Poseidon II , the ultimate engine?

[JdB 151]

Not every physical engine uses Ragdoll...

[HKFlash 9]

Gandalf, I dont think OFP2 uses rag doll... but if anyone could confirm...

OFP2 use physical engine and where is physical engine there is ragdoll ;)

What Lt.Hunter said. Ragdoll is not a physics engine AFAIK. Its a feature that enables the body parts to colide with the world around it, without trespassing it like ghosts.

[HKFlash 9]

Fully dynamic dammage model, see theres something alot more interesting than ragdolls .

Dont worry about the damn ragdolls. If the engine supports it, then it can be introduced with a "special" patch or an expansion pack.

Americas Army got ragdoll physics in a patch...

[Antichrist 0]

I don't think I will like the game if it doesn't have proper ragdoll physics rather than standard OFP death animations....

[HKFlash 9]

I don't think I will like the game if it doesn't have proper ragdoll physics rather than standard OFP death animations....  

Well IMHO the OFP death animations are the best I've seen for it so far. Only ragdoll beats it.

[Scrub 0]

Like you all said, 'Ragdoll' is nothing more than the weighted response of jointed limbs attached to a free body interacting with it's environment. They are usually tweakable from the unit's config or it's model properties. Modders be at ease.

[Mr ThunderMakeR 0]

I don't think I will like the game if it doesn't have proper ragdoll physics rather than standard OFP death animations....  

Really the way guys die in the game seems like its not really one of the most important aspects of a game engine.  Unless theres something sick and wrong with you, I dont see why you would focus on watching people die. When playing OFP as soon as I kill one enemy im scanning for the next, not watching them die.  I really dont see how this ragdoll physics thing that everyone is all nuts over is gonna affect gameply that much, its just eyecandy.

Sorry to single you out Antichrist, this is directed at everyone who feels this way.

[Antichrist 0]

I don't think I will like the game if it doesn't have proper ragdoll physics rather than standard OFP death animations....

Really the way guys die in the game seems like its not really one of the most important aspects of a game engine. Unless theres something sick and wrong with you, I dont see why you would focus on watching people die. When playing OFP as soon as I kill one enemy im scanning for the next, not watching them die. I really dont see how this ragdoll physics thing that everyone is all nuts over is gonna affect gameply that much, its just eyecandy.

Sorry to single you out Antichrist, this is directed at everyone who feels this way.

I'd rather see death that looks realistic than some animated crap.

When I play games I want the full experience, not just random bits and pieces that don't really fit together. I don't really like when you shoot a group of soldiers with a tank and the all just "fly away" in pre-animated positions. That thing just kills everything else developer worked very hard on.

[Spy17 1]

I would also like to see ragdoll!

For me it is more than just eycandy. Especially for indoor fights it is important.

Maybe it could be deactivated when the CPU load is to heavy.

OFP was always good in beeing scalable.

[Evishion 0]

I would also like to see ragdoll!

For me it is more than just eycandy. Especially for indoor fights it is important.

yep.. i agree to. it is kinda a eyecandy as is a "must" on todays games.

not that i think its "funny" to see peoples die. but, its a game, and i want it as realistic as possible, even peoples dies.

I mean.. its much more realistic.. and whby shouldent a game who focuse on realism use ragdoll ?....

well.. i can just hope they will add it

[Heatseeker 0]

I'd rather see death that looks realistic than some animated crap.

When I play games I want the full experience, not just random bits and pieces that don't really fit together. I don't really like when you  shoot a group of soldiers with a tank and the all just "fly away" in pre-animated positions. That thing just kills everything else developer worked very hard on.

Well i want a compromise then, i remeber testing America's Army Karma ragdolls with 15 dead bot soldiers in sp mode, fps drop from 70 to 10 for a few seconds if you make the dead bodies "jump" and that is just a small scale MP fps game, not severall hundred square km high detailed and populated complex game.

I also dont see many situations in a realistic war game where bodies would fly away, sure it would be nice to see them drop and colide properly if we shoot someone standing on some stairs or other uneven surfaces, maybe even if they happen to drop dead from high places but generally i dont see it worth spending much development time and system resources on, lets see what they can come up with .

[brataccas 0]

I want ragdoll in OFP2 BUT i do not want the enemys scremaing or shouting in the process of dying as this is very unrealistic when you shoot someone they dont make a sound PLUS when you head shot someone they are dead before they hit the ground.

[Denwad 0]

headshots IRL don't end up in instant death because of all the variables involved

but of course everyone must realise the people who have survived were incapacitated and in game terms that's just as good as dead.

[BlackScorpion 0]

I remember reading about a Finnish soldier who got... 2 bullets IIRC to his head and didn't know about it before he was told about it...

Nurse: "Hey, you have a bullet in your head. And another."

Soldier: "What the heck are you talking about?"

[gandalf the white 0]

Nurse: "Hey, you have a bullet in your head. And another."

Soldier: "What the heck are you talking about?"

memory loss .

