Printable View
I hear a lot of conflicting opinions about 2048's physics versus HD's physics and vice versa, and how the 2048 physics work on HD's tracks when doing crossplay or the DLC campaigns. I want to hear your thoughts: Which would you say was better or worse overall, HD's physics or 2048's physics? Now how about 2048's physics on the HD tracks? And finally, given your experience, how do you predict the HD ships/physics (pre- and post- patch) would hypothetically handle on the 2048 tracks?
I've often wondered the same thing. I've notice a few things that stand out to me in particular.
The framerate is still a concern for the HD DLC on the Vita. I can't even come close to my PS3 times when playing the same track on the Vita and while it is tempting to just say that the framerate is the fault, that isn't the case.
Barrel rolls are much harder to execute on the Vita, but at the same time, it is much easier to get the air needed to pull them off. The controls seem to respond sluggishly, and it is hard to time the roll when being used to the PS3 styled physics. All in all, I can't figure out if the fault is because I'm used to HD's physics or because the same moves just aren't possible on the Vita. Here is an example: you can barrel roll on Anulph pass FWD on the PS3 version right after the first long left hand turn on the slight hump. I've done it maybe 3 times total on purpose despite trying every time. On the Vita however a sideshift easily gets me the air I need, but the sluggish controls seem to prevent me from pulling it off. I have about the same success rate on both the PS3 and the Vita, so I can't say if the air I seem to get on the Vita is really worth anything.
When it comes to general handling however, the PS3 seems way more responsive for sideshifts. The Vita seems easier to get airborne. 2048 is a different story though. It is supposed to be the first few seasons of AG racing. As such, the handling seems to be decisively different on purpose. You seem to be able to get better results from a well executed airbrake than from a sideshfit. The opposite seems true for HD. I for one believe that this was intentional to maintain the guise that 2048 came way before HD. The handling feels more lift a drift than a peppy airbrake.
So I guess when it gets right down to it, I prefer HD's controls over 2048, but at the same time I appreciate the attention to detail. I also think that if SL meant for 2048's DLC HD content to rival the experience of HD's physics, it doesn't live up to my personal expectations because the controls seem a bit stiff. If there was a 2048 DLC released for HD using the same physics model I would destroy all my records the first try. But if they had a handling update for the 2048's HD DLC, I don't think the same would be the case.
At the end of the day we are comparing apples to oranges. 2048 was never really meant to be an alternative to owning HD on the PS3. If it were, it wouldn't have been a free cross-download. It is merely a way to play a different set of tracks. Even with the difference in framerates not considered, a PS3 controller is still a much easier input method and I don't think SL had the time to resolve the differences.
It's common sense that a console - handhelt port just doesn't feels right.
Neither PulsE on the PS2 nor HD on the Vita.
One exeption may is the original wipEout port on tbe Vita.
That does not answer the question. I am trying to get everybody's opinions on the physics, not wether or not ports are better or worse than the original games they are ports of.
I'm pretty certain that when you are playing HD circuits on 2048 it uses the HD physics, the only change would be the difference in responsiveness between 30 and 60fps. That is a big difference however, I find the HD content on 2048 pretty much unplayable especially after playing HD on the PS3, 30fps just isn't a nice experience.
You can't really compare 2048 physics with the HD physics as the difference in frame rate is so important in how the game plays, the lower input lag from 60fps makes the PS3 version of HD seems far more responsive than the 2048 version before you even consider the different physics engines.
No, the HD tracks definitely use the 2048 physics. Direct comparisons have been done.
I'm with Vatz here. There is a noticeable difference. Like I had mentioned earlier, there are certain rolls that I just can't do on 2048, regardless of being able to land them 100% of the time on HD. There are also some spots where I seem to "hang" more in mid-air on the Vita. 2048 has a physics mechanic where you get more air, but the rolls are more sluggish to perform. This feels nearly identical on the HD tracks.
To me, anyone playing on the Vita is at a significant disadvantage by about 5 seconds or so.
A good personal test might be to run a speedlap test on a track you are good at; one where you won't hit any walls and where you have a solid line. Run 5 speed laps on HD with the PS3, and 5 speed laps on the Vita. I did this both with barrel rolls and without. Take the average of each set, and you'll find that the evidence is pretty overwhelming that the physics handling in Vita is inferior. Some people may be better at Vita controls than with PS3 (although I doubt that is really the case for the majority of pilots). Just the fact alone that there is a 3-5 second margin between the 2 consoles is proof enough that there is a difference in physics.
From a developer's standpoint, to match the HD physics, you would have to release a whole new game. The HD DLC content is merely new maps and new ship skins. Though the framerate is certainly an issue, there is a definite physics difference. I think to try to balance things out the Vita version ships have slightly better acceleration (I've personally witnessed this) and they seem to get more air time from turbos. All in all it doesn't make up for one simple fact: HD was not designed to be a handheld game.
But my name's Amaroq. I took my PSN ID from my sibling because he never used the PS3 for anything besides the occasional round of Bioshock >.<Quote:
Originally Posted by mannjon
The HD ships don't use the 2048 physics system, through my admittedly very unscientific test I played a circuit on 2048, I then played the Chenghou Project time trial on the frenzy campaign on 2048 and PS3. The HD ships on PS3 and 2048 handle extremely similar and completely different . Barrel rolls and handling in general are harder on 2048 due to the frame rate differences. At 30fps you have a 33.3ms delay between frames, compared to 16.6ms at 60fps you can see there is a significant difference between the two. The times for events on HD and 2048 circuits are the same as well, Chenghou Project on the frenzy campaign are both 1.52.00 for novice gold so the devs didn't see any possible physics changes large enough to warrant a change in lap times. Also any differences in physics between 2048's HD content and the PS3s HD content would cause a lot of issues during crossplay, you would probably experience issues such as desynchronization and lots of other client side specific glitches.
