Actually... in the first 2 flatout games Flatout and flatout 2, there was no respawning... And in Flatout ultimate carnage, the main derby mode was without respawns, though they did also have a "deathmatch" mode that allowed respawning.... But yes, most of it was a points system where you got most of your points for crashing and you got bonus points for staying alive longer.. the last 3 all got points.
Played the preview and it's pretty good for what it is, but it just feels a bit lacking. I'm bored of it already, but I can spend hours messing about on gridmap in BeamNG. It just feels like stuff that has been done before and in some cases, done better elsewhere. I still prefer Flatout 1 TBH.
I doubt they'll do anymore updates for the pre-alpha... That was just for pre-order customers to test out... Basically to keep us from all going insane. I'm sure in very early 2014 they'll release the beta for us to test Until then, all we can do is wait
Meh, who cares. BeamNG and Next Car Game exist in essentially different spheres for me. They're both racing games featuring destruction but they're not exactly comparable. BeamNG is simulation and very good at that, NCG is pure 100% idiotic arcade and very good at it too. Both have their pros and cons. I went back to Beam after playing NCG and Beam feels pretty dry after all that madness and carnage and stupid fun stuff like car crushers and flippers. Entirely different games. I do wonder how Beam will fare when it comes to performance though and planned race updates etc, theres already a lot more load on my laptop just running the alpha. I can barely run 2-3 cars at a sensible framerate at 1368x720 (or whatever the resolution starting with 13 is...) in Beam, I can run 24 cars on NCG at 1920x1080 with everything maxed out and its incredibly fluid despite the chaos of hundreds of physics objects, cars and carnage all going off at once.
Well, we simulate all of the car, all of the time. They don't. They're essentially using 15 year old car physics tech with more parts falling off, which is why they can run 24 cars at a time. You'll never see a semi truck with a flexing frame in NCG's engine, or panels rattling as you drive a car over bumps. The suspension arms don't even animate. Rigid body physics are cheap (computationally), and have been around for decades.
Next Car Game Gameplay Montage Hi, What do you guys think about this game compared to BeamNG? I'd like to know what you think. I personally think they both have their good and bad sides. BeamNG is more of a simulator and NCG is more a crash game.
Re: Next Car Game Gameplay Montage Well, the Flatout series are arcade racing games so they're not really big on realism and Drive is.. Plus you have to remember that Next's damage system is much less power hungry than Drive. Also, you should put this in the Next Car Game thread next time
Gabe, do you ever look at yourself and ever realize that you constantly sound like the most pretentious person in the world. The "we are racing game Jesus come to save the world from the Damnation of other Racing Games" schtick is getting tiring. Every racing game in existence uses rigid body, because a system like BNG's would EXPLODE any computer if put in a racing game. Stop acting so disingenuous. You expect every racing game to use soft-body physics and it's not gonna happen for years.
There's a large difference between 1 contact point (sliding brick), multiple contact points (each wheel has a contact point) and soft body. I don't see how Gabe is being pretentious. How is expecting each wheel to be a contact point when the developer said it would be pretentious, arrogant, or any other word you want to pull out of a thesaurus? I'm genuinely interested.
..., well, even then (even though not a single thing you just said is true, unless the cpu cooler was horrible, it wouldnt explode) as gabester said, "(even though they claimed that the damage realistically affects alignment)." it ended up NOT, being true, as you can basicly turn a car into a motorcycle (damage wise), and it still work as a normal car, provided there's at least 1-2 wheels touching the ground
IMO, I don't care what someone calls gabe, because he has done a lot of pretty damn awesome work for this game. He could be a complete jerk for all we know, but when you look at everything he has done for people on here it doesn't matter if he would be an a-hole or not; he would be a generous, hard-working one at that. So, before you go putting labels on someone because they do or say things differently, realize that everyone is unique.
I'm stating facts. Take it or leave it. Soft-body physics are obviously a lot more taxing on the computer, but they're also a lot more correct. Rigid body is a compromise between realism and performance. No real world object is a perfectly rigid point mass. I don't expect anyone to use soft-body physics, since the game industry's general approach is to be lazy and cut corners whenever possible. They're all about profit and churning things out quickly. We're extremely dedicated to creating the most authentic vehicle simulation experience possible. Computers are not yet fast enough to simulate more than 4-5 cars at once with our soft-body physics, but that's alright, because computers are always going to get faster. The fact is, NCG physics are a bunch of band-aids and special effects piled onto a 15 year old sliding brick simulation model. It's entertaining, and it runs smoothly, but it's also completely physically incorrect.
