Let's Discuss: Is an Open World Simulator in the Best Interest of the Audience?

Welcome. I'd say it's time for a logical debate about the future of the game. So sit back, read up, and comment your thoughts or responses when you've finished. If you don't feel like reading a well-thought-out post, the last line summarizes everything. Details within the post.


After messing with BeamNG for a while, doing my usual thing of loading up the expressway map by B25Mitch (link) and launching myself off the off-ramp dividers in an attempt to perform the most spectacular flips and rolls, I was thinking. Amidst the debris flying in slow-motion and the ever-clunky sound effects, I began to wonder what the ending goal of this game would be, and if it would differ from what I was currently playing.

As it stands, BeamNG is a sandbox driving game with some nifty physics. And that's it; that's what you get for $15. Not going into the whole argument surrounding early access, I'd say I'm pleased with what I'm getting for $15. What does the satisfaction come from? Understanding that when I open the program, I'm going to be presented with a thing that allows me to mindlessly fling cars into walls to my heart's content. It's wonderful in its simplicity, without being lacking in content.

It's hard to explain what I mean without using another early access game as a comparison. And while I hate to point fingers, let's look at DayZ. DayZ is one of the many prime examples of early access's problems and how development can go wrong. Before I go on, let me say that I love DayZ. I played the hell out of the mod version for ArmA II, and I clocked in nearly a hundred hours of the standalone version. If you don't know what DayZ is, it's a zombie apocalypse simulator that's really very good. If you've never heard of DayZ, look at the Steam top ten for the past year or so. But wait, if it's so popular, why is it so flawed? With early access, three things must be met for it to be accepted: Lasting content, a relatively quick development pace, and player expectations must be met. These three things create interest in the game; interest is what fuels the early access market. People buy into early access because they like the idea of a game, and are willing to pay money to be able to play it faster. It is then up to the developers to hold the interest of the community until the game comes out.

The reason I use DayZ as the example here is because of how it manages to hold interest even though it is fundamentally flawed and will likely never be completed. In short, it won't be completed because its predecessor, the DayZ mod, never even left "alpha" --which is the dumbest possible name for a mod you don't pay for--even though it's been out for two years. Why does it still hold interest? Because people still love the idea of the game. But then we're presented with the question of "What is the idea of this game?"

Let's look to YouTube:


(yay Insanegaz)

Notice a trend? Every single video involves crashes of some kind. These are the first results for "BeamNG" on YouTube. How about the suggested videos in the search bar?



But wait, those first videos don't have very many views. The BeamNG videos have hundreds of thousands of views, surely people have interest in the game being presented. Well, not quite.



Here, and this is my point, is the proof of the interest in the physics aspect of the game, not the simulation part. The idea of the game people have is vastly different than the views of the development team. The interest is in crashing cars, rather than dealing with the consequences of driving said crashed cars. People like spectacularly realistic damage on cars being put in ridiculous situations, rather than mundane small collisions and trying to repair vehicles.

SoWHY is that what the development team is focusing on?

I do love this game, I really do, but I don't like the direction the development is going. People are interested in seeing all kinds of different cars, and being able to crash them in any way they want. After completely mangling my car beyond recognition, it's very satisfying to be able to push one button and the damage is instantly undone. No consequences, no punishment for me doing what I want to do. Racing in this game does not meet the expectations of the consumers. Why? Because while it adds an objective to an otherwise objective-less game, racing requires that you keep your vehicle functional until the end. Crashing halfway through means the end of the race, leading to frustration from it being so easy to mess up. This is why true realism doesn't work in games, and authenticity is what all developers should strive for; it serves as the halfway point between realism and fun. Irritating or annoying aspects of reality are removed to make a better experience.

SIDE NOTE: Can we please decide on a handling system that is either realistic or arcadey? The current system is in-between and has the worst aspects of both. Focus all efforts on one or the other, not some weird halfway point.

If I'm being so critical, why am I not contributing any ideas? Because I am not paid to participate in development, nor am I qualified enough to judge what the community truly wants. However, from what I've seen, it's seemingly clear what direction development should head. Instead of driving simulation, why not focus on creating spectacular crashes? Why not develop game modes along the lines of the ones in Burnout or Flatout? Flatout had some events where you must fling yourself and/or your car through hoops or a certain distance, or something similar. Burnout had events where you must immobilize as many opponents as you can; some events were even centered around crashing your car.

