Damage Model/Ballistics

VOWS Flawless · 2012-07-16, 01:57 PM

I've posted this elsewhere but wanted more people to check this out (hence why i'm posting it here). I pulled up an old video from an old game (wwii online). I just wanted to point out how impressive the ballistics are in such an old game engine. In fact, I don't think any other game has come anywhere near as close to the realism of these ballistics.

I wanted to ask the community how they felt about whether or not implementing this sort of level of realism would be a good thing or a bad thing to the game we already know we love. Perhaps only certain elements? Check it out.

SFJake · 2012-07-16, 02:05 PM

Its called overcomplications for the sake of nothing but realism which tends to massively hurt gameplay in the end instead of helping it in any way, shape or form.

I mean, some people love those things. I personally don't. Arma 2 to me, is an example of "realism for the sake of realism". Who the hell cares: I want a game, and those realism elements however "cool" they are on paper, are a nightmare for the gameplay and the fun factor.

If a game is a platform for realism, then maybe its not even a game to begin with.

maradine · 2012-07-16, 02:09 PM

I do love that level of realism, but to use Jake's example, you can really fuck it up ala ARMA. You still need a good game on top of the system you built, and a good UX on top of that game.

RSphil · 2012-07-16, 02:10 PM

aces high 2 had good realistic ballistics and also flight modeling. that in the video is far too much though. id say planetside looks good as it is. if it had the realism of aces high 2 that would be great aswell and not over the top.

VOWS Flawless · 2012-07-16, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by SFJake

and those realism elements however "cool" they are on paper, are a nightmare for the gameplay and the fun factor.

How do you figure?

ArcGuard · 2012-07-16, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by VOWS Flawless

How do you figure?

You get shot in the leg. You now have a broken leg. Your enemy leaves you to crawl back to your base, a mile away. You might bleed out on the way. You don't know if you'll make it or not. This next hour will be vital.

EDIT: Why is your signature image in the post itself...?

kaffis · 2012-07-16, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by VOWS Flawless

How do you figure?[/IMG]

To stay a little more true to the example highlighted in the original post than ArcGuard's (no less valid) point...

When I shoot a tank, I want to know what will happen. It's great that the game can deterministically say "well, you managed to shoot the gunner's neck, what a lucky shot and a sucky result for the gunner!"... If I shoot at what appears to be the same spot next time and I don't kill the gunner, it looks like the effects of my shot are downright random. In an action and skill based FPS, that's not good gameplay.

Sirisian · 2012-07-16, 02:39 PM

I'm fine with simple components for vehicles. Engines on aircraft for instance, tracks on tanks. I don't think Planetside 2 would gain anything from a full simulation for all the armor plates. It would be a balance nightmare also seeing as the game relies on situational imbalances and exploiting one of them in the wrong way would create even more unbalance.

Quantum Spices · 2012-07-16, 02:42 PM

Locational damage is enough for me.

VOWS Flawless · 2012-07-16, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

When I shoot a tank, I want to know what will happen. It's great that the game can deterministically say "well, you managed to shoot the gunner's neck, what a lucky shot and a sucky result for the gunner!"... If I shoot at what appears to be the same spot next time and I don't kill the gunner, it looks like the effects of my shot are downright random. In an action and skill based FPS, that's not good gameplay.

To be fair, lets talk more about skill based FPS. First off every FPS is skill based. Secondly, it takes skill to hit a certain part of a tank (turret, tracks etc..) and even more skill to shoot off a wing of an aircraft. In WWII Online, you are either good at or suck at it... just like any other shooter, but the variables that take place with the damage model adds an element of realism that IMO does not take away from game experience, but rather make the experience as a whole much more appreciated.

For example.. I've piloted many planes in wwii online, once in a while a lucky round being fired from an opposing aircraft might go through my canopy and hit me right in the head, rendering me dead instantly. Other times I will hear hundreds of bullets clanking all over my aircraft but none seemed to hit the sweet spot to do any serious damage (other than bullet holes being real objects and affecting flight mechanics slightly in different ways).

I guess if you haven't played the game you may not truely appreciate the variables that come into play, but more often than not, the variables arent even noticed in a heated dogfight or tank battle... but at the same time they seem to be there just enough to make you say WOW!! DID THAT JUST HAPPEN?!

kaffis · 2012-07-16, 02:52 PM

Yes, all FPS games are "skill based." However, you'll hear competitive FPS players sneer at many for including random elements. For instance, when TF2 launched, hardcore players despised the random damage range.

The video you opened the post with demonstrated that, while the damage modelling system is technically deterministic, it includes lots of elements that are literally hidden from view. When what happens when I shoot a tank depends on whether I successfully hit something I can't see... that doesn't feel like it's consistent.

You go on to point out just this very example. "... once in a while a lucky round being fired..." That lucky round is the difference between an instant kill and requiring "hundreds of bullets" that don't even do any "serious damage."

While this is very realistic, it's lousy gameplay for many styles of game.

Simulationists love it -- and I'm not knocking that, I love me some simulations. But PS2 isn't striving to be a simulationist game, it's striving to be one where you evaluate situations based on known quantities and reasonable expectations based on relative skill of the parties involved.

TheDAWinz · 2012-07-16, 03:06 PM

ARMA 2 is a prime example of what a milsim should be. Can't wait for arma 3. Those who say arma 2 should of taken out realism need to die, because ARMA 2 was made to be a MILSIM.

maradine · 2012-07-16, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by TheDAWinz

ARMA 2 is a prime example of what a milsim should be. Can't wait for arma 3. Those who say arma 2 should of taken out realism need to die, because ARMA 2 was made to be a MILSIM.

Do you think that claiming the holders of an opinion "need to die" makes your point more likely to be carefully considered, or less? I ask merely conversationally.

The point of referencing ARMA was not to claim that it is a bad MilSim, but to point out that many find that level of granularity distasteful if it is not married to good gameplay and a well-built user interface philosophy. I think ARMA, and ARMA2 in particular, would have been much more popular with things like a unified keymapping, better menu system, and more polished object interaction model. That doesn't make it bad at what it set out to do, but it does keep out people with a lower pain tolerance.

TheDAWinz · 2012-07-16, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

Do you think that claiming the holders of an opinion "need to die" makes your point more likely to be carefully considered, or less? I ask merely conversationally.

The point of referencing ARMA was not to claim that it is a bad MilSim, but to point out that many find that level of granularity distasteful if it is not married to good gameplay and a well-built user interface philosophy. I think ARMA, and ARMA2 in particular, would have been much more popular with things like a unified keymapping, better menu system, and more polished object interaction model. That doesn't make it bad at what it set out to do, but it does keep out people with a lower pain tolerance.

Less, thats why i said it :P Arma 2 is very good! i learned how it worked after a day or two after buying it and it is extremely fun! Keeps me occupied.

AThreatToYou · 2012-07-16, 03:25 PM

WoT has a full deflection, penetration, shot ballistics, shot velocity, shot pen. variations... a pretty realistic sha-bang when it comes to damage model. It's not bad and I'd like to something like that to be implemented in PS2 for the tanks besides a cheesy hyper-arcade HP pool that soaks up damage like nothing.

Now as far as SUPER realistic, broken legs and shit, fuel, tank critical hits on the treads and shit... no thanks. I just want a good damage model for the tanks that isn't something fitting of an arcade game.