Normal physics in CS:S?

[Unfocused]

Would you like there to be normal physics in CS:S (as in HL2 and HL2: DM), or would you like it to stay the way it is (you cannot stay on a barrel it "pushes" you off etc.). Up till yesterday I thought the objects in CS:S are different entities than in HL2 (to save bandwidth maybe) and making them act normally would require replacing the objects in CS:S maps with the same as in HL2, what would force us to re-download the maps. But yesterday I ran the CS:S maps in HL2 and the objects acted normally so it is just a case of changing a few lines of code I think. And these objects don't take up as much bandwidth, what we can see from HL2M.

 

[bvasgm]

aren't the physics the same?

 

[Unfocused]

aren't the physics the same?

Uh, have you played the games? Try jumping and staying on a barrel in HL2. Easy. Now do the same in CS:S. You jump on it, clip through it and get pushed away.

 

[Cukel]

Valve made the CSS physics "bouncy" because they thought that would change gameplay too much. IMHO it would be a nice add to CSS, like that place in italy where you could put the table to block the door

It cant be a matter of bandwidth, HL2DM runs real nice with full physics (most of the time)

 

[The Hulk]

There was a reason why they did it the way it is set up, just can't remember the reason.... would love to have it like HL2 though!

 

[drewd]

Aren't they already ?

 

[Dekstar]

Aren't they already ?

Someone wasn't listening

 

[Asuka]

Yes for sure.

Btw there are a few cmds that make it the way it is in hl2. No need to change the code.

sv_pushaway_clientside : 0 : , "sv", "rep" : Clientside physics push away (0=off, 1=only localplayer, 1=all players)

sv_pushaway_clientside_size : 15 : , "sv", "rep" : Minimum size of pushback objects

sv_pushaway_force : 30000 : , "sv", "rep" : How hard physics objects are pushed away from the players on the server.

sv_pushaway_max_force : 1000 : , "sv", "rep" : Maximum amount of force applied to physics objects by players.

sv_pushaway_max_player_force : 10000 : , "sv", "cheat", "rep" : Maximum of how hard the player is pushed away from physics objects.

sv_pushaway_min_player_speed : 75 : , "sv", "rep" : If a player is moving slower than this, don't push away physics objects (enables ducking behind things).

sv_pushaway_player_force : 200000 : , "sv", "cheat", "rep" : How hard the player is pushed away from physics objects (falls off with inverse square of distance).

 

[Unfocused]

It would be a good idea to make a poll via Steam similar to this one. I would like to suggest it to Valve and maybe send them the link to this poll (as we can clearly see the majority, as for now, wants normal physics). Can anyone provide me with an e-mail address to Valve, where I could send this suggestion?

 

[CookieCuttah]

Normal physics would be cool, but would let a lot of T's like on office, get real smart ass.

 

[azz0r]

Id just like to see them put it as an admin cvar atleast.

 

[genocide604]

Yeah i think they did that for gameplay reasons, though i personally think it would add some needed depth to gameplay.

 

[PvtRyan]

Maybe for some objects (like tables that you could use to block) but I'm really not interested in having people who will find ways to get to places they shouldn't get to. CS maps simply aren't built for this.
It is a seperate entity btw, prop_physics_multiplayer, you can place normal prop_physics in your map if you want, and you can climb onto them.

 

[Hectic Glenn]

hell yes this wouldnt change it for the bad, it would be awesome. Dont you find yourself tip toeing around the barrels and crates and breezeblocks just so you dont get stuck and reflected back into the wall. Its really annoying wen you are trying to move. If they behaved like normal props in HL2 and DM then we would have much more interactive fighting. Totally takes the edge off the gameplay for me. Game does look beautiful though, sorry to much criticism for one day of source. Hopefully they'll change it for a short period just to see what its like! That would be SO AWESOME! think about it

 

[Spectre01]

yeh having HL2's physics would be really nice. Then you could block entrances and use the enviroment to your advantage rather that just having it as a gimmik.

 

[MilkMan12]

I love the idea but everyone thinks it would enable people to block areas however it would do the exact opposite. If they fix the objects then the T's wont have to shoot chairs in to block the doors in office, because the reason they do that is if you do it right you either get stuck or push out of the room. If we enable physics to be like hl2 then if you land on them, its ok, you can keep walking, or u can push it, it may take a while to push but you can. How about cabinets in the storage room? Those wouldnt keep ct's from getting it, they could help cover the T's but the cts would at least be able to jump on them if they were toppled infront of the entrway. So Im all for changing the physics to be like hl2, but it wont do what some of you are saying, which is help block doors or players, it would work as better cover because you can stand close to the object with no problem, but players will be able to jump on it or push it without being pushed back.

 

[Unfocused]

Anyone know an e-mail address to Valve where I could send this link and suggest a Steam poll?

 

[Dumb Dude]

Thing is, with HL2 physics, you wouldn't be able to completely block off an area. Take Office for example, with the current physics, you can shoot some of the file cabinets to fall and sort of block an entrace to the hostage room, the bad thng about the way it is now is that it can make jumping over those a real pain and will actually block the entrance. If it had HL2 physics, you would just be able to jump on it, then go over, but we clearly can't do that.

 

[massivechicken]

There are more differences in the physics than just not being able to push things around.

When a ragdoll falls from a great height, for example. In HL2, the ragdoll accelerates towards the earth until it actually hits. In CS, the ragdoll reaches a terminal velocity of about 10km/h and then almost 'floats' the rest of the way to the ground.

Looks perfectly fine for small falls - but bigger falls - like jumping into the water in aztec, it looks ridiculous.

 

[Unfocused]

There are more differences in the physics than just not being able to push things around.

When a ragdoll falls from a great height, for example. In HL2, the ragdoll accelerates towards the earth until it actually hits. In CS, the ragdoll reaches a terminal velocity of about 10km/h and then almost 'floats' the rest of the way to the ground.

Looks perfectly fine for small falls - but bigger falls - like jumping into the water in aztec, it looks ridiculous.

I agree, it doesn't look too nice. Someone said it's more realistic than the ragdolls in HL2, but I'm not convinced completely. I am asking for an email, because writing to Valve could probably draw the company's attention to this problem(?), definitely more effectively than just talking about it on the forums.

 

[Hectic Glenn]

If you really get pissed off with blockage which wouldnt happen alot anyway, they could enable 'hold' so you could pick stuff up and use it as a little shield. I like the riot sheild in 1.6 and random objects could be makeshift sheilds but they break and dont cover all the body, and would move blocking objects. I dont care if it changes the gameplay too much, its already too different. Might as well go all the way.

 

[noQ]

If you really get pissed off with blockage which wouldnt happen alot anyway, they could enable 'hold' so you could pick stuff up and use it as a little shield. I like the riot sheild in 1.6 and random objects could be makeshift sheilds but they break and dont cover all the body, and would move blocking objects. I dont care if it changes the gameplay too much, its already too different. Might as well go all the way.

IMHO this would look rather funny.You'd see a ct with an usp and a banana floating infront of him.This would be too half-life2'ish :upstare: ,but there should be a little push action, for example go next to a barrel and press e and knock over the barrel. This would help if the css physics would be like hl2dm's physics.

 

[Unfocused]

If you really get pissed off with blockage which wouldnt happen alot anyway, they could enable 'hold' so you could pick stuff up and use it as a little shield. I like the riot sheild in 1.6 and random objects could be makeshift sheilds but they break and dont cover all the body, and would move blocking objects. I dont care if it changes the gameplay too much, its already too different. Might as well go all the way.

I definitely disagree. This would be a hardcore change. I can imagine how stupid would a professional CT look carrying a chair in front of him to get some protection against bullets.

 

[MuToiD_MaN]

Well I think blocking entrances could potentially ruin the game (i.e., make hostages unsaveable, bombsites unreachable, etc). Unless they did something to keep barricades from being solid, this is a bad idea.

 

[Unfocused]

Well I think blocking entrances could potentially ruin the game (i.e., make hostages unsaveable, bombsites unreachable, etc). Unless they did something to keep barricades from being solid, this is a bad idea.

Did you actually read the other posts? It would be easier to remove/jump over the barricades with HL2 physics

 

[urban]

personally i find the mucked up graphics very funny...throwing barrels into the enemy trapping them is ace

 

[Hectic Glenn]

Ive been trapped in italy under that raised room, the terrors were rushing and threw a nade down to the cts and i hid in the corner under the room, and it blew two tires in front of me. You can jump on them because they push you back, and bullets dont work cos they were jammed. If i could jump on stuff it would be okay, or pick it up. A banana or a chair would look funny, but why would you pick either of them up? neither obstruct hardly or serve a purpose. Its mostly barrels and tires and the occassional bike. I love HL2DM so much, and i think its the physics which feels the best cos we can interact with the map and environments so much.

My statement on physics for CSS
In CSS it feels like we are being pushed away (literally) from the environment and we have little interaction from it, except knocking over the random barrel...wahhey? Is you want to tie these two together then let us interact with the world around us. It would change the game...but who cares? CSS is totally different to 1.6 already. If we want a 1.6 style game we will play 1.6. Source needs to bring more to the table except the shiny cover thats been put on it. The physics are an important part which should be intergrated, and i wish so much and so hard that someone in valve would at least look at this again. I havent seen cliffe here in a long time, but if you are watching just consider how good it would be with the ability to really get into the game and interact. The number of players won't get any better the way things are. For CSS the potential is absolutely huge and i hope more can be done. I feel its only scratching the surface on whats possible.

 

[Unfocused]

It would change the game...but who cares?

I do . Picking up objects in CSS would make some people run with bananas floating in front of them (as you do not actually hold the object) for the sake of ruining other's experience by making CS look stupid.

I am asking again: does anyone know how can I contact Valve and suggest they do a Steam poll on this topic? Just agreeing that the physics should be changed on the forum does nothing. And I don't want to mail for example Gabe, because I don't think he's the one responsible for such things. I don't want to spam. I want to email the right person.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I hate the "fake" physics in cs:s, it is purely cosmetic and defeats the purpose of the object in the first place. You might as well make everything static so you can at least use it to your advantage/jump on it.

 

[Hectic Glenn]

I hate the "fake" physics in cs:s, it is purely cosmetic and defeats the purpose of the object in the first place. You might as well make everything static so you can at least use it to your advantage/jump on it.

EXACTLY EXACTLY....i think of them as pussy physics. Like they wanted to do them, but chickened out at the last minute putting half arsed physics in.

If you want to email valve, you need to email jess cliffe the CS man, his email is [email protected] but i don't think he reads them often or bothers to reply...i guess cos of the immense amount of work 'apparently'.

Info on Jess from valve website

Jess Cliffe - Game Designer and Co-creator of Counter-Strike
Cliffe joined Valve after co-creating the original Counter-Strike with Minh Le. He enjoys contributing anything and everything to CS and is the "voice of Counter-Strike" via the radio commands and sound effects. When not working on Counter-Strike, Cliffe can be found working on Half-Life 2: Deathmatch levels and sound design. In his spare time Cliffe can be found practicing with his synth pop Depeche Mode cover band, Error. One day he will get over how slowly people drive in Seattle.

 

[MuToiD_MaN]

Did you actually read the other posts? It would be easier to remove/jump over the barricades with HL2 physics

Truthfully, I didn't.

 

[disruptioN_]

HL2 physics would be awesome in CS:S. before the beta, the one thing in CS:S that looked like it would make a great improvement to regular CS gameplay was the physics. however when the game was released i was really disappointed to find out that barrels and cabinets push you around.
i think Valve should really consider taking out the pushaway force from the physics props in the official maps. it would make gameplay so great. there would be a ton of new strategies, and when someone throws a grenade you don't have to worry about barrels pushing you all over the place. CS:S would become so much better.

 

[Kouler]

HL2DM physics please.

 

[Unfocused]

Thank you, Hectic Glenn, for the e-mail address. I sent the suggestion and the link to this poll a few hours ago.