• 66 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Watch the following video, and tell me this isn't getting all you hot and bothered as well...

I've been longing for dynamic material simulation in games. As far as car body damage and the materials involved in such things go, this developer's efforts look incredible. Hell, in one of the crashes with the truck, you can actually see the sheet metal getting torn into shreds by the forces at play. Impressive. Kinda reminds me of when I first saw Crytek's CryEngine and could not believe my eyes. It's just too damn good.

If this is the kinds of improvements we can look forward to coming to future games on new generation consoles, I'm a happy camper. Just imagine GTA VI with this level of simulation fidelity. Oh my! 'Til then, check out the free tech demo on your own PC, or buy their game outright at their site.

#2 Edited by Giantstalker (1708 posts) -

That video is awesome, thanks for the heads up. This is the kind of thing I'm genuinely looking forward to when they talk about the "future" of games

#3 Edited by believer258 (12081 posts) -

That does look like pretty impressive crash physics. I'd like to see it implemented as a very key gameplay mechanic somehow and not just as an impressive toy to play with.

#4 Edited by BigJeffrey (5139 posts) -

Downloading that shit (Demo). I too want to join you in getting hot and bothered.

#5 Edited by Demoskinos (15091 posts) -

I'll be totally honest here when I saw soft body this is not what I expected. >_>

#6 Posted by EVO (3929 posts) -

Wow.

#7 Posted by Castiel (2700 posts) -

Zip.

#8 Posted by subyman (654 posts) -

Oh man, better physics has been my wish since I played Destruction Derby when I was younger. This is fantastic. I'm definitely getting the demo.

#9 Edited by BigJeffrey (5139 posts) -

First thing i did. THEN tears it to shreds. Very nice driving over shit physics.

#10 Posted by karatetron (692 posts) -

I'm a big fan of seeing cars getting demolished by grey cubes.

#11 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

Forza 4 looks way better..

#12 Posted by CaptainTightPants (2834 posts) -
@jdh5153 said:

Forza 4 looks way better..

http://replygif.net/i/311.gif
#13 Posted by Tordah (2484 posts) -

Those were some spectacular crashes. I hope something like this becomes the new standard for driving games in the coming years.

#14 Edited by Rorie (3169 posts) -

FAKE those cars don't even have drivers in them

Staff
#15 Posted by ShaggE (6625 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

Forza 4 looks way better..

... You know the difference between premade damage models and real-time soft body deformation, yeah?

#16 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

@shagge said:

@jdh5153 said:

Forza 4 looks way better..

... You know the difference between premade damage models and real-time soft body deformation, yeah?

That just looked like cardboard crap a two year old made...Nothing impressive about it at all.... I'll take the crashes in Forza any day over that.

#17 Posted by TruthTellah (9396 posts) -

The tech is certainly impressive, but all I keep thinking is, "Aw man, oof. How much is that damage going to cost to repair?"

Online
#18 Posted by ShaggE (6625 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

@shagge said:

@jdh5153 said:

Forza 4 looks way better..

... You know the difference between premade damage models and real-time soft body deformation, yeah?

That just looked like cardboard crap a two year old made...Nothing impressive about it at all.... I'll take the crashes in Forza any day over that.

Again, there's a huge, huge difference between Forza and what BeamNG is doing. I'm not sure you understand what you're looking at here, or why it's significant. Or what physics simulations are, for that matter.

#19 Edited by Humanity (9825 posts) -

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

#20 Posted by Korwin (2977 posts) -

Remember seeing early videos of this stuff a few years ago, should make for a good bit of middleware going forward.

#21 Posted by ShaggE (6625 posts) -

@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

Was hoping that was the case, because wow.

There is an old demo of soft-body on a zambie, but it's rather crude and outdated. Still cool to futz with, though.

#22 Posted by Zeik (2652 posts) -
@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

Dead or Alive has been working on that tech for years.

#23 Edited by TheHT (11663 posts) -

The way you feel about this is the way I feel about cloth physics.

Also this is awesome.

#24 Posted by Driadon (3008 posts) -

@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

All the broken bones.

This seems super cool, haven't seen real time physics simulation that cool since the Digital Molecular Matter demo for Force Unleashed.

#25 Posted by Korwin (2977 posts) -

@driadon said:

@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

All the broken bones.

This seems super cool, haven't seen real time physics simulation that cool since the Digital Molecular Matter demo for Force Unleashed.

