About Carmageddon 2 engine.. its the best

Rickard · Post by **Rickard** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:36 am

Please say that you are using the same engine

or one that is as versatile as Carmageddon 2´s.

After modding the carmaegddon 2 with Volvo 240 and

all other of the best available cars i find it the best

crash/demolition game of all times.
My carmageddon 2 video <<<<<<< Pretty cool i use the same music in 2007 that the developers use in their video

flykas · Post by **flykas** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:54 am

I've read that they are using the same just updated engine! yee !

Igoreso · Post by **Igoreso** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:10 am

Waht?

toffvs · Post by **toffvs** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:22 am

flykas wrote:I've read that they are using the same just updated engine! yee !

Most interesting! Do you have a source for this? Carma 2 is one of the best games ever made...

Killimanjaro · Post by **Killimanjaro** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:27 pm

It would be preety cool if they'd use the carmageddon 2 Engine..But i'm sure they will use a custom made engine.

BattleMetalChris · Post by **BattleMetalChris** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:47 pm

Why would it be "cool"? Carmageddon 2 is a 10-year-old game (optimised for 10-year-old hardware). I'd much rather they use software from , well.. this decade (this millenium even)

Killimanjaro · Post by **Killimanjaro** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 4:16 pm

It would run on 10 years old computer for sure,and this would be the primary reason it's cool,for me.The other reason would be nostalgia.As long as they have an engine that can run on older computers,it's good.

Toshiba-3 · Post by **Toshiba-3** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 4:20 pm

The technology behind C2 has obviously evolved a lot!

You can check the features on Stainless' site actually: http://www.stainlessgames.com/corporate/go/33

I don't worry for the engine :)

flykas · Post by **flykas** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 4:30 pm

The source is somewhere on this forum or site I'll try to find it. But it doesn't mean it would run on 10 year old computer. It is updated so it's now a decent engine wich would requre decent hardware. For me it would be cool because it had damage technology that you can't find anywhere even now with few exeptions. (1nsane..) So I try to imagine how good it can be with nowdays technolgies and power of hardware.

TurboDonkey007 · Post by **TurboDonkey007** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 5:09 pm

Beelzeebub was used in Carma 2 (i think) and the engine is always/has been updated and will be used for Reincarnation according to one of the Stainless staff on this board.

BattleMetalChris · Post by **BattleMetalChris** » Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:11 pm

Killimanjaro wrote:It would run on 10 years old computer for sure,and this would be the primary reason it's cool,for me.The other reason would be nostalgia.As long as they have an engine that can run on older computers,it's good.

I'm sorry, but this is a stupid reason. If you want to play a 10 year old game on a 10 year old PC, go play Carma 1. If everyone thought like this, we'd still be playing Pong.

I want to play a modern game on modern hardware, with all the advantages that technology orders of magnitude more powerful brings.

beatfreak · Post by **beatfreak** » Sat Jun 11, 2011 4:45 am

i played C2 a few days ago and i can't stand the graphics anymore. Even with some hires textures and full-hd resolution the game looks very aged. But that doesn't matter.

Take a look at Valve. They are still using the source engine, which still include elements of the 15 year old quake-engine. They are still developing the engine and good games are made with it.

TheMarmosetKing · Post by **TheMarmosetKing** » Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:28 am

Sure, C2 looked better. And the destruction was nice. But going from C1 to C2 I thought that the car to car impact lost nearly all of its punch. In C1, ramming an APC at full speed felt solid. C2 impacts just felt spongy by comparison.

Simply my opinion, but there it is.

Igoreso · Post by **Igoreso** » Sat Jun 11, 2011 12:51 pm

beatfreak wrote:which still include elements of the 15 year old quake-engine.

This is 99% wrong. Read this - and that's about HL1, you probably won't find even 0.01% of Quake code in last version of Source engine (that comes with Portal 2). Valve constantly updates it, but they don't aim for high-end computers, instead they aim for low-end and middle-end ones - so more people can enjoy their games. And that doesn't mean graphics are worse than, say, in some UE3 game.

