Ultra-Super-Realistic-Physics over 9000! please..

[propere 8]

hey community, hey dev-team.

I'm sorry if my english sucks a little. But I'll try my best.

If been looking for a "game" or better "simulation" of life without society for years now . so the zombie-scenario is coming real close to that what i want.

But I've never seen a game which is "real" enough, so you could probably really do anything you want.

For example: If you chopped down your pile of wood, is the only option really to make fire? Even if it would be 10 or 20 different options to choose, its still not that

what we call "Free will". Its merely playing sims in ego- or 3rd-person mode with weapon and some zombie. Personally I would chop down entire trees, use that wood

to build castles with traps >.> or tools, or decoration stuff, weapons.

Its a game about surviving and beeing creative, so it would be awesome if you could resocialize yourself ingame. Develop individual skills, invent own items (variety only bound by physical rules).

Like the world is full of zombies now, lets find a method to survive and build houses, grow vegetables, invent items.

We are human, we should be able to do anything, what we want with the environment, in-game of course ;)

If such a game would be developped with Biological/Physical and even Chemical-Rules + ZombiesApocalypsis,

as a customer i would even pay 500€ for a game, that simulates reallife in a unrealworld without government, police, industrie, modern social networksystems, without high population, just ,you know, realistic "back to the roots"simulation vs zombies.

with a really openmindedgame, people dont usually kill each other. see mindcraft. in dayz sooner or later you have to become a bandit because you're out of options suicide or boring looting till dieing. I think it would be nice, if you change the scheme itself. so instead of "survive" > "life". people wouldn't leave such a game for days and weeks anymore because you could do anything :) im really not a fan of guns tho, because its just to simple. push a button and someone dies. i mean thats so american :D so lowlifethinking. we're not soldiers spawning a zombiewar. we're human leftover civilisation fighting for survival. and yet the highest priority ingame is to carry a weapon to kill everything, because morons can't do anything else.

Bear Grills eats bugs to get Proteins and energy, build traps to gain meals. We need to go a zombie-village to gain a knife, axe and firestarters to cook some meat, which we have to hunt with a gun or an axe. Its not about making things easier, its about making things greater.

I hope you will read this and maybe develop it :)

Im a fan of:

simcity3000 & 4

sims

stranded 1 & 2 + expansions

dayz

spore

minecraft

googleearth

nature

bear grills

"the colony"

if you can combine all these flavours into a big meal, i swear to god, ill visit the devteam and give them all a blowjob :D Btw. If you can master this almost impossible request, I'm sure you get pretty famous&rich, because it would be the greatest game we've ever seen :)

Edited September 9, 2012 by propere

[Dirty Pyrex 23]

hey community, hey dev-team.

I'm sorry if my english sucks a little. But I'll try my best.

For years now, if been looking for a "game" or better "simulation" of life without society. so the zombie-scenario is coming real close to that what i want.

But I've never seen a game which is "real" enough, so you could really do anything you want.

For example: If you chopped down you pile of wood, the only option is to make fire? Even if it would be 10 or 20 different options to choose, its still not that

what we call "Free will". Its merely playing sims in ego- or 3rd-person mode with weapon and some zombie.

Its a game about surviving and beeing creative, so it would be awesome if you resocialize yourself ingame. Develop individual skills, invent own items (variety only bound by physical rules).

Like the world is full of zombies now, lets find a method to survive and build houses, grow vegetables, invent items.

We are human, we should be able to do anything, what we want with the environment, in-game of course ;)

If such a game would be developped with Biological/Physical and even Chemical-Rules + ZombiesApocalypsis,

as a customer i would even pay 500€ for a game, that simulates reallife in a unrealworld without government, police, industrie, modern social networksystems, without high population, just ,you know, realistic "back to the roots"simulation vs zombies.

Bear Grills eats bugs to get Proteins and energy, build traps to gain meals. We need to go a zombie-village to gain a knife, axe and firestarters to cook some meat, which we have to hunt with a gun or an axe. Its not about making things easier, its about making things greater.

