Changes to 3rd person skeleton ready for testing

Jokes aside, the chest view is common in fps but the environment, iirc has to be scaled as such to accommodate the view.

For example, in the game, if you crouch behind a small crate in-game you are effectively in cover and enemy players cannot harm you in any way, save flanking and explosives of course. Having the camera situated at the chest unconsciously alludes the player into believing he is behind cover. If we are to 'raise' it to say the head level, what you probably would see is a view above the crate because, keep in mind, your view in game is an invisible virtual cone completely irrespective of the surrounding environment(aka shape and size).

Ragdolls are not going to happen. No server can make those (or the) required calculations to make that possible on top of everything else it has to do, which is a huge platter of food in itself.

Does this affect the 3rd person in vehicles?
It would be nice to have Harasser 3rd person radius on all vehicles esp flash and sunderer.

Ragdolls don't cause any server load whatsoever, they are entirely clientside.

Does this account for the dead maxes that are actually still alive floating around?

No.

When you have ragdoll effects, the server HAS to be responsible to ensure that EVERYONE is seeing the EXACT same thing and effects. This is matter of computation and overall seamless gameplay and not simple offloaded work. Client-side ragdolls is nothing more than an unknown introduced exploit begging to be found.

I'm not seeing why that is. Lots of online games have Client-side ragdolls, and since they're mostly dead and stuff, it's not really an issue. The only problem I see with Client-side ragdolls in this game is medic revives, but I don't think that's such a game-breaking problem.

I would like to point out of it hasn't been already, that the NC MAX's left (his left) leg twitches when standing still.... His thigh, really.

Yes.

When you have ragdoll effects, the server DOESN'T have to be responsible, it doesn't matter if EVERYONE is seeing the EXACT same thing. Virtually all complex FPS games that use ragdoll physics use clientside ragdoll physics. Anything on the source engine (TF2, HL2, Garys Mod for the most part, Counter Strike), GTA, Battlefield, DayZ, Arma, basically everything...they all use clientside ragdolls.

There are a handful of exceptions that prove the rule, a few indie games with less complex engines do it and some games where physics are a specific part of the game, none that I can think of off the top of my head. I vaguely remember Borderlands 2 having synced physics, might be wrong though, and even then, that's not serverside because it doesn't run on dedicated servers.

There are a variety of ways you can deal with the medic problem. You can just allow the ragdoll to be calculated on each persons client and then allow the medic to revive the dead guy wherever they see them and the dead guy to revive at wherever they were revived. The majority of the time the two corpses aren't going to be far enough apart for it to matter.

You can calculate the trajectory of the corpse serverside, so for example, if a player was hit by a harasser, the server would work out where the body was and the client would calculate where each specific part of the skeleton was around that point. Gives you more accurate corpse placement but less accurate ragdolls and some extra server load.

You can allow each client to calculate the ragdolls and then have the dead persons client update the server with their bodies position and then just stick a revive symbol at that point and have medics revive work on the point of death rather than where the medic sees the corpse.

Or the best way, in my opinion would be for the dead person client to notify the server of where their corpse ended up and then broadcast that to the clients. Then have the clients check if the corpse on the sever is within say 10m of where their client thinks it is. If it is then just continue as normal, if it isn't have that specific client despawn the corpse and respawn it where it should be. It's only ever going to happen if rammed off a biolab landing pad by an ESF, or a corpse glitches out and catapults across the map.

The point is, loads of multiplayer games with revive mechanics use clientside ragdolls, they all get around it one way or another, I really see no reason why Planetside shouldn't be able to as well.

Because even though there is no server performance hit, there will be an increase in CPU usage for your client. In a game that is already struggling with performance at times...the last thing we need is a feature that doesn't enhance gameplay, but in any way reduces performance. Unless you leave it as a Toggle feature, like PhysX, which is still not working either...

these are great suggestions for ragdoll but ultimately we know that the dev team would like to have ragdoll but apparently there is some technical reason why they haven't yet and I'm going to trust them on that since it's their code.

I actually don't like ragdoll in games, I find it unnatural and disturbing. with the most recent improvements to death placement in PS2 I think it's fine, i.e. aligning with terrain, falling from edges more often. I don't want people to go all flying about willy nilly in a 200+ fight, that would be so goofy.

in these discussions where we compare PS2 to other FPSes it just doesn't match up, you can do a lot more detail when the world is 8 vs 8 and one "hex" and we have to accept the trade-off PS2 makes to be huge. The devs know the bar to meet is the standard FPS "small" experience and they're going to give us everything they can up to the point it craps out performance. I'm just wondering when do they make the call to abandon low performance PCs at the bottom of the list and push graphics higher, can it be done incrementally or will they wait for PS3. or maybe say, the performance of the Sony PS4 console is the lowest recommended power (1.6ghz AMD apu, like a laptop 8 core with an AMD 7700 gpu).

I was suggesting a toggle, and the game performance is fine for me, never had any major issues and I'm on a mid range PC. Will a 4 year old laptop be able to deal with ragdolls? Probably not, but there are plenty of people playing who have PCs decent enough to be able to handle them and personally I'd sacrifice a lot of the settings I have on ultra/high for ragdolls. I completely disagree that they don't enhance gameplay, that's exactly what they do.

Imagine going up a lift onto a biolab air pad and instead of seeing rigid dead bodies lying on the edge you saw them tumbling off the side and falling past you. Or if, when you ran someone over with a Harasser, the body didn't just weirdly collapse behind you but smashed into your bumper and rolled over the top of your vehicle. Or if you were looking at a guy standing in window when they were suddenly hit by a Railjack and their body slammed into the opposite wall of the room. Or if a Galaxy roadkilling people on ammo pads of a tower didn't just make them all flop over but instead scraped their bodies along the ground and pushed them all off the edge.