Rickard · Post by **Rickard** » Sun Jun 12, 2011 10:30 am

The only thing i want is a engine that is as good as in Carmageddon 2.

But i would like to have better graphics to.

harshit · Post by **harshit** » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:28 pm

I think this is 1 of the best game i have ever played

Mintydog · Post by **Mintydog** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:09 pm

lol it doesnt have to be best graphics ever, just nice and fun, and still cartoony. The damage on carma 2 was great too, had me laughing when a car splits in half, I hope that happens again!

ForeignKid · Post by **ForeignKid** » Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:12 pm

TheMarmosetKing wrote:Sure, C2 looked better. And the destruction was nice. But going from C1 to C2 I thought that the car to car impact lost nearly all of its punch. In C1, ramming an APC at full speed felt solid. C2 impacts just felt spongy by comparison.

All true except the prat where C2 looked better.. how did it look better with that grayish, depressive, pale palette? C1 looked way better (im talking about models and textures, and of course the palette)..

Take the good old HalfLife and the new.. lets say.. all other fancy games(except valves).. they all suck)(well most of them).. its not about the games Graphics, its about Aesthetics!!

TheCoach wrote:http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3201-Graphics-vs-Aesthetics
Carmageddon 1 has good aesthetics, Carmageddon 2 doesn't. That's why while it's fun to mod and do random stuff in C2, it isn't even nearly as engaging or good looking as C1

jimccar · Post by **jimccar** » Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 am

Mintydog wrote:lol it doesnt have to be best graphics ever, just nice and fun, and still cartoony. The damage on carma 2 was great too, had me laughing when a car splits in half, I hope that happens again!

This is a good point, the physics were forgiving to say the least. I had a friend walk in and watch me play carma 2 for about 30 seconds and go, "oh the car's like a tank" and then walk off, that sort of stuck with me. If the new car model physics are at least GTA San Andreas, or Grid level I'm set.

Carmageddon · Post by **Carmageddon** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:14 am

As far as I knew the old engine was licensed by (now defunct?) Argonaut Software aka BRender (or Blazing Renderer) and was used in both Carmageddon 1 and 2.

I have to add Carmageddon 2's graphics looked bad and out of theme for the franchise, looking more cartoonish than nitty-grtty along with everything else in the game.

It would be great if the engine had great performance/quality and allowed users to easily customise the game (customising would be a great bonus, with use generated content like new maps, cars, peds).

BattleMetalChris wrote:Why would it be "cool"? Carmageddon 2 is a 10-year-old game (optimised for 10-year-old hardware). I'd much rather they use software from , well.. this decade (this millenium even)

Thank you! Nostalgia is one thing but that would be ridiculous and pointless. Even the old Diesel Engine from the old FlatOut with its physics would be ok, but the BRender engine used for Carmageddon 2, I think I'd cry.

Carmageddon · Post by **Carmageddon** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:26 am

Mintydog wrote:lol it doesnt have to be best graphics ever, just nice and fun, and still cartoony. The damage on carma 2 was great too, had me laughing when a car splits in half, I hope that happens again!

I hope you don't mean the graphics when you say "cartoony". Personally I hated the cartoonish look in Carmageddon 2, it looked more like lego land than the dark and dangerous place Carmageddon should be. Though if you mean "cartoony" regarding gameplay as in outrageous stunts and crazy things that happen then I agree. One of the best things about Carmageddon was it's "Every day carnage" lol.

toffvs · Post by **toffvs** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:38 pm

I think that some of you are missing the point of this thread... I believe what Rickard is referring to is NOT the graphics (which obviously are outdated) ...but to the PHYSICS ENGINE of the game... Crash modelling, gravity, aerodynamics etc. Because the PHYSICS is what made Carma 2 great!

Carmageddon · Post by **Carmageddon** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 2:40 pm

toffvs wrote:I think that some of you are missing the point... I believe what Rickard is referring to.... the PHYSICS ENGINE of the game...

