Slashdot Mirror


Oblivion's Missing Physics Acceleration

An anonymous reader writes "An article on GamesFirst discusses how much better Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion would be if it supported true physics acceleration. From the article: 'Oblivion lacks Casual Physics, and the result is a splendidly beautiful world that still requires a blind eye in order to buy into the environment...' How would Oblivion be different if there were more than just Rag-Doll physics, if bad guys reacted to the swing of your sword, or if mist realistically moved around you as you walked."

33 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. "Lacking" isn't the right term. by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know how you can possibly call the physics in Oblivion anything but "comic". It has nothing to do with 'Casual' or 'Targeted' physics. The fact of the matter is that well done targeted physics are more than good enough if your goal is a good game. We're not doing nuclear simulations here, and 'casual physics' with hardware acceleration is only required to check a box on the marketing list. The reason Oblivion's physics stand out as lacking is that they're so rediculous. Crumpled up wads of paper interact with other objects as if they weighed hundreds of pounds... as does every other type of object. Enemies that die are seemingly uneffected by anything you hit them with... except for the killing blow, where your .1lb arrow sends even the biggest, heaviest enemies flying so far that it makes a Kung Fu movie seem realistic. When you jump... Oh let's not even get into it.

    Casual physics can actually subtract from a game, because it prevents you from making the obligitory tradeoffs between realism and fun. You don't wany full realism in a fantasy setting, quite honestly. If you're not going to use them though, please, pay attention to balance and details. It's that lack of attention to detail that makes the physics stand out in Oblivion. Stand out in a bad way, that is.

    As an aside, this guy says that Oblivion is close to perfect in visual presentation. I'd disagree. It's great, and shaders are nifty and all, but... Well, let's just say that more notes being played doesn't mean it's a better symphony. Use discression with the shaders, guys. Just because you can is no reason for you to make every single thing shiny.

    Also, all the Oblivion fanboys out there can hold off on flaming me. I'm totally addicted to the game, and I think it's great. It's OK to see negatives in something. Just because you spent $60 doesn't mean you'll be less of a man if let somebody give honest criticism.

    1. Re:"Lacking" isn't the right term. by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wonder if you actually played Morrowind, or if you just tried it and wrote it off after an hour or so.

      It's changed, just changed for the worse. There were no object interactions in Morrowind (you couldn't move things around in the game world while the game wasn't paused), so most of this stuff is actually new. Enemies going flying in Morrowind was non-existant compared to Oblivion. If you shot, let's say a Cliff Racer, it fell straight down. When you shoot a flying enemy in Oblivion, it flys back and to one side for 15 feet before bouncing off something, and flying off into some other direction. It's not uncommon to kill something and have it's body fly out of the rendering distance and out of existance so you can't loot it.

    2. Re:"Lacking" isn't the right term. by spyrochaete · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Does the prospect of realistic physics really ruin a game?

      Is it really more fun when it takes 30 sword slashes to cut down an opponent in an RPG? Is it more fun when you hack a guy 15 times in the face with a dagger, then stab him and the knee and he dies? Is it fun when you block a swinging mace with your wooden bow and you don't even get knocked backward? Or how you can carry 349 of 350 pounds, and then pick up a coin and be completely immobilized?

      Yes, many of these are gameplay mechanics that can be fixed without buying a $250 PCI card, but they are also elements that accelerated physics could really spruce up. Just because Oblivion in particular is a good game, doesn't mean it wouldn't be better if the world were more believable.

    3. Re:"Lacking" isn't the right term. by cgenman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ignoring the fact that what you've just described doesn't actually talk about the physics engine in a game, but damage engines, there are still reasons that arbitrary physics can be a mess.

