Realistic Physics

Traak · 2011-01-28, 05:35 PM

Want to make Planetside better? Realistic physics. Whoah, there snerdly, before you go off on a tirade about how it's futuristic, it's a game, can't be realistic, and start crying, listen up.

Just 2 things can greatly enhance gameplay: no bouncing back and forth, known as strafing, because that is just ridiculous and relies almost entirely on lag and packetloss to exploit the fact that the game is networked to be where the enemy is not firing, though it appears that you are. Warping, lag, and stupidly unrealistic maneuverability are not conducive to good game play.

Try getting in a point-blank firefight in Fallujah, and in the middle of it, strafe back and forth. See if that increases your survivability.

No hovering aircraft, unless they take a long time to get up to speed. Being able to accelerate faster than a Top Fuel Dragster after spamming enemies endlessly from a static hover that requires no skill on the controls to maintain, itself unrealistic, is death to the game.

Make planes have to take off and land using a runway, or make V/STOL planes that have, like the lack of ping-pong-ball strafing ability in soldiers, more realistic physics.

Bags · 2011-01-28, 05:39 PM

Nothing you described in your post makes the game sound any more fun. Realism for the sake of realism generally isn't a good thing in video games.

Chaotic Cow · 2011-01-28, 05:50 PM

Vertical take off isn't so much futuristic now. There are a lot of vehicles that can do this now. The whole runway thing is lame. The only vehicle that might need a runway would be the Lodestar. How it even flew in Planetside 1 is beyond me. Aerodynamics of that thing is like throwing a box into the wind.

Furret · 2011-01-28, 06:10 PM

There are definitely some physics that just need to be overlooked in games. Being able to change direction quickly is something that shouldn't be changed. While its not realistic, its a part of FPS gaming that people expect.

I can't really put what I want to say into words, so I'm going to leave it at this: The type of movement you want to achieve could be severely hampered by the game trying to figure out what movement you want to make. If the game decides that when you switch movements (left to right for example) it will decelerate and accelerate you quickly to make everything more realistic. But what if you want to stop quickly and continue in the same direction. The game would slow you down, speed you up in the wrong direction, slow you down again, and then finally speed you back up in the way you were going in the first place (which would make for some really funny walking).

Basically, It wouldn't work effectively in all situations, and there's no easy way to determine what the correct situation is.

Gogita · 2011-01-28, 06:44 PM

You want realism that badly? Here's a solution: go outside, cannot get more real...

I rather van less realism and more fun than more realism and less fun...

Hamma · 2011-01-28, 08:52 PM

While some realism is a good idea, and I do think some improvements should be made to the engine I don't think there's any need to go quite that far.

There are definitely some physics that just need to be overlooked in games. Being able to change direction quickly is something that shouldn't be changed. While its not realistic, its a part of FPS gaming that people expect.

I have to disagree there, anything that can be done to stop this crap should be done. There is nothing I hate more in FPS's than when people jerk back and forth so fast you cannot hit them. There is no aspect of skill with that and it's just annoying. That in particular is EXTREMELY unrealistic and easily stopped.

TheRagingGerbil · 2011-01-28, 09:13 PM

I'm ok with physics that are a little more realistic. Say along the lines of Battlefield 2142. Actually, my perfect game would be 2142 on planetsides scale, but thats besides the point.

Bags · 2011-01-28, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

While some realism is a good idea, and I do think some improvements should be made to the engine I don't think there's any need to go quite that far.

I have to disagree there, anything that can be done to stop this crap should be done. There is nothing I hate more in FPS's than when people jerk back and forth so fast you cannot hit them. There is no aspect of skill with that and it's just annoying. That in particular is EXTREMELY unrealistic and easily stopped.

There's no aspect of skill in hitting a moving target? Right. The only issue I have with ADAD spam is CSHD=warp and people going through walls / cielings. If it worked 100% properly all the time it'd be fine.

Traak · 2011-01-29, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

...anything that can be done to stop this crap should be done. There is nothing I hate more in FPS's than when people jerk back and forth so fast you cannot hit them. There is no aspect of skill with that and it's just annoying. That in particular is EXTREMELY unrealistic and easily stopped.

What is also annoying is that many of them are not actually doing it, they are using macros to do it for them. I'm not against macros, it is the behavior that makes the ADAD spam macro possible that needs to be toned down.

I agree also with what someone said further down, the COF should be gigantic if there is ADAD spam happening.

Movement keys should initiate acceleration in whatever direction the movement is keyed for. If I am running, the reverse key should accelerate me backwards, namely, reduce my forward speed then put me in reverse, after I have stopped. This is not hard to program, it was being done back in the Asteroids era of video games with that game. That was about what, 30 years ago? To say it is hard to program is erroneous. it doesn't have to take long, but being able to bounce back and forth with ADAD spam is not improving the game. If no one could do it, the kill stats would still be about the same, except the ADAD spam macro boys would have to do something else.

Instantaneous direction changes are great for people who have 2ms ping and very capable computers, but this game isn't just sold to that groum,

Making things unfairly slanted in the favor of people who advantages not enjoyed by the vast majority of players just runs people off and makes the game less profitable. Oh, that's right, that is exactly what did happen to Planetside. Having the few with nice computers lording it over the many without has been a contributing factor to reduced overall enjoyment, hence, subscriptions. No wonder people started cheating so badly. It was impossible to win otherwise, unless, as I said, you were sitting right on the continental optical fiber backbone and had a graphics card that used more power than the not-so-well-equipped players' computers.

Being slaughtered consistently motivates people to do two things: improve their computer and network access, or cheat. Guess which one costs less and works better?

