Cinematic Physics: How extensively used in Ep2?

[DEATH eVADER]

So by now, you should of seen the bridge falling apart across the ravine in the extended trailer. For those of you who don't know, that is Cinematic Physics.

If you saw clearly at the footage, you will notice that it wasn't true physics (Pieces of the road fall down way to slowly). This is because for something of this scale alone, especially when using deformable brushes that it will feel heavy for your CPU. For this reason, much of what occurs is already pre-determined to reduce the burden on the hardware (whether or not we will get the tools that is used to create scenes such as this remain to be seen)

Cinematic Physics supports a keyframe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyframe) system[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_engine#_note-ign-trailerimpres.), but its exact nature is currently unclear. It could be that an animator creates a largely complete but low-detail sequence which then sees details added by the physics system, or it could be that an animator creates a handful of single-frame states which are then used as motion targets for the ensuing simulation (in a manner not dissimilar to the Endorphin NaturalMotion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorphin_%28software%29) technology). Either method results in a drastic reduction of developer input, thus allowing the creation of far more complex scenes than before with the same budget. It is currently unclear both whether or not keyframes are strictly required, and what number are needed to create a scene as complex as the bridge collapse demonstration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_engine


So, the real question is how large a scale are we going to see cinematic physics used in Ep2?

My ideas are:
A avalanche- possible return of the beta pickaxe
A building- similar situation to the gunship battle in Ep1, just more awe inspiring
A nuclear explosion- probably not going to happen, I just thought the idea of a abandoned nuclear silo was a bit of an easter egg

What are your ideas for the technology?

[Cypher19]

So, the real question is how large a scale are we going to see cinematic physics used in Ep2?

Chances are it will be along the order of what the bridge scene demonstrated, due to the (highly likely) possibility that you will not be able to affect the cinematic physics, only that it can affect you. As a result, it'll probably be limited to either areas that you cannot interact with due to some barrier between you and the scene, or so large/unmovable that you would not be able to make any visible change to what's going on.

Off the top of my head, the only ideas that I can think basically revolve around BIG explosions/demolition such as what you described. Some smaller deformations are probably likely as well though, e.g. a massive chunk of rock flying at the train you're on, bending the railings/sides of the train. Also, a lot of strider super-attacks will undoubtedly take advantage of it as well, where they destroy trees, shacks, or rocks.

[bbson john]

much of what occurs is already pre-determined to reduce the burden on the hardware (whether or not we will get the tools that is used to create scenes such as this remain to be seen)


I don't think so, perhaps the whole thing in the trailer is taken in slow mode or something. It is Physics. Valve is needless to lie about it.[/QUOTE]



A avalanche- possible return of the beta pickaxe
A building- similar situation to the gunship battle in Ep1, just more awe inspiring
A nuclear explosion- probably not going to happen, I just thought the idea of a abandoned nuclear silo was a bit of an easter egg


Avalanche, parhaps, unlikely. A mountain has no structure at all. That can not show how the mountain slowly break up, fall down. A tiny landslide is possible, but an avalanche seems to have more to do with fluid mechanics. Just a pile of white snow is not a good utilization of the cinematic physics.

A building, absolutly possible.

Nuclear, too big, the models are too large and too many thing to be taken care of. Unlikely

[Naudian]

I'm going with all of Cypher's ideas :D

[DEATH eVADER]

I don't think so, perhaps the whole thing in the trailer is taken in slow mode or something
Well the cars seem to be falling at a speed that would indicate that its normal speed.

It is Physics
Yes parts of it is, but there are sections of it that makes me believe that there was developer input (using a keyframe system) involved in the directed destruction

If it was true physics, then once the bridge had split in two, then the heavier side (The one with all the girders) would have fallen almost at the same time. If you used simulations, then you know the type of bridge used in the trailer are moderately weak as it is.

Valve is needless to lie about it
Who said they were lying.

The reason I came to the conclusion that some parts of the bridge sequence had developer input is because some things that happened didn't feel like it was from the Havok physics system, notabaly the chunks of concrete that break apart. If we have all observed the physics system in the Source engine then you now that those chunks would either fall down (as opposed to fly up a few centimeters before dropping down) or fly off at incredible speed...

[Ennui]

They obviously sculpt it by setting keyframes, it's not called realistic physics, it's cinematic. Big difference.

[ktimekiller]

agreed with ennui

[Flyingdebris]

well, the people over at facepunch already developed working nukes, mushroom cloud, charred corpses, car tossing, random fires, and all.

Currently drops most comps into single digit FPS, but if you were to use cinematcic physics to tell most the the *ahem* flying debris where to go, how to bend, and where to bounce, it might not eat up so much power. Although why there'd be another massive explosion in ep2 so soon after the reactor meltdown in ep1 is beyond me.

[bbson john]

They obviously sculpt it by setting keyframes, it's not called realistic physics, it's cinematic. Big difference.

What is cinematic physics is yet to know. The only way to see the "cinematic" to "physics" ratio is when we play, we can see the degree of randomness. Since so many factors can affect the weight balance of the bright, theoretically everytime it falls a bit different. More random, more physics. Less random, more scripting.

If it was true physics, then once the bridge had split in two, then the heavier side (The one with all the girders) would have fallen almost at the same time. If you used simulations, then you know the type of bridge used in the trailer are moderately weak as it is.

Since cinematic physics has been developed for a time, so it missed the birth of Galilei Galileo. Two distinct objects of different masses fall with the same velocity is not yet proved.

[sniper wolf]

maybe you guys are overthinking a little...

the stuff that wouldn't make sense for it to be true physics could possibly also be affected by that wave thingy that caused the bridge to split in two in the first place

[Inyssius Grey]

Allow me to introduce you to my friend William of Occam, and his handy little Razor: if, for a moment, we accept that some of the particulars were a little off, which is simpler of the two explanations? A), that Valve error'd, or B), that the blast inexplicably, temporarily, and selectively altered the laws of physics?

[bigburpco]

Your mom. :x

[Flyingdebris]

yeah, they are probably still messing around with getting the cine-physics system right.

it'd look perfect if either the cars fell a little slower and the asphalt chunks moved a bit faster...and the asphalt didn't have white paint all the way through

[ktimekiller]

I have a question, DOES IT REALLY MATTER? Game does not follow the scientific laws, stfu :P

[Selkcip]

I agree, at least at this point in time (months from release) it doesn't matter whether or not it's physics or a monkey playing with dynamite. It's just a trailer.

[GordonFreeman911]

Ooh, Monkey playing with Dy-No-MIIIITE!

Anyway. I hope that bridge scene is in, along with a Gman sighting that I saw in a (Photoshopped) picture.