      The most common example is "stacking stuff" and breaking the 'freaking scripting. You've got a bad guy, you've got a castle. You are to go into this castle after the bad guy has revealed himself to have a climactic battle with his accountant. So instead of playing along with the game, the player stacks up a bunch of random crap outside of the castle, and climbs in. Or maybe they're accidentally blown in by a combination of a misplaced grenade, a feet of flight, and an enemy's lightning bolt. Either way, they've managed to completely break the scripting of the game and very possibly make it impossible to continue. They probably won't realize that either until after they've saved their progress.

      Or the player is in a heated battle with a group of enemies, and they're all firing Tim-the-Enchanter-esque rockets at eachother. Once the player wins the battle, he discovers that the cave he was supposed to go into is now blocked by the rubble of the building that was just nuked around it, preventing progress.

      Or the physics engine correctly asserts that objects should not pass through eachother, and so every time you swing a weapon it pushes the opponent out of your range. Or your body mass manages to push aside a character that is moving in a scripted fashion, thereby preventing them from reaching their objective. Or one of a million other things that can go wrong.

      All of the "casual physics" would need to be programmed into the game in some form or another. Sure, you could have tree leaves that brush away from the player. But in addition to the calculation overhead, you need to define the occupied regions, joints, anchor points, and other physical properties of that object. If you want a building to break, you've got to define the stress thresholds of all of the polygonal objects, the collision volume, the breaking patterns, and draw all of the internal portions of the object. If you want the player to be able to dig a post hole, you have to define a ton of parameters for that as well. It may look like a tree, but it doesn't have the slightest clue what it is and what it is supposed to do.

      Physics aren't free. They are, in fact, incredibly messy and touchy, and need to be coded on a case-by-case basis. I think Oblivion did a really fun job in this respect, as the two things I've seen people do with the game are A: jump their horse off a cliff to watch it twist up as it dies and B: blast the hell out of enemies trying to launch them over trees. Those must have taken reasonable amounts of coding resources, but added tremendously to the gameplay. The ability to arbitrarily deform buildings, on the other hand, would not be particularly helpful for this type of game.

      I'm not saying that better integrated physics isn't a good goal going ahead. The physics in Oblivion as they stand now would have been considered hyper realistic as of 8 years ago. But it shouldn't be the primary concern of developers. Experience should always come first, and if physics support that in proportion to their development cost, they should go in. If they add undue burden to the coders, artists, or QA, they should be ignored for more important things.

      Games are all smoke and mirrors, an illusion no thicker than the smoke eminating from a pool hall. Don't be confused into thinking that they are the real thing being held back by a lack of power. They are just an intricate floating illusion pushed forward by the remarkable power that we already have.

    4. Re:"Lacking" isn't the right term. by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll just say you're flat-out wrong on this one, at least regarding the hardware acceleration. In 5-10 years, people will be laughing at you at least as much as they were at the people who said "You can't fill 512k of RAM with meaningful code!"

      History is on my side. Problems frequently move back and forth between hardware and software as complexity of processors and processes increase in a cyclic pattern, but after time the processes end up staying put based on simple clasification. Processes with low IO rates end up on the general purpose CPU in the long run, while processes requiring heavy IO or stream processing stay as a specialized 'accelerator' function. Any benefit you would gain from a hardware physics engine will soon be negated by multi-core CPUs, and if necessary, MMX style instruction set extensions. If I knew how to find you in ten years, I'd make a bet with you.

      whereas with Causal, you just tweak the properties of the objects/world, the physics will Just Work(TM).

      Spoken like somebody who learned all he knows about the subject from a press release.

  2. requirements change? by skankinny7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Right, and then the game would probably only run on the top 20 supercomputers in the world :)

  3. How about if.... by cjb909 · · Score: 3, Funny

    What if Oblivion was projected in 3d holograms....and online....in space! Forget swords....more lasers! And Cheese Graters!

  4. Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by Inoshiro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've played through Half-Life 2, with its (in)famous physics engine, and I've also put a couple of days into Oblivion. One of these two games has a lot of content to go with its eye candy, and is a game I'll likely replay again. The other is Half-Life.

