It is not soft-body physics. They only simulate any deformation during the 1 frame of an impact, and it is only plastic deformation. We simulate deformation of thousands of beams 2000 times per second, both plastic (permanent) and elastic (bending and springing back) to best simulate any kind of real structure.
I'm not positive about that, but it sure seemed that way when my bent 45 degrees or completely missing front wheels had absolutely no bearing on how the car drove. If the game really simulates a car driving on 4 wheels, then wheel damage affecting physics is not something you "implement" later on. It should arise naturally.
That is what I assumed as well. I cannot see how a car that is 10% of the size it used to be can still manage to drive perfectly. Edit-Schmedit: This is a primary example:
Quick run around the tarmac track with 24 cars, I managed to steal first place in the last few seconds
Cool ! I bought the early access as well, but i only have the physics test level, how did you get the track?
Did you buy through their website, if so you probably got a steam key in your inbox somewhere? I just picked mine up on steam and it loads with the race tracks and demo derby stadium.
Actually, you're full of shit. These 2 games aren't even similar. Like the guy above, these games are aimed at different markets and have different target audiences. And just because they know what they're doing doesn't mean that they are full of themselves just because they aren't kissing everyones asses. They have loads of previous experience with this type of game and are willing to take it to the next level. BTW, who gives a shit if it doesn't have soft body physics, that is something unique to BeamNG and shouldn't be implemented into other games until this one is finished. - - - Updated - - - Define soft body damage...
your kidding me right? that post is like, a trillion years old, ive already gone through this with mopower77, i didnt research enough, turns out that was just a fan who was saying that, and not the game devs, there was a whole page of me and mopower77 talking, i deleted my post's, he deleted his once said "talk" was over, and i never said ANYTHING about it being bad that it doesnt have soft-body physics, so please, PISS OFF @2nd quote soft-body physics = as close to as real-life crashes as possible, rigid body = next car game, and the majority of other arcade games (for example, gta, saints row, mafia and mafia 2, and so on)
*cringe* These people clearly have been brainwashed by the rigid body physics and crappy damage physics of other games..
I couldn't agree more with the last several posts. I think when we have some 'official content' heavy machinery and trailers/tow-able objects in the game, some of the people who don't quite understand will begin to grasp the importance of an entire vehicle being simulated with as much accuracy as possible. I love how sensitive beamng is, Next damage is definitely not realistic and the squashed cars running around almost like new kind of ruins the visual damage anyways. I like bugbear's productions, yet what they strive for is totally different from beamng imo. Just because they both will allow racing and crashing doesn't mean it's all that valid of a comparison, especially when people don't understand how easy it is to trash a real car (pretty sure the majority of youtube has never driven a car).
This LAN Party video by Node made me pretty angry.. They basically claimed that NCG uses soft body physics, and confused NCG with the old BeamNG soft body physics video demonstration, in the way that NCG would be the first car game to have these soft body physics ipmlemented on. Nobody clearly can't quite understand what soft body physics truly mean. But yeah, how would they know? Otherwise, I think they're cool guys and you should definitely watch some of their lan party videos. (It's basically the guys from freddiew and corridordigital playing lan games)
Yeah, the majority of media related to anything slightly technical on youtube contains inaccuracies that are never addressed. I still don't fully understand why anyone wants to watch people they don't know playing games, but that isn't important, there's much I do not understand and such content is very popular it seems. Directly confusing beamng and ncg like that really isn't excusable imo, I don't believe ncg uses anything like the beam + harmonic oscillator style system. I guess we can help set the record straight in the video comments section. I'm thinking the most accurate basic comparison between the two would be that one is really just a visual effect, the other is a simulation.
I have first impressions, The handling and damage may be forgiving but the game is still quite brutal in it's way. It actually does have the feel of slightly more violent Finnish folk racing. The AI is competitive, probably the best balanced racing game I've come across and the game play is good. Its a fun arcade racer and that's not a bad thing. You can win in a fair racing environment and its an achievement because so much can happen to put you in last place instantly, you're not magically quicker than the AI and the AI are actually fairly competent drivers. We all race on the same physics engine with vehicles that seem to perform similarly. This game will be a fantastic tide over till the day BeamNG can give us races and hardware exists that will allow us to simulate 24 Bruckell Moonhawks at 60fps. For what bugbear advertized it doesn't live up to it, but for what it is it feels like what they wanted Flatout to become originally. Its a nice game, and BeamNG is in alpha. We're probably 5 years or so away from anything resembling a finished product from BeamNG. Here we have NCG giving us a rigid body version that still approximates extreme amounts of damage. It gives us some arcadey handling, 24 cars and destructible environments using known technology that is accessible to hardware that exists today. It'll have a shorter development time than BeamNG so it'll be out before BeamNG.drive. BeamNG aren't working with existing solutions, they don't exactly know what they're doing because Beam is new and its probably kind of a science for our development team. It has the hallmarks of a science anyway, look at how they've been developing the tire model. It hasn't been a process of "we have a bug, fix it with this known equation". There's been genuine experimentation and learning experiences to get the Beam.NG tire model to where it is. That's just one aspect of the physics engine in Beam. NCG doesn't deserve the hate we seem to be bordering on in this thread. I can tell you now that I own it that its good. Its like they made the cars out of the blocks in Space Engineers if I'm honest but its still quite fun.
