HL2: Will it really be THE revolution?

[ndee]

I watched the movie where he grenades down a big container at the end. First, I thought: "HOLY CRAP! That's AWESOME!" But then, after a little bit of thinking: Is that really so cool? Will it be totally scripted like: If Grenades hits the container, container fall down. I'm wondering how many objects you can really use in the game. In that video, there was this big thing of steel which also killed some guys. Would it have been possible to only gun down the steel thingie so that it falls down straight without hitting anyone?

 

[MangoTBG]

Nope

 

[Electrode]

There was a game that came out awhile ago called Red Faction that, as much as it sucked, implemented what I think you're talking about. You could take a rocket launcher or grenade and blow up just about anything, no scripting involved.

I remember a multiplayer map whose central area was a pair of platforms high above a pit. One could blast away the parts of the platform that connected to the rest of the map and send them plumetting into the abyss, meaning certain death for anyone standing on it. 😀

Edit: Screeny for yu0

 

[dighn]

it's gonna be good but nah i doubt it's revolutionary

 

[spaceman]

meh,itll be a good distraction.

it is after all, a game.

 

It will be more revolutionary than Doom3, that's about it.

 

[ndee]

Electrode: Thanks for the screenie 🙂

It's just because all that hype, just another "graphic" update, that about it. I think I have to check out Red Faction 🙂

 

[LordJezo]

Originally posted by: dwell
It will be more revolutionary than Doom3, that's about it.

How do you know?

Doom3 is stil pretty secret.

 

[ndee]

I just think, both games will be YAFPS(Yet another First-Person-Shooter) with better graphics(but still too unrealistic for me).

 

[MangoTBG]

Originally posted by: ndee
I just think, both games will be YAFPS(Yet another First-Person-Shooter) with better graphics(but still too unrealistic for me).

There's a REAL FPS waiting out there for you....


Go to your local gunshop 😉.


Just don't forget to reload.

 

[StageLeft]

Problem with Doom3 is that id knows how to make an engine but can't make an involving game for the life of them. Thusly Doom3 will suck my nuts. It's those who license it who will show us the true potential.

RedFaction's ...grr I can't remember what it was called - ability to blow up any wall/material was really just not as cool in reality as it sounded. In truth some materials were not indestructible and you were pretty limited with how you could REALLY use this feature. The insane physics I saw in HL2 were far and away better than anything I've seen in a game before.

 

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: dwell
It will be more revolutionary than Doom3, that's about it.

How do you know?

Doom3 is stil pretty secret.

Carmack has a habit of making the same game over and over again. Let's hope Doom3 is not, but he has given me no reason to believe otherwise.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Electrode
There was a game that came out awhile ago called Red Faction that, as much as it sucked, implemented what I think you're talking about. You could take a rocket launcher or grenade and blow up just about anything, no scripting involved.

I remember a multiplayer map whose central area was a pair of platforms high above a pit. One could blast away the parts of the platform that connected to the rest of the map and send them plumetting into the abyss, meaning certain death for anyone standing on it. 😀

Edit: Screeny for yu0

not realy, I went through the whole game, and it was sooo scripted, there were just certain parts of the map you could destroy. Map was created with it in mind.

First such game was Tresspasser which never became popular because it was soooo slow, had a real dynamics system and everything and we are first seeing such a system now.

 

[rh71]

It'll really be THAT cool if the physics involved are considered... and from the demos, it looks like it is. Meaning if you chuck a rocket at it from a different angle, it'll fall away differently, instead of it being scripted to fall only 1 way.

 

[Electrode]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
RedFaction's ...grr I can't remember what it was called

GeoMod

ability to blow up any wall/material was really just not as cool in reality as it sounded.

True. For some reason Volition's map designers felt the need to take this awesome ability and limit its use so much that it seems no different from scripted stuff.

Take the first level for example. Nothing is destructible but a few walls with target marks on them and detpacks in front of them. Defeats the whole purpose of having realtime arbitrary geometry modification.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: ndee
I just think, both games will be YAFPS(Yet another First-Person-Shooter) with better graphics(but still too unrealistic for me).

The time of "revolutionary" video games is gone. Just about everything has been done in some form or another.

I do, however, think HL2 has potential to be the best shooter in years - if not the best ever created. It probably won't have the wow-effect that the original had, simply because it will be among a sea of other great shooters - Deus Ex2, Doom3, Theif3, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Max Payne 2, etc.

HL2 doesn't have to be revolutionary to be amazing.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Electrode
There was a game that came out awhile ago called Red Faction that, as much as it sucked, implemented what I think you're talking about. You could take a rocket launcher or grenade and blow up just about anything, no scripting involved.