    Except for some of the silly physics (like being able to run the horse along a steep cliff without falling), I don't think Oblivion would gain much from being super-real-istic. I don't play Oblivion because I'm interested in real-world physics.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by Gulthek · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Does physics add to gameplay? Yes. Immersion is key. Role playing games are all about immersing you into a fully realized world and allowing you to run around and do as you please. The more realism that world has, the more it can pull you in. Is this a really hard concept to understand? How could making our escapist gaming worlds more cohesive and realized be bad? Should we just go back to playing Adventure for our RPG satisfaction?

      I don't play Oblivion because I'm interested in real-world physics.


      No, you play Oblivion because you want to adventure in a cool fantasy world! The more realistic the fantasy world, the more clever and interesting your adventures would be.

      Gaming is all about gameplay, yes. But good graphics, physics, sound, and all the other advancing gaming technologies add to the game developer's toolbox. Using the new tools provided by increasing technological capability developers can create better and better gameplay experiences. Sure the tools can be abused by hacks to develop games that exploit a tool rather than use it, but is that a reason to stop advancing altogether?
    2. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by Echnin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Final Fantasies are about telling a story; The Elder Scrolls are about immersing you in a sandbox-like game-world. There are different types of RPGs. Apparently you don't like the immersive kind, so what are you doing posting about what an immersive RPG should or should not be like?

      --
      Lalala
    3. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by The-Bus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "The more realistic the fantasy world, the more clever and interesting your adventures would be."

      That's ludicrous. The statement should read: "The more realistic the fantasy world, the more of a real world it becomes."

      If Oblivion's engine was realistic, then there would be no point in locks or lockpicking as I'm sure a fireball could set any door on fire and windows could be broken to crawl into any area. Also, item prices would change as supply and demand affect the worldwide economy. And you know what else?

      There'd be no fucking monsters made out of ice cubes or perky, nubile spider-women who can shoot lightning.

      I think the word you're looking for is not "realism" but "consistency" which has nothing to do with the physics engine and everything to do with how that engine (no matter how realistic or fantastic) is applied to everything. BUT... in video games, as in movies, you need to have something called suspension of disbelief. Otherwise, if I decided to just keep walking east, I wouldn't hit a magic force field that says, "You can't walk over there." Otherwise, I'd be wondering... where exactly are all the kids in Cyrodiil?

      Personally, I prefer being able to walk up to a group of guards and hit them with a sword to send them flying like so many Agent Smiths. For every moment I have where I say, "Oh, that's stupid, why can't I carry this candle across the room" I have another one where I jump off the side of a cliff and get a one-shot kill mid-air on some bandit 80 feet below me, then land on the ground and eviscerate his companions while I simultaneously pick flowers. That is what Oblivion is about.

      As far as the original submission, they asked: "How would Oblivion be different if there were more than just Rag-Doll physics, if bad guys reacted to the swing of your sword, or if mist realistically moved around you as you walked?"

      I wouldn't care. It's already a fun game. This is what saddens me about the tech demos I'm seeing lately: "Look, the car falls apart realistically!" While that gets me to geek out for a few minutes I wonder if so much effort will be put into gameplay.

      One look at the current quality of the average game and I think I have my answer to that question.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    4. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by NichG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is tradeoff. Lets ignore development time, since putting in an actual physics engine can actually speed that up if it means you don't have to explicitly program stuff, the same way that putting in random generation stops you from having to tweak each individual NPC's name and appearance.

      No, the tradeoff I'm talking about here is system specs. Oblivion is a good game, immersive, fun. It was a good game back when it was called Morrowind and ran on computers that would be laughable by today's standards.

      Now, I'm not saying they should have kept the graphics the same in Oblivion. But I'm saying they could have and if the rest of the game is solid, that wouldn't make it a not-fun game. Since systems have gotten better, then they can choose to improve the graphics and thats great. But the sort of casual physics they're talking about in that article isn't something that could realistically be done on modern systems. I was even surprised that the physics in Oblivion could be done until I realized that they had an on-off switch for it, so stationary objects weren't simulated. Meaning they had to do at most a couple dozen nodes at once - not a big deal.

