Galaxy can "proudly stand next to the Best-looking 360 and PS3 games"

  • 177 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for bulletmath
bulletmath

1339

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#151 bulletmath
Member since 2007 • 1339 Posts

I was talking about the graphics. SMG has great art, but not great graphics.

manningbowl135

Ratchet has much smoother/better graphics but overall mario galaxy looks nicer and like a far better game. Ratchet and Clank seems almost identical to the PS2 games, it'll be lucky to get AAA

Avatar image for teuf_
Teuf_

30805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#152 Teuf_
Member since 2004 • 30805 Posts

Nice try. Sure, 10 line of code to say, make the basic effect of gravity, but you say like omg Gravity code, game done.

You failed to see that way the gravity in galaxy works is the object with the greatest gravitational pull, also based on distance is the object mario will fall towards. That alone is at least 2-3 seperate systems working together in order to produce the effect of gravity...

Gravity depends on many other factors in even a simple game. Landing and chaning animations and current player state (assuming a finite state machine) is a part of making sure graivty works correctly.

I don't consider the code that moves an object down to a platform alone the full gravity system...

ssbfalco


Sorry dude, but I think youre getting off point. Thinks like handling the landing animation are completely orthagonal to how you handle your gravity forces, and such things have been implemented in 3D games since we've had 3D games. You guys were talking about the "gravity effects" and whether or not they should be considered impressive, and like I've already shown its a very simple problem that can be handled with a for loop and a little vector arithmetic. The actual result may look complex because mario may weave between planets in a way that looks very complex and non-linear, but actually implementing it is a simple matter of using the governing physics equation and summing your forces.
Avatar image for Shinobishyguy
Shinobishyguy

22928

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#153 Shinobishyguy
Member since 2006 • 22928 Posts
[QUOTE="agentfred"]

I don't get it.

You flaunt SMG's graphics here, but if I were to post images of mgs4, crysis, etc. You would claim graphics don't matter. Sheep are capable of a complete ideological 180, instantly, how?

coreygames

Or maybe, cows and lems make it their duty to flaunt their graphical superiority everday in our face. So, when we do get a game that has beautiful graphics in it, despite what they are saying, we should just keep it to ourselves? No! Wwe should stick it in their faces. Making threads with GT Pro and Crusin saying 'this is the best it can do' when there are obviously better looking games for it. And now, when we do try to show off our good looking games, despite them being lacking compared to the other console's best, you turn it back on us like we are you guys. Has anyone in this thread said that the graphics MAKE Mario? I doubt it. Mario games always have tight controls, a good plot, and great level design. How often do you hear people say, "Mario 64 looked so good, no wonder it was a great game." I doubt you have ever heard that. Post your pics of MGS4 and Crysis, but when you make claims on the gameplay based off of the pictures, then you are overstepping your boundaries. Stop trying to put words in our moths.

plot...in a mario game?

lol wut

I agree with the other two things and the level design in mario galaxy looks superb.....but plot has never been mario's strengh

Avatar image for ssbfalco
ssbfalco

1970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#154 ssbfalco
Member since 2005 • 1970 Posts

[QUOTE="ssbfalco"]

10 lines of code for gravity... HAH! For a basic 2d flash game maybe, and that wouldn't be smooth or any good at all...
Teufelhuhn


Actually...that's about all you need. It's nothing complex at all. You could do it with something like this (roughly):



actually it should be mario.acceleration += marioToPlanet * a but whatever.

Oh fine, write more efficent code than I do... (crap that's simpler than the gravitational fields to affect ithe in game gravity similar to galaxy (but more complex) that I was experimenting with...)

*edit* I was about to say HAH! Air resistance! But that would be pushing it a bit out of context... That and mario doesn't need to skydive, or change shape...

Avatar image for coreygames
coreygames

5027

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#155 coreygames
Member since 2005 • 5027 Posts
[QUOTE="coreygames"][QUOTE="agentfred"]

I don't get it.

You flaunt SMG's graphics here, but if I were to post images of mgs4, crysis, etc. You would claim graphics don't matter. Sheep are capable of a complete ideological 180, instantly, how?

