says the person who did no research, and is spewing out misinformation NCG most certainly does NOT, use soft-body physics, it uses rigid body physics, similar to the kind used and found in GTA IV (not the exact same engine, so dont you dare say anything) there is no "not as high tech as beamng/RoR" soft body physics, there's just what you find in beamng and RoR, and thats it, only other kind of physics are rigid body, which, is what NCG uses, so please, listen to your OWN ADVICE, and "do just a little bit of research before spreading misinformation..."
Well, you are missing my point not-so-far-away. My point was than they are totally two different games, they use different kind of engines, and you make your point just of one old video for really old pre-alpha demo? They are all the time making it better and better, so do you really think than it would to look like in that video? You silly sod
what? no, im talking about the latest release of NCG, it wasn't, and still isnt, a soft-body physics game, yes there different, but it still doesn't change the fact, that its NOT SOFT-BODY, NCG is RIGID-BODY PHYSICS, it most likely will always be that way, and yes, NCG and BeamNG are 2 different games, doesn't change the fact, that NCG does NOT USE SOFT-BODY PHYSICS, it uses rigid body, just because bugbear says it is, doesn't mean it is, as anyone can say anything uses soft-body when it does not, heck, i could make a 2d car platformer, and SAY, it uses soft-body, does that mean it does? NO!, it most certainly does NOT, so before you post saying how i have no idea what im talking about, maybe you should do a little bit of research. (Mythbuster, maybe you could explain this better?)
1. You keep saying this is an old video of NCG, The video was published on 'Feb 11, 2014'. 2. Also I agree the two games should not be directly compared as they are completely different than each other. The point of posting that video here was to show everyone how youtubers have no respect for facts, I had no intention of critiquing NCG or comparing it to BeamNG Drive, no need to get so defensive man..
This has been discussed before. NCG is soft-body. Soft body is an umbrella term for any kind of physics where the distance between two points is not fixed, but the general shape of the thing can be kept, i.e. it is not a fluid. However, there are multiple ways to achieve soft-body physics. NCG uses an optimized way that computes everything in one frame or so. BeamNG calculates the entire vehicle 2k times a frame. Even using rigid-body physics and constraints (Like people do in GMod or whatever) can be classed as soft body physics. LFS' tire model is soft-body. Just because they use a similar cover-all term to BeamNG doesn't mean you should defend BeamNG like your life depends on it, each system has its merits and disadvantages. NCG can simulate 24 cars real time on a consumer CPU, BeamNG cannot. BeamNG can simulate a vehicle in more detail than NCG. Its all a tradeoff of performance and accuracy.
And you know better than Bugbear? Bugbear has made games for quite some time, you know? Why they would to say than it is soft-body physic than if it is not? I am pretty sure than Bugbear know much better their own game than you. Show me the proof than it is not soft-body, show me, then I believe you.
Soft body is something that can provide a realistic deformation when played at a slower speed IMO. NCG looks bad when it is slowed down, and there is no camera shake to hide its horrible "soft body" deformation.
ummm, no, NCG is NOT SOFT-BODY, it has been proven many many many times -_- ncg's damage uses the same system as games such as GTA iv, and saints row use, RIGID-BODY, pls, learn to physics/google/research
sigh, i hate stupid ass fanboys, just leave, since you clearly have 0 idea about what your talking about, they would say it, beacause people will want to play it more, with metal and your logic, GTA iv, or saints row is soft-body physics, which isnt true at all, so yeah, just leave if you have no idea what your talking about, mythbuster has posted many many comments on youtube talking about how NCG is rigid-body, gabester has posted many post's on how ncg is not soft-body, seirously, just go back a few pages, and look at ncg video's, for example, this one: (imported from here) and link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VU8wvl1TBI see, RIGID-BODY, not SOFT-BODY
You can read, yes? Just comb through the 15+ pages of discussion on this issue, there has already been tons of 'proof' given to justify our argument. Also..
