Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

Realistic handling & suspension on wheeled vehicles


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic
Thread Starter
Bazul14
Bazul14

    Lance Corporal

  • Members
  • 46 posts

#1

Posted 28 February 2011 - 06:28

Realistic suspension would help. I remember seeing that Moskvich picture:

Posted Image

That should complement the current sliding and drifting on most vehicles that do not have a tank's suspension.

pyronick
pyronick

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 657 posts

#2

Posted 28 February 2011 - 10:05

This needs a lot more work than just suspensions.

You'll need friction (understeer, oversteer) in the form of tyre dynamics, differential simulation, transmission (gears and their relation to cornering), torque curves, etc.

Just improving suspensions would only improve the esthetics of the game.
Posted Image
"A generation that has taken a beating is always followed by a generation that deals one."
- Otto von Bismarck

MissionCreep
MissionCreep

    Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 586 posts

#3

Posted 01 March 2011 - 20:36

Plus if vehicle performance was realistic, huge areas of the map would be inaccessible to most vehicles. Traction, soft surfaces, ground clearance would come into play. Imagine making evasive maneuvers under fire offroad and blowing out your suspension in the middle of a killzone. I know its supposed to be a simulation, but as a player you'd be pissed for sure.

CMB Unit 01
CMB Unit 01

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 395 posts

#4

Posted 01 March 2011 - 21:17

Would be very nice to see, but not something I'd expect for a while. We'll have to see what BIS are up to ;)

pyronick
pyronick

    Master Sergeant

  • Members
  • 657 posts

#5

Posted 01 March 2011 - 21:57

Plus if vehicle performance was realistic, huge areas of the map would be inaccessible to most vehicles. Traction, soft surfaces, ground clearance would come into play. Imagine making evasive maneuvers under fire offroad and blowing out your suspension in the middle of a killzone. I know its supposed to be a simulation, but as a player you'd be pissed for sure.

You'd surely be able to move faster than the current situation.
There aren't enough ditches in ArmA 2 maps to break an axle or the undercarriage, unless you are doing 90 mph/120kph and hit a ditch.

Only accelerating on soft terrain in road cars would be very slow. Maybe even impossible uphill.
Posted Image
"A generation that has taken a beating is always followed by a generation that deals one."
- Otto von Bismarck

Pulverizer
Pulverizer

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1240 posts

#6

Posted 03 March 2011 - 19:03

I think the physics engine already simulates bumpiness of terrain types. Even when the grid is 50 meters or whatever the vehicles bounce on certain terrain. Like a repeating bump-map pattern but for physics instead of gfx.

Big Dawg KS
Big Dawg KS

    Captain

  • Members
  • 6363 posts

#7

Posted 03 March 2011 - 19:46

So basically you want cars that lean when they turn? IMO, that's not very realistic. Like a lot of things, I think this is one of those things that is overdramatized in movies and games these days.

It also does nothing to enhance the gameplay. This isn't a racing game or anything.
VBS Designer

I like to call Arma a sandbox game that works pretty much like LEGO - you buy it not just because you want to have a nice car from the main picture on its box, do you?


-=Grunt=-
-=Grunt=-

    Staff Sergeant

  • Members
  • 212 posts

#8

Posted 03 March 2011 - 19:53

The guy in the car kinda looks like Vin Diesel lol.

And yeah, I agree that a better vehicle suspension and traction system would be nice... Oh and I hope BIS fixes the ATV in the next patch.

EDIT: Hitting a small bump and your tires blowing up or your vehicle flipping into the air isn't really nice.

wipman
wipman

    Chief Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 3157 posts

#9

Posted 03 March 2011 - 21:49

Hi, i've the impression that many if not most of the vehicles on the ArmA2 don't have their real weight and i think that this could have something to do with the vehicles handling ingame; aside of the fact that some vehicles seem to have chewing gum suspensions. Let's C ya

Defunkt
Defunkt

    Warrant Officer

  • Members
  • 2254 posts

#10

Posted 03 March 2011 - 22:42

This isn't a racing game or anything.

Agreed, it's slightly tedious to see endless threads by people who I can only assume suppose their $50 entitled them to DCS: Black Shark, Falcon 4.0, Steel Beasts Pro and now rFactor in a single box. ArmA couldn't exist if it had to provide such fidelity across its entire simulation (price would go up and audience would go down) and evaluated in that context the wheeled vehicle handling is already very well done IMO. Fortunately and very importantly BIS have also provided us with a ton of modability to flesh out the parts we might wish were more detailed.