(how'd it end btw?)

Headshots, the chances of somebody being able to fight after a headshot is less then 1 on 1000 , so let's not try to simulate living with a bullet in your head...

Vision getting blurred when injured etc would be a good idea... an "amid first aid" (or die) action sounds like a good idea for that...

[BlackScorpion 0]

Well, if I really remember correctly, he was telling it himself... So... pretty darn well.

Another example... During WW2, the general who was responsable for Paris, tried to make suicide by shooting himself to the head (the normal head shooting way). Well, what happened? He blinded himself.

That's why Hitler shot himself to the mouth.

[baff 0]

did any spot where it said "dynamic campaign"

I have never seen a decent dynamically generated campaign yet.

For that matter even the dynamic missions i have seen have been dire.

Individually scripted missions and campaigns please.

I'm trying to imagine exactly how rubbish a dynamically generated novel would be.

Even episodes of the "A team" were actually individually scripted. And they were pretty seriously plotless.

Boring repetative dynamic missions. No thanks.

Well crafted, well plotted individual missions creating an overall themed campaign. Yes please.

[hardrock 1]

bump maps or normal maps or ... ?;

all so maybe layered textures ... ?;

I'm pretty sure they use bump maps, just look at the pictures, for example the uniform shadows are VERY detailed, they use bump maps there for sure.

[Dwarden 1125]

to be fair i'm not impressed with HL2 physics at all ..

not to mention HL2 not using Havok2 (many of Hl2 features missing) it uses heavy modified Havok1 ...

and today already exist Havok3 ...

why i wasn't impressed? because there were other physical engines existing already when HL2 was coming out and were capable of much more (ie meqon www.meqon.com) ... and there are at least 3 great "free" physical engines (ODE, Tokamak, TrueAxis) ...

now there is big hype about NOVODEX from AGEIA and theirs PPU (mainly because firms like EPIC decided to support it (UE3)) ... but there remain question if these PPUs can be used by other physical engines ...

[ebns72 0]

Poseidon would be perfect if the main issues can be cleared up with cqb. Think about it, the ai in cqb and the geometry can't and probably won't be able to do what AI in, say, half life can do in a cqb situation. Movement in tight spaces is also very rought in flashpoint due to a bit of a slow response between switching directions.

However, if close-quarters environments, AI, geometry (collision detection, etc.) and movement can be improved in ofp2 then without a doubt it will be the perfect engine.

[Heatseeker 0]

Movement in tight spaces is also very rought in flashpoint due to a bit of a slow response between switching directions.

However, if close-quarters environments, AI, geometry (collision detection, etc.) and movement can be improved in ofp2 then without a doubt it will be the perfect engine.

But keep in mind movement is one feature that makes OPF less arcadish than other games where you run around and strafe run&gun, also you dont run in cqb unless its safe to do so, you walk when inside buildings and tight spaces, faster or slower but you walk and check every direction for possible targets .

This works better in OFP too, but colision detection, a.i. and other gameplay issues make cqb not very good.

I hope the a.i. will act acordingly to the environment they are in, urban, forest or barren landscape. Also speeding up movement could turn the game into something undesirable in other combat circunstances other than cqb .

[BlackScorpion 0]

SF running, the one seen in e.g. Rainbow Six, is just fast walking. That's why in RL too, you're atleast have a chance of hitting something...

I'd like to see this feature in OFP. But not too accurate shooting when moving. But so that you could hit a guy from 10m with M249 when going straight towards him (not that hard actually, just the recoil). Agreed?

[Colossus 2]

Im guessing, almost, that they will use Havok.

Havok

Or they might use Meqon's engine.

Meqon

PS: This was the only engines I could find on the web (I didn't look hard though)

[Scrub 0]

Speaking of movement and the changes due to situation and damage, I was thinking about rifle handling and what effects it.  A Dx9 engine should have no problem scaling or passing the effects on to the GFX chip.

 In the field, for engagements at range, you need the current OFP method of aiming.  One that uses the arms more so than the body, and the forward arm is extended a bit to be able to hit anything.  CQB methods won't do anything but make it harder.  However in CQB itself, the forward hand comes closer, right on the magazine to allow fast pointing, the body is used more to move the weapon into the doorway or wherever when clearing.  Both situations are very different, and I'd like to see view/weapon handling settings to acount for that.

Of course speed, and damage always come into play to cause aiming errors.  When heavily damaged, due to weakness, the body moves slower than the person tells it to.  Vision swims, can cause you to fall down, can't match arm movement to what is in the real world all too well.. This can be emulated by randomly adjusting the mouse settings from the users norm until the effect wears off.. Really annoying, but easily done.

For the new engine to be the most 'rockinest', I feel it should realistically support both range and CQB environments - and the differences between them.  Every other engine has one or the other (poorly done, but at least attempted )

[Victor_S. 0]

Judging by the positioning of the weapon on the screen and some other screen shots it appears that 3d iron sights are possible.

Does anyone know if standing on moving vehicle will be possible?