BeamNG is in Early-Alpha, and has soft-body physics, so, no, your logic does not work, BeamNG has 4 devs, THATS IT, Bugbear is a huge tripple A studio, im certain, that if they were actually going to use soft-body physics, they'd use, REAL soft-body physics, instead of marketing there rigid-body physics, as soft-body
I am sorry to tell my friend, that Bugbear is not triple A studio, not at all It even try to get Kickstarter financing, but failed (marketing was made horrible wrong). But in Steam Greenlight it rocked it way over the limits.
"A Soft Body in general, is a simulation of a soft or rigid deformable object." --Blender Documentation "Unlike in simulation of rigid bodies, the shape of soft bodies can change, meaning that the relative distance of two points on the object is not fixed." --Wikipedia "Imagine a rigid body, but squidgy. The mass doesn't change, but the shape of it can." --Bullet Physics documentation Both BeamNG and NCG fit these definitions to some degree or another. But overall, the only definition of soft body physics/dynamics that I can find on the internet is that "Stuff moves and changes shape" and both these engines, and many other engines, support that.
..., yep, you clearly know nothing, it most certainly IS, a triple A studio, and even then, they still have WAY WAY WAY more devs then BeamNG.Drive does, and, we have just proven like, 50 different times, that NCG uses RIGID-BODY PHYSICS, so, end of discussion, anyone who continues to argue, is in denial - - - Updated - - - see all that? ALL PROOF, that NCG is a RIGID-BODY game, thats only MARKETED/ADVERTISED, as soft-body, when it most certainly, IS NOT (and even more proof in a few pages back, just read this whole thread, and the above pictures and video's, and you have your proof
Bugbear Entertainment Ltd. is a Finnish video game company. It was established in March 2000 and had 40 employees as of 2007. - Wikipedia And they are really not big AAA studio, i think than you don`t know for Bugbear about anything. Did you know than they have to sell Flat Out-title away, because they needed money back in the years. Ridge Racer-deal with Namco saved them and now they are making new game. I have followed bugbear long time ago, I live in Finland where Bugbear is all the time in news and it is not yet AAA grade. You cant say it for sure, everything is still under building. They possibly use both of it, not only once for it, metalmuncher said it really good: AND for the truth of internet: (imported from here)
My opinion is not proof... Don't use my comments as proof please. As far as I know, both NCG and BeamNG fit the soft body definition if you take it litterally. Point is, the description/definition is very vague, and the way I understand the actual text, it seems to include types of deformation that it never meant to include, because the true meaning of soft-body is so hard to describe. I guess you could say we(or I), here at BeamNG, use our own definition of soft-body physics, or that we're trying to give it a new, better definition. Yes, if you really litterally follow the definition of soft-body physics anywhere, you'll see that it can even include games like GTA 4/5 and such. But I honestly don't think that's what the original authors meant when they wrote the text... It seems just that they wrote it so vaguely that the term started to include those types of dynamic rigid-body deformation as well, and now that definition has grown it, giving companies like Bugbear the ability to use the term "soft-body" without truely lying about it... Meanwhile, even though I just posted a lot of those comments on Youtube, I still will not accept that a game like NCG has actual soft-body physics... I know an opinion doesn't change anything, but in my opinion, the true definition of soft-body physics SHOULD exclude NCG, as that's not really what the term originally meant, as far as I can see. Hope that clears it up a bit... Technically we can't call the devs of NCG liars... Then again, I, personally, just won't agree on NCG actually having soft-body physics, even when Wikipedia says their physics fall under soft-body... You CANNOT find any REAL definition on the internet, as far as I know, that actually proves NCG doesnot have soft-body physics, simply because all definitions are too vague and too broad for what they actually mean. However, for Vittuiksman above me, something that IS fact: Their engine won't suddenly change to "true soft-body"(stupid term I just made up!) from what it has now. That's near impossible and would require a complete re-write.
