everything else is polished and optimised. Just think of the incredible lag this would cause right now. *shudder*
  • King CowKing Cow Join Date: 2011-07-28 Member: 112663Members
    Being able to make barricades, move cover would be very nice. Having a second type of sentry that players can move like hf2 would be great also. They should be easily knocked down or just much weaker than sents we have now because they would be incredibly overpowered otherwise.

    Another idea that comes to mind are power cables, marines picking up cables and placing them in the right slots to get power on sounds appealing...
  • ZenoZeno Join Date: 2007-09-05 Member: 62183Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1864518:date=Jul 29 2011, 11:29 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Jul 29 2011, 11:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864518"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Currently...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    ...the servers are overstrained with what is already there. But I agree that some things should be more alive, especially the cables. As long as you don't stumble across random crap all the time like in Dystopia or CSS of course. When the 3d-DI is done it would be nice to have wobbling tissues, drops, drools, and other stuff. But honestly I doubt that some of these will be implemented because it is just a cosmetic thing that would eat a lot of Max' time.

    Btw: <a href="http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/06/nvidia-launches-physx-3-0-with-support-for-emerging-gaming-platforms/" target="_blank">http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/06/nvidia-lau...ming-platforms/</a>
    Multi-Core support by a new Physx version, i wonder if it could be used for NS2 (they already have a licence, right?)
  • FehaFeha Join Date: 2006-11-16 Member: 58633Members
    edited July 2011
    <!--quoteo(post=1864518:date=Jul 29 2011, 10:29 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Jul 29 2011, 10:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864518"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Currently, I fell like the game looks really nice but there is little interactivity with the environment. Everything is glued down to the map. Even wires just hang static rather than swinging back and forth (and they block your path like solid pipes).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Why "<i>even</i>" wires? I would argue that it is harder to make proper physics for wires than normal boxes. You would have to use a curved shape, which probably is not a model, as I assume that you want wires like the rope tool in gmod, which goes between 2 points and has a certain length.
    Even in source those ropes have no physics. Yes, it is possible to get physics for ropes/wires, but it is harder than physics for boxes. So saying that not <i>even</i> ropes have physics make no sense. :P
  • WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Members
    I wasn't trying to imply that developing physics for wires was easier. I just meant that having wires that that act as solid objects is very strange and doesn't feel right. It's easier to imagine that a box is so heavy that it cannot be moved than a wire that acts like a solid pipe.
  • croncron Join Date: 2010-06-21 Member: 72122Members
    Physics for ropes is not a big problem, just imagine a chain of <i>n</i> long pieces per <i>world unit</i> attached to each other that behave just like every other physics object. The higher <i>n</i> the smoother it looks, but it's not much different from a box really.

    Also physics like that will most probably not be calculated by the server as it doesn't affect gameplay, this can be done client sided. Sure, stuff you move around does need to be synchronous but ropes or particles that don't interact with the players really do not.
  • Jason WhoreJason Whore Join Date: 2011-04-11 Member: 92514Members
    edited July 2011
    shooting stuff should be able to push it (not just lerk spikes)
    and ropes shouldnt be solid. it seems just not right.
    the tiny tin cans should be able to be pushed around..

    oh and what would be awesome is if shot decals would stay there for the rest of the round.. (option for lenght like XXX seconds or forever)
  • ASnogarDASnogarD Join Date: 2003-10-24 Member: 21894Members
    I would imagine such considerations would come in after all the features and optimisation is done, I would hate to see the flood of whine should a patch be delayed due to :

    - Adding new rope funct() LUA - effect.
    - Adding small obj. phys - LUA - effect.

    - Server optimisation - delayed till next patch.

    Personally I wouldnt be all too bothered with the lack of objects that react to shooting / collisions... games that usually feature some objects usually have players try abuse the object physics ( like CS:S knocking over shelves in Office to make it hard to navigate the area. ) .
    I think the combat should be fluid and not hampered by silly objects, like imagine as a Skulk getting stuck on a physics object like a desk while trying to circle strafe a Marine ? A marine getting blocked while retreating becuase someone pushed the shelfstack into the corridor ?

    AAARGH, my mighty, highly trained marine got 'pwnd' by a shelfstack! ARRGH!
  • NurEinMenschNurEinMensch Join Date: 2003-02-26 Member: 14056Members, Constellation
    My personal opinion on this: In a single player game, sure. In a multi player game? Can do without.
  • SyknikSyknik InversionNS2.com Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2064Members, Constellation, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Shadow
    I understand the whole wanting stuff like barrels and such in the game, but in a competitive aspect they always get in the way, in one way or another, they're just a hassle to have and I know myself I am not intrigued at all by them in game. I personally don't feel like they're needed in the game.
  • FehaFeha Join Date: 2006-11-16 Member: 58633Members
    Barrels are needed in singleplayer games, and sandboxes. I noticed that people making multiplayer maps generally stay away from dynamic props, apart from a few cases.
  • AlignAlign Remain Calm Join Date: 2002-11-02 Member: 5216Forum Moderators, Constellation
    That's due to video game 3d physics still being wonky as hell.
    Jump on top of a barrel and hold it at just the right angle and you'll go floating up in the air... jump on top of a box and it'll vibrate like a sex toy before shooting off like a meteor, headshotting one of your teammates just as he respawns... nudge the side of a lamppost and it'll vanish outside the map, and while you're staring at where it used to be it hits you in the back of the head causing you to crater...
    Good times.
  • ScardyBobScardyBob ScardyBob Join Date: 2009-11-25 Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    <!--quoteo(post=1864594:date=Jul 29 2011, 06:11 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Jul 29 2011, 06:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864594"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My personal opinion on this: In a single player game, sure. In a multi player game? Can do without.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Seconded.