I hope you will read this and maybe develop it :)

Im a fan of:

simcity3000 & 4

sims

stranded 1 & 2 + expansions

dayz

spore

minecraft

googleearth

nature

bear grills

"the colony"

if you can combine all these flavours into a big meal, i swear to god, ill visit the devteam and give them all a blowjob :D Btw. If you can master this almost impossible request, I'm sure you get pretty famous&rich, because it would be the greatest game we've ever seen :)

Did... what? What did I just read.

[Spart248 80]

Haven't seen something this blissfully ignorant on these forums since......well, never.

Rocket would love to do this and strives towards it. He even said in an interview regarding how far he would go with the authentism of the game and he said (roughly) "Oh yeah, I would let players die of sunburn if they sat out on the beach for too long if I could!". However, these are mostly dreams (what you are saying) simply because it would require years and years, possibly decades, to literally simulate real life in a video game. We may not even have the appropriate technology to do something like that.

Well you certainly gave me a good laugh regardless of whether you meant to or not, so thanks :)

Edited September 9, 2012 by Spart248

[twitch13 49]

plugged it into google translator and still can't understand...

[KennyNZ 121]

Would cost too much to develop. By the time it was done you'd be nearing retirement and be too old to give two fifths of fuck all anymore :D

[Uncle Gapey 16]

Way to stifle a dreaming mind, Spart. You're a good dude for talking down to him. What a champ.

Realistic or not, I'd also like to see a more authentic-to-life game, Pyrex. It would take a crazy amount of coding to allow a subfunction such as creating your own structures from chopped wood, though (remember how long it took Spore to release?). It certainly would be awesome to see, though. Some day perhaps there will be enough open source game function libraries that it will be simple to implement a Minecraft-esque building feature to an otherwise unrelated game.

[propere 8]

im sorry i cannot formulate all my thoughts in good english. i thought i mentioned it, but nvm. if you dont understand my thoughts, its kinda your mental problem. because i know what im thinking & rly dont care for trolls. anyways.

Since I'm not a developer i can not comprehend, how much time it would possibly take to code "everything". But what I understand is, that time is money. So if the development would have more money, they could

create a greater product in a shorter mount of time(using more coders, more teams etc.). I mean, what would you buy? A 15 Bugs - unfinished -wannabe-authentic game or lets really say 200 bugs for a fully deleveloped second reality, where there is no subfunction, everything you do is mainfunction! I really doubt, that it would take decades to develop such a game nowadays. xbox-kinect-style using your hands to manipulate structures or hold a knife cut that piece of wood to a spear. the tech & knowledge is there, its 2012. Just some years ago, computers were invented. Since then we made unbelievable processes. I absolutely not think that I'd be unrealistic if such a game would be released the next few years, and I'm 21 right now, if have much time to wait for my computergame ;)

"when we're old and retired" - what we do then? we grew up with computers, our parents and grandparents not. they watch tv. we play computergames, open your eyes, its future already.

Edited September 9, 2012 by propere

[Dirty Pyrex 23]

Way to stifle a dreaming mind, Spart. You're a good dude for talking down to him. What a champ.

Realistic or not, I'd also like to see a more authentic-to-life game, Pyrex. It would take a crazy amount of coding to allow a subfunction such as creating your own structures from chopped wood, though (remember how long it took Spore to release?). It certainly would be awesome to see, though. Some day perhaps there will be enough open source game function libraries that it will be simple to implement a Minecraft-esque building feature to an otherwise unrelated game.

I do remember. I also remember that Spore was a complete and total flop, and now who plays it?

I like realism too. If I wanted that intensity of realism: I'll go outside.

I like my gaming, to be frank, to involve aspects of a 'game,' and a concept like 'fun,' might emerge.

It's crazy stuff here gentlemen, but I'm pretty sure, and correct me if I'm wrong: it's a game.

[twitch13 49]

im sorry i cannot formulate all my thoughts in good english. i thought i mentioned it, but nvm. if you dont understand my thoughts, its kinda your mental problem. because i know what im thinking & rly dont care for trolls. anyways.

kekekekekeke

google translator worked on this one: "if i cannot communicate my thoughts eloquently enough for you to understand me, then you have mental issues. i know what i'm thinking and therefore you should too, even if i'm unable to present my ideas coherently."

