What do you think about physics in games these days ?

Game developers are focusing on physics these days they have the graphics down to a tee and physics are closely following

A few years ago when Red Faction came out this was really a hot button issue, developers were touting engines like Geo-Mod and Havok as the future of programming, and there was a realistic arguement that top end titles were merely expensive tech demos.

However, games these days are typically marrying gameplay elements with sophisticated engines, and while they may fall down in many areas (design and writing I'm looking at you) I can't say that physics is a major focus in the current gaming climate. I think the industry is currently in flux, looking for a focus rather than actually pushing forward in a specific direction...

I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."

Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.

AntiAntagonist:
I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."

Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.

see i like realistic games so if i went at a fence with a hammer it would break and splinter what i dont want the wood to do is dissapear into a cloud of brown dust *scowls at half life*

I think Physics need to be in games because it can make things more fun , like the ragdolls in half life 2 or the physics in Gta 4... it's not imperative that you have the best physics in your game for it to be fun , but i think sooner or later it will be , because these days's games usually must have real like graphics , so why not real like physics , mess with them a bit and you get sci fi physics:D

physics are good. I don't care much for realism in games if I want realism I can go outside.
but it makes the game world more believable. but sometimes physics make small object react over the top and make them bounce all over the place. I mean most real things just fall and hit the ground and that is where the whole physics end. clay cups break or roll a little but they don't go on adventures on their own.
I think AI is a far more important thing for developers to focus on that would make gaming more interesting.

alygishere:
I think Physics need to be in games because it can make things more fun , like the ragdolls in half life 2 or the physics in Gta 4... it's not imperative that you have the best physics in your game for it to be fun , but i think sooner or later it will be , because these days's games usually must have real like graphics , so why not real like physics , mess with them a bit and you get sci fi physics:D

ahhh nothing like kicking back and playing with physics is there , i always played saints row and put the prat fall cheat on and spend hours running into walls

I think it's amazing what's been done with physics in games in the last ten years or so... I remember the first time I saw the famous ragdoll in action - some FPS game, Unreal Tournament I think. The guy showing me the game had just died, and the view zoomed out and showed his character as he tumbled down a pit and hit a bunch of stuff on the way down. It made a big impression, because it seemed terribly real.
There is certainly room for a bit more improvement - Oblivion's physics system in particular is famous for its quirks - but I would rather see more focus devoted to - as has already been mentioned mentioned - AI systems as well as emotionally engaging storytelling.

I think it depends on what game you're playing if the physics should matter. a fighting game? as long as your character doesn't go through walls and stand in midair it's fine. But in like elder scrolls the physics should be really really good.

Physics can be good or really bad, depending on implementation. Take Oblivion for instance. The physics were great until you tried to set up a treasure vault to display your goods and realized that setting a sword near your stack of armor caused the whole pile to leap up into the air in a frenzy of metal that would likely kill your character if it were allowed to. Even if you got it right, you could never walk too close to the table again.

Compare the physics to something more like Half-Life 2. Still problematic at times (really, how many of you got beat down by that one guard for messing up when you threw the soda into the trash?) but overall much more subdued and better.

The overall problem with physics is that things seem to behave as if they've all coated in bouncy-ball rubber, and objects tend to either be light as a feather (walking gently by a knee-height crate full of supplies will knock it around) or simply unmovable. It's being refined and we're certainly getting there, but we've got a ways to go yet.

- J

jamie5166:

AntiAntagonist:
I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."

Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.

see i like realistic games so if i went at a fence with a hammer it would break and splinter what i dont want the wood to do is dissapear into a cloud of brown dust *scowls at half life*

How DARE you scowl at half-life?!

Seriously though, physics [in games] are great and so are ragdolls.

physics are great as long as developers don't lose sight of gameplay.

mGoLos:

jamie5166:

AntiAntagonist:
I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."

Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.

see i like realistic games so if i went at a fence with a hammer it would break and splinter what i dont want the wood to do is dissapear into a cloud of brown dust *scowls at half life*

How DARE you scowl at half-life?!