    However, Source did set the standard with physics objects. If you make an engine that doesn't handle them, then its one more way in which Spark is inferior to Source. This is something I see happening more after the NS2 v1 release.
  • IactoIacto Join Date: 2010-11-23 Member: 75209Members
    Well, the engine does handle dropped objects like guns (and buildings when they die too). But I really don't like there being a lot of stuff in the way in a game like this. The whole atmosphere and feel that NS has is very clinical Sci-Fi, and abandonment, not destruction. Think of it as more <i>Alien</i> and less <i>Battlestar:Galactica</i>
  • jkflipflopjkflipflop Join Date: 2010-10-13 Member: 74423Members
    edited July 2011
    Yeah, but smaller stuff that doesn't affect gameplay such as a couple of wrenches and a screwdriver getting blown off of a box can make things alot more dynamic. Each player can then render the physics locally since they're not going to be sync'd up. Then you get the oohs and aaahs of stuff flying all over the place without the server dying in the first 5 minutes of a match.

    If I had to pick though, I'd want to get volumetric effects over physical objects. Flamethrowers and lerk spores in a tight map with giant fans all over the place? Sounds like fun.
  • Squeal_Like_A_PigSqueal_Like_A_Pig Janitor Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 66Members, Super Administrators, NS1 Playtester, NS2 Developer, Reinforced - Supporter, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Developer
    <!--quoteo(post=1864518:date=Jul 29 2011, 09:29 AM:name=Wilson)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wilson @ Jul 29 2011, 09:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864518"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hey, now that 183 is running nice a smooth for me, I have a question. Will the spark engine, once complete, have physcis objects like in source? (e.g. barrels, crates, boxes, small objects...that can be shot and moved around a bit.)

    Currently, I fell like the game looks really nice but there is little interactivity with the environment. Everything is glued down to the map. Even wires just hang static rather than swinging back and forth (and they block your path like solid pipes).

    I guess bulet decals will be added at some point. What about objects that you can shoot into pieces and destory? (boxes, glass, lcd screens, computer terminals that spark once shot etc.)


    I really think that this increased level of interactivity makes the game world feel more alive and makes it more enjoyable just to interact with the map.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Yes, we do plan on adding more physics to objects at some point. We actually have some physics working already, and our dev test map that we use for testing has work lamps that can be knocked over. It's quite a bit easier to do client side only physics (which is why things like swinging cables is probably a lot simpler to do) but when you get objects changing position it gets much more complicated when the server needs to update it. Not to mention gameplay issues, with objects getting moved and then blocking main routes (yes that could be cool, as well, but potentially problematic at the same time). There are quite a few more important features, as well as optimizations that need to happen first, though, before we get to this.

    Breakable objects would also be nice. There is a particular room on our Docking map that comes to mind, that has a lot of little props that would be great fun to shoot up, so that is something on our wishlist as well.

    Bullet decals are far easier then the physics stuff. We already have some decal tech working, for the infestation, but we still need to develop the tech further to allow for more FX as well as mapper placed decals, as well. But yeah, bullet holes, claw marks, damage decals on structures, all that is stuff that's on the list.

    --Cory
  • QuovatisQuovatis Team Inversion Join Date: 2010-01-26 Member: 70321Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    You can play hockey with medpacks and gorge spit already. Somebody should make a mod. :)
  • HakujinHakujin Join Date: 2003-05-09 Member: 16157Members, Constellation
    I think BFBC:2 did it really well by having a LOT of client-side physics objects. It really helps with immersion without causing server or gameplay issues.
  • maessemaesse Join Date: 2010-04-08 Member: 71213Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1864530:date=Jul 29 2011, 09:53 AM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Jul 29 2011, 09:53 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864530"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As long as you don't stumble across random crap all the time like in Dystopia or CSS of course.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I never noticed anything like that in Dystopia (and never really played CSS), care to refresh my memory?
  • WilsonWilson Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Members
    Cool. I look forward to seeing some of this stuff :) Thanks for the reply Cory.
  • ZenoZeno Join Date: 2007-09-05 Member: 62183Members
    edited July 2011
    <!--quoteo(post=1864678:date=Jul 29 2011, 07:25 PM:name=maesse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (maesse @ Jul 29 2011, 07:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1864678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never noticed anything like that in Dystopia (and never really played CSS), care to refresh my memory?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    In dys_vaccine you have these: <a href="http://imgur.com/a/fattJ" target="_blank">http://imgur.com/a/fattJ</a>
    On public games they are often used to block doors. Idk if that was the mapper's plan but it sucks.


    Oh btw: the stuff in the first picture (chairs, screens, keyboards) don't make you stumble (i guess these are client-side physics props?) but the rack and the grey "crate"-things do.


    I haven't played Css for a long time but i can remember these yellow barrels lying around everywhere when a grenade exploded.
  • wulf 21wulf 21 Join Date: 2011-05-03 Member: 96875Members
    edited July 2011
    afaik nearly all physics objects in source are serverside. In L4D for example you can place a chair just at the right place to go out of the map. Everything you can actually interact with must be serverside or you would have other players standing around where you are seeing a physics object. Only physics that doesn't interact with players at all and would only be a visual detail can be clientside (e.g. random debris from destroyed objects or stuff like that)
Sign In or Register to comment.