Shinobishyguy

Or maybe, cows and lems make it their duty to flaunt their graphical superiority everday in our face. So, when we do get a game that has beautiful graphics in it, despite what they are saying, we should just keep it to ourselves? No! Wwe should stick it in their faces. Making threads with GT Pro and Crusin saying 'this is the best it can do' when there are obviously better looking games for it. And now, when we do try to show off our good looking games, despite them being lacking compared to the other console's best, you turn it back on us like we are you guys. Has anyone in this thread said that the graphics MAKE Mario? I doubt it. Mario games always have tight controls, a good plot, and great level design. How often do you hear people say, "Mario 64 looked so good, no wonder it was a great game." I doubt you have ever heard that. Post your pics of MGS4 and Crysis, but when you make claims on the gameplay based off of the pictures, then you are overstepping your boundaries. Stop trying to put words in our moths.

plot...in a mario game?

lol wut

I agree with the other two things and the level design in mario galaxy looks superb.....but plot has never been mario's strengh

I'm sure that if we went through every mario game, you could tell me the story because they were memorable. Granted, the first games didn't have a lot of room for a complex storyline, but it was still good for the times. Especially if you look at Mario 3, the Paper Marios, Mario RPG, Sunshine, and I'm sure Galaxy will be great. Sure it's not his "strength", but they aren't bad either.
Avatar image for teuf_
Teuf_

30805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#156 Teuf_
Member since 2004 • 30805 Posts


[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="ssbfalco"]

10 lines of code for gravity... HAH! For a basic 2d flash game maybe, and that wouldn't be smooth or any good at all...
ssbfalco


Actually...that's about all you need. It's nothing complex at all. You could do it with something like this (roughly):



actually it should be mario.acceleration += marioToPlanet * a but whatever.





Oh fine, write more efficent code than I do... (crap that's simpler than the gravitational fields to affect in game gravity thing I was experimenting with...)



Well you know, I'm just that awesome. :P

Also that little snippet assumes you have a vector ****defined that can handle addition with another vector and multiplication with a scalar. Without those, there would be more code as you'd need to multiply and add each component of the vector seperately.
Avatar image for manningbowl135
manningbowl135

7457

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#157 manningbowl135
Member since 2006 • 7457 Posts
[QUOTE="manningbowl135"]

I was talking about the graphics. SMG has great art, but not great graphics.

bulletmath

Ratchet has much smoother/better graphics but overall mario galaxy looks nicer and like a far better game. Ratchet and Clank seems almost identical to the PS2 games, it'll be lucky to get AAA

It may look nicer to you, but that doesn't prove anything about wii's capabilities. All it shows is that a game 10 years in developement under the greatest designer ever has done absolutely stunning art and made a game that looks absolutely fantastic. That's what happens when you're getting nitpicked by Miyamoto for 10 years. Great art in a game doesn't mean wii is capable of graphics like these, especially in games like CoD (which is not for the wii anyway) or any other games that rely on realistic graphics to enhance realism and therefore enhance gameplay.

Avatar image for haziqonfire
haziqonfire

36392

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 22

User Lists: 0

#158 haziqonfire
Member since 2005 • 36392 Posts
[QUOTE="nintendofreak_2"][QUOTE="therealmcc0y"]

The wii is a joke next to what the PS3 and 360 can do

Go home

Franco-J

I'm sure :roll:

Its true. Wii is not near in the same class as 360 or PS3. Its cheap, thats why it sells, but its for kiddie games, and people who dont game much/like games without much challenge. I could only see waving that little controller around for a while before getting bored and doing some real gaming on 360...


First off i doubt you've ever played a Wii, considering not all games make you just wave the controller around. Secondly, little kids? If anything, the Wii has games that range from E - M. Manhunt 2 is a prime example of a mature title. No More heroes is another one. Anyway, if all you can do is play games based on their ratings, your missing out on some great games..
Avatar image for dracula_16
dracula_16

16572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#159 dracula_16
Member since 2005 • 16572 Posts

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

Avatar image for ssbfalco
ssbfalco

1970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#160 ssbfalco
Member since 2005 • 1970 Posts

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

dracula_16

Soo... how many times has IGN lost it's credibility?

Avatar image for Pro_wrestler
Pro_wrestler

7880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#161 Pro_wrestler
Member since 2002 • 7880 Posts

[QUOTE="ssbfalco"]

10 lines of code for gravity... HAH! For a basic 2d flash game maybe, and that wouldn't be smooth or any good at all...
Teufelhuhn


Actually...that's about all you need. It's nothing complex at all. You could do it with something like this (roughly):



actually it should be mario.acceleration += marioToPlanet * a but whatever.

LMAO! This is the funniest yet most ironic unintentional ownage in SW! I'm of course talking about "mario.pos." Mario.PeiceOfSh*t.

