Register
Email: Password:
Forum » NOTRIUM 2 PLEASE!

NOTRIUM 2 PLEASE!

natedog 10 years ago
Hey ive been plying notrium since the original version...i think... ne ways i was thinking that u should make a notrium 2.

You could have a continuing from a certain ending

Example: You escaped the planet in an escape pod but now you've lost control and landed on another planet controlled by the UC.
or
You killed all the residents of the planet and made your living there on the remaining aliens and you've been using the nesting grounds to feed yourself. Now the UC marines are back with all their high-tech weapons coming to find out why they lost their outpost.
#
natedog 10 years ago
Oh yeah. And if you read this and have any ideas feel free to leave something here.

Also thank you Ville for creating notrium and wazzle.
#
Redemption 10 years ago
You double posted within two minutes of posting the first one, don't do that use the edit button.

Wazzal

Ville is probably to busy with Cormoon right now.

We all want Notrium 2. You could mod Notrium 1 into Notrium 2 if you had enough time and effort.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
Notrium 3D is the sequel to Notrium 1.341, and was originally going to have multiplayer capabilities, but I'm pretty sure we dropped it. You'll have to wait a very long time until we release a usable release. Before you ask, I'm afraid you're a bit too much of a newbie to help with it.

All your games are belonging to us.
#
ville 10 years ago
I'll just drop in to say that Notrium 3D is not a sequel, it's more like a remake or a fan game.

It'll be a good while before we make a sequel to Notrium, but I'm pretty sure it will be done at some point. Just don't hold your breath.
#
Redemption 10 years ago
"ville" said:
It'll be a good while before we make a sequel to Notrium, but I'm pretty sure it will be done at some point. Just don't hold your breath.

I choose to interpret that as a promise!

*holds breath*
#
Inane 10 years ago
Am I the only one bothered by the apparent appearance of 'uille corp'?

It's VC, not UC.
#
Crazy 10 years ago
Yes, Inane, you are...

But what if Notrium 3D turns out to be much better than the original?
#
Amarth 10 years ago
"Crazy" said:
But what if Notrium 3D turns out to be much better than the original?
Then I would be quite surprised . Let me tell you something, physics engines suck.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
We could animate all the physics... no, that sucks even more.
#
Redemption 10 years ago
As long as dead enemies have radoll ill be happy.
#
Quanrian 10 years ago
"Crazy" said:
Yes, Inane, you are...

But what if Notrium 3D turns out to be much better than the original?

It's quite plausible, though 3D and physics present many more problems than were probably taken into consideration in the first place. The 'real' original wasn't actually all that fancy, if it was people wouldn't of kept requesting more and more. Right now they still need to build an engine, than when that's done they can think about making the game. I really do hope it turns out well, but it's a complicated project and I've seen easier ones dropped.

On the sequel, it's probably going to happen, eventually, as Ville said. Though we're working quite hard on Cormoon now and will be into next year. After Cormoon is done, than we'll see how people feel about a sequel. Though next time I'd probably prefer an engine like Snowblind, which would of been perfect for Notrium. Though it'd probably not be 'quite' as impressive as Snowblind, I can see it being done.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
I like what you did with Cormoon and the layering. Perhaps it's not too late to consider using whatsisname for Notrium 2 instead of Snowblind?

I know, it seems wierd that I forgot, but... whatever.

3D physics is apparently a pain in the arse, because there haven't been amy updates on the Olog-Hai forums.
#
Amarth 10 years ago
3D Physics engines ARE a pain in the bottom. At least, ODE is. It's the main thing stopping our engine now. Well, and exams, of course.

No-one want to license the Havok engine or something?

Nah, we'll get it done. Don't worry. I really don't plan on dropping this one. Might take some time, though. I'm not giving out numbers, sorry .
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
How much to license it? Honestly, if it's such a problem, I'll give you my $20.

It's taking so long that I could do nothing with modeling for another couple weeks and be perfectly fine. I'm not rushing you, Amarth, but please, there must be SOMETHING you haven't considered.
#
Amarth 10 years ago
Well, I don't know. Couple of 1000's of dollars, I suppose.

