Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Will EQN voxel-world have proper physics?

DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon

Example you have a voxel pillar - if players cut out the middle will the top fall or will it float like in most voxel games?

Or digging a hole under a patch of soil - will the patch float or fall with nothing under it?

Destructibility is awesome if physics is done right, otherwise it could get very silly.

I know the game uses voxel farm engine integrated into Forgelight, I've seen every voxel farm video on YouTube and there is no mention of physics at all.

Also there is no mention of voxel water at all.

 

«1

Comments

  • Four0SixFour0Six Missoula, MTPosts: 1,181Member Uncommon

    Best, most reasonable, and "telling" question yet.

    +1

     

    I say without it will be a JOKE. (That is being nice)

  • st3v3b0st3v3b0 Gainesville, FLPosts: 147Member Uncommon
    Didn't NVIDIA attend SOE Live during the announcement?
  • KyllienKyllien Renton, WAPosts: 315Member
    I hope so too.  But did you see the video with the Iron Golem?  If not go watch it and pay attention to the trees.
  • MarkusrindMarkusrind CrawleyPosts: 359Member
    Not sure how it will work but they did mention that if you put water down it would run downhill or sit as a puddle on the floor so it sounds like they have thought about it. How wide they have done things like that though I have no idea.
  • AmylionAmylion BerlinPosts: 38Member

    In the "EverQuest Next: Creating Worlds" panel they showed a simulation of the physics engine.

    16:45

    26:45

    Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.

    If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...

  • wizardanimwizardanim Apple Valley, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Kyllien
    I hope so too.  But did you see the video with the Iron Golem?  If not go watch it and pay attention to the trees.

    I would be surprised if trees were voxel based.  It would seem to be a horrid waste of memory to voxel-ize vegetation, static or procedural.

  • AmylionAmylion BerlinPosts: 38Member
    Originally posted by wizardanim
    Originally posted by Kyllien
    I hope so too.  But did you see the video with the Iron Golem?  If not go watch it and pay attention to the trees.

    I would be surprised if trees were voxel based.  It would seem to be a horrid waste of memory to voxel-ize vegetation, static or procedural.

    Trees are made out of voxels.

    And how could it be a waste of memory? A polygon mesh with textures is taking more RAM than the voxels...

    Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.

    If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...

  • tedgptedgp vthth, ALPosts: 33Member
    Check youtube. Theres a video from the guy who created voxelfarm showing that if you dont build buildings correctly (stress/balance etc) then they will collapse. Since the Terrain is built on the same engine and premise, you do the math.
  • wizardanimwizardanim Apple Valley, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Amylion
    Originally posted by wizardanim
    Originally posted by Kyllien
    I hope so too.  But did you see the video with the Iron Golem?  If not go watch it and pay attention to the trees.

    I would be surprised if trees were voxel based.  It would seem to be a horrid waste of memory to voxel-ize vegetation, static or procedural.

    Trees are made out of voxels.

    And how could it be a waste of memory? A polygon mesh with textures is taking more RAM than the voxels...

    Voxels are a solution to large scale world streaming, and destruction. There is no need to store volume data for trees.  The goliath video even shows that they are using mesh replacement to destroy the trees, not voxels.  Voxels are beneficial when sub-division is necessary.  In the terrain, in player housing, etc.  I am saying we probably won't see trees that will dissolve into nothing.  They will break apart.  Polygons are much more efficient from a cpu usage standpoint for this method.

    Mesh replacement is effectively identifying when something transitions state, lets say a tree from 'not broken' to 'broken'.  The tree mesh is replaced with a variety of parts.  The tree mesh is removed from the world, and the new meshes are put in.  The new meshes interact with the physics system, and can fall/collide with other objects.

    Please watch the small tree on the left in this video.  The goliath runs over it, and you notice the small tree 'pops' into a few bigger pieces.

    All the trees in the foreground are the same model.  The small tree on the left, however, is just a scaled down version of the larger trees.  You will notice a full big tree pop into existence behind the mobs arm and fall to the ground when his hand h its the small tree.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQBzDK9qdn4

  • AmylionAmylion BerlinPosts: 38Member
    Originally posted by wizardanim
    Originally posted by Amylion

    Trees are made out of voxels.

    And how could it be a waste of memory? A polygon mesh with textures is taking more RAM than the voxels...

    Voxels are a solution to large scale world streaming, and destruction. There is no need to store volume data for trees.  The goliath video even shows that they are using mesh replacement to destroy the trees, not voxels.  Voxels are beneficial when sub-division is necessary.  In the terrain, in player housing, etc.  I am saying we probably won't see trees that will dissolve into nothing.  They will break apart.  Polygons are much more efficient from a cpu usage standpoint for this method.

    Mesh replacement is effectively identifying when something transitions state, lets say a tree from 'not broken' to 'broken'.  The tree mesh is replaced with a variety of parts.  The tree mesh is removed from the world, and the new meshes are put in.  The new meshes interact with the physics system, and can fall/collide with other objects.