Avatar image for bulletmath
bulletmath

1339

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#162 bulletmath
Member since 2007 • 1339 Posts


It may look nicer to you, but that doesn't prove anything about wii's capabilities. All it shows is that a game 10 years in developement under the greatest designer ever has done absolutely stunning art and made a game that looks absolutely fantastic. That's what happens when you're getting nitpicked by Miyamoto for 10 years. Great art in a game doesn't mean wii is capable of graphics like these, especially in games like CoD (which is not for the wii anyway) or any other games that rely on realistic graphics to enhance realism and therefore enhance gameplay.

manningbowl135


It proves that the Wii is capable of good looking games. Not by "gamecube standards" by "anyones standards" It also proves that the developers imagination is more important than horsepower in many cases (which is why Mario Galaxy looks much more fan than Ratchet

As for more realistic graphics i'm not naive enough to think that it it'll match 360/PS3 graphics. But i do think it's capable of XBox 1 graphics, and some of those games looked good enough for me (see below)



Avatar image for coltonnaslund
coltonnaslund

3793

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#163 coltonnaslund
Member since 2005 • 3793 Posts

In the next 2 years I will probably be spending easily over $1000 in GAMES ALONE

why do Wii games look SOO good!!!

Avatar image for dracula_16
dracula_16

16572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#164 dracula_16
Member since 2005 • 16572 Posts
[QUOTE="dracula_16"]

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

ssbfalco

Soo... how many times has IGN lost it's credibility?

This is the first time. IGN's credibility has slowly gone downhill, let me explain:

They gave Hour of Victory a 5.7 which is much, MUCH too high.

They gave God Hand a 3.0 I believe

They also gaveGod of War GOTY over RE4

So those 3 mistakes plus this means I'll never trust them again.

Avatar image for ssbfalco
ssbfalco

1970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#165 ssbfalco
Member since 2005 • 1970 Posts
[QUOTE="ssbfalco"][QUOTE="dracula_16"]

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

dracula_16

Soo... how many times has IGN lost it's credibility?

This is the first time. IGN's credibility has slowly gone downhill, let me explain:

They gave Hour of Victory a 5.7 which is much, MUCH too high.

They gave God Hand a 3.0 I believe

They also gaveGod of War GOTY over RE4

So those 3 mistakes plus this means I'll never trust them again.

But I thought God of War was better than RE 4...

*Connect to XBLA. Downloading: Flame Shield... 1%... 2%...*

Avatar image for RobbieH1234
RobbieH1234

7464

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#166 RobbieH1234
Member since 2005 • 7464 Posts
[QUOTE="ssbfalco"][QUOTE="dracula_16"]

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

dracula_16

Soo... how many times has IGN lost it's credibility?

This is the first time. IGN's credibility has slowly gone downhill, let me explain:

They gave Hour of Victory a 5.7 which is much, MUCH too high.

They gave God Hand a 3.0 I believe

They also gaveGod of War GOTY over RE4

So those 3 mistakes plus this means I'll never trust them again.

They also gave Jade Empire a 9.9.
Avatar image for MARIOSDAD_basic
MARIOSDAD_basic

1067

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#167 MARIOSDAD_basic
Member since 2002 • 1067 Posts

Wasn't Miyamoto one of the people who helped develop the Wii? Even if he's not, he's basically nintendo to some people. Mario is his baby. Galaxy by him probably takes advantage of every single thing the wii is capable of doing. This may be a title that is this good looking b/c it pushes the wii to the limit. 360 or PS3 haven't even come close to that level yet. This is just speculation of course, but the disparity b/n galaxy graphics to every other game (yes even SSBB and MP3) maybe shows this is the greatest wii has to offer. manningbowl135

Using your logic PS3 is also maxed out because it launched at the same time as Wii. and 360 maxed out at gears because thats still the best looking game on Xbox 360 .... Hey i think you're onto something :| seriously NO console can be MAXED out after only 9 months.

