Next Car Game vs BeamNG.drive

This is such a stupid comparison. BeamNG is a simulator, and not even a real game yet. NCG has already been shown to be a real game and can handle 24 cars comfortable even on a moderate computer. BeamNG cannot.

Personally, I like BeamNG better because NCG's damage is terrible, but 24 cars is way better than 4. However, being really interested in derbies and damage, I have to pick BeamNG over NCG. If I was not really interested in the potential of the game, and just wanted something fast, explosive, destructive, NCG is a much better choice than BeamNG.

First of all, the games are entirely different other than they both have cars, and 2nd, NCG already has a pretty good foundation for their game, whereas BeamNG is just a free world with highly unintelligent AI that you can't even have an intricate car chase or race with. You can really only derby them, and even then if there's walls they take more damage from the walls than they do from the other cars.

I'll play BeamNG more than I'll probably ever play NCG (as I already have, and do) And when it comes to the point that there will be missions and an actual game in BeamNG, you'll find me trying out new parts and techniques to make a better derby car, and wrecking cars in a derby arena. If I didn't have an interest in spending hours setting stuff up, I'd just go play NCG and mindlessly meander into a derby or race and go H.A.M. there.

 

Shadows hurt my FPS the most. If I have the lighting set to high in BeamNG Drive, which improves the shadow quality, I lose 15 - 20 FPS.

 

That's exactly my point about this game in particular.

I'll bet you don't have many issues with any other game.

 

It's actually like that with most games for me. The shadows can't be set to high / very high or I lose a considerable amount of FPS.

I consider my hardware mid-high. Keep in mind, I have to play hardware demanding games ( like BeamNG ) at 1366x768 too because I'd also lose a considerable amount of FPS if I wanted to play at 1920x1080.

To me, high end hardware will play a current game at 1080p with maxed settings and keep 60 FPS.

 

It's a bit of a silly comparison really, especially when you start making sweeping generalisations about which willl run easier on a given system.

Whilst NCG might run better on a lot of systems, on mine it runs like dog (5 yr old hgh end cpu laptop) as I have very little in the way of GPU performance. It is totally unplayable, about 8fps with everything turned down and no other cars.

On the other hand, the supposedly more system hungry Beam NG will run quite happily at a playable 25fps on Gaz's insane testing map.

NCG = GPU

BNG = CPU

Most 'modern' desktop systems have reasonable GPUs in them, or at least reasonable compared to 5 years ago so they will run NCG better as they tend to skimp on processing performance to save money, relying on the GPU to pick up the slack. The GPU can't pick up the slack in BeamNG...

This reflects what each game is about, NCG is accessible, exciting and shiny, BNG is cold, unforgiving and calculating.

 

Not even beginning to mention what other than damage simulation BNG has to offer compared to NCG

NCG currently has:

• up to 24 cars
• scripted damage model
• derby and different races
• no sandbox

BNG currently has:

• up to 4 cars
• simulated node deformation
• race events (coming)
• total open sandbox freedom
• modding freedom and an open platform
• supports "any" type of land vehicle and air vehicle (if we get better water definitions and realistic water displacement, we can have boats and subs too)
• Any type of frame can be created (tho, missing slidenodes for this statement to be 100% true)

Obviously, if you're into arcade style racing, and still want to experience the cars being damaged and destroyed NCG is a very good alternative, but BNG offers so much more. BNG has no limits.
I couldn't really care less about damage, yet it is awesome that the game is based around this, and driving a crawler around on a difficult course beats driving in a race any day.

 

I have been getting into FlatOut UC again, and it is the perfect definition of how some camera effects can immerse so much more. I say that UC looks better, but it is a finished game. BNG isn't. I have to tell my friends why the game isn't stupid, and how it isn't even finished yet. (There is a self-entitled one who says RoR is better??? He says it has better physics and better content. I can't stand him, and that isn't the only reason why)

 

NCG is better :33

 

What are you trying to accomplish here?

 

Nothing

Lähetetty minun LT26i laitteesta Tapatalkilla

 

Sure. Whatever. Live and let live.

 

Oh here we go again.
It's like comparing GT6 to Forza 5. They are pretty much different games in most respects. Lets just leave it at that.
We don't need huge flame wars comparing games to other games its just childish

 

this man, this. I'm addicted to super hexagon.

 

super hexagon vs BeamNG, the physics of super hexagon rival BeamNG in realism.

 

I've massively mismanaged my tabs here; and this was meant to go in the desktop wallpaper thread. oops . Mind you, it turns out its not a useless post in here. This thread is one of about seven billion similar threads. We've reached the consensus before that the difference between NextCarGame and BeamNG is BeamNG simulates vehicles and NCG simulates sliding bricks that change shape erratically.

 

if they don't want it, THEN DON'T BUY THE GAME, it's that simple

 

As already sad a million times, it's dumb to compare those games, and it's even dumber to complain about NCG physics... Just imagine what NCG would be with BeamNG physics, a laggy pile of shit where everything glitches into each other... Both games are great and have there cons and pros. Even as a huge fan of RoR, Beamng and it's realism, I love NCG and I can't wait for the full game.

(And yes, it was a really dumb idea of me to do those 2 Videos about Beamng vs NCG...)

 

My i5 2410m/Intel HD 3000 laptop concurs with this man.

 

as does my i5-3330 and hd 2500 Desktop (although, going to upgrade to a real gpu soon), the ncg tech demo runs fine at medium settings, the actual game? 0.5 fps (probably literally, including at lowest possible settings) is there really that much of a difference in graphics between the tech demo and the game?

 

Face it, NCG wasn't going for realism, it appears that they were just going for "lets throw cars in a pit and smash them". Its a game for people who want to watch the world burn.
BeamNG aims to be a simulation.

Both end up having alot of damage simulation (although NCG's is cheated) but do seem to cater for a different audience.

A person can always like both.