    Please watch the small tree on the left in this video.  The goliath runs over it, and you notice the small tree 'pops' into a few bigger pieces.

    All the trees in the foreground are the same model.  The small tree on the left, however, is just a scaled down version of the larger trees.  You will notice a full big tree pop into existence behind the mobs arm and fall to the ground when his hand h its the small tree.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQBzDK9qdn4

    Greetings!

    From watching this video I got the same impression, that the trees were "props", polygon meshes, but if I remember correctly they said in a panel that plants are made out of voxels. Sorry, I don't know where, and maybe I misunderstood it. It could have been the Crafting panel, where they said, that the whole world is made out of resources. If I remember correctly they said trees are made out of wood voxels, so you get your wood from the same voxel system, not from some distinguished polygon system.

    That was my impression. I get your points, they are valid. On the VoxelFarm page you can see that the programer specifically targeted the problem of trees (with small trunks). I also see other problems, liking animation in the wind... But it seems that they could solve it, and if they do, it makes much more sense to consistently build the world out of voxels. Very ambitious project indeed!

    The advantage of making trees out of voxels is to have the option to build tree houses. You could even set the trees on fire... and the tree houses would fall down if there is too much damage. It would look and feel more "naturally" if the same (voxel) system would account for that...

    Amylion.

    Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.

    If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    The VoxelFarm system converts between voxels and polygon meshes on the fly. It's not an either/or scenario for them, they can do both.

    In one of the videos for EQN, when the giant guy was walking through the woods, he didn't selectively smash parts of trees, the whole trees disappeared and limbs fell from where the trees were. I bet trees are models that have drops when you break them.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amylion

    In the "EverQuest Next: Creating Worlds" panel they showed a simulation of the physics engine.

    16:45

    26:45

    Again this doesn't answer my question - it shows voxels falling down only in the area that is destroyed, it doesn't show any examples of proper physics for the object collapsing because the underlying support has been destroyed.

    Example: 80% of the column being destroyed near the bottom, the remaining 20% can't support the weight and it collapses.

    I imagine this will be very hard to program - but it could lead to silly stuff where one skinny voxel column supports the entire house above it.

     

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    The VoxelFarm system converts between voxels and polygon meshes on the fly. It's not an either/or scenario for them, they can do both.

    In one of the videos for EQN, when the giant guy was walking through the woods, he didn't selectively smash parts of trees, the whole trees disappeared and limbs fell from where the trees were. I bet trees are models that have drops when you break them.

    The trees IMO were never voxels - they were always polygon meshes. They broke apart as polygons not voxels.

     

  • ltankltank Fort Myers, FLPosts: 288Member Uncommon
    I did wonder about this somewhat and also have to wonder if they simply haven't fully implemented the physics engine yet. If they did one would think the trees wouldn't just collapse in place and would instead fall over towards the keep away from the iron golem.
  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon

    To illustrate my point - I hope EQN does not allow this to happen in game (assuming the below structure is made out of stone - it should collapse) - voxel games often allow structures like this to exist.

     

  • AmylionAmylion BerlinPosts: 38Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    To illustrate my point - I hope EQN does not allow this to happen in game (assuming the below structure is made out of stone - it should collapse) - voxel games often allow structures like this to exist.

     

    1. It's not that hard to code a physics engine for a voxel system.

    2. In your example, it depends on the "glue" between the blocks. Yes, probably in "EverQuest Next" the engine will treat them as one single block by default. I guess they will save the relation of each voxel to the surrounding voxels. Then, in the editor you could "cut" the connection to others, and that may lead to what we've seen in the video, the collapse of the structure.

    Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.

    If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amylion
    Originally posted by DMKano

    To illustrate my point - I hope EQN does not allow this to happen in game (assuming the below structure is made out of stone - it should collapse) - voxel games often allow structures like this to exist.

     

    1. It's not that hard to code a physics engine for a voxel system.

    2. In your example, it depends on the "glue" between the blocks. Yes, probably in "EverQuest Next" the engine will treat them as one single block by default. I guess they will save the relation of each voxel to the surrounding voxels. Then, in the editor you could "cut" the connection to others, and that may lead to what we've seen in the video, the collapse of the structure.

    I think it's more complicated than that as you have to take into consideration balance points and tipping points, types of material that are being simulated. I doubt that the physics engine will be that sophisticated. 

  • AmylionAmylion BerlinPosts: 38Member
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Amylion

    1. It's not that hard to code a physics engine for a voxel system.

    I think it's more complicated than that as you have to take into consideration balance points and tipping points, types of material that are being simulated. I doubt that the physics engine will be that sophisticated. 

    Oh, it would not be that hard to implement, the question is, if it's worth the combined costs of implementation, testing, resources...

    I also expect that the physics engine will not tap the full potential.

    They said they want to simulate different type materials, explicitely the hardness. A reporter who was at E3 wrote that the water will behave accordingly reflecting the physical attributes of neighboring voxel tiles. So there will be some sort of physical simulation.