Avatar image for ReverieDLM
ReverieDLM

1891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#168 ReverieDLM
Member since 2004 • 1891 Posts
Apparently most of the people in this thread have never taken a lesson in debating, because the number of straw man agruments flying around here is rediculous. Let's list some things that this discussion is *not* predicated on that keep coming up: - Whether SMG looks good on its own - Whether or not it will be a good game - Whether a blind person would immediately notice the difference between SMG and other games This discussion is predicated entirely on the false assertion by the article that SMG is in the same graphical arena as games on 360 and PS3. It is NOT. Period. That doesn't mean that it doesn't still look good, or that it won't be a great game. It simply means that it is NOT as graphically advanced, not by a long shot, as titles on other next gen consoles. This is because it *cannot* be. The Wii is vastly less powerful than the other consoles, and thus many aspects of the graphics must necessarily suffer, relative to games on more powerful hardware, as a result. There is no argument to be made that shows SMG is as graphically advanced as something like Viva Pinata because IT ISN'T. End of story.
Avatar image for VideoGameGuy
VideoGameGuy

7695

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#169 VideoGameGuy
Member since 2002 • 7695 Posts
IMO some of the best looking PS3 and 360 games are also the most colorless, SMG in comparison is probably one of the brightest, most colorful games i've seen yet this gen. I have a feeling that the 360 and PS3 can't display alot of colors when games are very graphic heavy...just something ive noticed.
Avatar image for shaggymcp
shaggymcp

2896

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#170 shaggymcp
Member since 2003 • 2896 Posts
..... Any sheep that tries to compare SMG to the likes of the graphical offerings of the 360, PS3 or the PC = a total joke :lol:
Avatar image for d_garza2242
d_garza2242

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#171 d_garza2242
Member since 2006 • 54 Posts
watch out wit that guy
Avatar image for Shinobishyguy
Shinobishyguy

22928

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#172 Shinobishyguy
Member since 2006 • 22928 Posts
[QUOTE="ssbfalco"][QUOTE="dracula_16"]

Well there goes IGN's credibility. :lol:

dracula_16

Soo... how many times has IGN lost it's credibility?

This is the first time. IGN's credibility has slowly gone downhill, let me explain:

They gave Hour of Victory a 5.7 which is much, MUCH too high.

They gave God Hand a 3.0 I believe

They also gaveGod of War GOTY over RE4

So those 3 mistakes plus this means I'll never trust them again.

All sites have their share of "off" reviews.

GS for instance

THPS3 10

LOZ: MM 8.3

Mario kart 64 6.4

warioware 9.1

TP 8.8

etc etc etc...

Avatar image for ReverieDLM
ReverieDLM

1891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#173 ReverieDLM
Member since 2004 • 1891 Posts
Nice try. Sure, 10 line of code to say, make the basic effect of gravity, but you say like omg Gravity code, game done. You failed to see that way the gravity in galaxy works is the object with the greatest gravitational pull, also based on distance is the object mario will fall towards. That alone is at least 2-3 seperate systems working together in order to produce the effect of gravity... Gravity depends on many other factors in even a simple game. Landing and chaning animations and current player state (assuming a finite state machine) is a part of making sure graivty works correctly. I don't consider the code that moves an object down to a platform alone the full gravity system... ssbfalco
I don't think you understand what gravity is. Gravity is a force along a vector. One of a large number of forces that are calculated when moving an object in a game (provided it has actual physics). Here's basically how it works: - For each dynamic object in the scene, calculate the force applied on the object from other objects in the scene. This includes: - Objects that have collided with it - Gravity - Other effects (static/kinetic friction from moving walkways, blasts of air, whatever) - Multiply this force by the time slice and add to the current velocity vector to determine what distance the object should move during the frame, and the amount of force on it - Attempt to move the object, if it would collide with another object, first calculate the above two for the object(s) that it would hit to determine the transfer of momentum, and thus the proper final location for the object. Now do you understand why gravity is trivial? It's just a force, and it is one of many that contributes to the movement of the object. How you animate the object once forces have been appplied to it is irrelevent, because you have to animate the object in some way regardless of what physics are involved in its movement.
Avatar image for peaceful_anger
peaceful_anger

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#174 peaceful_anger
Member since 2007 • 2568 Posts
To all the 360/PS3 fanboys saying SMG looks like crap, I better start hearing the same thing about Eternal Sonata and Disgaea 3 from yall as well then. Both those games look like crap compaired to the graphic standards on the 360/PS3. I mean Eternal Sonata looks like it could run on the Wii and Disgaea 3 looks like an early PS2 game or even a PS1 game. So please, start hating on those game since graphics are all that matter to yall.
Avatar image for ReverieDLM
ReverieDLM