If PS were to cater less to the advantaged players, and more to the vast majority of players, it would sell more. One reason the other MMO games garner playerbases in the millions and PS has a playerbase in the hundreds is because they don't auto-fail if they don't have a monster system in the other games. You can still play, enjoy, succeed, and progress without having fantastic ping or a very fast system.

It wouldn't make the game less enjoyable if just those two things: flight mechanics and soldier physics, were less biased towards expensive computer systems and low network pings and more reachable by the common guy. It would attract and RETAIN more players, make more money, which would make it possible to pay more devs to provide more variety and content, AND watch out for more cheaters, which, I don't care how you slice it, is usually going to be the top 100 players in any multiplayer game.

I don't cheat at PS, never have, never plan on starting. I have noted that cheaters, as a whole, band together to dump on anyone who dares suggest ANYONE is cheating, just like fat chicks dump on skinny ones any chance they get. Why wouldn't they? What have they got to gain by saying "Yeah, that's true, I do cheat, and here is what I use:...

It's the same old thing, human nature. State something should be changed, and those who take maximum advantage of it will oppose it. It doesn't matter if it is right, or better for the game, or would help there be more players, the selfish ones are only concerned with one thing: kill stats, and the game be damned.

Making small changes to make the highest scorers actually have to earn their high scores by doing something other than programming clever and complex macros, and having nicer computers, and having very low ping times, would make the game more accessible, enjoyable, and profitable, which would lead to a positive feedback loop of more enjoyment, and more profit.

So the top 1 percent of players who are high scorers get mad and go play UT instead or whatever it is they do if they can't OMGPWNZ0RZ everyone in sight by being in a position where they are more advantaged than the average player and capitalizing on it. Sony will gain far more people by making the game less rewarding for the small minority and more rewarding for the vast majority.

I like FPS games. What I liked about PS was that teamwork used to be rewarded. All three of my CR5's got there on the back of AMS and CE stuff, because I couldn't really do much when my framerates dropped to "slide show of a battle" speed in one-on-one combat, but it is easy to lead squads and platoons when you are the only one in the battle who is providing support in any consistent way. People often appreciate more running, less gunning.

I have hosted FPS games on my own computer, and I got invited to join people's guild/leage/outfit/whatever, so contrary to the negative blather, I really am quite good at the FPS skills. I have just been technologically crippled. What I think is funny is that people so often leap to "Oh, you just OMGSUXX0RZZZ LOLz" when I mention this stuff.

Make the game reward skill more, and hardware less, and you will have a broader user base. Keep it rewarding hardware, as it does, and watch it trail faaar behind other MMO games for that reason. There aren't 20 million people who would like to play PS who can afford the level of connection speed and ping, along with macro-programmable controllers that are required to be one of the boastful jackasses that looks down on everyone else. I bet there are more than are playing now who would play if it wasn't instagib losses in one-on-one battles due to the ADAD spam and whatever other advantages people with a lot more loose change can have.

The game doesn't have to be as slow and graphics-dumb as other MMO's. It could just be improved in a few areas that would not do anything but improve the game for about 99.999 percent of people who might play, while making the top-scoring twits more likely to have to do something other than program macros to win.

Peacemaker · 2011-01-28, 06:09 PM

No. Its obvious you had a bad connection while playing PS. Its also obvious that you h8 on reaver pilots.

1. There was no "stafe pong" in PS. Because you couldnt shoot more than 5 feet with it accurately, except for the Heavy Weapons, but unless your connection was bad they never could stafe pong.

2. Any aircraft that "Hovered in one spot and spammed death" was dead. Regardless of how fast they took off. Flack, AV, AA Maxs, and small arms fire ment certain death for anyone stupid enough to Hover over a battlefield, would die, and fast. The exception behind to pup up behind cover, fire, duck below cover, which is what makes choppers like the AH64 a badass tank killing machine. I would however like to see real aircraft that could NOT hover be introduced.

Furret · 2011-01-29, 06:07 PM

Sounds like you just want a better connection, not a removal of the A and D keys, despite what you seem to post.

Traak · 2011-01-29, 10:52 PM

Strafing is fine. If it occurs as it does with a person in a more realistic situation. Bouncing back and forth instantly with no acceleration or significant aiming penalty is bad for most players, good for a very, very few.

Weaving as you run at someone is one thing. Jerking back and forth? Why not make it so we can hop up and down endlessly also, as they do in UT? Why not go all the way and make soldiers fly all over, bouncing off walls, ceilings, floors, and becoming invisible?

The hyper-strafing we have now makes the game worse for many, benefits a few. Just like the 5g acceleration of the Mosquito, or the 3g acceleration of the Reaver.

Bags · 2011-01-29, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by Traak

Strafing is fine. If it occurs as it does with a person in a more realistic situation. Bouncing back and forth instantly with no acceleration or significant aiming penalty is bad for most players, good for a very, very few.

Weaving as you run at someone is one thing. Jerking back and forth? Why not make it so we can hop up and down endlessly also, as they do in UT? Why not go all the way and make soldiers fly all over, bouncing off walls, ceilings, floors, and becoming invisible?

The hyper-strafing we have now makes the game worse for many, benefits a few. Just like the 5g acceleration of the Mosquito, or the 3g acceleration of the Reaver.

It's only bad because of the net code. Fight someone who lives near you and it's a joke to hit them.

Traak · 2011-01-29, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by Bags

It's only bad because of the net code. Fight someone who lives near you and it's a joke to hit them.

Right. So, instead of creating a situation where everyone has to live within a mile of each other, why not optimize the gameplay for the fact that we are literally all over the world, in all four hemispheres?

Bags · 2011-01-30, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

Right. So, instead of creating a situation where everyone has to live within a mile of each other, why not optimize the gameplay for the fact that we are literally all over the world, in all four hemispheres?

Because planetside was made with 2003's technology, and we are now in 2011?