Everyone Check this out! DESTRUCTABLE ENVIROMENTS AND WEATHER!

[Green_Day_584]

sure, the ability to blow holes into walls would be fun, but it is possible to blow objects up *to an extent* in ut 3, and thats good enough for me. i mean, would we REALLY want the ability to blast through the bottom of the bridge in suspension and tunnel our way up to the flag? no. not only would there be not enough ammo for it to be "realistic", but it could even be labelled as cheating.

i like ut 3 as it is.

[Ryman]

Only for single-player games.
If the environment is too interactive the game will crawl for online play due to all of the required replication.
Making a multi-player fps game with a realistic interactive environment causes a lot of technical and gameplay issues.



Limiting the map to a single path or choke point after the environment is destroyed will kill the game play.

You're basing your entire theory if the designers had no idea what they were doing. Yes, more interactive environment is/should-be the future, along with the MMOFPS.

[Taboen]

Heathray has some things too that can be destroyed: the wires above link and shock ^^ Walk through them with the darkwalker and they will snap

[Harmatia]

We have a thread about the Ageia physx card and UT3 here (http://utforums.epicgames.com/showth...=582643&page=4).

[Brutal]

yeah that wont be in the game, those where special maps that dell asked for so they could let every 1 see the first laptops with Ageia, they wont be on ut3.... i would want it tho, that was really nice

[ArakkAttack]

Yeah, I played red faction. And it was ok, but the destructible environment was pretty basic. Implemented to a high level though, It would be fun.

[KriLL3.8™]

It wouldn't be "fun" online, what would happen if the map was so destroyed you couldn't get around in it?

[fraksken]

In the game RED FACTION and RED FACTION II you could destruct the enviroment. it was usefull to make shortcuts in MP maps, or to reach places (e.g. powerups, weapons) hidden in the walls you couldn't access without blowing them up.

It didn't lack of gameplay though. RF1 Was a great game, almost as good as UT99

[Ultron]

Frakshen speaks the truth. I played RF for a bit and it was a well-done game. Destructable environments were pretty neat. You could, for example, grab the flag, blow the floor away below you, and drop down. You could forge your own way out, sometimes. Or in DM you could surprise someone by shooting them through the wall with some weapons. Pretty crazy stuff.

[Axeman]

Yes- Red Faction 1 did destructible environments very well- albeit basic.
Like mentioned above- it was fun to create a new path to run the flag.

[DHJudas]

Alot of people are getting things a little messed up, who in the right mind would allow a map to become completely destroyed to the point of not even being able to get around within a short period of time... someones not going to send a redeemer down the middle and expect the whole place to cave in due to it..... everything will require a specific ammount of damage before it'll crumble. It's not like everything is made of tissue paper and it'd fly appart... yes that would make the game ****ty..

RF was an excellent game, the yes it had basic distructible enviroments, yes it is 6 years old, but i'm serprised as hell that no one else had taken the time to try and develope it further.... the idea was sound, now with ageia and multi core cpu's... it can be taken to a whole NEW lvl.

a well, perhaps UT3.5 or UT4 will get the balls to take it further.


BTW, for multiplayer, distructable objects aren't going to do all that much.... the extra amount of information is going to throw anyone out anymore, with further increasing high speed connections.... and if done right it won't be nessary to have on a constant up to date bases for each item... it'll be no different then someone triggering a assault similare aciton from taking place.

they could even put in super quick game breakers when something massive happens....

[Hedge-o-Matic]

It's not like everything is made of tissue paper and it'd fly apart...

Except for the Goliath and Hellbender, that is. Lol!

[DGUnreal]

Alot of people are getting things a little messed up, who in the right mind would allow a map to become completely destroyed to the point of not even being able to get around within a short period of time... someones not going to send a redeemer down the middle and expect the whole place to cave in due to it..... everything will require a specific ammount of damage before it'll crumble. It's not like everything is made of tissue paper and it'd fly appart... yes that would make the game ****ty..

BTW, for multiplayer, distructable objects aren't going to do all that much.... the extra amount of information is going to throw anyone out anymore, with further increasing high speed connections.... and if done right it won't be nessary to have on a constant up to date bases for each item... it'll be no different then someone triggering a assault similare aciton from taking place.

There is a very big difference between a proper destructable environment that leaves the rubble on the map versus one where the wall/window/whatever just disappears.
To have a map leave rubble at the same locations on each client requires a lot of replication if there is a lot going on, that is why you don't see it in online multiplayer.

Everybody wants more realism, and having a wall turn into dust that fades away isn't real. And using physics to crumble a bunch of chunks and have them all land at the same spot on every client takes a massive amount of replication.

... i'm serprised as hell that no one else had taken the time to try and develope it further.... the idea was sound, now with ageia and multi core cpu's... it can be taken to a whole NEW lvl.

a well, perhaps UT3.5 or UT4 will get the balls to take it further.

In single-player they have. In online multiplayer, no. For the reasons that I have already specified. Current FPS games are barely getting over 32 to 64 players online with vehicles, projectiles, etc. Having completely destructable enviroments can easily double the amount of network traffic on top of that.
Don't you think that games would already be doing it if it were as easy as you think it is?
And it has nothing to do with UT3 not having any "balls", Epic didn't exclude that feature on the maps just to irritate you or cheat you out of something, if you want to add some destructables to your own maps, the engine is more than capable.
We are probably at least three to five years away from interactive online maps, before enough people have quad core systems and 5mbit+ connections. I'm sure if you did a wide poll, you'll find a lot of single/HT CPUs, older video, and 1.5mbit connections. Just look at the fps that most people are getting with low player counts in the beta demo.

[Kpow]

...I want this map

[Dangerdog]

There’s no reason why physics like that couldn’t be done without the need of a hardware add-on card, I wonder how much Epic is getting in kickbacks from Ageia?