      Or, to put it another way. I can make a game that solves compressible Navier-Stokes to derive the weather patterns so that the player can influence the weather via the butterfly effect. Or I can stick in a random distribution. If its free, I might as well do the former. But it isn't, so if I want anyone to be able to play my game, I choose to do the latter which is almost as good. Putting in by hand swirling smoke gives you something which takes you as a developer more time to do, but the benefit is that the computational difficulty drops and you have spare cycles to do even more interesting stuff. I'd rather have my cycles used for a really clever AI, or even an evolving world, than simulating the grass. And since I have a finite computational power, thats a choice that must eventually be made.

    5. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'd rather have my cycles used for a really clever AI, or even an evolving world, than simulating the grass. And since I have a finite computational power, thats a choice that must eventually be made.
      And that's why the article is talking about supporting hardware physics acceleration, with one of those special chips.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by Godeke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I picked up the recompiled version of Plane Scape: Torment (that works under XP). Those 1999 graphics are not going to blow anyone's mind.

      But the game is immersive. The *story* is immersive, to be specific: you actually can enjoy the interactions of the characters and your choices do make a difference.

      Meanwhile, making the "game world" a FPS with a physics engine is no guarantee of immersion. The story can still be poorly written and artificial stupidity can ruin the experience.

      People who think that high end technology is the only way to achieve immersion must have never picked up a good book.

      --
      Sig under construction since 1998.
    7. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by patternjuggler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is what saddens me about the tech demos I'm seeing lately: "Look, the car falls apart realistically!" While that gets me to geek out for a few minutes I wonder if so much effort will be put into gameplay.

      I think all 'graphics vs. gameplay' arguments are typically wrong in their assumptions about how games are made and sold.

      The fallacy of the 'lets do less of x and more of y' is that x is typically very well defined and achievable with a limited budget and schedule with the proper people and tools, substance y is vague and intangible and unmanageable.

      Everybody with eyes and a brain knows what good graphics are, there are lots of good artists and graphics programmers out there so it's only a matter of time and money to get good graphics. A huge part of our brain is devoted to processing visuals, so I think it's well and good that that part of the brain is targeted. Another good bit of mental processing is devoted to physics- recognizing where things are falling intuitively, how to move muscles to achieve desired effect and so on- and we understand physics. Visuals are a subset of physics in reality, and that's pretty well understood too.

      I have no idea what 'good gameplay' is, or what 'fun' is. I'm sure there are a lot of people out there with theories that work sometimes when the stars are aligned and so forth. There may be some really brilliant people out there who really understand how to make some specific kind of 'good gameplay' and 'fun' and can consistently create games with those qualities, but for the most part since those people are few and far between the easiest way to make a fun game with good gameplay is to copy another game that just happened to hit upon those qualities. Another thing is that in the development process, the point at which a game becomes fun may come really late- you won't know you screwed up until its too late to make fundamental changes to how the game is played without breaking budget and schedule.

      That just covers the developer end though- consumers, although they want to have fun and have good gameplay, have no real method of determining if a game embodies that by looking at the box, or watching the video. They know it when they experience it. And sometimes it takes a while to learn a new style of gameplay, so maybe a demo isn't enough- so again it's easier for consumers to stick with what they know, and have past experience with a genre of game they'll know much sooner when first playing a game whether it will be fun and so on. But the first thing the consumer sees is going to be the graphics, and the second thing they'll experience is the way entities in the game move and interact- the physics and animation. Those two things make the first impression even if gameplay is more important to making them enjoy the entire game- if those two things are done poorly then the gamer will most likely never get to the gameplay part of the game. I don't think there's any way around that.

