Why don't more games have destruction?

Why don't more games have destruction?

Attached: 1574819249476.webm (1280x720, 1.52M)

Other urls found in this thread:

vocaroo.com/dtVwEb3gXI
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Is that a... s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-basedjak?!

because it brings nothing to the table and is completely useless, even in a game like teardown. The 5 minutes you have fun with it won't be worth it once you see the limitations.

EDF would like a word with you.

OK.

So let me explain why, the physics for that building blowing up isn't really that realistic neither does the building have anything inside that is really detailed this is to save on costs.

You could do an ultra detail building that collapses in real time but you'd need one heck of a machine.

It's then the art spent on making it work, you've got to design levels that have layers to it so that if players decide to blow the level to a crater then they can still play without it being WW1.

kek

It gets absurd real quick, like in Battlefield Bad Company 2 where the map would turn into a flat plain with no buildings by Minute 10.

vocaroo.com/dtVwEb3gXI

Noita

Attached: 1603795429493.png (492x692, 108.23K)

...and that's a good thing!

>shoot a background wood beam so it falls over
>some dirt and rock falls from nearby ceilings
neat

relatively based

Kek, based glass cannon witch

>because it brings nothing to the table and is completely useless

Utter fucking retard.

It literally could change the dynamics of maps/gameplay a million times over.

The reason we don't have it is because your computer would explode

>It literally could change the dynamics of maps/gameplay a million times over.
And how is that a good thing?

Do those damage modifiers even affect dynamite since it has no direct damage?

Yeah, the next step should be craters being made by the explosives, so instead of flat lands it's a fuckton of man-made hills

reminder red faction went backwards in destruction

I was excited for crackdown 3 just for the fact that it was a game based on destruction again and they fucked it up

>Start game with dumb rain cloud spell
>First perk I pick is electrical immunity
>Second Perk is perk lottery
>Third Perk(s) are infinite breath, unlimited spells and the one where I shock shit.
>Enter Hiisi base as an old testament god, drowning and electrocuting all in my path.
Fucking love that game

Because technological progress is wasted on increasingly minor graphics updates and other things that don't fucking matter or actively detract from the experience, instead of giving players fun things to do.

We should have some kind of law that for the next 10 years, graphics are not allowed to improve at all. Instead, all effort must be put towards making as many things have proper physics as possible, so that when you fire your gun things and people actually BREAK.

>Why don't more games have destruction?
Because we outsource 70% of development to poos, and the rest is off the shelf middleware.

We don't actually make games anymore, we just repackage them.

Attached: RedFaction.gif (280x157, 909.28K)

play Red Faction Guerilla

That's just shitty implementation of destruction. You can make different objects have different health and destruction effects, resulting in cool rubble and ruins.

Because the Battlefield games did it and proved to everyone that the idea is horrible

Retarded zoomer.

I remember they had that in the BF3 beta but they toned it down massively.

Battlefield has had building destruction since the early days.

And by the time we make destruction good and viable and unique in every experience we end up having literally no other gameplay mechanics

would be easy to implement physics cores on pcs
pain in the ass to implement on consoles that are already redlining on basic games

because most "good graphics" are smoke and mirror that can only exist if you control the environment.
Also game designers are kinda lazy and touchy, they like to think their vision of the game world is perfect as is, and that players wanting to break things is just childish behavior against their masterpiece.

That's better than few scripted destruction events that barely change the dynamic of the map that battlefield has now

It was a thing in BC2 after a c4 explosion. The holes could get only so big though.
t. fucked around on an empty server

This is one of the reasons ray tracing is kinda exciting. It's all dynamic so scenes won't be baked any longer

yeah that sounds like fun

I hope they improve the engine a bit. This was very disappointing to see

Attached: teardowntower.webm (1000x418, 2.88M)

I'm far less excited you are. Ray Tracing will just further the trent of everything looking the fucking same

because its either games with some destructible peices or tech demos like that that have no other gameplay aspect

wtf

Attached: teardowm.webm (1000x418, 2.55M)

I wonder how much optimising can be done with this, I get 60fps or less with a 1080ti and a 2700X

Ah I misunderstood you, I thought it was some sort of "works on my machine" post
It's just odd to me playing a game at sub 60 fps after I've bashed the map up for a run

try not to expose your low IQ and lack of imagination when you retort man it's a bad look

>not letting the glass to break above your head
casual faggot

Holy fuck I didn't know such miserable taste could be possible.

Actual high IQ big brain opinion
They should make Teardown a multiplayer Battle Royale

Attached: b.jpg (261x193, 6.44K)