Flatout

[Kolzig]

Anybody in the Idle T forums interested in this upcoming Finnish superb arcade racing game?

The game is created by Bugbear, the makers of the excellent racing game Rally Trophy.

http://www.flatoutgame.com/

It's coming out 5th of November and for example play.com has £17.99 (!!!) as it's launch price.

I've already pre ordered the game, it looks to be a sweet game.

And it's being made for PC, PS2 and also X-Box.

The physics engine in the game is groundbreaking.

[Huz]

OK I'm getting it.

(Seriously, based on these screenshots alone.)

[Huz]

Wait, ragdoll drivers? With the trailer entirely devoted to running them over? What the hell? That is not cool.

Plus the web site has a massive image of a cassette tape obscuring the text. Screw this game! Also, I am John Kerry.

[Jake]

Click "none" on the tape casette to make it go away.

[toblix]

That trailer was positively gruesome. It looks like they may have crossed the line from comedy pain ragdoll tumbling to horribly real shrieks of pain and cracking bones and blood trickling from mouth in painful awkward silence. The physics look cool, but if it's going to be all about the corpse being mangled underneath passing cars (in other words, a Horrible Car Accident Simulator!), I don't see much of a game.

[manny_c44]

Yeah, you don't, but there are a million 12 year olds dying to show this game off to their parents and psychologists.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

So the violence is gratuitous, then.

How original.

[OftenK]

That's a lot of tires.

[Erkki]

Yeah, they have definitely crossed the line here. Not interested.

[Kolzig]

Hmmm?

The ragdoll thing ain't the main point of Flatout, the racing is, it's a racing game.

It's sometimes strange when people immediately take some small thing and magnify it into some huge "omfg this thing is a ragdoll driver running over car game."

And about the tires, I just chose random pics that just happened to be full of tires, because those pics show off the physics engine.

[Jaero]

Ah, yet another thing that merits a Cantankerous Rant™!

Kolzig, here's the thing. This is not a racing game. This is a game, sure enough, and it has many elements of a racing game, and damn good graphics. What it lacks is a design team with the ability to depart from the meaningless adolescent power-fantasies, in which I throw the 'gratuitous violence' concept. See, to have a racing game, you have to get one thing straight. Nascar is a bunch of left turns, it isn't very exciting. NFS Underground and especially Burnout 3 have really hit it right on, to give the player a profound sense of freedom (this is very much what sells the GTA games). That you can basically do anything within the outline of the game's concept. Well, whatever - what I'm getting at is this - those games are Racing games. Why isn't Flatout? Gee... could it be... 'racers' are smart enough to wear freaking SEATBELTS? Not even seatbelts, a harness!

To me, this game is Manhunt. A game I haven't played, nor will I ever. Why? I've been desensitized enough through TV and movies that aren't even a fraction as violent. There's no reason or value in it. Maybe I would see it differently if I weren't in a long-term relationship, and had little need to show my more sensitive side, but maybe not. I hope one doesn't justify the absurdity of Flatout by saying "but Burnout 3 was a crash-test simulator!"... the thing is, it didn't involve hurting people. It involved inanimate objects. Sure, the crashes were violent and all, but sane people find that when you're not mowing down hookers in your Miata, or seeing how fucking far you can fly out your windshield, it can be fun instead of border-psychotic.

I appreciate that some companies like Rockstar and (whoever is making Flatout) are trying to push the boundaries. That's great. The industry really needs to expand its horizons. But here's the thing. It's games like this, Leisure Suit Larry, Grand Theft Auto, and Manhunt that are being used as scapegoats by the media, in cases of murder and equally despicable acts, and it's not just the game companies that suffer - it's the entire industry. We wonder why there are states in which the First Amendment has been ruled to not apply to video games because someone declared that they are not capable of 'presenting ideas' (other than of course, how far one can launch a corpse, or how many blood sprites can you pile up before your framerate drops). It's games like Flatout that push the bounds in the absolute wrong direction, which draw us ever closer to having to need to call and pleed with our Congressmen to save the medium in which we love. I pray it never comes to that.

It's a damned shame that these children have spoiled their entire game with one 'cool' feature. If not for that, I too would have played it on day 1. Yes, I play First Person Shooters. I'm not preaching that violence in video games is the Devil™, but this kind is more senseless and needless than anything. The game would be absolutely fine, and awesome, without it. I shutter to think at the faces of all the mothers and fathers, and people who possess an actual sense of right and wrong, when they see this game in action.