Thread Starter
Bazul14
Bazul14

    Lance Corporal

  • Members
  • 46 posts

#11

Posted 04 March 2011 - 04:21

Yo, there is VBS2 that probably has all what you said and a lot more. But some implementations in arma2 would not be bad either, especially when they can be moved from VBS2 with only some modifications. As for cars, well they can go a lot of places, even without the ability of climbing 80* hills. Actually, changing that would make players think twice about the routes they take. It is not like they must do that or that. Making a game harder and more realistic does not automatically mean making it less fun.

coopr
coopr

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 88 posts

#12

Posted 04 March 2011 - 12:23

Yo, there is VBS2 that probably has all what you said and a lot more. But some implementations in arma2 would not be bad either, especially when they can be moved from VBS2 with only some modifications. As for cars, well they can go a lot of places, even without the ability of climbing 80* hills. Actually, changing that would make players think twice about the routes they take. It is not like they must do that or that. Making a game harder and more realistic does not automatically mean making it less fun.


+1 :)

Posted Image


stk2008
stk2008

    Sergeant Major

  • Members
  • 1504 posts

#13

Posted 04 March 2011 - 13:37

"Making a game harder and more realistic does not automatically mean making it less fun."

I like this and agree this is what ARMA is all about to me any ways a simulation.

Big Dawg KS
Big Dawg KS

    Captain

  • Members
  • 6363 posts

#14

Posted 04 March 2011 - 13:56

Yo, there is VBS2 that probably has all what you said and a lot more. But some implementations in arma2 would not be bad either, especially when they can be moved from VBS2 with only some modifications.


This has been discussed to death. It's a poor justification to say that VBS features would be easily implemented in ArmA 2. Honestly, if you want all of the bells and whistles of VBS2 then you should expect to pay that kind of price.
VBS Designer

I like to call Arma a sandbox game that works pretty much like LEGO - you buy it not just because you want to have a nice car from the main picture on its box, do you?


Pulverizer
Pulverizer

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1240 posts

#15

Posted 04 March 2011 - 16:47

Well they did improve aircraft physics quite a bit from Flashpoint to Arma after all, so this isn't asking for the impossible. Similar upgrade could be done to land vehicles.

No one's asking for hardcore racing simulation driving physics. Just get the fucking basics about right, so that driving would be fun and functional instead of horrible and surreal.

Big Dawg KS
Big Dawg KS

    Captain

  • Members
  • 6363 posts

#16

Posted 04 March 2011 - 16:52

Just get the fucking basics about right, so that driving would be fun and functional instead of horrible and surreal.


That's the problem. Nobody will ever agree on what the "basics" are, and everyone will have their own (correct or not) ideas of the level of fidelity that should be in the game. For example, I personally feel that the driving is pretty good as it is. There is room for slight improvement, but there's nothing fundementally flawed as you would seem to suggest.
VBS Designer

I like to call Arma a sandbox game that works pretty much like LEGO - you buy it not just because you want to have a nice car from the main picture on its box, do you?


Pulverizer
Pulverizer

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1240 posts

#17

Posted 04 March 2011 - 17:29

I would consider the almost complete disregard of grip/friction a fundamental flaw. It just feels very, very off. Like you're on some imaginary magnetic rails, instead of being only loosely connected to the earth's surface via small partitions of four rubber wheels.

Max Power
Max Power

    Mr. Angry Face

  • Members
  • 12828 posts

#18

Posted 04 March 2011 - 18:59

Let's also consider that while OFP: DR was a game with an engine designed with racing games in mind, that their vehicle physics were also quite hilarious. Perhaps once a game gets past a certain complexity, there's a wall you hit in terms of cycles you can spend.
Posted Image
Posted Image
My inbox is fill and won't be emptied. If your PM is regarding requests to use my work, unfortunately I choose not to grant such permission. My work is for use with CWR2 only.

seamus
seamus

    Private First Class

  • Members
  • 30 posts

#19

Posted 04 March 2011 - 19:03

Its not the wheeled vehicles that get on my nerves its the tracked vehicles,why oh why when doin down a hill fast,when turning do they slide all over the place,espically tanks,and i would think tanks would go up a hill alot faster than they do in arma

Pulverizer
Pulverizer

    Master Gunnery Sergeant

  • Members
  • 1240 posts

#20

Posted 04 March 2011 - 19:41

Let's also consider that while OFP: DR was a game with an engine designed with racing games in mind, that their vehicle physics were also quite hilarious. Perhaps once a game gets past a certain complexity, there's a wall you hit in terms of cycles you can spend.


But it had to also run on consoles. DR ran at a rock solid 60 fps on my modest PC with everything maxed at 1920x1200. Ie, plenty of headroom for some more complicated driving physics.

There were driving games with satisfactory driving in the mid-90's when CPU's were like 50 times slower in instructions per second.