People who think in this day and age it's still ok for a racing game to use a sliding brick as a physics model for a car honestly need to get their head checked. Noone says they need to use soft-body physics, but the least they could do is simulate them with 5 points of mass: 4 wheels and a body. Even in GTA, the car tips over when you knock a wheel off. And GTA isn't even a racing game and it has super arcady physics... For a racing game like NCG to just ignore that is pretty goddamn stupid if you ask me, and I doubt the "mechanical damage" they "disabled" has even been coded yet, and I also doubt they will ever make it so that your car will start leaning to one side if the suspension bends... If you put damage in your arcady racing game, it just breaks all immersion when you allow players to completely abuse it in a way where there's no longer a car driving, but just a 5x5x5cm cube with wheels and it'll still drive the same way as the original car... Just look at Trackmania... That's a brilliant game, and unrealistic as hell.
Forza and Gran Turismo games are still using the sliding brick model as well... I really don't understand why they can't at least have correct rigid body physics for how the cars move - it's literally high school physics (classical mechanics).
Oh, this thread is about BeamNG? Anyway... From what I've seen in the TECH- DEMO, PRE ALPHA model... Yes, obviously there's work that needs to be done, and it's QUITE CLEAR, actually, that they clearly haven't implemented the mechanical failures and their effect on gameplay. Jesus people, we all know that it's not entire realistic... as no arcade game will be. Also, I HATE HATE HATE that everyone has to compare this to BeamNG. Yeah BeamNG is more realistic, yes it simulates the damage better than any other game out there... No it will not be a racing game for years, and the majority of people won't be able to handle 8 cars comfortably for years yet. Gabe, I do love your work, and I'm very pleased to see you working on BeamNG. At the same time, you could be a little more supportive rather than just saying that "it's shit this, it's shit that. NO GAMING COMPANY IS EVER HONEST" blah blah. (yes I realize you didn't say those exact words, but you're beyond condescending. And I get it, you make the best stuff, and your game simulates everything the best. Get over yourself. You're still a human being, and I can't believe that someone being of an indie company, can't support another indie company... Bugbear's made it for entertainment, and they're talking to the fans, and they're taking suggestions... Perhaps you could try to help them out by giving them suggestions. I know you're quite talented, and you have a lot of sense of the physics and all that. But the way I see it, saying that it's bad, or unimpressive, and then comparing it to a physics system that can't realistically be applied to this game is really unreasonable and immature on your part.
Well, for them to fix the problems I've mentioned would require an entirely different approach to their physics. What they have is fun and entertaining; I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing against the people who seem to think NCG's car deformation/physics are realistic, and Bugbear's own claims about their physics which I've found to be false in my own testing. I'm not over at Bugbear looking at their code or vehicle parameters and seeing what they need to tweak. I'm just pointing out what I see is wrong. For example energy doesn't seem to be absorbed properly in collisions, causing cars to move and rotate incorrectly and excessively in crashes. That's something they could probably fix, but I don't know enough about their physics system to say for sure. Their statements to the public seem to be that they've started with a realistic driving simulation base and just dialed back the realism to make it into a fun arcade racer. I don't think that's true. Bugbear is hardly an indie company, by the way... unless you think running out of money turns you into an indie company. They released several AAA titles and had proper publishers. The entire FlatOut series is not indie. Besides, we're on the BeamNG forums. Of course this thread is going to be somewhat about BeamNG. Anyways, as long as people stop mistaking NCG as a realistic car crash simulator and comparing it to BeamNG then I won't care. But it seems like a lot of their fanbase is calling it the "BeamNG killer" when they are completely different games.
Oh... I thought that releasing a game independently made you an Indie company... no? And I understand the last part, I also hate that it's constantly being compared... And I do agree, their damage is off, to say the least, and the tires and suspension... well that needs major work lol... But yeah, I guess I didn't realize they stated they had started with a driving simulator and toned it back... That seems entirely unreasonable Though if you do care so much, which you seem to, and any reasonable person does realize that it doesn't simulate damage as well as BeamNG, and anyone that doesn't understand that probably won't be convinced otherwise, you could just as easily as complain about what's wrong with the game in this forum, go suggest to them what you'd rather see changed...
NGC is shaping up to what Flatout1 Should have been when Flexbody in RoR was in it's infancy, and the best example of it was Solid_Granite's Toyota Hilux. EVen before Gabester made that Lexus.