    8. Re:Does physics really add that much to an RPG? by LarsWestergren · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I hate the control system too. While the UI that controls maps, inventory, quests, character is an exercise in minimalism, it sure is a pain in the arse to use.

      You should download BTMod, it makes life much more pleasant for PC players of Oblivion. It gives you larger maps and inventory/spell screens, works great.

      I haven't had any problem with the voices (maybe because I'm not a native speaker), but one thing that ruins immersion for me is the way opponents level. I understand why, it makes balancing much easier and keeps the game challenging and fun througout. But it takes some of the tension out of exploring - you know you will always be able to take out anything you bump into when you enter a cave, you will never accidentally stumble into the dread lair of the dead God while you are at level one. So neither do you get the sense of accomplishment of levelling your character and coming back later for some "who is the tough guy NOW, eh?".

      It also constantly makes me wonder at later levels, if a group of bandits all have legendary elven weapons and magical armor, why don't they sell it and buy a luxury house with servants to take care of them the rest of their lives, instead of lurking in a cold and dank sewer all day waiting for a passerby to rob for scraps?? I'm considering downloading the mod that makes high level weapons and armor much more rare.

      Still, amazing game though. The radiant AI is a bit wonky sometimes, but you occassionally get some really jaw-dropping stuff. For instance, when I killed one bandit his magic sword fell clattering down a mine, and another bandit dropped her lousy iron knife, picked up his sword and ran at me!

      And all the great books...

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

  5. Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems. by Valdrax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Physics realism in the game is nothing compared to the lack of social realism especially with regard to crime. If you steal something anywhere in the game, everyone in the game knows that it wasn't yours and may take steps to punish you for it.

    You can steal a horse in one town and ride it to the furthest town away that you can get to, and everyone will know that it's not your horse. You can pick up an alchemy book to read it with no one in the room and put it back down when finished only to be accosted as soon as you open the door. If you kill a guard in an alleyway, every single guard in town will come straight for you to kill you.

    Until the game gets social realism down, a few odd-looking collisions means nothing for my immersion.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  6. waste of time by tengennewseditor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jesus christ, the physics are fucking impressive for an RPG. They can only put so much effort and manhours into Oblivion, and with the ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF GAME CONTENT I'm surprised they even got a physics engine that is as fun as it is. True physics would have been nice, OK, but not worth the time. I mean, developers will release a game solely on the merits of its physics engine (see: Black) so it's not something that's trivial to add...

  7. Wow...who cares about Oblivion by Cornflake917 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The /. article title and summary cover the least important topics about the title. It really has nothing to do with Oblivion except that they talk about how cool Oblivion would be if more physics were added and these physics were processed by a PPU (physics proccessing unit). I think this is a very interesting idea. Having a physics accelerator card that is completely dedicated to the physics of the game would add huge amounts of realism without performance drops. I think this could be cool. It might even change the way games are made. However, I'm not sure how many gamers will be willing to add another expense when they upgrade their system. But I think retailers would love to have another periphiral to sell that will increase a computer's performance.

  8. Smells like a press release by cgenman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So they claim that Oblivion would be much better with AGIA brand physics acceleration hardware support. And if they had just supported AGIA, then so much more realism and immersion would be possible.

    'smells like a press release to me. Nobody has an AGIA physics accelerator card yet. That's like saying the game would be better on a blue-ray disk. I wholeheartedly hope that physics acceleration will become a more standard piece of gaming kit at some time in the future, but nobody has one yet.

    The success of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion makes it the perfect example of what's missing from our current conception of next generation games... Oblivion lacks Casual Physics, and the result is a splendidly beautiful world that still requires a blind eye in order to buy into the environment.

    Or maybe the success of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion shows that Casual Physics are not necessary for a great game.

  9. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by chanrobi · · Score: 4, Informative
    Besides the physics issue, anything that can be modded script wise (such as the stealing thing), has been modded already. There is a big community out there with a great number of mods for almost anything imaginable already. The stealing issue has already been fixed, as has the "psychic" guards.