[propere 8]

@dirty pyrex: Yes and in a game you're free to do what you want to do. and im askin for the most realistic one. outside the internet you lack resources to fulfill your wishes. ingame not, easy to understand? ;)

in games you dont have such things as bureaucratism, in realife you can't pull out a axe and chop a tree, because its violating the enviroments and laws. So you're wrong,

the intensity of realism you can actually get in realworld is below of the experience you can achieve through gaming. no im not a fat american guy with glasses. normal student,mid/west-europe with dreams and hopes. and 1 of them are the perfect games ;)

its like the question, "you take blue or the red pill?". I would rather be in matrix then in shitty realworld, except i would've enough resources to fullfill my dreams ;)

Spore was a innovative game. Nowadays its outdated. But I really liked the idea of evolution.

@twitch: congrats. you have my beans bro. but level of language does not display real penis size. but go on, try to show off.

Edited September 9, 2012 by propere

[twitch13 49]

translation: "in real life you can't run around chopping down trees indiscriminately. in a video game you can. therefore, real life isn't as real as a video game."

[propere 8]

translation: "in real life you can't run around chopping down trees indiscriminately. in a video game you can. therefore, real life isn't as real as a video game."

yeah thats exactly what you're like. im talking about limits or differences of freedom between realife and virtual experiences. and you're beeing an asshole nvm kid. i will still give you attention, even if you continue trying to twist my words.

Reallife - only 1 long life, this means you're not allowed to do certain things and you have to have some behaviour in order to keep yourself healthy in system.

games - #1 its a game

you cannot compare games with reality at all. I just thought about a better alternative then any other games, where you can "life aka play" free without any bounds.

because life is not a game, we're looking for alternatives. because life is boring sometimes, we need some fun which can be found in games. a game is just a tool for us to

life out our creative or playfull site.

Edited September 9, 2012 by propere

[Uncle Gapey 16]

I used the example of Spore because of the incredible coding talent it took to make it. You guys are saying, "Nah, if you want real go outside. This is supposed to be a realistic zombie mod t.... oh, whoops." Silly kids.

[twitch13 49]

If been looking for a "game" or better "simulation" of life without society for years now . so the zombie-scenario is coming real close to that what i want.

But I've never seen a game which is "real" enough, so you could probably really do anything you want.

So you're wrong, the intensity of realism you can actually get in realworld is below of the experience you can achieve through gaming.

you cannot compare games with reality at all.

what?

also your snide anti-american comments are adorable and endearing. smart move!

[[ZD] Insertcoins 46]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv1xuLNy4tE

[KennyNZ 121]

Where would you draw the line though?

You said you want the most real game someone can make. You want to be able to take a dump? Masturbate? If you went into the medical side of things, how many diseases would you have? All of them?

Not trying to troll, just seriously wondering where the line would be drawn in the ideal game. It's kind of impossible to include everything.

[propere 8]

is it so hard to just think of, that i get trolled? are you so simple minded? its in developers hand how detailed that game would be.

There is no line in a ideal game, thats what for example dayz trying to do. Decide yourself, what kind of game you play.

Of course it would be an big-ass-game. Without question i want the biggest game, even if it is sold for biggest price.

i can' understand, why you can't understand that :D IQ-Problems? :D

--

of course, you can set limits. You dont have to add all human-known materlials. But i want to shapeshift that material that i can see. So you can build things freely.

@twitch: your posts = troll = i dont care for you, you're kinda lowlife.

---------

i mean just imagine it. 10 guys building a house with many traps, to defend theirself against other human or zombie. instead of searching hours and hours for a good gun, go to a tree with axe and knife and build a bow or/and a spear to hunt. imply gardening-seeds, variety of flowers, trees ans bushes. Make your own cloth with materials that you find and so on. It just would be the next step.

Throw stones, learn hand-to-hand-combat, just simple things, that should be in ONE game. All those elements im talking about, are already invented or seen elsewhere. But no one has ever put all that stuff into one program, so there is no game yet. I'd love to see DayZ & WarZ would go in to that direction.

