28 replies to this topic

[General Taskeen]

The Frostbite is continually enhanced for its 'pre-determined' destruction. It doesn't make it any less cool though - the immersion factor is pretty amazing.



The next Star Wars Battlefront game being made by DICE will be on the same engine as BF4. Do you know how amazing it will be to stomp around in a giant AT-AT and shoot down snow-speeders in General Veers Elite Blizzard Force? All the way awesome.

Edited by General Taskeen, 27 August 2013 - 09:30 AM.

[I am]

General Taskeen, on 27 August 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

The Frostbite is continually enhanced for its 'pre-determined' destruction. It doesn't make it any less cool though - the immersion factor is pretty amazing.



The next Star Wars Battlefront game being made by DICE will be on the same engine as BF4. Do you know how amazing it will be to stomp around in a giant AT-AT and shoot down snow-speeders in General Veers Elite Blizzard Force? All the way awesome.

Wow that looks so much cooler than what we have. I hope the new Titan Fall looks a lot like that, and a lot less like this.

[Wolf Ender]

Mektek is using the Unreal engine for their new Heavy Gear game.

I am fully confident that it will be 100% better than MWO in almost every aspect EXCEPT for one critical factor - it won't be set in the battletech universe and therefore no interest to me. Still, I am sure the guys over at Mektek took a good long look at several game engines and had good reasons for going with Unreal 4

[Argent Usher]

http://www.youtube.c...9AoP5kVLdI#t=17

http://www.gamestar....gine,71664.html


I don't think there is something wrong with the CryEngine Or?

Maybe PGI just needs a triple A staff.

I think the whole MW:O thing needs mooooaaaarrrreeee time and in 1-2 years the gamers outthere will have the needed rigs and the dev team will have the proper skill and CryEngine3 experience ("10000h master skill rule" -> canadian clocks go slower).

[Evox]

Syllogy, on 27 August 2013 - 07:14 AM, said:

Frostbite doesn't have true destructibility. It only allows buildings to be destroyed in pre-determined patterns and deforms land based on pre-defined rules.

This is not true. You can make a volume hole in any wall, in any place of it, even in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (Frostbite 1.5). You can destroy entire building with rocket launcher by getting down its parts one by one. This is not scripted at all. However some destruction events are really scripted to look even better because Frostbite physics still isn't 100% perfect.

Engine performance is also amazing but price is a good argument.

[Captain Katawa]

As far as I know cryingine 1 had everything the game needed including nice visual stuff and great physics with destruction.

However it's silly to ask devs something like that since it would be equal to remaking the game from a scratch.

[Gaan Cathal]

Evox, on 30 August 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

This is not true. You can make a volume hole in any wall, in any place of it, even in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (Frostbite 1.5). You can destroy entire building with rocket launcher by getting down its parts one by one. This is not scripted at all. However some destruction events are really scripted to look even better because Frostbite physics still isn't 100% perfect.

He's not arguing that every building's destruction is scripted. He's saying that the destruction patterns are pre-defined - i.e. when you strip down that building with the rocket launcher as you describe, each 'part' is a pre-defined destruction location (basically, a hitbox). Full deformability, a'la Forgelight, requires a full-voxel terrain system, whereby destruction can propagate from any given point of impact.

Ironically, whilst the Forgelight system makes more intuitive sense (destructive radius is centred on your point of impact), the Frostbite setup actually achieves a higher facsimile of realism at this stage because the 'hitboxes' are design to destruct in a realistic fashion. Spheroid-voxel destruction sort of makes everything an antimatter or gravity shock weapon depending on if you have debris retention.

[Evox]

Gaan Cathal, on 30 August 2013 - 08:48 AM, said:

He's not arguing that every building's destruction is scripted. He's saying that the destruction patterns are pre-defined - i.e. when you strip down that building with the rocket launcher as you describe, each 'part' is a pre-defined destruction location (basically, a hitbox). Full deformability, a'la Forgelight, requires a full-voxel terrain system, whereby destruction can propagate from any given point of impact.

Ironically, whilst the Forgelight system makes more intuitive sense (destructive radius is centred on your point of impact), the Frostbite setup actually achieves a higher facsimile of realism at this stage because the 'hitboxes' are design to destruct in a realistic fashion. Spheroid-voxel destruction sort of makes everything an antimatter or gravity shock weapon depending on if you have debris retention.

This makes sense. I didn't know that. Actually a very smart move by Frostbite team considering modern computing power limitations. Not aiming for beauty of the technology but for the result.
It also explains how Medal of Honor managed to suck in destruction even though it's using the same engine version as Battlefield 3 (Frostbite 2).

[GRiPSViGiL]

I do love me some Destruction and have long played the BF series. I have opted to play MWO instead of BF4 even though they are bringing back commander.

I think EAs embracing of the console side of the game turned me off of it. I played in the Alpha of BF4 but it just didn't excite me.

Edited by GRiPSViGiL, 30 August 2013 - 11:06 PM.