1891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#175 ReverieDLM
Member since 2004 • 1891 Posts
IMO some of the best looking PS3 and 360 games are also the most colorless, SMG in comparison is probably one of the brightest, most colorful games i've seen yet this gen. I have a feeling that the 360 and PS3 can't display alot of colors when games are very graphic heavy...just something ive noticed.VideoGameGuy
Kameo and Viva Pinata are two of the most graphically sophisticated games on 360, and they are extremely colorful. R&C4 on PS3 is another good example of a graphically advanced game that is very colorful. While it is true that you can do more with a more limited color palette with some renderers (for example, you can trade color range or depth and use those bits to carry things like material properties). The reason for using muted palettes is generally because it reduces contrast, which helps to hide other graphical flaws. For example, the environment textures in the KZ2 demo were mostly nothing to write home about, but their lack doesn't stand out because of the muted color palette.
Avatar image for deactivated-5e836a855beb2
deactivated-5e836a855beb2

95573

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#176 deactivated-5e836a855beb2
Member since 2005 • 95573 Posts
To all the 360/PS3 fanboys saying SMG looks like crap, I better start hearing the same thing about Eternal Sonata and Disgaea 3 from yall as well then. Both those games look like crap compaired to the graphic standards on the 360/PS3. I mean Eternal Sonata looks like it could run on the Wii and Disgaea 3 looks like an early PS2 game or even a PS1 game. So please, start hating on those game since graphics are all that matter to yall.peaceful_anger
I actually think Eternal Sonata looks very much like a (very) upgraded Chrono Cross.
Avatar image for Kaze_no_Mirai
Kaze_no_Mirai

11763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#177 Kaze_no_Mirai
Member since 2004 • 11763 Posts

I don't get it.

You flaunt SMG's graphics here, but if I were to post images of mgs4, crysis, etc. You would claim graphics don't matter. Sheep are capable of a complete ideological 180, instantly, how?

agentfred

Its just make fanboys stop saying that the Wii's graphics are trash. They may not be as important but it ALWAYS come up.

Avatar image for kingyotoX
kingyotoX

2689

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#178 kingyotoX
Member since 2007 • 2689 Posts

Yet another glowing preview of Super Mario Galaxy! Its from IGN, but it's not from Matt or Bozon. Here are some quotes from it!

"This is one Wii game that can proudly stand next to the best-looking Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 games."

"The gravity effects are really impressive and you'll find Mario is pulled towards whichever heavenly body he is closest to."

"The camera is very smart and zooms after Mario wherever he goes. One wonders if the open space environment of Galaxy was a means of dealing with that pesky camera, one of the few complaints that can be made of Mario 64."

"We could go on and on about Super Mario Galaxy, but you really only need to know one thing: it's awesome."

Wow, good stuff! Can't WAIT for this game! :D

kansasdude2009

woo hoo I can't wait

Avatar image for WongB
WongB

1701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#179 WongB
Member since 2004 • 1701 Posts
Overall, visually pleasing but still does not compete with what Xbox and PS3 can deliver. Not to say it won't be a good game though.
Avatar image for ssbfalco
ssbfalco

1970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#180 ssbfalco
Member since 2005 • 1970 Posts

[QUOTE="ssbfalco"]Nice try. Sure, 10 line of code to say, make the basic effect of gravity, but you say like omg Gravity code, game done. You failed to see that way the gravity in galaxy works is the object with the greatest gravitational pull, also based on distance is the object mario will fall towards. That alone is at least 2-3 seperate systems working together in order to produce the effect of gravity... Gravity depends on many other factors in even a simple game. Landing and chaning animations and current player state (assuming a finite state machine) is a part of making sure graivty works correctly. I don't consider the code that moves an object down to a platform alone the full gravity system... ReverieDLM
I don't think you understand what gravity is. Gravity is a force along a vector. One of a large number of forces that are calculated when moving an object in a game (provided it has actual physics). Here's basically how it works: - For each dynamic object in the scene, calculate the force applied on the object from other objects in the scene. This includes: - Objects that have collided with it - Gravity - Other effects (static/kinetic friction from moving walkways, blasts of air, whatever) - Multiply this force by the time slice and add to the current velocity vector to determine what distance the object should move during the frame, and the amount of force on it - Attempt to move the object, if it would collide with another object, first calculate the above two for the object(s) that it would hit to determine the transfer of momentum, and thus the proper final location for the object. Now do you understand why gravity is trivial? It's just a force, and it is one of many that contributes to the movement of the object. How you animate the object once forces have been appplied to it is irrelevent, because you have to animate the object in some way regardless of what physics are involved in its movement.