Broken bones, eh. However solving the age old problem of clothing an muscle tissue deformation on contact with other geometry is extremely interesting. Bioware might be able to make a space bonin' scene that doesn't look like a Barbie and Ken doll being smashed together by a 6 year old.

#26 Posted by SamStrife (1286 posts) -

I really enjoy just driving about on the demo level for fun, I can zen out and do it. It's telling that they give you the car with the least amount of physics in the demo though.

I'm pretty tempted to drop a tenner on the alpha (and get all subsequent releases) just to show support and use as a game I can just zone out to.

#27 Posted by Driadon (3008 posts) -

@korwin said:

@driadon said:

@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

All the broken bones.

This seems super cool, haven't seen real time physics simulation that cool since the Digital Molecular Matter demo for Force Unleashed.

Broken bones, eh. However solving the age old problem of clothing an muscle tissue deformation on contact with other geometry is extremely interesting. Bioware might be able to make a space bonin' scene that doesn't look like a Barbie and Ken doll being smashed together by a 6 year old.

There is already soft body simulation in UE3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imPJ9a1KwEw) just using it for space bonin' probably would look even weirder

#28 Posted by BigJeffrey (5139 posts) -

I want to see this in real games. Like in Battlefield, two planes colliding and shit.

#29 Posted by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

Well I'm glad I'm not the only person that actually sees what the next step in gaming needs to be about. Unfortunately, you'll go into the same type of depression I did, when you realize this isn't doable in any serious way on next-gen console hardware if you still plan on having that hardware run a video game.

Personally I feel in order to make things such as soft body physics and accurate material creation, the first step is really going back to square 1 and getting rid of rasterization just so we can get the materials right and do away with so much hackery and texturing. Put the focus back on geometry and high polygon counts. We need to run all of this in a ray-traced engine, which itself requires more power than we can realistically currently afford yet, then they have to handle the physics behind an increased polygon count. A much, much larger polygon count than what we are currently used to, because when you start deforming geometry, it needs to be made of lots and lots and lots of bendable and breakable geometry subdivisions. If you want to bend that car door, well it needs to be made out of lots of subdivided triangles. You can't do this with a detailed 1080p brick texture plastered on a flat plane to create a brick wall and some bump mapping or tesselation, which is currently what we're accustomed to. If you want to blow up that wall, you need to actually have it made of 3D bricks, which crack in tiny little pieces themselves. Same goes for soft body cloth dynamics. You want to bend a table cloth? The polygon count needs to go from 1-20 polygons to thousands, 10s of thousands or more. Or ....the holy grail.....fluid dynamics. We need both ray-tracing with IOR capability and an insane polygon count as well as a capable enough box of doing serious computation to run a complex fluid sim.

Nvidia's PhysX demo got me excited...

Still waiting for a game that actually uses PhysX to manipulate water like this and still calls itself a video game and not a demo.

#30 Posted by Capum15 (4960 posts) -

I remember seeing the stuff at about 1:20 a few months ago (or at least something incredibly similar). Pretty damn good.

@alexglass: mmmm, physics.

#31 Posted by cheapandtacky (130 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

That just looked like cardboard crap a two year old made...Nothing impressive about it at all.... I'll take the crashes in Forza any day over that.

It's a Physics engine not a graphics engine so it isn't made to look good, It's about how it behaves and despite the big crashes that grab peoples attention it's applications are much greater than smashing into a wall.

Real working suspension, shapes that flex bend and deform. If what they are doing takes off someone else can apply Forza 5 shinies.

#32 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1803 posts) -

Wow, that is some mighty impressive stuff. Finally we have the GeoMod equivalent of smashing cars! I was surprised at how realistically the suspension behaves, too. The day games utilize this tech will be a good day, indeed.

#33 Posted by falserelic (5480 posts) -

Next we need to see car sex.......

#34 Edited by Xolare (1284 posts) -
#35 Posted by Deranged (1856 posts) -

That looked fantastic. It's amazing how those tiny little touches improve the experience that much more.

#36 Edited by BBAlpert (1554 posts) -

You guys might like some of these technical papers and SIGGRAPH presentations about physics simulation stuff.

http://www.physicsbasedanimation.com/

It's full of stuff that I don't understand but love the crap out of like this.

On a side note, my dream game would be Garry's Mod with the material and AI tech from The Force Unleashed.

