From Gametrailers


Oh wow. I am really in awe at how well these people "get it". How to handle a big, all-platform IP, how to implement Wii motion sensitivity, the style of gameplay you should have on a portable platform, how to get the most out of the PS2, how to respectfully put new content to an existing setting. It all looks like it is done just right. Between this, the new Indiana Jones game and Fissure, LucasArts could very well making a very big resurgence in the next year or so. I can't see myself getting any less than two versions of this game in all honesty. I am a SW nut so I was always going to get this so long as it wasn't offensively bad or I deemed it somehow sacrilegious to the existing source material, but what we seem to have get is God of War with a lightsaber and force powers (it even has red orbs coming off dead enemies!) That is to say an empowering romp through hoards of weak enemies, enough that they can hurt you, but no so many that you can't tear them all apart before that can happen, and topped off with more challenging and even more satisfying boss battle. I should probably acknowledge that this reaction may partially be fanboy optimism and excitement at seeing something shiny and move on.

It was at the last (and sadly I really do mean last) GDC London that I first saw what would become Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. We didn't have any details on the story, which itself is pretty compelling and seems to be aiming to repeat the success of the "Everything but the movie" approach taken by the Shadows of the Empire project.

What we were shown(a similar presentation can be seen here) was an impressive new engine, a combination of tried and true Havoc physics (used well, thankfully, I'm sure a lot of us are tired of seeing it clumsily tacked on) Digital Molecular Matter, which simulated the behaviours of materials , and NaturalMotion's Euphoria animation engine, the part I will probably gush the most over.

So what are these things and what makes me think it's so important they have been brought together like this? I'm sure most gamers already know of Havok, pretty much top-dog where it comes to physics engines, games with even the most trivial use of any kind of physic simulation seems to use it, especially when ragdoll is needed (in so far as it is ever needed)

Euphoria has quickly become quite a big deal, we will be seeing it in GTA4 soon, and is a way to dynamically animate within a game. It is used to simulate a character's body and animate it on the fly rather than use pre-made animations, meaning it can perform actions that would have used a single animation and look a little different each time. When walking, the feet will land appropriately on uneven ground, and the arms can brush against things. In terms of gameplay this does nothing but potentially look cool, but when you consider the engine is causing characters to try and keep their balance, more potential emerges. An example was shown of Indiana Jones stood on a rope bridge, which the demonstrator could jiggle, or throw rocks at him. As the bridge moved, Indy shifted his balance and even grabbed at the hand-ropes, and I have read that GTA 4 will include a section where you must fight to keep balance as you walk home drunk. Not that this sort of thing can't be done without dynamic animation, but it makes what you see quite a lot more 'real', makes the characters behave like they really are part of the world they are seen in.

One of the most apparent uses of Euphoria, certainly in TFU, is the way it replaces conventional ragdoll. Characters can be knocked down into a heap, but then roll over and get back up, without a jarring shift into the first frame of a fixed animation, and they can use parts of their environment to help them get up. Further, characters will try to stop themselves falling by grabbing for support from surrounding objects, even other characters. It all seems together and makes AI characters seem more 'alive'.

Add to this the Digital Molecular Matter and you should have something that simulates just about everything in the world as we see it. The people and the objects within it react against each other appropriately, as can the player. It might not be a huge step forward in gameplay, most of what it does can be done with potted animation, but it just won't look as good. Part of what makes a game rewarding and fun can just be what you see in it, even if the player does not need to act against it.

Should I be concerned that I think it's so cool that technology is coming about that allows for better simulation of corpses being thrown through things?

Oh, and Gametrailers? Less of the RAS Syndrome please?

AJM