But wait, engine limitations! Again, this comes back to what I was saying about me not being qualified to answer the question. However, I believe some compromise can be made without causing severe framerate issues or overly simplified design. What can be done to do this? Hell if I know. The problem is that it can never be achieved even slightly if the developers don't put their focus on it.

But wait, the BeamNG video says they're planning demolition derbies and cop chases! This, this is what the development should focus on. Game modes that focus on physics are exactly what this game needs to set itself out in the market. However, the "career" mode is not congruent with these modes. The career mode is the main part of the game; the campaign mode, the quest mode, the multiplayer mode, the reason people buy it. Everything else is just fluff. It can be wonderful fluff, but it is still fluff. The presented "career" mode is the sum of all the wrong I mentioned with the development team's focus. Their "drive", if you will. They want to fix cars, I want to ruin them.

Overall, it's counterintuitive to create a game about NOT crashing cars out of a game where you crash cars.

 

I'm not sure I agree with all of this. Yes, most people seem to enjoy the crashing the most. The final game will still include the sandbox, but it will also have the gamemodes you mentioned. I find the career mode intriguing. Most games give you no consequences for destroying your car, and on top of that, it's very difficult to do so in them. BeamNG has the potential to become much more than those games. I would not like to see this potential wasted by limiting the game to what is popular. Maybe I'm just weird, but I don't really care if 99% of people won't use the career mode (though I think it'll be more like 20-30%), it should remain for the 1% who want a realistic racing game. Instead of conforming to what has already been done, I want to see BNG become a pioneer for full-realism racing games.

 

The devs have made it quite clear. They want to create a realistic driving simulator with realistic driving physics. The crashing is simply a positive side affect of the model they are using. BeamNG are using a realistic engine so that they can simulate any type of driving and this also includes the crashing aspect. As for the driving physics, they are working on it and have made major improvement in the last update.

 

true dat

One thing I've noticed is a shift of the perception of this game. Remember when the game was first released? Everyone only cared about one thing - wrecking cars. I have noticed that recently people have shifted their attention to stunts, driving, rallying and drifting. Remember when you loaded up the fastest Covet and rammed it into a wall? Now I find myself tripod-ing the stock Covet around racetracks.

This has come to focus the real state of this game - alpha. It's becoming more and more obvious that this is early, early alpha. The cars don't handle very well. The cars clip through eachother and stick when touching. The game is overly technical. Cars are always clean and unscratched There's no official support for most controllers. Obviously this game is in Alpha, but that said it is still the best game purchase I've made and I have no regrets.

However - a few major bugs/needed features need to be worked out. There's about 4 - intervehicle clipping(yes i know the devs are working on this), handling, and controller support, and some dymanic decal system for scratches and dirt.

Once these get ironed out we can begin to see gameplay. I'd like to see more descriptions of the cars - give them character. The game lacks character - seems dull and technical. We need music (preferably gabe's) and help notifications. And more importantly, we need gameplay. Mission - a POINT. Sandbox is very awesome but gets slightly boring after some time. Mission, like derbies, chases and races, and maybe WRECKING to the point of the OP. But this game need a mature feel to it - I really don't want to see this creation turn into YEA CRASH SOME CARS EXPLOSIONS GUNS SMASH USE NITROUS TO GO FASSTTTERR DO A BARREL ROLL!!!11!!!!.

To the devs if you read this: I know you're probably annoyed and frustrated by this comment, thinking ARGGH WE KNOW WE KNOW ITS COMING EVERYTHING YOU WANT AND MORE JUST WAIT.

 

You bring up some interesting points and ideas. I think the bottom line is this game is still in a very early alpha, things like demo derbys, cop chases, and other things that better show case the games physics will be added eventually. Racing (against the clock with online leader boards) is something simple that can be added in the near future as apposed to other things like what I said before that will involve advanced AI, and better friction and collision among the cars (so the cars don't get stuck to one another which is a common problem right now). So basically why are they working on a simple racing against the clock system? because its simpler to do at this point in development.

You mentioned that the devs should make the game more arcade like, and perhaps have game modes similar to Flatout or Burnout. The point of the game is to feature REALISTIC physics, handling, and damage model, the devs have made this very clear, that is there objective. If one wishes to just smash cars up, why not just buy Flatout or Burnout? BeamNG's realistic physics is what makes in unique and one of a kind (besides Rigs of Rods which was made by the devs of this game).

One thing I fell is needed desperately is an OBJECTIVE or some sort of GAME MODE, simple driving around an open environment is fun, but the game needs something more for the player to do, whether its racing, demo derby, delivery missions ect. it does need something.