Imagine roadkills with a Scythe, or HE tank shells into a crowd of people, or if, when you shot Light Assaults out of the air their jetpack didn't cut out and their body spiralled out of control and smacked into the side of a building.

Good physics are what make an engine fun to play in. It makes the game unpredictable and less repetitive. Just play Grand Theft Auto 5 and see how endlessly enjoyable the physics and animation are and then tell me they have no impact on gameplay.

Dunno why I even bothered arguing about this actually. Here...hundreds of ragdolls on the Planetside engine.

When players will have collisions? when sunderer, prowler will have fixed physics?, when game will be balanced? TR are the weakest now, everybody play vanu the game have such big problems and soe do nothing at all to fix it.

over year ago in mass batles i have easly 60fps now it drops to 20fps

i5 3570k 4.7Ghz
16gb of ram
hd 7970 1040/1550

[quote="over year ago in mass battles i have easily 60fps now it drops to 20fps

i5 3570k 4.7Ghz
16gb of ram
hd 7970 1040/1550[/quote]


don't know why people like you have low FPS. might be software or hardware things im not going to explain. i never go under 15 FPS even in a 200 person battle and i norm play at 30 or so and it stays there don't matter how big the battle gets (unless its too big like the 200 one)
got i5 @ 2.8GHz

4GB DDR3
and some fast video card with a gpu of 650 MHz and 2GB of ram (Nvidia)

Tell me the TWO most glaring and touted differences PS2 has to every contemporary FPS in existence. If you know the answer to that, then you know/understand why there's no ragdoll physics.

Plus, I'd like to know of some FPS indie games with player counts above 64/128 IN a persistent world or so you claim.

Did you miss this post?

I mean seriously, you're argueing that ragdolls aren't possible in the Planetside 2 engine when they've literally already been done in the Planetside 2 engine.

When did I claim that? Are you even reading my posts?

It's called Forgelight, and a mob of running zombies is in no way representative of ragdoll physics. Try again.

You're being ignorant and stubborn for no real intelligent reason.

If you're mentioning it, you're claiming it, otherwise you would've said nothing at all, and this drivel wouldn't be going on as far as it has.

If ragdoll physics were actually feasible in game of PS2's scale, we'd have more games like this by now. Don't talk as if its a simple endeavor just because other games have it and never taking into account how those games are made and played. Thoughts like these are nothing more than wishful thinking where all roads lead to broken pipe dreams.

The servers have to maintain constant surveillance/coordinates on each and every player, vehicle, and projectile fired. We've already experienced hitching and server-wide lag on countless occasions. Adding additional ragdoll physics that will simply add more math to the algorithms the server already has is and its likely the least of SOE's goals right now.

...it is when all of those zombies are ragdoll enabled on a multiplayer server along with hundreds of players. I mean I thought I didn't need to explicitly explain exactly what I was pointing out with the video, I thought it was fairly obvious, but apparently it's beyond you. So just to be clear. H1Z1 uses the same engine as Planetside, they have suggested that the player population per server will be larger than Planetsides as well as hundreds of NPCs on top of that all with ragdoll physics.

So stop with the "ragdoll physics aren't feasible in a game of PS2's scale"...the same company is literally in the process of making a game of PS2s scale with ragdoll physics. It couldn't be more feasible. It's beyond feasible...it already exists.

I was explaining to you that ragdolls aren't serverside and using examples of games where they aren't to try and get the point across to you. At no point did I suggest that any of those games could be directly compared to PS2. I also pointed out that some physics games use server side ragdolls when the ragdolls are specifically part of the gameplay. You challanged that by asking me to name physics games with 128 players...do you honestly not understand where you went wrong there?

And then when I asked you to show me when I'd made this claim about indie games you quoted a paragraph where I was talking about client side physics in AAA titles. It's like you can't even follow your own train of thought, nevermind understand what I'm trying to tell you, which you clearly haven't as you then go on to say.

Yes...they do, and as I've been trying to explain to you, adding ragdolls to the game would have literally zero effect on that server load...as, as I have said repeatedly now, ragdolls, the vast majority of the time, are client side. If you can't wrap your head around that simple fact there's really no point in discussing this.

If you paid attention and looked very closely, you'd notice the zombies have the exact same death animation as PS2. No ragdoll effect there.

See above, you're only taking the word of a YouTube commenter. That's already your downfall.

It was implied, and like i said before, you would not have mentioned them before if they weren't "comparable". CS, BF, TF2, HL2, and ARMA are match-based games while GTA is a single player game mostly. Not to mention those games don't manage players above 64 online at once. Thus incomparable entirely, let alone mentioning.

If the devs wanted to add ragdoll physics, they'll want the most seamless integration possible. That said, the animations would have to appear the same from any angle and any view from any player. That would not be possible on client-side because now you have thousands of computers independently creating the variables that make this possible, and not all of them will appear exactly the same, period. Why do you think people applaud PS2 as it is now? Because its the only AAA that melds 'MMO' and 'FPS' together, on a large scale at that. As result, everything has to be in constant sync, including physics if it's present.

You seriously fail to grasp the simplistic theme with PS2...

You can be optimistic if you want but your advocation is no different than an AMD/Intel fanboy shouting "moar cores!". There's no point in discussing this because you've narrowed you mind to one 'solution' and failing to understand specific implications.