[Erkki]

It's sometimes strange when people immediately take some small thing and magnify it into some huge "omfg this thing is a ragdoll driver running over car game."

The developers did that when they made the trailer.

[Kolzig]

So if they had not made that video things would be a little different?

[Erkki]

possibly. I didn't look at much else.

[toblix]

Kolzig, do you think it's positively crazy that people get the impression the game is about mangling corpses when the trailer contains 98 per cent corpse-mangling? If the game isn't about mangling, I suggest they mangle the people who made the mangling trailer.

[Huz]

My thoughts exactly, Jaero. This could quite easily have been a game about hurling cars around a track and smashing inanimate objects about, but for no reason the developer has seen fit to make it gratuitously violent instead of just plain fun. Or so it seems.

Kolzig, the 'corpse mangling' aspect may well be a small part of the game, but the trailer hardly suggests that, does it? I find it hard to believe that you can't see this. You know how they try to sell movies differently to different audiences? The trailer suggests they are trying to sell this game to fucking loons, which suggests it is aimed at fucking loons and therefore not the kind of game the average non-fucking loon would like to play. Perhaps I'm over-analysing the near 100% human-mashing content of the trailer here, though.

Yes, I guess if the trailer didn't exist, it wouldn't seem like the "ragdoll pain and realistic snapped vertebrae effects omg!!!!1" were such a big deal. As it is, it just highlights how the developers have tainted a perfectly good "car game" by making it about the people inside them. Very few "car games" do that, and I don't believe anyone ever thinks of other drivers while tearing around the Indy 500 track backwards in a misguided attempt to cause as much mayhem as possible. Er, possibly unless they're doing it in real life.

[Emotion Magnet]

im not usually really easily offended but ..

thats just fucking sick.. ive been a car accident and i thought my mom had died.. .. i really didnt need to see that ...

[Kolzig]

http://www.m4driving.it/article/8/14840.html

[Jaero]

Thanks for posting it, Kolzig. See, here's the thing that gets me, the real tragedy of this game (which lies in these answers):

The damage seems to be one of the strongest points in your work. Did you use some innovative features for it?

*** The physics system is in-house built and it is one of the most impressive engines at the moment. It allows us to use up to several thousands of interactive objects on the track. This combined with the 40 different deforming damage points in each car allows for a truly spectacular show. The technology for the physics including the ragdoll is definitely cutting-edge and it is perhaps one of the best currently used in racing games.

You used a very original way to create your soundtrack: picking music from unsigned bands... how it was?

*** I believe that this was the right approach. FlatOut is rough around edges, it is not a shiny corporate product, but a real work of passion by talented game developers. The unsigned bands and their great tunes match this too. Music made with passion fits the game really well.

Altough FlatOut doesn't simulate real cars, is there a realistic handling in the game?

*** The handling could be called convincing instead of realistic. We didn't want to make a simulator, but a more arcade feeling game with a lot of fun in it. I think we succeed in marrying the physics, a real driving feel, ease of driving and fun pretty well.

To me it seems that there doesn't have to be only one Burnout 3. That game is great, but not the end of the discussion in the genre. Even from the first Burnout, it was known as a crash-test simulator. Flatout on the other hand had the opportunity to take it one step farther, closer to the pinnacle of perfection, and instead - I think - took a nose dive right off the damn cliff. Doesn't seem to be the smartest course of action, unless their final testament of the physics engine is for them to test it on themselves.

I would play this game, were it not such a terrible attempt to be violent (yeah, again, I play Shooters too) but also put such a real twist on it that it becomes desplicable. Burnout was something enjoyable because you could create car crashes and flip your car this way and that, play replays, and cause great havoc - that will sell any game. I admit that I did laugh with joy a few times when I played it. What Burnout did not do was (insensitively or not) introduce a sense of mortality that is in fact, no joke. People do fly out of windshields and die horrible needless deaths. They go splat on the sides of great tree trunks, they get crushed and body parts are severed. In your lifetime, you will know someone who becomes a victim of this if you don't already. Maybe in Finland it is not such a problem as it is in the states, and if it's simply an oversight their marketing folks made, or whether they just didn't care, I find it unforgivable.