I think it's safe to say any perceived differences between physics in 2048's HD content and HD on the PS3 comes down to the difference in frame rate and how that makes 2048 a lot less responsive. It would also be less work to have the HD content use the same physics system as the PS3 version.
Actually, it is the other way around: You are adding new ships and tracks to a game through DLC, it wouldne less work to make the DLC use the same physics as the game it is DLC for since you would have to completely rewrite the system to allow the use of two different physics systems in the same game. The reason crossplay still works is because the game keeps track of your position and movement client-side, which is why players on the Vita often have a disadvantage against players on the PS3. (Believe it or not, the difference between 30 and 60 frames per second isn't increased input lag, you are thinking of the V-Sync.)
I can agree with you that 30 FPS sucks and that the Vita has inferior controls overall, but the physics ARE in fact different. You said it yourself, your tests were rather unscientific, we'll try Zone Mode! (Speaking of which, the collision detection on The Amphisium (Reverse) in Zone Battle and Detonator is just horrible in 2048.)
The ship's slide around more (in the bad way), they gain more height (which is actually better), the lose more speed while turning, sideshifts are less responsive (they actually seem to not go as far), the ships tend to bounce oddly when thry land (causing you to lose the speed gain from your barrel roll), barrel rolls are less responsive (negating the advantage of having increased height to do them), etcetera.
And I thought I AM that bad ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by mannjon
Nope! Not at all ^_^
I'm sure if you switched to the PS3, you would have significant improvement in lap times. You'd have to get acquainted with the handling differences, but in general, I think you'd find the ships in the PS3 HD handle far more accurately and responsively. I've even noticed on certain tracks that when playing the Vita DLC, I've hit a "ceiling" that acts like a wall. Take Talon's Junction Reverse: the barrel roll over the mag strip can be done pretty easily (with a turbo of course) on the PS3. But on the Vita, I've hit an invisible ceiling that prevented the roll from being possible. My theory is that you get more height on the Vita, as has been previously noted already. While the map might be the same, it could be that the extra little bit of lift is to blame. I'm not saying this particular roll isn't possible, but it requires more precision and you have to nose down slightly on the Vita. This in turn causes less of a boost from the roll, so even if you land it, there is a 0.5 - 0.25 second difference from the PS3 version. This isn't the only spot too.
On Ubermall FWD for example, the triple roll possible after the hump before the chicane leading to the cat turn is relatively easy to do on the PS3. But on the Vita, after you land the first roll, and execute the second roll immediately after it, you get too much lift to land in the sweet spot to be able to sideshift and make the third one. Instead of landing on the speed pad, you'll hit the wall beside it or land off the track. The margin for error is extremely close, while the PS3 is much more forgiving. Once again, it isn't impossible to do, but it requires more precision to do. After three laps on venom, this means a loss of around 3-5 seconds or so total just from missing that one roll. Even if you are able to land all three rolls every lap, you'd have to alter your racing line to the point where you would lose a few tenths of a second to be able to pull it off (you have to nose down for the first roll over the hump which almost negates the benefit of the first roll. So while this isn't conclusive proof, I think there is more than enough evidence that the physics are to blame, and not the framerate.
*Sorry Amaroq! I had no idea Vatz was your brother! ^_^*
WAIT!
How are you guys gaining more height to br?? I barely get any height to br >.<
I don't know why but my ships have a habit of pitching down their noses without my input. Its like Pulse where the ships just nose dive for me, strange :P
I only really dislike the "apparent handling difference" when racing Phantom, it becomes a nightmare, Feisar is to responsive and anything lower is to heavy to handle for me. I also get this annoying problem where the ships just bounce off the walls even after the slightest scrape. It makes Zone incredibly difficult as well.
That's another thing to point out though, it may not be different physics but the lower frame rate means Phantom looks, feels and is faster than normal and same for the other speed classes meaning reaction times are severely limited. Its kinda like:
Venom = Flash
Flash = Rapier
Rapier = Phantom
Phantom = Super Phantom and depending on the track even Zen.
It is down to the frame rate but I do feel like there is something else behind the experience I get and I think the physics may have been tampered with but I have no evidence to prove that.
It may or may not actually be more air, but it feels like the ships hang more on the Vita. More often than not, it is a hindrance because the ships despite having more air time, don't seem to roll as responsively which ultimately just means losing a few tenths of a second or just not rolling. You gain more height, but it is meaningless essentially. It might just be a graphical discrepancy where it appears like there is more height but there really isn't.
The framerates DO in fact seem to speed things up slightly. But at the same time, I think having different physics could also be to blame. The controls seem considerably less responsive, which could account for the perceived speed difference. That is to say that having less responsive controls is akin to having less control over turns, which is generally one difference between speed classes: you have less time and less of a margin of error.
Are you using the dpad or the stick for control? I found that when using the stick, it does seem to nose down more. Dpad doesn't seem to produce the same phenomenon.