Breakable doors and gates -1 reply

Please wait...

Von Mudra

Lo, I am Mudra, za emo soldat!

50 XP

25th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,064 Posts

0 Threads

#31 12 years ago

You guys do realize that there is no way FH2 could do this.... Every destructible thing on the game would cause lag. The more destructibles, the more lag. Making destructible gates, landslides, etc....would cause untold problems for anyone who doesn't have an extremely high end computer. Maybe this will could be put in FH3 in years and years time when computers have caught up, but for right now, these things are all just pipedreams. The most we might see is the occasional destructible feature, like the current fences on Bardia.




Flippy Warbear

One of Kelly's Heroes

50 XP

2nd January 2004

0 Uploads

2,600 Posts

0 Threads

#32 12 years ago

Like I've said before I say it again, even tho the destroyable buildings and enviroment would look cool, but in the end would it be worth it when the maps would turn into mush and rubble after 10 mins of playing? The great details the devs would put into the game would vanish when one start lopping those HE-rounds in the towns and forests. It would be a cool feature, but in my books it would be quite pointless. I find it cool in games like COH but I dont think it has a position in a ww2 shooter (yet).

But I am strongly supporting the idea of having more destroyable objects that are either essential or optional things for players to do. For example, in creation of a new route to by destroying a certain part of a high wall, blowing up some specific house... And so on...

Would be cool to have objective based structures such as a large house which works as a control point for the defending party, then the attacker must blow the shit out of it in order to capture the area and move forward to a new flag. Or these could also work as extra spawn locations which arent connected to flags. So to avoid getting surrounded and flanked, these strategic points should be destroyed in order to stop the enemy from reinforcing the flanks and stop their counterattacks. I had this idea going for a map for FH back then. Having trucks or supply depots that act as spawnlocations to the main flag to an area. So in order to truely conquer the area, you would have to destroy the additional spawn locations to stop the enemy from making any swift backcaps.




Cesokeso

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

15th June 2008

0 Uploads

113 Posts

0 Threads

#33 12 years ago

I hope to see destroyable static that are useful for soldier.. just few breakable gates and doors could make a difference and doesent cause lag, like in that pr engineer vid. My suggestion wasnt to make everything destroyable. :D




GirlsHateMe

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

30th January 2006

0 Uploads

1,254 Posts

0 Threads

#34 12 years ago

Even if they are breakable doors and gates they should not be destroyed by throwing a nade at it.




Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#35 12 years ago

well wooden doors and fences ofcourse blows by a grenade...

But as Flippy said, it's not that kind of a game FH2 is about.. Personally destructible environment isn't that special at all... We've allready seen it and know how it works, it doesn't mean we need to use it to fulfill our needs in FH2.

The more destructible environment a game has, doesn't make that game better IMO a WW2 epic conquest game like FH2 should force the players to overcome the enemy not the statics. The Controlpoints in FH2 represent oftenly heavily fortified positions strengthen over many years of occupation, and to capture a flag should be done by tactics, teamwork and individual combat competence... not by spamming nades on a wall.

So, FH2 will only feature destructible statcis on selected spots on selected maps, where the mapper need it in order to fulfill his needs in the design, not so players can blow shit up for fun.




General_Henry

Veteran Tanker

50 XP

29th April 2006

0 Uploads

1,699 Posts

0 Threads

#36 12 years ago

Natty Wallo;4526095well wooden doors and fences ofcourse blows by a grenade...

But as Flippy said, it's not that kind of a game FH2 is about.. Personally destructible environment isn't that special at all... We've allready seen it and know how it works, it doesn't mean we need to use it to fulfill our needs in FH2.

The more destructible environment a game has, doesn't make that game better IMO a WW2 epic conquest game like FH2 should force the players to overcome the enemy not the statics. The Controlpoints in FH2 represent oftenly heavily fortified positions strengthen over many years of occupation, and to capture a flag should be done by tactics, teamwork and individual combat competence... not by spamming nades on a wall.

So, FH2 will only feature destructible statcis on selected spots on selected maps, where the mapper need it in order to fulfill his needs in the design, not so players can blow shit up for fun.

but i think some few "destructable walls" would make the gameplay better since tanks could destroy wall and flank enemy.(of course that is designed by mappers) and tanks will be less vulnerable to infantry like they are in Fh1 (forced to use the main roads, which is mined, camped by bunch of engineers/AT)




Admiral Donutz Advanced Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#37 12 years ago

Natty Wallo;4526095well wooden doors and fences ofcourse blows by a grenade...

But as Flippy said, it's not that kind of a game FH2 is about.. Personally destructible environment isn't that special at all... We've allready seen it and know how it works, it doesn't mean we need to use it to fulfill our needs in FH2.

The more destructible environment a game has, doesn't make that game better IMO a WW2 epic conquest game like FH2 should force the players to overcome the enemy not the statics. The Controlpoints in FH2 represent oftenly heavily fortified positions strengthen over many years of occupation, and to capture a flag should be done by tactics, teamwork and individual combat competence... not by spamming nades on a wall.

So, FH2 will only feature destructible statcis on selected spots on selected maps, where the mapper need it in order to fulfill his needs in the design, not so players can blow shit up for fun.

It ca contribute to it though. It depends on how the gameplay is to begin with and how the destructable enviroment is implented.

For instance, if you could blow up everything (and make the destroyed objects to disappear rather then leaving rubble of any kind) it would soon lead to a plane, totally open playing field and the game would be boring if not killed outright (since it will just be like picking of enemies at the horizon in the desert).

But if objects would only be able to be destroyed with realistic weapons (thus makign it quite hard to start destrying stuff to begin with) the level of destruction would be constrained. Bridged would require the placement of explosives (and enough of them in the right spot), buildings when fired upon by a tank would simple lose a bit of their front facade (plus other damange depending on the round fired, the building itself etc.) to destroy a single house it would require a ood pounding by tanks. To destroy a complete village would take hous... something that woudm't happen during your avarage game. Thus the enviroment created would be an interesting mix between slightly damaged, damaged, heavily damaged buidlings an such and piles of rubble of destroyed things (material just doesn't disappear it leaves rubble, and you can hide in rubble.. and rubble might block vehicles and slow down movement of infantery).

So if done well a totally destroyble enviroment could add a lot to gameplay, but it would require an engine that would handle things kind of realistic to prevent arcarde bullshit where a town is laid to ashes and whiped of the map completely with pretty much any weapon in 15 minutes... which would just be lame and kill the game (nothing left to hide behind, no ill effects of you destroy too much such as rubble blocking your way etc.).




GirlsHateMe

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

30th January 2006

0 Uploads

1,254 Posts

0 Threads

#38 12 years ago
General_Henry;4526137but i think some few "destructable walls" would make the gameplay better since tanks could destroy wall and flank enemy.(of course that is designed by mappers) and tanks will be less vulnerable to infantry like they are in Fh1 (forced to use the main roads, which is mined, camped by bunch of engineers/AT)

How about making some walls and buildings destructible to make way for concealment of tanks ?




Niebler

[130.Pz]A.Niebler

50 XP

2nd August 2006

0 Uploads

1,114 Posts

0 Threads

#39 12 years ago

If anything, they should spend their time on making cover penetration rather than destructible objects. I.e. hide behind wood, and you can get shot through (similar to the metal fences atm), that way not every cover is ideal, etc :P




Flippy Warbear

One of Kelly's Heroes

50 XP

2nd January 2004

0 Uploads

2,600 Posts

0 Threads

#40 12 years ago

Yeah its amazing how one can hide behind a mattress and not get killed, then hiding behind the metal fence and get killed. =p