Re: [Algorithms] Passing on: PhD student looking for interviews on gamephysics

[Tom F. <tom...@ee...>]

Er... he should probably just subscribe to the list and lurk while we =
flame
each other.

Realistic physics is sucky. Things pinging off to infinity, bug =
databases
full of unreproducible problems, framerate aliasing all over the place,
frustrated players. Not to mention the fact that you're interacting with =
the
world with a 10-foot barge pole - if you're lucky you get to stick a =
magnet
on the end. Whereas in the real world we have hands and opposable thumbs =
and
awesome motor-feedback systems. Realistic physics gets you Trespasser =
:-(

What you want is *plausible* physics. Every game I know that has physics
that are considered good by game players started with a realistic =
physics
system and them mercilessly hacked it until it felt fun. That's not to =
say
the physics is *simple* - it is in fact far more complex than the real =
world
because it has all these special cases in it making the game fun.

TomF.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gda...@li...=20
> [mailto:gda...@li...] On=20
> Behalf Of Danny Kodicek
> Sent: 19 July 2006 14:34
> To: gda...@li...
> Subject: [Algorithms] Passing on: PhD student looking for=20
> interviews on gamephysics
>=20
>=20
> Hi, sorry to interrupt :)
>=20
> Just a quick message. I've had a contact from someone wanting=20
> to interview
> me about the philosophical issues of simplified vs realistic=20
> physics in
> games, and he asked if I knew anyone else that might be interested -
> naturally I thought of y'all. So if anyone here wants to=20
> contact him, his
> name is Andreas Schiffler: asc...@fe....
>=20
> Best
> Danny