And there's probably a lot of things we haven't considered yet . I find ODE to be very unstable and hard to control... Perhaps we should simply take a look at another physics engine. Bullet looks interesting.

Or perhaps we should simply drop the physics engine.

Ah, whatever. We should discuss this at my forum. But not right now. I have to catch a train in 15 minutes .
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
A train? Oh, well. Have a nice trip.

How can it be thousands of dollars? I get the feeling that that was a wild guess. I'm doing some reasearch.

[edit] Scratch that last statement. I can't find prices, either. [/edit]
#
ville 10 years ago
Havoc prices? They ask a different price depending on lots of different factors. Havok is not really in the indie price range, as they could easily ask for tens of thousands.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
do you have any idea how to calculate the cost for freeware use?

I seriously think that it'd help. It's taking them quite a while to get anything new to us, mainly because programming physics sucks.
#
ville 10 years ago
You'd have to ask them, but I doubt they'll even consider your offer.

Havok is probably not easier to use than most of the free physics engines, so it's not a solution if the free ones are just hard to use. It is a solution if the simulation is doing weird things and you're doing everything correctly, but I presume that's not the case.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
It definitely sounds like it is, but then again, I'm not the expert.
#
Amarth 10 years ago
"ville" said:
It is a solution if the simulation is doing weird things and you're doing everything correctly, but I presume that's not the case.
Hey! What are you trying to tell us?

I don't know. It's probably not set up right, but I don't see what one could do wrong. And it works mostly, it only is, well, a tiny bit unstable. Wobbly cubes, creeping uphill and all... The Cube of Nightmares...

Anyway, as stated a couple of times on that other website, I won't have much time to look into it. Going away to a far, far country (well, Poland) for a couple of weeks...
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
You feel pretty far where you are right now. Oh, well. Have a nice trip.

In the meanwhile, I know a good game engine site. Maybe I can gather data on what we have and find another one like it? If only I could remember the name...
#
Quanrian 10 years ago
You can easily do Notrium 3d without physics. Honestly I don't know why you guys thought you needed it in the first place. While physics are kewl they're not going to improve the game as drastically as you think. All it's going to do is jack up your development time. Even Havok isn't stable and it costs thousands of dollars. The key to physics is figuring out its limits, things you simply cannot fix, and just avoid doing them as often as possibe, if not entirely.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
Is it possible to partially implement physics so that only some things are affected by it? We originally wanted it so that we could cut down trees and have them fall, and fly off when something exploded nearby. That's not much, is it?
#
Amarth 10 years ago
It should be possible. We could hand-write our own 'physics engine', only accounting for the things that are actually needed. Howaver, I have to admit that I'd hate writing collision detection algorithms and all that stuff. Well, yeah. Axis of separation, here we come.

Oh, next month, that is.
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
I don't want you to have to do more work than you have to. I could always animate the movements, although that'd suck because you'd always die in the same position and stiffly hang off ledges and all that stuff.
#
JimmyJ 10 years ago
Perhaps you guys could hold off on physics for later and implement them later on?
#
Anonymous1157 10 years ago
... And rip a hole in the source code to get it in later? Even I think that's a bad idea.
#
Quanrian 10 years ago
"Anonymous1157" said:
Is it possible to partially implement physics so that only some things are affected by it? We originally wanted it so that we could cut down trees and have them fall, and fly off when something exploded nearby. That's not much, is it?

Make a tree in pieces, have the pieces fall apart in an animation. The fallen piece has a special animation that is triggered when an explosion goes off near it. It's not physics, it's purely done by triggers and animation, hence you don't need physics, you just need to do some creative animation scripting. I can give you many more examples. Trust me when I say games had plenty of kewl stuff without physics. You're cutting your nose off to spite your face so to speak.
#
Bien45 9 years ago
use the havok engine
#
Redemption 9 years ago
This thread is fairly old, and Notrium 3D is at <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.olog-hai.be">http://www.olog-hai.be</a><!-- w -->
#
Forum » NOTRIUM 2 PLEASE!

Post Reply


Your email:
Your name: