PDA

View Full Version : better sinking animations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



h00vertime
23rd Jul 2008, 16:51
i do hope the sinking animations are going to be better than just slowly seeing a ship go under...

some ideas id like to see would be...

ships breaking in 2

oil slicks (some with fire maybe?)

people jumping overboard (on fire if the ship is on fire?)

people being sent flying by explosions instead of just standing there



atention to detail is just as important as gameplay i feel!!

chip5541
23rd Jul 2008, 17:05
i do hope the sinking animations are going to be better than just slowly seeing a ship go under...

some ideas id like to see would be...

ships breaking in 2

oil slicks (some with fire maybe?)

people jumping overboard (on fire if the ship is on fire?)

people being sent flying by explosions instead of just standing there



atention to detail is just as important as gameplay i feel!!

You mean like this?

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/855/855539/battlestations-pacific-20080228110326647_640w.jpg

While people running around on a ship on fire or flying through the air as the ship explodes would look cool you have to weigh that against a massive performance hit when having multiple ships sinking.

Arrow
23rd Jul 2008, 17:16
I have no idea why he made ANOTHER thread in the original BSM forums about this exact same topic.

Nice way to spam.

chip5541
23rd Jul 2008, 17:25
Maybe brain gas? :whistle:

:lmao:

crazyhorse128
23rd Jul 2008, 18:23
Sigh, look at the stern, the AA gunners are still happily manning thier guns even though their end of the ship is at 45 degrees. Better not mean that on larger vessles sailors carry on their duties as ships go under.

chip5541
23rd Jul 2008, 18:28
That is what you call dedication. :nut:

battleshipman
23rd Jul 2008, 22:21
Sigh, look at the stern, the AA gunners are still happily manning thier guns even though their end of the ship is at 45 degrees.

Sailor #1 $20 says I can man my station longer that you.

Sailor #2 YOU'RE ON!!!

h00vertime
24th Jul 2008, 16:44
soz didnt mean to post 2 threads, and didnt realise there was 2 boards, i just thaught that that there was an error and it didnt post so re did it.

yes i can see maybe people flying through the air maybe a problem but how about just pre rendered animations for people abandoning ship and oil slicks ?

i remember it just looked so lame on midway wen a boat was sinking or onfire and the crew were just ambling along not doing n e thing lol

M0n3y
24th Jul 2008, 19:15
Sailor #1 $20 says I can man my station longer that you.

Sailor #2 YOU'RE ON!!!

genius :D

crazyhorse128
24th Jul 2008, 19:48
sailor 3 (look at the bridge) is the one who's going to get the money :p

M0n3y
25th Jul 2008, 09:56
sailor 3 (look at the bridge) is the one who's going to get the money :p

i say that those 2 at the aft have to share it :D

radar
26th Jul 2008, 21:10
I would like to see a ship capsize and then End in a Huge explosion.

sstoffels
26th Jul 2008, 21:37
I would like to see a ship capsize and then End in a Huge explosion.

yeah that would great if sinkings were a bit differnt everytime

andy3536
27th Jul 2008, 07:56
I would like to see a ship capsize and then End in a Huge explosion.


HMS Barham went over before exploading.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HSY94QVIss

23 seconds in

Arrow
27th Jul 2008, 14:28
Yamato did that too, didn't it?

While explosions are fun, it becomes weird where absolutely everything explodes (*cough*GoldenEye*cough*)

M0n3y
27th Jul 2008, 16:43
Yamato did that too, didn't it?

yep
only the Yamato blew up a thousand times harder than that other ship...

h00vertime
28th Jul 2008, 08:52
so even pre renderd animations of people abandoning ship are out of the question?

Red October
28th Jul 2008, 12:50
so even pre renderd animations of people abandoning ship are out of the question?

I wouldn't say that. They could already be in the game we just haven't seen enough ships blow up. Personally i think an oil slick would be cool.

Arrow
28th Jul 2008, 13:37
I'm sure people will be abandoning ship if the CV crew was thrown about after that kamikaze hit. Whether they'll appear in lifeboats and stuff...we'll see. I still don't think lifeboats will matter much.

xXRebornFireXx
7th Aug 2008, 03:34
it be pretty cool if u could close compartments not just put people on water, and see a rapiar crew repairing your turrets automaticly (Fast) and with fires, have people with fire extinguesers, showing white foam to

crazyhorse128
7th Aug 2008, 09:30
For reparing turrets, when it isnt the case that the turret has been completely blown off then the repairs would be 90% intenral.