I remember a multiplayer map whose central area was a pair of platforms high above a pit. One could blast away the parts of the platform that connected to the rest of the map and send them plumetting into the abyss, meaning certain death for anyone standing on it. 😀

Edit: Screeny for yu0

not realy, I went through the whole game, and it was sooo scripted, there were just certain parts of the map you could destroy. Map was created with it in mind.

First such game was Tresspasser which never became popular because it was soooo slow, had a real dynamics system and everything and we are first seeing such a system now.

Trespasser isn't that Dino game, is it?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: KnightBreedThe time of "revolutionary" video games is gone. Just about everything has been done in some form or another.

In a way you're right...we now have 3d and better and better graphics/physics. So things are evolutionary. However, there is still a major thing to be done - full surround 360 degree view. Kind of like virtual reality, but it actually doesn't look like crap.

Also if you note the physical differences between our life and a video game you'll see that there is still a gargantuan amount of reality that video games lack. Even the impressive physics in HL are nothing compared to the intriciate impressions we can leave on things in real life. There is only so much one can script into a game and it takes increasing amounts of CPU power to handle them. Perhaps AI will be needed to really pound out all the logic for true physical interaction and we're still a good number of years away from "close" to real life physics and a pretty good graphical knockoff from real life.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: ndee

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Electrode
There was a game that came out awhile ago called Red Faction that, as much as it sucked, implemented what I think you're talking about. You could take a rocket launcher or grenade and blow up just about anything, no scripting involved.

I remember a multiplayer map whose central area was a pair of platforms high above a pit. One could blast away the parts of the platform that connected to the rest of the map and send them plumetting into the abyss, meaning certain death for anyone standing on it. 😀

Edit: Screeny for yu0

not realy, I went through the whole game, and it was sooo scripted, there were just certain parts of the map you could destroy. Map was created with it in mind.

First such game was Tresspasser which never became popular because it was soooo slow, had a real dynamics system and everything and we are first seeing such a system now.

Trespasser isn't that Dino game, is it?

thats the one

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Electrode

Originally posted by: Skoorb
RedFaction's ...grr I can't remember what it was called

GeoMod

ability to blow up any wall/material was really just not as cool in reality as it sounded.

True. For some reason Volition's map designers felt the need to take this awesome ability and limit its use so much that it seems no different from scripted stuff.

Take the first level for example. Nothing is destructible but a few walls with target marks on them and detpacks in front of them. Defeats the whole purpose of having realtime arbitrary geometry modification.

Look at it from the level designer's point of view. If you blow up a wall, then there has to be another room or building beyond it. How would you tell your story when the gamer is off blowing up walls and buildings? It would be impossible to design any sort of mission to progress the plot.

There have to be limits of what can and cannot be blown up, simply to force the gamer to continue the game. Otherwise, you'll end up with a level where everything is destructable, but without a real point... Hmm... like the overrated Grand Theft Auto 3 (and Vice City).

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Electrode

Originally posted by: Skoorb
RedFaction's ...grr I can't remember what it was called

GeoMod

ability to blow up any wall/material was really just not as cool in reality as it sounded.

True. For some reason Volition's map designers felt the need to take this awesome ability and limit its use so much that it seems no different from scripted stuff.

Take the first level for example. Nothing is destructible but a few walls with target marks on them and detpacks in front of them. Defeats the whole purpose of having realtime arbitrary geometry modification.

Look at it from the level designer's point of view. If you blow up a wall, then there has to be another room or building beyond it. How would you tell your story when the gamer is off blowing up walls and buildings? It would be impossible to design any sort of mission to progress the plot.

There have to be limits of what can and cannot be blown up, simply to force the gamer to continue the game. Otherwise, you'll end up with a level where everything is destructable, but without a real point... Hmm... like the overrated Grand Theft Auto 3 (and Vice City).

Nah, designers merely have to think outside the box. GTa3 aside look at real life. Let's say you're a special forces guy. You have the ability to blow up anything you want and you're acting within the confines of real life. And yet of course you can be given am ission and you have to simply play it out according to real life instead of a highly scripted game. Redfaction was a step in the right direction, but it was just executed poorly and we're not ready for it yet. Future games will certainly incorporate its sort of idea and others too.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: KnightBreedThe time of "revolutionary" video games is gone. Just about everything has been done in some form or another.

In a way you're right...we now have 3d and better and better graphics/physics. So things are evolutionary. However, there is still a major thing to be done - full surround 360 degree view. Kind of like virtual reality, but it actually doesn't look like crap.

Also if you note the physical differences between our life and a video game you'll see that there is still a gargantuan amount of reality that video games lack. Even the impressive physics in HL are nothing compared to the intriciate impressions we can leave on things in real life. There is only so much one can script into a game and it takes increasing amounts of CPU power to handle them. Perhaps AI will be needed to really pound out all the logic for true physical interaction and we're still a good number of years away from "close" to real life physics and a pretty good graphical knockoff from real life.