Physics wasn't mentioned at all or even reference in the OP and infact seems more interested in it being easy to mod which I also think is a good idea so we can have lots of user generated content. Also not everyone liked the physics in Carma2 versus 1. Regardless it doesn't matter what part of the engine is being referred to, it's all ancient by tech standards, there isn't a single part of it that so much as holds a candle to engines that are old even by today's standards.

Besides as I said the engine was licensed from Argonaut Software who as far as I know is out of business so it's hard to imagine the engine has even been kept up to date. So there are probably better free engines than BRender as far as I know and better free physics engines such as Bullet, or they could even just use Havok.

I'm sorry but even the thought of using something so old and severely limited is ridiculous, there isn't even a single valid reason. If this discussion was just about what features people would like to see in the new engine great but even remotely suggesting anything from that ancient engine would be even adequate wouldn't do a modern game any favours.

TheMarmosetKing wrote:...going from C1 to C2 I thought that the car to car impact lost nearly all of its punch. In C1, ramming an APC at full speed felt solid. C2 impacts just felt spongy by comparison...

Well said, in C1 when you hit something it felt like a violent impact but in C2 it all felt soft, bouncy and dull. Hitting another car at high speed often felt disappointing even if the crash wasted them.

ForeignKid · Post by **ForeignKid** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:07 am

Carmageddon wrote:
TheMarmosetKing wrote:...going from C1 to C2 I thought that the car to car impact lost nearly all of its punch. In C1, ramming an APC at full speed felt solid. C2 impacts just felt spongy by comparison...

Well said, in C1 when you hit something it felt like a violent impact but in C2 it all felt soft, bouncy and dull. Hitting another car at high speed often felt disappointing even if the crash wasted them.

All thumbs and toes up!!

Also C2 was paperish.. Almost the entire game you were driving a car frame.. All parts were felling off even if you slightly hit something.. I didnt like that at all..

I'm ok with the realistic parts falling thing.. but I think you have to work harder(much harder) to get to the cars frame..

CzechDeath · Post by **CzechDeath** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:10 pm

Yea I can see that stainless made ton of game for PS3 and Xbox360

Im kinda curious what.... um .... what about PC?

I mean Carmageddon:Reincarnation will it be for PC?

Synetearis · Post by **Synetearis** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:23 pm

CzechDeath wrote:Yea I can see that stainless made ton of game for PS3 and Xbox360
Im kinda curious what.... um .... what about PC?

I mean Carmageddon:Reincarnation will it be for PC?

No, only nintendo wii

Igoreso · Post by **Igoreso** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 6:47 pm

And iPhone, you forgot about iPhone. No PC. :(

Deadhart · Post by **Deadhart** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 6:55 pm

Are you guys crazy? Everybody knows they're making the game for DOS only.

Igoreso · Post by **Igoreso** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 7:45 pm

^ You're obvious troll.

Caddy Fat Cat · Post by **Caddy Fat Cat** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:46 pm

For my money, the original Carmageddon pushed the envelope of what collision physics could be. Prior to this game, racing games didn't even really bother modeling crash physics. The damned car just bounced around, and went back on the track, looking as clean as it would on the showroom floor. I never cared about racing games until Carmageddon came along, and still don't. It's so much more than a racing game.

I guess my point is, these guys pioneered the art of car collision physics, and I have full faith that they will do so again, pushing the envelope into a new decade, and introducing their wonderful brand of carnage to a new generation. To "hope" that they'll just update the original physics engine is shortsighted, I believe.

Deadhart · Post by **Deadhart** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:48 pm

Igoreso wrote:^ You're obvious troll.

Goddamnit you've seen through me.

CHRISTIAN · Post by **CHRISTIAN** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:37 pm

I think carma 2 engine is the best, carma 1 is good and tdr sucks but if reincarnation scientist need a basic engine it must to be carma 2 engine carma nose bleed pack engine y don`t know because I never install it so maybe it must to be a good engine to

The CWA Board