Seriously though, physics [in games] are great and so are ragdolls.

you do know that they have something better than ragdolls now its caled endorphin check it out its what GTA IV runs on thats why it looks so human when u get hit by a car and go whirling off into the nearby old lady also you know the pepsi advert the one with the orange blobs and he sticks down the side of the building they made that on endorphin aswell :P see im full of crap

tiredinnuendo:

The overall problem with physics is that things seem to behave as if they've all coated in bouncy-ball rubber, and objects tend to either be light as a feather (walking gently by a knee-height crate full of supplies will knock it around) or simply unmovable. It's being refined and we're certainly getting there, but we've got a ways to go yet.

- J

Hopefully, we'll see a lot of these issues going away very soon. The big flaw of graphics and physics is that the CPU can't get feedback from the game world very well.

That's what Intel's new chip-thingy is trying to solve, moving graphics and CPU onto the same die should allow them to share data more easily.

So, your issues might be things of the past soon.

jamie5166:

mGoLos:

jamie5166:

AntiAntagonist:
I saw the title of the thread... and was rather confused. "I like physics... it keeps the molecules of my cells together."

Like graphics, physics doesn't necessarily need to get better for games, unless that's what the game calls for. To put what I just said in graphic arts terms: graphics needn't be absolutely accurate if the overall style of the game is supposed to be impressionist.

see i like realistic games so if i went at a fence with a hammer it would break and splinter what i dont want the wood to do is dissapear into a cloud of brown dust *scowls at half life*

How DARE you scowl at half-life?!

Seriously though, physics [in games] are great and so are ragdolls.

you do know that they have something better than ragdolls now its caled endorphin check it out its what GTA IV runs on thats why it looks so human when u get hit by a car and go whirling off into the nearby old lady also you know the pepsi advert the one with the orange blobs and he sticks down the side of the building they made that on endorphin aswell :P see im full of crap

Sigh...Endorphin doesn't handle the human physics.

what does it handle then i dont get what u mean

Painkiller was a game that really made me appreciate physics. It made me look back on games like doom, but with havok implemented, killing things was really really fun with physics.

You know I would far rather in games they had less physics and made it so when you look down you see the front of your shoulders, body and legs. When you pick something up to throw it your arm actually goes back etc. This for me would make alot of games far more personal. Although I do think that the games industry needs a big boost of more powerful processors. To me we're still in the vector era of physics and there is so much more that could be done but just need the processing power.

Although by the time that comes out they'll have found a new fad

Am I the only one here who actually likes the physics in Half-Life 2? Maybe it's less their actual physics engine and more the fact that they actually use it and/or let you play with it - plenty of objects around to mess about with and the gravity gun makes that a lot of fun. The occasional physics puzzle to remind you that they "do" physics... I like.

Realistic physics are definitely making headway with destructible environments and the like, what would be nice is more ways to interact with stuff - in a lot of FPS games the only thing you can really do with your hands is hold a weapon, would be nice if you could grab a random piece of shrapnel, metal pipe, plank of wood or whatever and use that as a bludgeon, or put things together and build some simple stuff... could be interesting. The trick is writing the game to be openended enough to allow for innovative solutions to problems, without it becoming too easy because you can just toss rocks at every obstacle until it breaks instead of playing the game and doing what they expected you to.

There are more pressing things though - good AI could really add to a game and make it great, whereas good physics is just... nice to have. Oh, and above all games could do with more effort applied to the storytelling. A compelling plot will allow players to overlook a lot of other flaws, a crappy story can be annoying and immersion-breaking even with the best graphics/physics. Still, any progress is good progress...

(im gunna prob have shortest anwser) i think if the gameplay and graphics advance so should physics

Mmm... physics.

Does anybody know if there is game in which where you shoot (or stab) the rope is where it cuts?

I like physics, but I couldn't eat a whole one. Oh wait, that doesn't make any sense.

I want a game that focuses on quantum physics like you're an electron or something.

Well that would be pissing annoying. Quantum physics RPG, every now and again your level hops about randomly to where it feels like and you could never actually take 1 path anywere.

Physics are a useful tool for creating a believable environment and does wonders for player immersion and interactivity. It could be the central focus for a puzzle-based game but many FPS and 3PAA developers lose sight of this and try to make it more than it is (ala HL2, in which admittedly it was used very well).
Digital materials are pretty awesome as well (Euphoria/Endorphin) and would take this even further.
Overall though it's one useful, but still quite gimmicky ingredient in a boiling pot which should contain many other ingredients. Physics shouldn't interfere with gameplay much or vice versa.