    Here is one among many: http://www.oblivionsource.com/

    If you can't find a mod for it, mod it yourself and let everyone else enjoy it!

  10. Not the only realism problem... by verbatim_verbose · · Score: 3, Funny

    They should really do a little more research on other aspects of reality, such as how difficult it actually is to cast fire directly from your hands. Just what kind of world do these guys live in?

  11. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Everybody writes their name on *everything*. ;)

  12. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by danpsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Having played Morrowind, I understand why they made this game behave the way they did, but I can't say that I agree with it. In Morrowind, it was very simple to amass large quantities of wealth by stealing everything in houses and going off to the nearest trader, who would give you money in exchange. This was certainly much easier than killing the overpowering monsters that attacked you (especially as a thief) and then getting 5 gold for their pelts. I think, however, that they thought this was _too_ easy and too tempting for ordinary classes. I'd argue that while it is pretty easy, it is necessary. It's unrealistic to have people steal things and get caught by the simple fact that the item is "stolen." It's an invisible flag that doesn't make any sense. I think that the creators of Oblivion were bothered by how easily you could get away with stealing in the first game and decided that this was the way to curtail that. I believe that they should've just made the shops more strictly guarded. They should've made stealing harder, the penalties for getting caught maybe more severe. A lot of the ability to steal in Morrowind stemed from the fact that most shops had other rooms with no guards, no locks, or a petty lock and stuff sitting out everywhere with nobody looking after it. But yes, the stolen flag does indeed cut down on realism quite a bit, and I totally disagree with that decision. Part of what made Morrowind so fun was the ability to steal without getting caught in a realistic way.

    --
    Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
  13. Too realistic means unplayable by Animats · · Score: 2, Insightful
    You don't really want realistic physics in your combat games. You don't have enough control to use it. If game combat had real physics, game players would have to have real martial arts skills. "No, no, your lead knee must be slightly bent before you start that throw". "Yes, sensi". Few gamers put in the dojo time to get those skills. You can't express them through a game pad, anyway. (A DDR pad and full VR gear, maybe. But even then you lack physical feedback, which is about 5x faster than eye/hand coordination.) Then you need an AI good enough to do real martial arts, a tough problem in itself.

    Just insisting that swords actually hit a vulnerable point with enough force to cause damage makes play too hard. Guns, yes; we can do guns. (Basic problem of video games: players can shoot well and move adequately; little else can be done well through a game pad or keyboard.)

    We know how to do much better game physics. What we're actually getting, though, is mediocre physics for everything in the environment. Which is all Ageia delivers; it's not better, you can just use it on more objects at the same time.

    Question: If we had a first-person combat game that took two real joysticks to play, and considerable practice to learn, but let you do real martial arts, would you play it?

  14. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by spectecjr · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can steal a horse in one town and ride it to the furthest town away that you can get to, and everyone will know that it's not your horse.

    Of course they know. They check the license plate and the bumper sticker - it's pretty obvious.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  15. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is it a good game if you have to hunt down and install countless mods, all with unknown side-effects, just to make the game enjoyable?

    If you can't find a mod for it, mod it yourself and let everyone else enjoy it!

    What if I want to play a game, rather than write and exchange mods?

  16. Easy, actually. by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    1. Pour gasoline on hands.
    2. Ignite said hands.
    3. ????
    4. Profit!

    1. Re:Easy, actually. by hyfe · · Score: 2, Funny
      Nobody disputes that's it easy to set your hands on fire.

      The tricky part is getting the fire off your hands and somewhere else. :)

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
  17. Yes by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Insightful
    But then your talking to a Grand Prix Legends player here. So perhaps I am not entirely normal.

    GPL for those who don't know is a very though historic formule 1 game that focusses on realism. It was so realistic that it took fans a lot of time to realise that all the setups of the cars had been done wrong. Modern F1 games are made to ride as low to the ground because of airodynamics BUT the F1 cars in the era simulated do not even have wings.

