Bloodnick 0 Posted February 4, 2006 I was thinking about this: What if Bistudio co-operate with other game corporations? I thought about Valve The kick-ass "source" engine would give the game a big blast into reality. HDR, ragdoll, the realism in it. "BIs next generation game, in cooperation with: Valve" . And the game will be finished quicklier Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sniperwolf572 758 Posted February 4, 2006 Highly doubt it, IMO BIS NGPCG has a far better engine than Source engine, why would they sink so low to ask assistance from them? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fork122 0 Posted February 4, 2006 I doubt it too. Â Besides, the Source engine, in the game's I've seen it in doesn't have big open areas like OFP does. Â The largest area i've seen in it is when your on the highway in HL2, and even then the view distance is <1000m. The source engine is nice, but doesn't really include things that a big battlefield simulator would need. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
guyguy1 0 Posted February 4, 2006 I agree with all of the above and more. Ragdoll physics are pretty unrealistic (source engine example: ragdolls doing cartwheels when shot in the side of head with .357, ragdolls being blown around like flyweights). Keep in mind that when people are shot, they have muscle spasms and they twist and do whatever because of the shock. Simply shooting someone in the leg a few times and watching him fall over like a sack of potatoes (as in ragdolls) is pretty awkward. IMO a large variety of death animations (10+ per hit area) based on where the character model is hit is the best way to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bloodnick 0 Posted February 4, 2006 well, you wana have the game quicklier done, don't you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shinRaiden 0 Posted February 4, 2006 1) Ragdolls are normally missing trans-selectional muscles and tendons in nearly all implementations I've seen. 2) Source does not provide a destructible environment, it only supports pre-cracked objects. 3) Source uses a closed box planar model, OFP uses open world object entities. 4) Source is optimized for alley zombie shooter logic, OFP is open terrain optimized. 5) Everyone has HDR now. --- Changing Game2 to accomodate this would drasticly increase the development time, integrate in all of the bad bits of BF2 with none of the good, and in general tank the product. Online distro like Steam on the other hand would be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bloodnick 0 Posted February 4, 2006 Okay , What about lucasarts then? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
guyguy1 0 Posted February 4, 2006 Naw I think that BI has a good development team and making them cooperate with another developer would cost them more time (to arrange things) and I doubt that it would make the game any better (if not worse). Just let BI finish the game in whatever amount of time it takes and you will not be dissapointed. Remember ArmA is coming out soon... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted February 4, 2006 Okay , What about lucasarts then? Ow come on, look at OFP, they know how to make a game, they dont need help... (well, they might use some money, who knows? ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brataccas 0 Posted February 4, 2006 the source engine has a slighlty dated look to it Its hardly next gen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Madus_Maximus 0 Posted February 5, 2006 Source is shiny! That's why people like it, something to attract their attention! In reality, it's pretty poop, even compared to the current OFP engine. It has tiny maps (which take forever to load), the AI is all scripted, nothing dynamic, it's linear, it has boundries (only boundry in OFP is running out of fuel over the endless sea haha). Meh, it's a decent engine, well optimised (although recent updates have started to lag the thing up a bit) and fits the game well. The physics aren't that impressive, they're Havok 1 just massively modded, and lack any mass for models when they're "null" (ie killed). Hidden & Dangerous 2 is still the best example of well done ragdoll's. Shoot someone and they drop like a sack of do do, not go flying off into the air or do flips like they do in HL2 and BF2 (which is much worse... makes me cringe watching that game in action... the animations are sooooooooo poor! Gliding along the ground). Anyway, methinks they'll do a great job, I just hope it gets advertised well. Glad to see Codemasters won't be involved mwuahaha! Online distribution AND phsyical retail copies would be the best way to go too, so long as it's not like Steam and needs you to log in once every 30 days to renew your "tickets" so you can play offline, and activate it over the net. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sniperwolf572 758 Posted February 5, 2006 well, you wana have the game quicklier done, don't you? If we have to wait another five years for it to be done, so be it, we will have ArmA, and NGPCG will look and feel awesome, just like OFP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InqWiper 0 Posted February 5, 2006 I wouldnt want OFP2 with the source engine if that would mean I could have OFP2 tomorrow lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bloodnick 0 Posted February 5, 2006 Okay, I've had many failures with crating polls on BIforums, but this is the worst one, and it ain't even locked Share this post Link to post Share on other sites