Were I to have caught one of the designers before the design document were finalized, I would have given them adequate feedback - because this game could have been saved, unlike Manhunt. I would say that perhaps it would be more appropriate to make the 'ragdolls' into Crash Test Dummies (either the band, or the real dummies; both would work). That way, you still get the ragdolls, but they are not real people. I agree that the physics engine is nigh-flawless, even though it's not entirely realistic (which it isn't meant to be). But the scenes I see are in real world settings. I would say detatch it from the real world - set it in the future, or in another setting, any setting would be better than ours. That way, you get all the Flatout, and none of the twisted maniacal gratuitous madness... etc.

The second quote is fodder for my last point. I really like the answer Bugbear gave to that question. I like the fact that they approached unsigned artists to give the game a more finished 'Flatout' touch. It's a great way to give deserving artists exposure, which everyone could use. What I fear is that due to the nature of the game, and how it may be received when it's launched, is that it might do absolutely nothing to better the careers of those artists, or worse.

[Metalmickey]

Ok, gonna try not to write too much here, and restrict myself to a few disctinct points:

1. I'm drunk, as is often the case when I get round to sitting at my PC and browsing these forums, so please forgive any inevitable oversights (Hmm, probably the 1st time I've bothered to point that out ).

2. I went to the sight and browsed the various sections. From reading the previous posts, I got the impression that the entire site was focussed around the ragdoll driver physics. I was surprised to also find some nice screenshots, news, band info, the big f*ck-off cassette (which is worth going through), a busy forum, and about 10 trailers, of which the ragdoll one happens to be at the top of the list. However, it's called the "Ragdoll" Trailer ffs, so it's not like it's supposed to be representative of the gameplay as a whole, it's just a trailer specifically designed to show off the ragdoll physics... just like if you saw a "Weapons" Trailer for Half-Life 2 or Doom3, you would expect it to show off some serious violence, and not be representative of the story, level design, general gameplay, or level of immersion, etc. If 2 more trailers are released over the coming weeks, and the ragdoll movie drops down to the 3rd in the list, would you still be so convinced that mangling your driver is the main focus of their entire marketing drive?

3. I applaud you for having a go at the gratituously violent marketing trend amongst certain games these days, which do seem to deliberately target audiences who are below the age ratings that the games are inevitably going to be given. Personally, I've become bored of being called a pussy, etc, from arguing with casual gamer idiots, and it's nice to find somewhere like IdleThumbs where people will actually debate stuff (reasonably) sensibly

4. However, I do think this particular game has been blown out of proportion by this 1 trailer. I have a slight problem with the GTA3 series, and a bigger one with manhunt, since there's no way around the fact that one of the neccesary goals of the game is to be as psychotic and sadistic as possible. However, I think it's too early to judge this game and assume that the driving/racing parts won't be worthy of merit in themselves, and worth buying/playing the game for. After all, sticking gruesome ragdoll driver physics into a racing game is not going to stop me from appreciating the racing, as long as it's not a necessary part of the game's progression...

[Jaero]

Wow, drunks can make good points and just statements. That's a new one on me. Well said.

Admittedly, I didn't give the site much time. I might have discovered some redeeming features if I did. And I do admit when I come across games like this, I write them off into the same category of "Shit I Wouldn't Play". This is something I would work on, but sometimes it's a Catch 22 where if I do a good job and judge a game properly, that would involve me playing it. I feel I've been desensitized enough.

However, given the physics engine, I suspect (and I don't know this for sure), the whole 'ragdoll' concept seems like something they threw in just because they could. In Ernest W. Adam's words... "Bad Game Designer! No Twinkie!" If this game had an option in the menu where one could entirely disable the whole ragdoll feature, I might give it a swing.

Thanks for adding your drunken insight, Metalmickey. I always prefer ranting with others, and not to others. It's boring to talk to myself, whether or not my voice sounds good.

[Metalmickey]

Hey, thanks cantak...cantankerer... Jaero I've already spotted a couple of typos despite previewing it at least twice, but I need sleep now, as the clocks went back and my body's telling me it's after 3am already, despite what my PC says... Look forward to ranting with you later

[Emotion Magnet]

this game isnt even on our computers at software ect. ... wierd

[Erkki]

Heh. I looked at the site again and found the scrollbar in the downloads page. It was not very noticeable so previously I thought the Ragdoll Trailer was the ONLY trailer. But it doesn't change much.

Now I also looked at the Extras page and there were two minigames about crashing test dummies.

[RLacey]

I'm more interested in Trackmania: Sunrise myself...