Why does everybody keep saying how good the GTA IV physics are? Has anyone ever used the telekinesis in Psi-Ops?

cthulhu257:
Why does everybody keep saying how good the GTA IV physics are? Has anyone ever used the telekinesis in Psi-Ops?

no but i have just been reading it in my 360 magazine and it said it was glitchy

cthulhu257:
Why does everybody keep saying how good the GTA IV physics are? Has anyone ever used the telekinesis in Psi-Ops?

whts that
???

Physics can be an excellent component to add to the game if applied properly, but if you're going to make a game that has physics as a very important or centralized part of the gameplay (Mirror's Edge's Parkour or Half-Life 2's Gravity gun) it has to be implemented with extreme consideration and lots of work to get it perfect. No one likes a mediocre gameplay mechanic.

Aside, I still don't know why people argue about Physics being better in one game than another because Havok basically runs a monopoly of that respect.

Shabubu:

tiredinnuendo:

The overall problem with physics is that things seem to behave as if they've all coated in bouncy-ball rubber, and objects tend to either be light as a feather (walking gently by a knee-height crate full of supplies will knock it around) or simply unmovable. It's being refined and we're certainly getting there, but we've got a ways to go yet.

- J

Hopefully, we'll see a lot of these issues going away very soon. The big flaw of graphics and physics is that the CPU can't get feedback from the game world very well.

That's what Intel's new chip-thingy is trying to solve, moving graphics and CPU onto the same die should allow them to share data more easily.

So, your issues might be things of the past soon.

I really dig it when people drop info like this.

Please don't take this as as, "I don't believe you, show me a link," request, I'd just like to read more about this, so I don't suppose you have a link to an article or anything? It sounds like it would be a good read.

- J

Anarchemitis:
Physics can be an excellent component to add to the game if applied properly, but if you're going to make a game that has physics as a very important or centralized part of the gameplay (Mirror's Edge's Parkour or Half-Life 2's Gravity gun) it has to be implemented with extreme consideration and lots of work to get it perfect. No one likes a mediocre gameplay mechanic.

Aside, I still don't know why people argue about Physics being better in one game than another because Havok basically runs a monopoly of that respect.

Well, because people implement it into their game engines with more or less prowess. Look at the difference between Halo 3's physics and Half Life 2's physics. Also, I think physics pretty much hit the roof with Star Wars: The Force Unleashed: Euphoria, Digital Molecular Matter and Havok all running at the same time, with zero performance hits. Now there can be fine tuning of these, but still...

What's the difference between Endorphin and Euphoria?

Anarchemitis:
Physics can be an excellent component to add to the game if applied properly, but if you're going to make a game that has physics as a very important or centralized part of the gameplay (Mirror's Edge's Parkour or Half-Life 2's Gravity gun) it has to be implemented with extreme consideration and lots of work to get it perfect. No one likes a mediocre gameplay mechanic.

Aside, I still don't know why people argue about Physics being better in one game than another because Havok basically runs a monopoly of that respect.

There's some engines with their own physics, like CryEngine 2.

tiredinnuendo:
I really dig it when people drop info like this.

Please don't take this as as, "I don't believe you, show me a link," request, I'd just like to read more about this, so I don't suppose you have a link to an article or anything? It sounds like it would be a good read.

- J

I think he's talking about Larrabee...Check out the info/news/drama here:

http://www.engadget.com/tag/larrabee/

Eggo:

tiredinnuendo:
I really dig it when people drop info like this.

Please don't take this as as, "I don't believe you, show me a link," request, I'd just like to read more about this, so I don't suppose you have a link to an article or anything? It sounds like it would be a good read.

- J

I think he's talking about Larrabee...Check out the info/news/drama here:

http://www.engadget.com/tag/larrabee/

Sweet. Thanks.

- J

What do I think? Well I think that they are fucking great and add so much to the game that all games need them.

Bionic Commando Rearmed is a damn 2D platformer with PhysX powered Ragdoll, rolling a barrel into someone and seeing them land on their neck and break it is what makes the game so awesome.