You are 100% correct! In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that brings out "virtual reality," while the rest of the industry is struggling with Quake3-level graphics. In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that simulates a realtime lighting and physics engine that is indistinguishable from real life, while the rest of the industry is struggling to make a lightswitch turn a bulb on and off.

The quality of video games is an evolutionary process that follows closely behind new hardware advancements. As systems get faster, games get better looking and better playing.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: KnightBreedThe time of "revolutionary" video games is gone. Just about everything has been done in some form or another.

In a way you're right...we now have 3d and better and better graphics/physics. So things are evolutionary. However, there is still a major thing to be done - full surround 360 degree view. Kind of like virtual reality, but it actually doesn't look like crap.

Also if you note the physical differences between our life and a video game you'll see that there is still a gargantuan amount of reality that video games lack. Even the impressive physics in HL are nothing compared to the intriciate impressions we can leave on things in real life. There is only so much one can script into a game and it takes increasing amounts of CPU power to handle them. Perhaps AI will be needed to really pound out all the logic for true physical interaction and we're still a good number of years away from "close" to real life physics and a pretty good graphical knockoff from real life.

You are 100% correct! In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that brings out "virtual reality," while the rest of the industry is struggling with Quake3-level graphics. In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that simulates a realtime lighting and physics engine that is indistinguishable from real life, while the rest of the industry is struggling to make a lightswitch turn a bulb on and off.

The quality of video games is an evolutionary process that follows closely behind new hardware advancements. As systems get faster, games get better looking and better playing.

You'll(We'll) be waiting a long time(many years), before games have life like physics. Hell, we are a long way away from life like graphics in real time too, and life life physics will come a long while after that. Dont forget about AI.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Electrode

Originally posted by: Skoorb
RedFaction's ...grr I can't remember what it was called

GeoMod

ability to blow up any wall/material was really just not as cool in reality as it sounded.

True. For some reason Volition's map designers felt the need to take this awesome ability and limit its use so much that it seems no different from scripted stuff.

Take the first level for example. Nothing is destructible but a few walls with target marks on them and detpacks in front of them. Defeats the whole purpose of having realtime arbitrary geometry modification.

Look at it from the level designer's point of view. If you blow up a wall, then there has to be another room or building beyond it. How would you tell your story when the gamer is off blowing up walls and buildings? It would be impossible to design any sort of mission to progress the plot.

There have to be limits of what can and cannot be blown up, simply to force the gamer to continue the game. Otherwise, you'll end up with a level where everything is destructable, but without a real point... Hmm... like the overrated Grand Theft Auto 3 (and Vice City).

Nah, designers merely have to think outside the box. GTa3 aside look at real life. Let's say you're a special forces guy. You have the ability to blow up anything you want and you're acting within the confines of real life. And yet of course you can be given am ission and you have to simply play it out according to real life instead of a highly scripted game. Redfaction was a step in the right direction, but it was just executed poorly and we're not ready for it yet. Future games will certainly incorporate its sort of idea and others too.

The GeoMod feature was toted as the next BigThing? in gaming, but I think Volition realized their vision of an entirely destructable world was detracting from their ultimate of goal of telling a story. Thus they pulled back a bit and used the technology sparingly, and I agree poorly.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: KnightBreedThe time of "revolutionary" video games is gone. Just about everything has been done in some form or another.

In a way you're right...we now have 3d and better and better graphics/physics. So things are evolutionary. However, there is still a major thing to be done - full surround 360 degree view. Kind of like virtual reality, but it actually doesn't look like crap.

Also if you note the physical differences between our life and a video game you'll see that there is still a gargantuan amount of reality that video games lack. Even the impressive physics in HL are nothing compared to the intriciate impressions we can leave on things in real life. There is only so much one can script into a game and it takes increasing amounts of CPU power to handle them. Perhaps AI will be needed to really pound out all the logic for true physical interaction and we're still a good number of years away from "close" to real life physics and a pretty good graphical knockoff from real life.

You are 100% correct! In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that brings out "virtual reality," while the rest of the industry is struggling with Quake3-level graphics. In my eyes, a revolutionary game would be one that simulates a realtime lighting and physics engine that is indistinguishable from real life, while the rest of the industry is struggling to make a lightswitch turn a bulb on and off.

The quality of video games is an evolutionary process that follows closely behind new hardware advancements. As systems get faster, games get better looking and better playing.

You'll(We'll) be waiting a long time(many years), before games have life like physics. Hell, we are a long way away from life like graphics in real time too, and life life physics will come a long while after that. Dont forget about AI.

Well, that's exactly my point. You won't see a revolutionary jump to "reallife." There will be several steps inbetween the crappy graphics and what's considered real life graphics. HL2 is simply one of those steps. Hopefully it'll be a step that doesn't suck.