Edited September 9, 2012 by propere

[magrathea 11]

They should model physics well enough to allow you to dig a pit, put sharp spikes in the bottom and cover it with a tarpaulin covered in sticks and grass..also you should be able to cover yourself in mud and shout "they drew first blood!" while waiting for victims

I think this kind of general purpose physical simulation, good enough to allow you to create working (even simple) machines out side of a very limited context, is a great concept but outside the bounds of practical implemention in a game presently.

[Atom Quark 437]

Really do not need fancy physics I just need to be able to get a branch and use it for leverage to turn my 4-Wheeler back over.

[Spart248 80]

im sorry i cannot formulate all my thoughts in good english. i thought i mentioned it, but nvm. if you dont understand my thoughts, its kinda your mental problem. because i know what im thinking & rly dont care for trolls. anyways.

Since I'm not a developer i can not comprehend, how much time it would possibly take to code "everything". But what I understand is, that time is money. So if the development would have more money, they could

create a greater product in a shorter mount of time(using more coders, more teams etc.). I mean, what would you buy? A 15 Bugs - unfinished -wannabe-authentic game or lets really say 200 bugs for a fully deleveloped second reality, where there is no subfunction, everything you do is mainfunction! I really doubt, that it would take decades to develop such a game nowadays. xbox-kinect-style using your hands to manipulate structures or hold a knife cut that piece of wood to a spear. the tech & knowledge is there, its 2012. Just some years ago, computers were invented. Since then we made unbelievable processes. I absolutely not think that I'd be unrealistic if such a game would be released the next few years, and I'm 21 right now, if have much time to wait for my computergame ;)

"when we're old and retired" - what we do then? we grew up with computers, our parents and grandparents not. they watch tv. we play computergames, open your eyes, its future already.

1. You are not being trolled. All the responses to this thread have been serious. Learn what "to troll" means before throwing it around and making yourself look like a troll. Nobody is trolling you. Everyone has provided a real opinion or feedback that is evidently serious (the opposite of trolling), whether it is an insult, a compliment, or whatever the hell you think it is.

2. "Time" is not "Money". It doesn't work that way. To start off, frankly, there are few men on the entire Earth that could even afford to make a game as you dream of within a somewhat reasonable time limit (we'll say in the next 10 years). And that is just an estimate of the amount of time it would take to code the entire damn thing. Now, that is assuming that we have the technology to make something that advanced. To literally make a game that simulates life down to the very damned particle level would likely require technology years, if not decades, beyond where we are now. Not to mention it would probably cost a king's fortune to afford it when it is just developed, along with computers to handle it. I am no programmer, but I can certainly comprehend the scale of what you are asking. Is that "easy to understand"?

Now I am not trying to "stomp on an innocent's hopes and dreams" or any dumb shit like that. I told you in my first post, and I am telling you again that although Rocket (along with the entire community) would want a game that is as authentic and real as real life itself as you say, it is just not plausible, nor will it be for quite a long time.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Spart248

[burtondrummerNY 3]

bear grills

"the colony"

You have my beans sir

[apache25 133]

wow all the comments i see are against propere give the guy some respect these are good ideas

[Rastamaus 323]

there is a game, a great game out there with real world physics, retina resolution graphics and every atom and photon and star in the universe is represented accurately - it's called reality and you don't need a 6 billion dollar super computer to run it, unfortunately no zombies so far....

[apache25 133]

that maker of this thread does not use dollars he uses euros

Edited September 9, 2012 by apache25

[doom4mr 135]

lol, what can't you understand?

Propere want this game to be as much realistic as possible.

This is survival game, and I think that its really wrong if I can't drink without the water bottle for example.

its obvious thing to do but you can't, you can stay near the water and die because you need water bottle to drink, this is very lol.

of course its impossible to include every possible aspect of real life in game but there is a lot of work to do in DayZ to make it real survivor game, as it now we can't really survive there, we can just fill our backpacks with stuff and run away away away away

Much better thing to do, instead of adding dogs... :|

Edited September 9, 2012 by DooM4MR