Bad Company has some competition for the destruction physics! I can't wait to topple a whole bridge with mines, and see it fall down in a very believable fashion. Apparently they had to have engineers/architects on the team, since they were making materials with actual weight and architecture to them.
Commented on 2009-03-11 19:59:03 In reply to digi_matrix
Posted by digi_matrix
Bad Company has some competition for the destruction physics! I can't wait to topple a whole bridge with mines, and see it fall down in a very believable fashion. Apparently they had to have engineers/architects on the team, since they were making materials with actual weight and architecture to them.
BFBC did cosmetic destruction and did it quite well, this is a whole other ball game. As you said they had to understand the physical structure of the buildings instead of just plonking them down with on/off states on certain parts.
In reply to
This message and account have been deleted at the user's request
It actually looks good. I'm a big fan of the original game (not so much the sequel), but I have to say, going from FPS to TPS looks good for the series.
I think it looks pretty boring. It's the type of game that i would guess get's really old really fast. I'm guessing that rather than having solid game mechanics it's all about running around blowing shit up.
Maybe this will sound stupid, but I have the impression this is a glorified version of Mercs 2. Destruction is nice, but if that is all game has to offer, than it doubt it will be fun after 2 hours of playing. Destructability of environmonts should be used to make things more intense and immersive, but shouldn't be the purpose of the game.
A glorified version of Mercs 2 would actually potentially be good since that game failed on so many levels, not sure this will be it though...
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:17:19 In reply to Megido
Posted by Megido
I think it looks pretty boring. It's the type of game that i would guess get's really old really fast. I'm guessing that rather than having solid game mechanics it's all about running around blowing shit up.
if it's anything like the past games that wont be the case.
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:42:13 In reply to Megido
Posted by Megido
Last time i checked Red Faction 2 sucked pretty bad. Red Faction 1 was alright though so i guess it's a 50/50 chance ;)
you never said anything about the quality of the title, you said it was "all about running around blowing shit up"...which neither of the past titles where about. sure it had the whole geomod tech, but it was a solid FPS first and formost. this aint mercenaries.
I remember seeing the first screenshots of this - looked amazing. Sadly the actual game reminds me more of Mass effects side mission planets..pretty bare.
I really liked the multiplayer though, i thought the backpacks added a nice take on it
I personally thought that the first game wasn't great--a good shooter, but not genre defining. This doesn't look to be outstanding either. I think that it seems that a lot of games that tote destruction as a feature often fail in other regards. So it'll be great when destruction is a given in games, and designers can focus on other details (maybe some one will develop a Havok-like engine just for destruction--I know Dice did this for BFBC, but are other developers using Frostbite?).
fwiw red faction are headlining destructibility as the selling point of its game engine; mercs 2 uses the old fashioned method of destructible enviros - simply using smoke and particle effects to exchange the polygon model of the old building with that of the new destroyed one. crysis allows models to disassemble from their component parts; useful if you have tin shacks to destroy but stressing the processor too much if you have a skyscraper. Red Faction, from what i understand, treats objects entire objects as a whole. Allowing the engine to calculate stresses and strains, and other physical properties, on a tower made of say concrete and steel and calculating how it will respond to a stimulus - like driving a truck through it or firing a rpg at it. It has the potential to be very realistic without overly taxing the system its running on. BTW my opinion is lay and only based on what i have read and understood!
Again, that destruction engine sounds (in your description) and looks great. But how about the rest of the game? Will it suffer from too much attention paid to destruction?
YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! F*** YES!!! Red Faction Guerilla had me worried since that last trailer I saw was lackluster but this great trailer just tossed my fears out of the window! The Walker, jet pack were cool and the hammer and guns had some crazy destructiblility! I think the Jet Pack alone showed why RF is better off being in third person now but I'm still hoping for a 1st person mode button just to shoe away the naysayers.
Commented on 2009-03-12 21:11:49 In reply to digi_matrix
Posted by digi_matrix
Bad Company has some competition for the destruction physics! I can't wait to topple a whole bridge with mines, and see it fall down in a very believable fashion. Apparently they had to have engineers/architects on the team, since they were making materials with actual weight and architecture to them.
Is that really you digi? I didn't know you were on this site.
Loakum
@Driftwood Awesome! I’m loving it! It does show a much crisper picture and the frame rate looks good! I was playing Stella Blade and Dragonball Soarkling Blast! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@Loakum: enjoy, the one Sony sent us will be there on launch day. Coverage will follow asap. (2 Weeks ago)
Loakum
*takes a large sip of victorious grape juice* ok….my PS5 pro arrived early! So much winning! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@reneyvane: non ils l'ont publié le 1er octobre et je crois que tu l'avais déjà linkée. ;) (5 Weeks ago)
reneyvane
Factornews à joué à KingdomComeDeliverance2 au Gamescom 2024 mais ne publie sa preview que maintenant ? [url] (7 Weeks ago)
CraCra
Y a un souci sur les forums ? (8 Weeks ago)
nostradamus
very few with religious beliefs are naive or zealots, but for sure don't find amusing their beliefs being thrown in for clout. maybe STFU with that discourse? (11 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
Download is now functional again on Gamersyde. Sorry for the past 53 days or so when it wasn't. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Another (French) livestream today at 2:30 CEST but you're welcome to drop by and speak English. I will gladly answer in English when I get a chance to catch a breath. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
GSY is getting some nice content at 3 pm CEST with our July podcast and some videos of the Deus Ex Mankind Divided preview build. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
For once we'll be live at 4:30 pm CEST. Blim should not even be tired! (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
More Quantum Break coverage coming in a few hours, 9:00 a.m CEST. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
We'll have a full review up for Firewatch at 7 pm CET. Videos will only be tomorrow though. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Tonight's livestream will be at 9:15 GMT+1, not GMT+2 as first stated. (> 3 Months ago)
Patreon
All comments (24)
Commented on 2009-03-11 19:22:48
Commented on 2009-03-11 19:36:17
Commented on 2009-03-11 19:38:40
Commented on 2009-03-11 19:59:03 In reply to digi_matrix
Commented on 2009-03-11 20:44:47
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:13:14
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:16:56
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:17:19 In reply to Megido
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:34:12
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:36:19
Commented on 2009-03-11 22:42:13 In reply to Megido
Commented on 2009-03-11 23:01:25. .
Commented on 2009-03-11 23:07:46I remember seeing the first screenshots of this - looked amazing. Sadly the actual game reminds me more of Mass effects side mission planets..pretty bare.
I really liked the multiplayer though, i thought the backpacks added a nice take on it
Commented on 2009-03-12 00:17:58
Commented on 2009-03-12 03:10:29
Commented on 2009-03-12 03:30:15
Commented on 2009-03-12 06:34:26
Commented on 2009-03-12 11:20:47Only outer walls were destructible and the the holes were allways those prescripted squares. There wasn't even physivs involved.
This looks much better
Commented on 2009-03-12 17:33:05
Commented on 2009-03-12 19:27:25
Commented on 2009-03-12 20:02:58
Commented on 2009-03-12 21:08:33
Commented on 2009-03-12 21:11:49 In reply to digi_matrix