Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Games' started by Ukuku92, Aug 31, 2013.
The accidental emoticons!
It is you who is wrong, it is soft-body physic, NCG point is not be like super realistic soft-body physic, do you really think than you can play 24 car rally for true soft-body physic?
Absolutely not, it is impossible for basic computer for calculate 24 cars everything for beamNG physics reactions for about everything.
It is soft body physic, but it is not so super high-tech like BeamNG, because there is not powerful enough home computers to play it
AND you probably wont never finish even a one full lap in race before you totally broke down your car fatally, because totally true physic like BeamNG
That is reason why engine is not like BeamNG, and in that video, it is really old Pre-Alpha, in today car broke down, so you retire, it don`t go anymore so silly small, as like in video.
It is not in same stage as BeamNG, and not even same category as BeamNG, so i think than it is pointless to compare these two.
It is even more earlier stage than BeamNG
And yes, i have pre-order it long time ago, played all those demos, so i know what i am talking about.
And BeamNG of course.
I wish people would do just a little bit of research before spreading misinformation...
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
Is that proof? Looks like some part swapping to me, rather than soft body physics.
Because it is not build in, and remember, it is just pre-alpha stage (or something like that.)
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.
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
Lol LSDMT, I tried quoting the video that you just posted, but I guess it just showed the code.
From the Indie impressions NCG video:
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