And your crew already do close compartments. Currently crews will pump water out of any compartment of the ship, but once one on the little lines in the hull diagram in the DC screen has been flooded over then you crews seel it off and no water can be pumped out.

xXRebornFireXx
7th Aug 2008, 16:50
For reparing turrets, when it isnt the case that the turret has been completely blown off then the repairs would be 90% intenral.

And your crew already do close compartments. Currently crews will pump water out of any compartment of the ship, but once one on the little lines in the hull diagram in the DC screen has been flooded over then you crews seel it off and no water can be pumped out.

no no no, that is not what i mean, i ment you can choose witch conpartments you want to close, like all of them at the biggining of the game, so only a little flooding will be done, it be pritty cool if the turrets DID blow right off, then u have to go to a dock to get onother one on

also, more ideas for sinking animations

1: When the deck is hit more then 2 times in the same spot it should show a hole, same with the hull with the torpedo, only one hit though

2: sinks like the titanic some times

3: capsizes then sinks (U.S.S oklahoma)




Edit: never mind, holes are confirmed, look at 1:22 and 3:38 of this video http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36616.html

General_Snipe77
13th Aug 2008, 18:48
Sailor #1 $20 says I can man my station longer that you.

Sailor #2 YOU'RE ON!!!

I Would love to challenge someone at that.

Commander92
11th Oct 2008, 08:07
I'd like to see turrets being blown off their mounts.

crazyhorse128
11th Oct 2008, 09:26
already happens :thumbsup:

sona1111
17th Oct 2008, 22:32
i think it would be cool for all detachable parts, even if it does not effect the ship at all, to be blow-offable. like ANY piece that juts out. parts of the bridge, the FCS, any type of tower.

as for the sinking itself, it would be nice for the animation to not be the same everytime. say, their could be four for each ship. for the first one, it would stay mostly upright, and sink slowly. for the second, the ship would roll to one side and explode. (whatever side has more list) the third would be the break-in-half. and the last would be something like the ships stern sinking nd the front part comeing out of the water (or vice-versa) and then going straight up, and sinking down. (like in silent hunter)

Red October
18th Oct 2008, 01:15
Though, i hate to see a sub go down especially when it is mine, i think the subs need better animation too. Maybe if you get a nice clean depth charge hit on a sub you should see a huge plum of air pop up from the water from the hull breaking.

It3llig3nc3
18th Oct 2008, 07:36
Compared to BS:M in BS:P the ship damage modeling has improved a lot - just have a look at the videos. The ships got more details, they can break apart and sink according to where the damage occurred.

I do not know about the subs... :D

As for myself I'm a bit conservative on "eye candy" when it comes to BS:P. It is simply because in general once you are in the middle of a huge battle these small details do not really matter...

I recall when I was playing in the focus group testing that for a while I haven't even noticed that the ships now can break into two before they sink. I had one of the EIDOS designers sitting behind me and he was really excited seeing a ships nicely blowing up and breaking into parts... ...he asked me if I had seen that animation :D Unfortunately I was occupied by defending my remaining ships against enemies so it did not matter to me at that moment.

Overall visuals and models have improved a lot. The game is up to the 2008 "standards". My question is if there is a trade off between EVEN more eye candy vs. more units on the map & more stable network - what would you choose?

don't forget: the more you ask about ship models, the more resource it takes to deal with that. More detailed ship models require more memory AND bandwidth in multiplayer to handle everything correctly.

Personally myself I'd rather have a bit less details that does not really matter in the general gameplay, if I can have more units plus faster and more reliable network communication. After all I'm here to PLAY the game . If I want eye candy I go to a cinema :D

Polarshark
19th Oct 2008, 01:07
i think a sub sinking and it shows from the surface a huge blast of water up in the sky is a great idead

It3llig3nc3
19th Oct 2008, 15:38
i think a sub sinking and it shows from the surface a huge blast of water up in the sky is a great idead

I do not question if it is a great idea or not. I just ask if in order to GET that in the game, would you be ready to give up let's say a unit?
Water effects, especially splashes that you describe are very sophisticated particle effects - taxing on performance and video card.

Red October
19th Oct 2008, 15:52
I do not question if it is a great idea or not. I just ask if in order to GET that in the game, would you be ready to give up let's say a unit?
Water effects, especially splashes that you describe are very sophisticated particle effects - taxing on performance and video card.

How can you expect people to make that kind of a choice. Well if anything i would rather have better effects than new units.

It3llig3nc3
19th Oct 2008, 18:11
How can you expect people to make that kind of a choice. Well if anything i would rather have better effects than new units.

