33 replies to this topic

[Kylahullu]

River McCain, on 20 July 2012 - 06:21 AM, said:

I agree with the idea, but I also remember MW3 where everything had mass and everything was destructable, it was a laggy nightmare online, great single player though.

But today isn't 2000, but 2012 and engine is uber-modern cryengine 3. It will be foolish at least not to make tree and buildings destruction like in MW4.

[Terror Teddy]

River McCain, on 20 July 2012 - 06:21 AM, said:

I agree with the idea, but I also remember MW3 where everything had mass and everything was destructable, it was a laggy nightmare online, great single player though.

Bad Company 2 had some destructible terrain in the form of buildings and that was up to 32 players. That was a pure shooter.
This will be a more slow paced game so destructible terrain shouldn't be that punishing to performance.

[StainlessSR]

Terror Teddy, on 20 July 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

Bad Company 2 had some destructible terrain in the form of buildings and that was up to 32 players. That was a pure shooter.
This will be a more slow paced game so destructible terrain shouldn't be that punishing to performance.

I think it may be more items that the game has to keep track of that is affecting performance more that BC;
1. Direction of movement
2. speed of movement (not sure of BC but speed is very variable in MWO)
3. amount of torso twist
4. amount of shake from hits
5. heat level
6. ammunition level
7. lockon
any number of other items that i have been unable to think of at this time. Destructible terrain would add a lot more realism to the game (I would love to be able to blow the trees out of my way with a large laser then PPC the mech standing behind them), however it would also add a lot of overhead to the PC requirements of the game and they are trying to keep it as mainstream (low level processor/video card requirements) as possible so players will not need a screaming fast (brand spanking new) comp to play.

[l33tworks]

I posted a sinilar concern a while ago, but it barely got any attention.

Posted 11 March 2012 - 02:03 AM
If devs actually do read this, I want to thank
them for pushing through with this tittle
through the times its not easy, and continuing
to do so. It may be just a game but it is such a
fascinating past time for many people. It is one
rare and special type of game that can keep
such appeal with the older 30+ crowd ( not
that I am there yet, closing in though ).
What I noticed watching the game play/
interview video is IMO the mechs "fall" in
every sense of the word, a bit too fast, unless
this is taking place on one huge planet and
that was intended
Gravity and momentum do not scale, at all. So
a mech tripping and falling would not fall at
the same rate as a person or human sized
robot would tripping and falling in the same
manner.
A person falls at 9.8m per second per second
and so does Mech on a planet as dense as
earth (sorry for the for metric I'm from
Australia), but the mech is a lot bigger and
most of it is further from the ground so it
would take however many times higher of the
ground it is compared than a person, to fall.
So if a mech is 20 times taller than a person it
would take 20 times as long to hit the ground
than a person sized object would if it toppled
in the same way
Smaller planets would mean less gravity
=slower falling, heavier planets would mean
faster falling, slower running, etc.
I think this is really important to convey the
big scale the battles are taking place.
It may or may not be implemented but I just
wanted to put it out there and it may be as
simple as tweaking a few gravity values for the
fall rate, and tweaking the death animation
speed to like 0.5 etc.
You can get a really good sense of how fast
mech sized objects fall from videos like this
.
This building is about the size of a mech and
has correct gravity values for earth
The time it takes for that single piece to fall
from the top corner of the building to the
ground is about how long a mech should take if
it topples.

here is the thread that should also contain the links.

[Stefan Ukris Amaris]

I agree with the OP on all points.

Also the walking animations make the Mechs look human sized. Look at how the centre of mass bobs, it's falling faster than 9.8 m/s at the scale of a Mech. It falls at 9.8 m/s iff the scale is a human. That brings up another point, look how much the cockpits must bob. It looks like they move vertically about 1 m every second. That's going to cause some serious neck injury to the pilot not to mention motion sickness and inability to see properly.

I really wanted this MechWarrior game to be a sim not silly like MW4.

[Dog killer]

Non destructable tree = free armor to light mechs. Have fun hitting my raven who can hide behind trees and poke you to death.

[Brenden]

Don't forget, this is also in the Beta Phase. I am sure they will add more different types of destruction later on. I'd like it if you had a Flaming 'mech you could set the ground ablaze.

[ollo]

I don't know where (i guess in some Q&A), but i'm pretty sure i read something about them implementing destructible trees before launch, but that's not the highest priority right now.

[Bloodyfool]

In my opinion they should put great emphasis on destruction because this is what mechs are made for! They should not cut down on effects and graphics and destruction just for the sake of having it run on some old sluggish laptops. If I had to choose I would rather go for less resolution and less details than to relinquish total destruction. I grew up with Commodore 64 and the systems that came after that (Atari/Amiga) and I had fun on all systems. At that time graphic was nowhere close to what we have today but miraculously the games were fun too (great fun). The reason was that the devs developed the game to make it as much fun as they could, not carying too much about the looks. Today it is the opposite, dev teams spend too much on the looks and less on the fun (or realism in our case). Of course someone could argue that good graphics add to the immersion of the game and I won't deny that but realism is what makes the change for the fans. When I see that even in the latest video no single object gets destroyed it makes me sad because this tells me that for the devs destructable objects only play a small part in this game...

[Dymlos2003]

Mass land destruction is not coming for it isn't being planned at all.

[peve]

l33tworks, on 20 July 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

I posted a sinilar concern a while ago, but it barely got any attention.

*snip*
So if a mech is 20 times taller than a person it
would take 20 times as long to hit the ground
than a person sized object would if it toppled
in the same way.

Your logic is seriously flawed. Falling means accelerating.

During the first second, stuff falls in earth gravity about 5m and reaches a velocity of about 10m/s.
During the second second, it falls about 15m and reaches a velocity of roughly 20m/s.
Since the largest mechs are about 20m tall, they would fall their height in two seconds (5+15 meters).
Since they dont fall straight, but rotate about their feet, their rotation from vertical to horizontal would take more than 2 seconds, but nowhere near 10 times of the time it takes for a person to fall.

Here is a calculator that helps you to find out stuff about falling.
http://www.calcresul...s/freefall.html

[Bansheedragon75]

You have to remember that the game is still in beta.
As such they have probably not implemented all features yet.
My guess would be that they add things a little at a time, then have that tested, once that has been done they add some more and so on.
I'm sure this will come into play once the game gets close to launch.

[Aescwulf]

Well let's give them time to finish gameplay before the extra bits like destructible trees etc

[WarfieldSRT]

Well Nitsua, its not as though we're making demands here. While obviously destructable trees is something they'll surely impliment in the future, maybe not by the Aug 7th open beta (which is STILL BETA lol), but its perfectly valid for us to raise concerns that the depth of scale of Mercs may be a bit off.

My thing is, and I don't know a lot about the canon or the way these Mercs are powered, but once one recieves enough damage to be destroyed, it obviously loses power. I would think a 20ton mech would lock-up as soon as it was powered down. Electromagnets in the joins would require power to function and move properly. As a safety feature, powering down a mech would cause all the joins to freeze, keeping it stable. So would a destroyed mech fall over at all, or would the flaming hulk sieze up and stay erect?