- Welcome to Stunts Forum.
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 20, 2024, 08:06:12 PMFlight sims and racing sims are very different. I dare to say that a flight sim is easier.
But to give a bit of perspective in what made stunts I'll summarise some bits and pieces from elsewhere on the forum.
It started with another project by other people. They designed a driving simulator that they wanted to sell as instructional setup. It had a real cabin and controls and was very expensive.
It worked, but they couldn't sell it. Until they were asked to make a game of it. It went into the arcades as "hard driving".
It was a hit. Well worth the heavy investments. But it was bound to the arcades.
When home computers evolved and became "strong enough" to run something similar several companies tried to make one for home computers.
Stunt driver is one, it's ok. Didn't last.
DSI started a game with the title "skid marks" and in an early promotion it has a track that is very similar to hard driving with even the barn in the right place.
Before the release they added more track elements and changed the name to STUNTS.
But the inspiration that was taken from hard driving is unmistakable.
Hard driving was ported to pc later. But in my opinion is STUNTS still the best racing game of that time.
But to give a bit of perspective in what made stunts I'll summarise some bits and pieces from elsewhere on the forum.
It started with another project by other people. They designed a driving simulator that they wanted to sell as instructional setup. It had a real cabin and controls and was very expensive.
It worked, but they couldn't sell it. Until they were asked to make a game of it. It went into the arcades as "hard driving".
It was a hit. Well worth the heavy investments. But it was bound to the arcades.
When home computers evolved and became "strong enough" to run something similar several companies tried to make one for home computers.
Stunt driver is one, it's ok. Didn't last.
DSI started a game with the title "skid marks" and in an early promotion it has a track that is very similar to hard driving with even the barn in the right place.
Before the release they added more track elements and changed the name to STUNTS.
But the inspiration that was taken from hard driving is unmistakable.
Hard driving was ported to pc later. But in my opinion is STUNTS still the best racing game of that time.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 04:27:37 PMDeltar doesn't count, because the simulation method used there wouldn't work on a 286 CPU, to which we were referring, while the method used in the flight simulator would and actually did, because there were versions for IBM PC.
Posted by Overdrijf
- February 20, 2024, 04:19:18 PMQuote from: Matei on February 20, 2024, 03:44:35 PMActually, physics simulations existed much earlier than that:
https://fshistory.simflight.com/fsh/index.htm
Actually, would Deltar count? It was a purpose build analog computer, first put in use in 1960 but with prototyping going back as far as 1944, in which electrical current, voltage, resistance and capacity were used to model the equivalent principles in water. It ran simulations/calculations for building the Delta Works, the famous Dutch dike system in the province of Zeeland. I've always thought that was a cool bit of simulation, if distressingly lacking in a way to race in it. The graphics presumably sucked too.
Although I guess if I'm counting that I may have to count the computers the US army and navy pursued during WW2 for ballistics calculations as well. That might cross the border from simulation into just calculation though.
Posted by Duplode
- February 20, 2024, 04:17:22 PMIn any case, I don't think there's anything on the table here to justify a passionate argument. On the one hand, it's obvious that Stunts doesn't provide a comprehensive, realistic physics model; on the other hand, it does incorporate a number of aspects of car dynamics, perhaps more than would be expected for an arcade racing game of the era. There's no need to argue semantics, it's clear enough what everyone means.
Posted by Chulk
- February 20, 2024, 03:57:26 PMQuote from: Matei on February 20, 2024, 03:12:14 PMI think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics.You shouldn't speak as if you knew every answer to every question only because you posted about it in your blog. I don't think there is one thing in this world you can name and 100% of people would agree, and that is even more true when talking about leisure activities and what people find fun. Heck, you can't even get 100% asking people "do you want to live?".
Also, you keep saying "this or that is better". Better is completely subjective and while many people may think X is better, other may say Y is better. And they are both entitled to their opinion.
We are here because we think Stunts is better than most (if not the best) racing game, whether you like or not.
So please, be a little more careful about the words you choose and how you phrase your opinions. Remember they are opinions and not universal truths.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 03:44:35 PMActually, physics simulations existed much earlier than that:
https://fshistory.simflight.com/fsh/index.htm
The knowledge is even older:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooke%27s_Law
But that was exactly my idea, that Stunts is more realistic than most driving games that came after it, which gives it a historical significance.
https://fshistory.simflight.com/fsh/index.htm
The knowledge is even older:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooke%27s_Law
But that was exactly my idea, that Stunts is more realistic than most driving games that came after it, which gives it a historical significance.