Sorry I did not mean NEW units, I meant giving up one (or more) units from the total. (so you get the splash but then the max number of units on the map gets reduced from 16 to 14)

I know that it is hard to ask. However the developers have to face such choices on a day by day basis. Memory of any system is limited and since this is an XBOX360 console product nobody can count on to say "let's just bump up the system spec" as it is a GIVEN.

What many people don't acknowledge is how difficult to make these kind of things happen from the programming perspective. Especially in multiplayer over internet where the number of interactions skyrocket.
So you have X kbyte bandwidth and Y MB memory. All is pretty much stretched out. What would you take: an Iowa battleship or a splash effect?

Red October
19th Oct 2008, 22:12
Sorry I did not mean NEW units, I meant giving up one (or more) units from the total. (so you get the splash but then the max number of units on the map gets reduced from 16 to 14)

I know that it is hard to ask. However the developers have to face such choices on a day by day basis. Memory of any system is limited and since this is an XBOX360 console product nobody can count on to say "let's just bump up the system spec" as it is a GIVEN.

What many people don't acknowledge is how difficult to make these kind of things happen from the programming perspective. Especially in multiplayer over internet where the number of interactions skyrocket.
So you have X kbyte bandwidth and Y MB memory. All is pretty much stretched out. What would you take: an Iowa battleship or a splash effect?

Yah i know that. When i worked with Activison in the sound deparment, we would record these nice multilayered sound effects but would have to dumb them down for the game.

I would probally choose more units on field over splashes, that way i am more concerned about how not to get by butt blown up rather than the effects.

tc2324
21st Oct 2008, 07:08
I`ve got to say that I`m quite shocked at some of the comments in this thread. I love BSM and am looking forward to BSP like the next man, however seeing `men on fire` jumping over board is something I hope the game makers will ignore.

Captcaboose
22nd Oct 2008, 20:59
what would be cool is on the northhampton class ca and the new york class bb the main tower falls like in pearl harbor movie instead of just blowing up

Polarshark
25th Oct 2008, 03:41
what would be cool is on the northhampton class ca and the new york class bb the main tower falls like in pearl harbor movie instead of just blowing up

wow good idea

but i think it's already in the BSP but no one outside really knows

who knows????

h00vertime
27th Oct 2008, 18:11
I`ve got to say that I`m quite shocked at some of the comments in this thread. I love BSM and am looking forward to BSP like the next man, however seeing `men on fire` jumping over board is something I hope the game makers will ignore.

what?? why?? it would used to happen in real life so why not it the game??

and as for subs... would be cool to see them implode :D

Captcaboose
31st Oct 2008, 19:39
what?? why?? it would used to happen in real life so why not it the game??

and as for subs... would be cool to see them implode :D

definetly

Dremora Warlord
3rd Nov 2008, 02:31
what?? why?? it would used to happen in real life so why not it the game??

and as for subs... would be cool to see them implode :D

The most that would happen for a submarine would be a hole would form and the ship would be filled with water in less than a second, nothing like it being crushed like a soda can. Regardless, I would like to see the hole form.

Red October
3rd Nov 2008, 04:14
The most that would happen for a submarine would be a hole would form and the ship would be filled with water in less than a second, nothing like it being crushed like a soda can. Regardless, I would like to see the hole form.

They would probally just make cracks form and have bubbles bursting through the crack.

It3llig3nc3
3rd Nov 2008, 13:46
I’ll be extremely morbid here since I’m a bit frustrated about the fact that tiny visual details seem to play a huge role in this game – probably at the cost of putting resources on a more enjoyable gameplay.

So assume holes or cracks on the submarine when sinking (BTW: who on Earth is going to watch it during a battle…) – somebody is going to come and request bodies of the crew to come out of the hole, their face showing the horror of being suffocating and then their last breath of air bubbles coming out of their mouth… You might say it is nonsense, but somebody WAS asking for saving people from the water here once...

All in all war is a terrible thing and I really don’t like the idea of taking that much pain and suffering into the game that is associated with the LOSS of something. It is a game, a simulation, but also can fulfil “sadistic” needs if it is taken too far.
A ship is breaking apart and sinking – that’s more or less OK… but why is it so important to focus on these dramatic “sceneries” in details, instead of other more enjoyable aspects?

I’m sure there are many modelling software out for simulated ship/sub damage/sinking. If someone enjoys watching these kind of things, take those, rent a DVD on the subject etc..

