Didn't see this thread until now. I definitely agree the bush characteristics should be altered. I understand not fine tuning a bunch of collision meshes if they would ultimately like to replace the system entirely at some point, but reducing their strength in the meantime would be greatly appreciated. Especially so on JRI where some of the dirt paths feel like you're surrounded on both sides by fly traps. Also, that East Coast video reminded me of a bush/barely matured lemon tree on JRI that shattered my T75's axle like paper nearly 6 minutes into a record run. If crashing such a weighty vehicle didn't feel so viscerally exciting as to distract me from the frustration, I probably would've given up there.
Yeah, pretty much everything on JRI is either going to break your car or make 200 mph crashes turn into iihs style crash tests. I still don't understand why this thread hasn't really gained traction.
Uh, because it isn't a simple fix? If these "game experts" with all these strong opinions actually knew what they were talking about most of these stupid posts wouldn't happen.
If it wasn't a simple fix, then how did they take the time to implement it? How do you know if it's a simple fix? You aren't a part of the dev team. Stop acting like you know everything.
I don't know, ask Hutch about that. The main point I'm making is you simply can't make a static collision mesh less strong, either it is infinitely strong or not there at all. To slow down a vehicle would require a whole new setup entirely, and to have a deforming tree or bush is seemingly very far away from happening.
Ah, the lemon tree switcharoo. To specify, the one on the left side of the path that broke the axle and sent me into his buddy, wall hugging lemon tree. Nothing but dirt there, I double checked. Also, @Inertia, don't know why you're being so hostile to the thread. People aren't just discussing the most challenging implementation of a fix without consideration for dev time and effort or demanding a triple A finalized perfect system by the very next update. They're interested in the authenticity and realism of the game and simply want to see a placeholder that has a more realistic effect and doesn't unnecessarily penalize racing and rallying. Everyone would be happy with the quickest and simplest solution the devs can think up, or one of the devs stating why there wouldn't be a quick fix for it and/or what plans they have for the feature in the future. As of now it was added in 0.5.4 back in April of last year, got the same feedback people are giving now that it was a great idea but felt wrong in its current implementation, bush behavior was stated to have been changed for Utah only in 0.5.5 10 days later but didn't solve those specific concerns, and then there's been basically nothing for 10 months. How else would people bring attention to a feature they feel is important and lacking acknowledgement than by making a thread like this? Isn't that the point of the Ideas and Suggestions forum?
Near as I can tell, soft bushes were first implemented following support for ground-type materials on static meshes, allowing meshes to have custom friction, particles, tiretrack-no tiretrack conditions, and, most importantly, depth. A soft bush simply has a collision mesh with a depth value added to its material; the greater the depth, the less resistance the bush provides. Simple, but by extension, not ideal. After all, it basically means that vehicles are hitting something more akin to water or mud than to a plant. The tough part would be simulating the 'snap' after the vehicle overpowers the structural integrity of the plant, leaving the vehicle free to move. I guess in order for that to happen, the collision would need to be capable of dynamically deactivating, and account for both the vehicle's speed, and its mass [momentum]. That, and a value of the material that decides how much resistance the plant can provide.
Essentially the bushes act like a volume of fluid that creates drag, similar to the mud, but with a softer outer volume. We are looking at creating a smarter system rather than spending too much time tuning and tweaking this one.
Not to beg or be a douche but where can I find this code? Is it really feasible to remove it or is it going to be a big hassle?
That's good to hear, looking forward to seeing how the system is innovated on. BlueKnight's sentiment makes me wonder if anyone's ever made their own "soft" objects to put in a modded map for something like a net object. I know there's even been a map with portals, but can't recall if custom soft objects have been done before.
I wouldn't recommend it. Even if it were cleanly in its own block of code and wouldn't cause any dependency issues, it would get the bushes to stop acting like mud, and start acting like concrete. The hedges in Garfield Heights are soft.
Gotta disagree on this. They are tedious and over-exaggerated. There are several times where I've just clipped a tiny bush or example, and my car has flipped, or come to a complete stop from 60+MPH. It's especially annoying when a scenario goes down a road full of bushes/
Same here dude. Really wished they were fixed next update after being implemented and never changed for the past 6 months.