Teufelhuhn(I'll spell that name right eventually...) already showed a simple method for the gravity system, which since that post I came out of rambiling sw mode into "let me think about what I'm actually talking about" mode. It was just that recently I was messing with a crazy system that involved "generating" gravitational fields of varying strength around objects when I was fooling around with a galaxy like gravity system and have the object attracted to the strongest one based off of field strenght...

Basically, taking some stuff I went over in physics ****unncessarally overboard (based off of something a physics fanatic friend of mine said about the gravity system I told him that galaxy had...) Long story short, it kinda worked, but would be useless unless it was rewritten and done in such a way that the fields are essentially "meshes" that can be altered with something, and even then there's probably an easier way of doing it...

Normally, I'd apologize for being so rash (and braindead), but since this is systemwars I'm forced to pretend "ownage" never happened...

I tend to overcomplicate things anyway only to smack myself later realizing that there were much better ways... Stupid box, I can't tell if I'm too far inside, or too far outside...

yeah...

Avatar image for ReverieDLM
ReverieDLM

1891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#181 ReverieDLM
Member since 2004 • 1891 Posts

[QUOTE="ReverieDLM"][QUOTE="ssbfalco"]Nice try. Sure, 10 line of code to say, make the basic effect of gravity, but you say like omg Gravity code, game done. You failed to see that way the gravity in galaxy works is the object with the greatest gravitational pull, also based on distance is the object mario will fall towards. That alone is at least 2-3 seperate systems working together in order to produce the effect of gravity... Gravity depends on many other factors in even a simple game. Landing and chaning animations and current player state (assuming a finite state machine) is a part of making sure graivty works correctly. I don't consider the code that moves an object down to a platform alone the full gravity system... ssbfalco

I don't think you understand what gravity is. Gravity is a force along a vector. One of a large number of forces that are calculated when moving an object in a game (provided it has actual physics). Here's basically how it works: - For each dynamic object in the scene, calculate the force applied on the object from other objects in the scene. This includes: - Objects that have collided with it - Gravity - Other effects (static/kinetic friction from moving walkways, blasts of air, whatever) - Multiply this force by the time slice and add to the current velocity vector to determine what distance the object should move during the frame, and the amount of force on it - Attempt to move the object, if it would collide with another object, first calculate the above two for the object(s) that it would hit to determine the transfer of momentum, and thus the proper final location for the object. Now do you understand why gravity is trivial? It's just a force, and it is one of many that contributes to the movement of the object. How you animate the object once forces have been appplied to it is irrelevent, because you have to animate the object in some way regardless of what physics are involved in its movement.

Teufelhuhn(I'll spell that name right eventually...) already showed a simple method for the gravity system, which since that post I came out of rambiling sw mode into "let me think about what I'm actually talking about" mode. It was just that recently I was messing with a crazy system that involved "generating" gravitational fields of varying strength around objects when I was fooling around with a galaxy like gravity system and have the object attracted to the strongest one based off of field strenght...

Basically, taking some stuff I went over in physics ****unncessarally overboard (based off of something a physics fanatic friend of mine said about the gravity system I told him that galaxy had...) Long story short, it kinda worked, but would be useless unless it was rewritten and done in such a way that the fields are essentially "meshes" that can be altered with something, and even then there's probably an easier way of doing it...

Normally, I'd apologize for being so rash (and braindead), but since this is systemwars I'm forced to pretend "ownage" never happened...

I tend to overcomplicate things anyway only to smack myself later realizing that there were much better ways... Stupid box, I can't tell if I'm too far inside, or too far outside...

yeah...

An interesting prospect, actually. Typically, gravity calculations for objects in games are always done assuming a point mass at the center of gravity for the object that has the gravity effect on an object. The problem with this system is that it isn't necessarily accurate. For example, consider this system: ._................................_ |..|............................X|...| |..|_____________|...| |________________| Now, if your character is at position X, standing on the side, then in a typical gravity system, it would actually be pulled off of the surface and onto the floor near the center. In reality, this is probably not what would happen. Actually, in reality, the system would be unlikely to have enough gravity that it would attract you to stand on it in the first place. But let's assume that the object also has extremely high mass. In that case, there's still a pretty high likelihood that you could stand on the edge there because the gravitation forces of the rest of the mass are pretty far away and would likely not be as strong as those for the bit that you're currently standing on. Of course, the typical solution of this is fairly simple. Don't have macro-scale concave geometry :)