Why make BS:P an ESRB 18+ game?

SuperE
5th Nov 2008, 04:00
Why make BS:P an ESRB 18+ game?

Because everyone else is doing it.

Call of Duty: World at War, Halo, Gears or War

Polarshark
5th Nov 2008, 21:38
Because everyone else is doing it.

Call of Duty: World at War, Halo, Gears or War

lol then we can't play the game

SuperE
6th Nov 2008, 01:30
I can play it if it was rated M

but to get back to the thread I hope that some of the machine guns will still fire while sinking like the Bismark while it was sinking it fired off one salvo before it went under

W4lt3r89
6th Nov 2008, 08:03
I can play it if it was rated M

but to get back to the thread I hope that some of the machine guns will still fire while sinking like the Bismark while it was sinking it fired off one salvo before it went under

I think you are talking about HMS Hood on that one, right before the bow turrets went under they fired the last salvo and slipped underneath... Bismarck was destroyed by the demolition charges or whatsoever by the ship crew... or then the 16" shells from the Rodney. *shrug*

com345
6th Nov 2008, 15:57
i think it never will be 100% sure if the bismarck was sunk by the crew or by the RN ships

ive read books, watched documentaries and so on.... some say this some say that

my personal oppinion is that is was sunk by the crew to end the nightmare the went through!


but when the bismarck went under there where no guns firing anymore

SuperE
6th Nov 2008, 20:19
The show dogfights did a special on the Bismarck and there idea was that they fired one salvo right before it went under as for the Hood it was blow up before it it sunk so it couldn't have shot a salvo before it sunk.

chip5541
6th Nov 2008, 20:27
Actually she did fire off a shot before she slipped beneath the waves.

Hood vs Bismark http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbz6Oa5PQuA

Well worth a complete watch.

SuperE
6th Nov 2008, 20:49
Nice job finding the Dogfights episode I think that is the best one in the series but I wonder why the ships in Battlestations Midway fire one shot at a time unlike in the video

Also torpedoes should be able to take out the main turrets if they flood and to counter it the splash from the main guns should take out planes

Thats how the Bismarck tried to take out the swordfishes

Red October
6th Nov 2008, 23:42
The chicago fired off a last salvo too. It was a Houston class CA. The fire reached the gun chambers as the ship was sinking and fired off its last salvo, i will try to find the dogfights episode.

SuperE
7th Nov 2008, 02:27
Kind of weird that we use a show called dogfights to show naval combat.

Red October
7th Nov 2008, 03:05
I’ll be extremely morbid here since I’m a bit frustrated about the fact that tiny visual details seem to play a huge role in this game – probably at the cost of putting resources on a more enjoyable gameplay.

So assume holes or cracks on the submarine when sinking (BTW: who on Earth is going to watch it during a battle…) – somebody is going to come and request bodies of the crew to come out of the hole, their face showing the horror of being suffocating and then their last breath of air bubbles coming out of their mouth… You might say it is nonsense, but somebody WAS asking for saving people from the water here once...

All in all war is a terrible thing and I really don’t like the idea of taking that much pain and suffering into the game that is associated with the LOSS of something. It is a game, a simulation, but also can fulfil “sadistic” needs if it is taken too far.
A ship is breaking apart and sinking – that’s more or less OK… but why is it so important to focus on these dramatic “sceneries” in details, instead of other more enjoyable aspects?

I’m sure there are many modelling software out for simulated ship/sub damage/sinking. If someone enjoys watching these kind of things, take those, rent a DVD on the subject etc..

Why make BS:P an ESRB 18+ game?

Why do have to hate on all my post:confused:
I was only saying bubbles from cracks as what would happen in real life proabally, i never ment for it be takin seriously.
And how does bubbles make a game +18?

SuperE
7th Nov 2008, 03:30
And how does bubbles make a game +18?

I don't think he is talking about bubbles.

chip5541
7th Nov 2008, 13:26
And how does bubbles make a game +18?


:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: When you grow up I will explain it to you :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


oh god! Now I can't get the song out of my head


Kind of weird that we use a show called dogfights to show naval combat.

Dogfights was/is a great show but I only watch if WWI or WWII battles. I really don't care for jet fighters.

I am just glad they did because it was such an awesome battle and needed to be told.

SuperE
7th Nov 2008, 19:46
the orbital battles were pretty cool

Red October
7th Nov 2008, 21:17
[QUOTE=chip5541;880745]:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: When you grow up I will explain it to you :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


:eek: Get your mind out of the gutter chip :rasp: QUOTE]