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 20, 2024, 03:30:39 PMQuote from: Matei on February 20, 2024, 03:12:14 PMI don't think the physics model is very simplified because of the hardware limitations, I think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics. I mean look at the driving games made after 1995 and until now. How many of them have decent physics models?First, stunts is a 1990 game. Physics engines didn't exist yet.
Secondly,
QuoteI think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics.realistic or not, that is a matter of taste. It's still a physics model.
And stunts feels more realistic than many games that came behind.
Thirdly, I'm sure there are games with better physics now that could function on a 286, but that knowledge wasn't there in 1990.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 03:12:14 PMI don't think the physics model is very simplified because of the hardware limitations, I think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics. I mean look at the driving games made after 1995 and until now. How many of them have decent physics models? I'm pretty sure that what Mr. Simon Hasur describes in the second video here could have functioned perfectly on a 286 CPU:
https://matei.one/games.html#video
...considering that:
https://worldofspectrum.net/item/0004969/
When I was using Window$ 98 I had tens of driving games and none of them was good, except for Wild Metal Country, which wasn't with cars.
https://matei.one/games.html#video
...considering that:
https://worldofspectrum.net/item/0004969/
When I was using Window$ 98 I had tens of driving games and none of them was good, except for Wild Metal Country, which wasn't with cars.
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 20, 2024, 02:47:26 PMStunts has a physics model, it is just very simplified because of the hardware limitations at the time. But it's a clever setup and is many ways ahead of it's time.
It may not meet your standards, but the game has a physics and collision engine. It has pathfinding for the automated opponents. A very powerful track editor for it's time that can make millions (not a joke) of different tracks.
It supports car engine parameters almost straight from the car manual for gear ratios among other things.
Try not to down talk stunts so much. We are passionate about it and your ignorance could be taken badly by some.
I apologise for misremembering the of the shelf physics engine you used.
It may not meet your standards, but the game has a physics and collision engine. It has pathfinding for the automated opponents. A very powerful track editor for it's time that can make millions (not a joke) of different tracks.
It supports car engine parameters almost straight from the car manual for gear ratios among other things.
Try not to down talk stunts so much. We are passionate about it and your ignorance could be taken badly by some.
I apologise for misremembering the of the shelf physics engine you used.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 12:54:30 PMI used Open Dynamics Engine for one game and some functions made by me for the other one. Stunts doesn't have a physics model. With a physics model, on those tracks, this is how you have to drive:
https://redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=fboYtJTuLMc
https://redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=fboYtJTuLMc
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 20, 2024, 09:46:16 AMI have a strange working mind. So I often miss things other find important. Even after reading back i don't see it. So I'm sorry about that. One track mind I guess.
I'll check out the link to China later. .
As for graphics, we sort off have that covered with CAS his graphics engine. It can already generate gameplay videos from replay dump files.
The difficult part is doing 'the same trick' in live gameplay. You used bullet physics if I'm not mistaken. I think we want to try and build something like that with the stunts game core physics model. Not an easy feat. But not impossible either.
You could for instance plug it into your game as an optional feature.
You have a lot of knowledge about game making on the level we are. I personally consider that an asset if you are willing to help with this. Share your expertise, and maybe we can help you with getting your games to the next level as well.
And looping back to your email from 2014.
Stunts is not freeware. It is abandoned. The right are (just as prince of Persia) owned by Ubisoft. Ubisoft owns TrackMania now. So as long as we don't threaten that game we are quite safe.
I'll check out the link to China later. .
As for graphics, we sort off have that covered with CAS his graphics engine. It can already generate gameplay videos from replay dump files.
The difficult part is doing 'the same trick' in live gameplay. You used bullet physics if I'm not mistaken. I think we want to try and build something like that with the stunts game core physics model. Not an easy feat. But not impossible either.
You could for instance plug it into your game as an optional feature.
You have a lot of knowledge about game making on the level we are. I personally consider that an asset if you are willing to help with this. Share your expertise, and maybe we can help you with getting your games to the next level as well.