 

So in summary - you note the development is focused on driving rather than crashing and use this to make the point you feel development is heading the wrong way.

Well in answer to your query, the first video on the first piece of your youtube evidence

happens to also be the latest update made by the devs in their blog.

If as you say the direction of development is so incorrect, why does youtubes advanced search algorithm seem to think its so relevant.

 

I do not know how the YouTube algorithm works. However, my argument is supported by the viewcount. Developer's video viewcount: 3,425 views. Viewcount on video solely dedicated to crashes: 3,825,734. The viewcount is my evidence. People would rather watch a video of cars being obliterated than an update video.

As for people claiming it's "Early Alpha", is it? Is it really early alpha anymore? This game has been out for more than a year now. By "out", I mean available for purchase, so yes, it's out. Incomplete, but out. Unless the release date is in seven or eight years, this is in no way "early" alpha. Alpha, sure. Development is slow for alpha, but seeing as the development team is a handful of people, I can't complain too much. However, this isn't "early" alpha. The first video they released? Called BeamNG.drive? That's early alpha. They even referred to it as early alpha, four seconds in. Those that claim this to still be "early alpha" are implying that little to no progress has been made. Has it? Maybe. I believe the alpha label becomes less and less valid as time progresses. (see DayZ) Some say alpha is in reference to game update. I see it as a mixture of development and time released.

 

Viewcount is also highly dependent on the producer... Insanegaz and nerdcubed are far better known than drowsysam and nadeox

 

While this is true for Nerd³ in part, many of the views come from people intrigued by the thumbnail. Nerd³ has 1.7 million subscribers, and his video has 2.7 million views. These views are not all from repeats; many people see the thumbnail, find it interesting, and click it to see what it's all about. They see the car smashed on the ground, and click it. Same for Insanegaz's videos. He has 217,000 subscribers, yet some of his videos have millions of views. How? Because he has thumbnails that bring in people's attention. I really like his channel, and he absolutely knows how to bait people with his thumbnails, then promptly delivers with what is teased. He doesn't tease realistic simulation, he teases ridiculous situations. That's what people want to see.

Seriously, just look at some of these; you want to know what's going to happen:




This man knows what people want to see, so his channel is based on those wants. This is how he gets millions of views. This is how any channel gets millions of views. Create something interesting, and people will click it.

 

The idiocy in this post is astounding. You clearly have no idea where the development is going. They are not turning this into just a racing game, that is going to be simply one aspect of the game. Ever heard of Cabela's Offroad Adventures? What about Street Legal: Redline Racing? Go look those up, because they want to do something similar to those games, just greatly, greatly expanded upon. You will start out with a shittier vehicle and use it to earn cash and buy more vehicles and parts for them by doing a bunch of different things, from racing, to delivering things, and whatever else they come up with. This is probably years down the road. They are just adding the first gameplay element they chose to add which happens to be racing. (this is just the career mode they will still have a sandbox mode from what ive read)

The physics aren't arcade-ish right now, they are simply work in progress and quite damn realistic. No other game simulates an entire vehicle like this does, with the chassis bending and twisting, the suspension components fully simulated and not magically dispersing extreme forces, etc etc etc. The only thing that makes it feel not so realistic right now is the tire friction, which was just vaaaastly upgraded in the pre-race update. The problem they are having now is the tires going into dynamic friction or something like that too easily, and some other design issues with the vehicles (might be wrong here) that cause them to be very loose and vague at high speeds. Other than the traction issues this simulates a vehicle better than anything I've ever seen before.

I personally think development is going in the right direction, and that the developers should keep up the amazing work they are doing. So close to having a perfect simulator on our hands here, just need the tire friction fixed, collisions fixed, the wobbly-ness on some of the vehicles, and a few other minor things. Then some gameplay elements and more content. This is more of a niche simulator like any extremely accurate simulation. Look at DCS: World, we need something like that for ground vehicles. Beam-NG is the only thing comparable to that level of realism for anything with wheels IMO, and its still very very far off from that level of quality.

 

What Tom666 said....word for word. Programs such as Beamng existing in an ocean of multi-billion dollar one dimensional consumer garbage is why we see threads such as this.