    So while all the players tried to get the cars as low as possible they were in fact making the cars impossible to handle. The cars instead needed lots of clearance in able to fully use their shocks to get around corners.

    GPL is harder then most driving games as you need to special controls of being able to break and accelerate at the same time. So the usual joystick setup of only one axis for both just isn't good enough.

    GPL is also a game in wich you shouldn't mind loosing. You probably just won't be good enough to beat the AI drivers. Then again the thrill of coming 10th in that game is infinitly greater then coming first in lesser race sims.

    So I would like to play a game with more realistic combat, not to realistic offcourse (just as I can pause GPL for a bathroom break and don't actually have to fit enough to handle a high performance car) but giving me a real challenge in actually having to do some fighting and not just push a button.

    I liked Oni. While not realistic you could at least use all your different moves to great effect. Far better then the regular hit or block. Still love that move where you ran to the side of badguy then swung around his neck kicking his companions in the face before snapping his neck.

    But why can't we have both? GPL has lots of helper functions wich if all turned on make the game a lot easier. No fun, but a lot easier.

    In fact all the really though sims do this.

    Morrowind in fact had three different attack moves. Probably considered to complex for console players but there is no reason it couldn't have been an option in Oblivion.

    So yes, I would buy such a game and I think I am not alone. True for every Operation FlashPoint fan there are plenty of gamers who could not handle the fact that bullets arc BUT that can be a selling point as well.

    To me Oblivion is a nice game, just as soon as I got the instant kill mod because the current fighting get to bloody boring. Especially those damn gates. Endless non roleplaying level with boring enemies dropped around the place. Yawn.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  18. Re:Physics Realism? Pfft. There're bigger problems by Osty · · Score: 5, Informative

    Part of what made Morrowind so fun was the ability to steal without getting caught in a realistic way.

    If you're getting caught stealing in Oblivion, you're doing something wrong. Use sneak mode and make sure nobody sees you taking stuff. If nobody sees it happen, you get no bounty. If you have no bounty, guards won't try to arrest you. Sure, you still can't sell stuff to normal shops, but it's easy to join the Thieves' Guild to get access to fences (you have to advance in the guild to get access to better fences).

    In all, I like Oblivion's theft implementation a little bit better. Sure, I have to seek out a fence to sell my stuff, but at least I know exactly what stuff is stolen and I don't have to keep track of who I stole it from. In Morrowind, the same "Stolen Property" flag was there, but hidden. If you didn't keep good track of what you stole and kept, you could find yourself weaponless or armorless if you ever got caught by a guard (because they took all of your stolen merchandise, just like in Oblivion). More importantly, if you stole an item from a shopkeeper, you could never sell that type of item to them again (whether it was the same item you stole from them or not). Even worse than that, some NPCs would even refuse you service if you ever stole from them (most notably enchanters, where they would refuse to enchant items for you if you stole from them -- whether you were caught or not).

    Is it realistic that guards know exactly what you've stolen at all times, even if it was something you stole many game-months before? No. Does it hurt gameplay? Not really. Not nearly as much as it did in Morrowind.

  19. If you want a real physics model by cafn8ed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want a real physics model, go outside, pick up a rock, and throw it. For bonus points, you can throw it at your own window. You'll get a physics model, a destructible environment, and full stereo sound, all at once. Soon to be followed by an all-to-realistic economics model based on a goods and services, skilled labor market.

    Meanwhile, um, Oblivion is a magical fantasy-based role playing game. I can't speak for anyone else, but I play games like that because they're NOT perfect models of reality. When I want reality, I turn off the computer and take a walk with my dog.

    --
    Coffee is my drug of choice.
  20. Asshole physics engine by DrXym · · Score: 2, Interesting

    According to Something Awful, it's asshole physics engine is also lacking. i.e. you can be a total asshole in the game and no one cares.