#37 Posted by Humanity (9825 posts) -

@zeik said:
@humanity said:

@shagge: jdh is a huge troll, just move on and save yourself some time and trouble.

Now that we have soft body physics on cars JUST THINK about soft-body physics ....on people

Dead or Alive has been working on that tech for years.

I'm just waiting for real time boob collision engine where a fist hitting a boob will create appropriate flesh waves. This is what fighting games have been waiting for all these years!

#38 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@onekillwonder_ said:

Wow, that is some mighty impressive stuff. Finally we have the GeoMod equivalent of smashing cars! I was surprised at how realistically the suspension behaves, too. The day games utilize this tech will be a good day, indeed.

That's a game actually. You can grab the demo for free. It runs fine on my 3 year old PC. It's linked right there in the OP. The full game is like 10 quid.

GTA IV wasn't that far behind this. I certainly had cases of car geometry being deformed to the point of blocking a wheel for instance. I guess to a certain degree, this will always be a question of playability. How much realism is more fun than reality. When does it start to detract from the fact that games can aspire to be more fun than reality.

Either way, I'm looking forward to seeing more dynamic simulated touches in my games. I'd really love to see simulated brick and wood walls. The whole Minecraft-angle of Everquest Next for example is quite exciting, with the whole gameworld being built out of destructible bits and pieces, and the community being given the tools to create new stuff, that are inherently destructible. Even without extensive physics simulation, the mere fact that gameworlds can be a whole lot more granular and interactive is an exciting prospect.

The future is about to start, and it's exciting.

#39 Posted by deathstriker666 (1337 posts) -

Yeah, I remember hearing about this years ago from these very same forums. It might even have been from you, Seppli. Don't get me wrong, the work they're doing here is mightily impressive, but it's not like this is the first time we've seen such things. I remember Nvidia showing off PhysX a few months ago with their collision physics applied to buildings, damn impressive. I wonder if Havok is feeling the pressure...

#40 Edited by Veektarius (4968 posts) -

I imagine that improving physics engines for things that have been lagging behind for years (like TressFX attempted to do) will be the main technical advance of the next generation.

#41 Posted by psylah (2182 posts) -

@alexglass: Haven't seen that much fluid flung at a rabbit since that furry convention I stumbled upon.

#42 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@deathstriker666 said:

Yeah, I remember hearing about this years ago from these very same forums. It might even have been from you, Seppli. Don't get me wrong, the work they're doing here is mightily impressive, but it's not like this is the first time we've seen such things. I remember Nvidia showing off PhysX a few months ago with their collision physics applied to buildings, damn impressive. I wonder if Havok is feeling the pressure...

The difference is, this isn't a tech demo. It's a game in the making. And you can run the code on your box right now.

Now that developers will again have some free resources to allocate to cool shit like physics driven animation, we will start to see these kinds of improvements everywhere (hopefully). Back when GTA IV came out, and the Euphoria Engine made its debut, I thought we'll see this stuff everywhere, but really, Rockstar is one of the very few developers that seems to use this type of techniques in their games - at least to any noticeable degree. I hope it becomes a much more common occurence, and will be applied to a much broader field than just character animations in the near future.

#43 Posted by oraknabo (1514 posts) -

I've been playing the demo for a couple of days and it's pretty impressive. Can you change cars at all in the demo or is it just the truck?

#44 Posted by Jeust (10804 posts) -

Impressive, but I'm not a big fan of realism in video games.

#45 Posted by Bollard (5744 posts) -
#46 Posted by FlipperDesert (2103 posts) -

Unf, I'd put my hands all over those soft bodies if you know what I'm sayin'.

#47 Posted by EXTomar (4916 posts) -

I think what we need to do here is to get Mythbusters to make a truck do a barrel roll like that to see if it really does turn into jelly when subjected to torque like that.

#48 Posted by tourgen (4542 posts) -

Yep we are on the edge of some really cool stuff.

Real time dynamic tessalation is a thing now. Convex decomposition is a semi-standard rigid body physics middleware feature. And now soft body physics is about to take off. GPU accelerated physics is coming along too. That and/or unified memory is necessary for fully dynamic worlds. Great news! Both are happening!

Good time to be into playing games

#49 Posted by Hunter5024 (5892 posts) -

@demoskinos said:

I'll be totally honest here when I saw soft body this is not what I expected. >_>

I'm as disappointed as you are.

#50 Edited by EXTomar (4916 posts) -

Would you be happier with hard bodies?