 

Let's face it though, even those of us wanting a sim out of this are still going to want carnage now and then. Something I don't think would be too difficult and could work with the current AI would be a "bullet hell" kind of mode, where as you drive around, a fixed number of vehicles spawn around you with chase AI, and if one's drivetrain snaps, or it's lost traction on a drive wheel (diff slipping), gets out of range of the player, flips over or otherwise sits still too long it is removed from the game and a new one is spawned near the player again. The goal would just be to survive as long as you can, either through drivetrain damage or a movement timer. No time limit to hit, just last as long as possible. I think that the rock-dumb current AI would be good for this scenario because there's no penalty if they get stuck and if they were too smart you'd be done in a minute, tops.

 

In no manner did I say it would be blasphemous or completely unacceptable to include both design choices for BeamNG. I bring up this post from a business standpoint. BeamNG wants to sell. That's why you must purchase BeamNG to play it, the developers are trying to make money. More people buying your product gets you more revenue. More revenue means more freedom to do what you would like with your product. There is a market for both simulation and action-focused games. That does not mean they cannot overlap, by the way. As with the evidence presented above, it is clear which has a larger market. Games with action in them sell more than those without (GENERALLY).

My suggestion? Have BeamNG include both modes. Mainly advertise the chaoticness, and still include simulation aspects to satisfy both parties, who again, can still overlap. Basically, the company would benefit from a change of focus. I'm not saying change their morals or vision for the game, but the development team needs to understand what will make their currently fantastic product even better to sell to a broader audience. Add, don't limit.


EDIT: Because, for some reason, not mentioning this will somehow discredit me, I'll put down this bit of information to give some insight on myself: I don't like Call of Duty. Modern Warfare 2 was when the series peaked, and since then it's gone endlessly downhill, as pretty much every other person alive can tell you. What's my favorite game? Papers, Please.

 

Damn, despite my name, I would hate to see this game turn into a brainless crashing game as it's main element. Crashing videos have so many views because they are fun to watch, but it's not the same when it comes to playing.

Do you know what I want from this game? A realistic driving game where I can push my car to the limit withOUT crashing, and have realistic demo derbies. I want to have to think before I slam into a car head on at full speed in a demolition derby, and use logical decisions to come out on top.

If the main focus of this game was mindless crashing, that would honestly ruin it for me, and probably for a lot of others too. It's called Drive, not Crash

 

To the OP I think something you are sort of missing on with all those youtube videos is the fact that as of right now crashing is about all this game is, unless you want to do laps around some track. Since there is not any true gameplay other than essentially a tech demo of course all of the videos will showcase the crashes and such. I bet once the race update lands we will start to see videos of people racing instead of just crash videos. Sure there will be crashes during the races but that's one of the reasons people like racing so much for the spectacular crashes, just as long as everyone walks away.

Me personally I love the direction the devs seem to be taking this game. It sounds totally unique and like it will be a very fun game to play, also for $15 you can't really go wrong. I'm having fun with what the "game" is right now so I can only imagine as it becomes more game like I will enjoy it more.

 

I agree with this and I think all of us agree that this is currently NOT a game but rather a technology demonstration. I personally have never seen BeamNG as a "game" but rather an experiment in making the whole
racing genre more realistic and fun.....down the road. Paying the penalties in a game with real time deformation properties would be thrilling indeed.

Folks who come blasting in here demanding features and services like only Turn 10 studios could provide is ridiculous, lazy and ignorant, but a fact of life. I seriously doubt nobody here didn't go through that phase.

 

I would love to have races and every other kind of driving experiences in this game but it's not possible just yet (but it will at some point) so all my videos are focused on crashing but saying that even when the game is finished I will still make crash testing videos simply because a car/vehicle crashing is fascinating and beautiful to me and I have been doing videos like it since 2008 and this game is by far the best at doing it yes NCG does it well but BeamNG just feel so much more real.

 

Don't ever stop crashing cars and making videos of it dude....ever.

 

yes. please don't stop overlaying techno music on slow mo car crashes for that sweet sweet youtube ad money. very high quality stuff, very unique content. i wonder what his viewer demographics are like.

re-quoting that for emphasis on the original question

this is a much better question than people here are giving you credit for. you just surrounded it with a lot of extra words.

take the current game as it stands. your evidence, among other blatantly obvious evidence, correctly demonstrates that this game has a stigma of 'crash simulator' and nothing more. like it or not, it's true.

so to answer your exact question:

i've been told by a developer that they simply do not want the 'omg car crash' demographic to be the primary audience. as far as i understand, they're not satisfied with attracting only the demographic of people that just like to see the crashes. they are making a uniquely realistic car game and want it to be relatable to people who enjoy any aspect of car - daily driving, racing, repairing, modifying... whatever. crashing cars is attracting the wrong audience. they want the stigma gone.