    But maybe even they don't know yet how far they will go... ;-)

    I would be interested too though, try to ask them on reddit! ^^

    Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.

    If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...

  • engellenengellen liberty, IAPosts: 83Member
  • AceshighhhhAceshighhhh Gainesville, FLPosts: 185Member
    Originally posted by Amylion

    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Amylion 1. It's not that hard to code a physics engine for a voxel system.

    I think it's more complicated than that as you have to take into consideration balance points and tipping points, types of material that are being simulated. I doubt that the physics engine will be that sophisticated. 

    Oh, it would not be that hard to implement, the question is, if it's worth the combined costs of implementation, testing, resources...

    I also expect that the physics engine will not tap the full potential.

    They said they want to simulate different type materials, explicitely the hardness. A reporter who was at E3 wrote that the water will behave accordingly reflecting the physical attributes of neighboring voxel tiles. So there will be some sort of physical simulation.

    But maybe even they don't know yet how far they will go... ;-)

    I would be interested too though, try to ask them on reddit! ^^

     

    I actually asked this question to the lead tech director(Steven Klug) at SOE Live and he said that the voxel engine does not have an extensive physics implementation at the moment.

    He did in fact say it would be very difficult to provide proper physics to a voxel-based engine and doesn't know of they will implement it by launch :(. He also mentioned that the trees are props.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon

    Collision detection is hard, period.  If you want physics that involves collision detection, then that physics is hard.  That's why games pretty much invariably have enormous simplifications to physics:  no matter what your character looks like, for physics purposes, you're probably either a box or a cylinder.

    To do collision detection in a game, you have several choices:

    1)  Few large, blocky, regular objects,

    2)  Physics that don't match the graphics very closely,

    3)  Very low frame rates that make the game basically unplayable, or

    4)  More than one of the above.

    3D games typically go with both (1) and (2).  To do (1) without (2) basically means that what you're allowed to draw graphically is largely dictated by what you can do physics for efficiently.

    Voxels restrict your options further.  They don't lend themselves to (1) at all unless you're going to make an incredibly blocky game world.  (Without voxels, you'd have the freedom to make cylinders, spheres, and so forth, and not just boxes.)  If you're unwilling to do that and want to avoid (3) (which basically amounts to "game doesn't work"), then you're stuck with having your physics completely ignore the voxels and do something else that is more tractable.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Amylion
    Originally posted by wizardanim
    Originally posted by Kyllien
    I hope so too.  But did you see the video with the Iron Golem?  If not go watch it and pay attention to the trees.

    I would be surprised if trees were voxel based.  It would seem to be a horrid waste of memory to voxel-ize vegetation, static or procedural.

    Trees are made out of voxels.

    And how could it be a waste of memory? A polygon mesh with textures is taking more RAM than the voxels...

    In traditional rendering, the vertex model and textures only take token amounts of system memory to keep track of which buffers the video card needs to use, outside of a brief period (tens of milliseconds) between when they are loaded from the hard drive and then deleted after being passed along to video memory.

    Video memory is the real issue, and there, it can vary wildly.  A tree is likely to have only a few textures, but use a texture many times in drawing the tree.  And if you want 50 copies of the same tree, that takes the same amount of video memory as if you only want one.  I'm not sure how you'd do it with voxels.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    First..  physics does not exist in gaming, especially a fantasy MMO..   If it did, there is no way of explaining how someone can dig 3 feet into the ground to expose a cave world underneath the size of Texas..  lol
  • ZydariZydari Fort Worth, TXPosts: 84Member
    The demo from SOE Live showed the physics engine. It showed realistic physics with things falling, crumbling and exploding the way they should. Don't think this will be a problem but also don't think it will be to sophisticated either. Simple realistic physics.

    Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.

    Thomas Jefferson

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Originally posted by Amylion

    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Amylion 1. It's not that hard to code a physics engine for a voxel system.

    I think it's more complicated than that as you have to take into consideration balance points and tipping points, types of material that are being simulated. I doubt that the physics engine will be that sophisticated. 

    Oh, it would not be that hard to implement, the question is, if it's worth the combined costs of implementation, testing, resources...

    I also expect that the physics engine will not tap the full potential.

    They said they want to simulate different type materials, explicitely the hardness. A reporter who was at E3 wrote that the water will behave accordingly reflecting the physical attributes of neighboring voxel tiles. So there will be some sort of physical simulation.

    But maybe even they don't know yet how far they will go... ;-)

    I would be interested too though, try to ask them on reddit! ^^

     

    I actually asked this question to the lead tech director(Steven Klug) at SOE Live and he said that the voxel engine does not have an extensive physics implementation at the moment.

    He did in fact say it would be very difficult to provide proper physics to a voxel-based engine and doesn't know of they will implement it by launch :(. He also mentioned that the trees are props.

     

    Thanks for the info - its what I suspected, so a tiny skinny column under a corner of a huge block will not collapse in EQN.
    I think that will kill the immersion for me.
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.