Reducing player speed - reaction/realism?
by Mike Stoddart · in Torque Game Engine · 05/24/2002 (10:22 am) · 4 replies
I changed my player to reduce his walking (ok, his model runs but I want him to move at walking speed) speed to that of a human. I read somewhere that the scale in the Torque engine is metres and metres/second. So I searched Google and found this reference:
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/1998/98_03_25.html
So I figured that to get human speeds, I would use the following. Note that I intend to implement variable speeds in the future, so this is just research out of interest.
I changed the player.cs script and set:
I ran the demo and the movement seemed realistic, yet it would take forever to get anywhere on the vast terrains that are available with Torque.
So I was wondering what peoples' reactions would be to having players walking at this speed, in a game that is set during WW2. Obviously with jogging and sprinting the player will move around a bit quicker.
I love realism in a game, but I was wondering where the line is drawn between fun and realism.
Thoughts?
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/1998/98_03_25.html
Quote:To put these speeds into perspective, let's compare them to typical human running speeds. Athletes can run the 100 yard dash in about 10 seconds, an average speed of 23 mi/hr or 10 m/s. Longer races are run at slower average speeds. Runners can cover a mile in approximately 4 minutes at an average speed of 15 mi/hr, or 6.7 m/s. By comparison, Olympians can speed-skate a mile in about 2 minutes, but that doesn't seem very relevant here in mostly ice-free Hawai'i. Marathon runners can win at speeds of around 11.5 mi/hr, or 5 m/s; typical walking speeds are 2-4 mi/hr, or 0.9-1.8 m/s.
So I figured that to get human speeds, I would use the following. Note that I intend to implement variable speeds in the future, so this is just research out of interest.
Walking - 1.8m/s Jogging - 6.7m/s Sprinting - 10m/s
I changed the player.cs script and set:
maxForwardSpeed = 1.8; maxBackwardSpeed = 1.8; maxSideSpeed = 1.8;
I ran the demo and the movement seemed realistic, yet it would take forever to get anywhere on the vast terrains that are available with Torque.
So I was wondering what peoples' reactions would be to having players walking at this speed, in a game that is set during WW2. Obviously with jogging and sprinting the player will move around a bit quicker.
I love realism in a game, but I was wondering where the line is drawn between fun and realism.
Thoughts?
#2
05/24/2002 (12:09 pm)
I think it could work. I would hope that there will be vehicles to traverse large distances. From what I remember from T2 scripting I would think 1.8 is very slow. But if you can run at a faster speed then I would say that is probably a normal walk speed. I would not worry too much about that as of yet. Let your game develop and then tweak things like that later on when you are balancing things. I would just suggest that when you begin tweaking it just try it out and if it is so slow that it is annoying then speed it up.
#3
05/24/2002 (1:06 pm)
My plan (pipe-dream?!) is to have players that can walk, jog and run AND drive vehicles, such as jeeps. I think the default movement will be either walk or jog. The ultimate aim is to have vehicles, but I've got a long, long way to go before I'll be good enough to code this.
#4
In a WWII type game, I would guess jogging would be the most used. Like maybe if you have stamina, running may drain stamina, where jogging won't. So you'd only run when you really need to make a quick break for it, and you probably only walk when you're either doing some dificult close footwork, or when you're trying to be quiet.
Also, like the first responder said, play tastes very quite a bit from person to person. If you just make the controls re-bindable, you can have the player set it up to how they like it most.
05/24/2002 (7:54 pm)
Well, this will be highly dependant on how the overall feel of your game develops as it progresses. I, personally, don't like to "walk" in games, as it just seems a little tedious. Ask yourself "Do my players *need* to be walking most of the time?" If you have three speeds, my first instinct would be to set the default to the middle one, jog. That way, they can speed up or slow down as needed, but they're always in the middle ground. It kind of depends on which speed you think will be used most often in the game.In a WWII type game, I would guess jogging would be the most used. Like maybe if you have stamina, running may drain stamina, where jogging won't. So you'd only run when you really need to make a quick break for it, and you probably only walk when you're either doing some dificult close footwork, or when you're trying to be quiet.
Also, like the first responder said, play tastes very quite a bit from person to person. If you just make the controls re-bindable, you can have the player set it up to how they like it most.
Torque Owner Jarrod Roberson
Example: IL-2 Strumovic, one of my best friends is
Russian and a Flight Sim fanatic! He LOVES playing on the most difficult settings in IL-2 ( or any other sim ), just using IL-2 for example as it is the newest and most realistic and he talks about it all the time. ( X-Plane is another ). He swears that you can not have too much realism! And that it is the most fun a person can have by themself legally.
I don't find it that much fun until I turn down the "realism" settings to about half-way.
Does that make "too much realism" or "realistic difficulty" not fun?
I don't think so, it just means I don't like as much realism/difficulty in flight sims as he does.
Same goes for Operation FlashPoint ( extremely "realistic" ) movement speeds. Weapon usage and other things.
I LOVE this game, it could be even more "realistic".
Same also for WorldSuperbike 2001. AWESOME, very realistic "feel" for superbikes, with all the "assists" turned off it takes forever to get good enough to actually finish the race, but for HARDCORE motorcycle fans, I am willing to put in the time to master this game, where I would not spend that time on a flight sim.
But then again, I hate bunny hopping, 20km per hour running around shooting like a dead eye while flying thru the air crouched all the way across a map games.
Does that make them "bad" nope, just means I don't like them.
Personally I am taking this "realism" code to the extreme in my game, that way it can be turned off or down based on user preference ( like IL-2 ).
But if it is NOT in there to begin with, it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to make an arcade game feel realistic, but you can always remove realistic calculations to decrease the difficulty.
Basically it gets down to WHAT YOU LIKE!
I am sure that you will find a tonne of like minded people when you release your first demo!
If not, you can always allow for the server admins to set the "realism/difficulty" settings how they or their players like prefer them.
I can't release any specifics due to NDA's but I am planning on the most DETAILED RPG / FPS game ever made.
Many people here have already commented that the amount of detail and accuracy I am striving for is "wasted" effort at one point or another, well maybe on them it will be wasted, but for everyone else that wants details, accuracy and a simulation that is a statisticaly realistic as possible, I will make it available. For all the simpletons there will be games by the majors that tend to be able to screw up an anvil from the inside out.