And looping back to your email from 2014.
Stunts is not freeware. It is abandoned. The right are (just as prince of Persia) owned by Ubisoft. Ubisoft owns TrackMania now. So as long as we don't threaten that game we are quite safe.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 08:46:30 AMI noticed your tendency to focus on the least important parts of my messages. Anyway:
https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=2482.0
https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=3760.0
So you're interested in reverse engineering. As I understand, Chinese people are really good at that.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/g23303922/china-copycat-air-force/
If you want to use software rendering, I can help you with the graphics.
https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=2482.0
https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=3760.0
So you're interested in reverse engineering. As I understand, Chinese people are really good at that.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/g23303922/china-copycat-air-force/
If you want to use software rendering, I can help you with the graphics.
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 20, 2024, 08:27:46 AMOf course we noticed your games. And several of us played them. I will to when I have the time (have not played anything for months now since I just bought a new house and it takes a lot of my free time).
The point with stunts is that we like the physics and collision engine, its a strange mix of arcade and simulation driving in pseudo physics. We wanted to port it all to C to be able to just upgrade the graphic engine. That is a Mammoth task and we are with a small group.
Our current goal is to try and isolate the engine core and place it in a new shell.
To keep the essence but upgrade everything around it. And reverse compatible with the original if possible.
The point with stunts is that we like the physics and collision engine, its a strange mix of arcade and simulation driving in pseudo physics. We wanted to port it all to C to be able to just upgrade the graphic engine. That is a Mammoth task and we are with a small group.
Our current goal is to try and isolate the engine core and place it in a new shell.
To keep the essence but upgrade everything around it. And reverse compatible with the original if possible.
Posted by Matei
- February 20, 2024, 12:10:50 AMThanks for the link. I never suggested that you leave Stunts behind, but quite the contrary. You seem to want to leave it behind, because that's what something "exactly like Stunts" means. I actually play with Stunts myself, as well as with other old games for DOS, sometimes. What's new compared to 2014 is that now I can use tracks from Stunts in Simcar (it will take a while but I just got everything I need), I have some improved graphical functions and thanks to those, since 2018 Skunks has a menu, which quite a few people asked me to do... before 2012.
From Amtix magazine, 13 November 1986, page 84:
This is about Elite for ZX Spectrum:
https://worldofspectrum.net/item/0001601/
[edit]
I don't know if anyone noticed, but I already have 2 games and there are significant differences between them. Even if I wanted, I couldn't make one of them play exactly like the other one, although I made both of them.
[/edit]
From Amtix magazine, 13 November 1986, page 84:
QuoteDid you get a lot of help from Braybon and Bell who wrote the original?
Oh yeah - a 6502 hex dump - just a pigging list of numbers. In the end we wrote our version by playing Elite on a Beeb and making ours look the same.
AN EASY JOB
Was it an easy job?
Far from it. When you normally write a program, if something doesn't work, you just throw it away and try something else. But we had to produce something that looked the same.
But at least you had a framework.
Yes but things that just sort of happened in the Acorn version were really an effort to copy for the Spectrum. We had to mimic what were really bugs!
This is about Elite for ZX Spectrum:
https://worldofspectrum.net/item/0001601/
[edit]
I don't know if anyone noticed, but I already have 2 games and there are significant differences between them. Even if I wanted, I couldn't make one of them play exactly like the other one, although I made both of them.
[/edit]
Posted by Daniel3D
- February 19, 2024, 11:25:13 PMWhat makes you think that we want anything else than STUNTS?
I mean, we are aware of your work for a very long time.
See the first mention of your site and work
But there is a reason why we still play STUNTS. And will continue to, unless the same gameplay is featured in a newer game.
Since that hasn't been the case. We stick with what we have.
We like your work. And appreciate it. We will support and help you wherever we can. But don't expect us to leave STUNTS behind in favour of your work.
I mean, we are aware of your work for a very long time.
See the first mention of your site and work
But there is a reason why we still play STUNTS. And will continue to, unless the same gameplay is featured in a newer game.
Since that hasn't been the case. We stick with what we have.
We like your work. And appreciate it. We will support and help you wherever we can. But don't expect us to leave STUNTS behind in favour of your work.