Support NeoGAF

[Krieger]

I don't know how, but I know for certain that DICE will somehow create a new Battlefield that is in every possible way worse than 2042 was at launch.

 

[Klik]

I miss the good old Battlefield. Hoping that we finally get Battlefield game that we deserve

 

[EDMIX]

What I really hope we get in the future is debris that stays on the ground. Even in the finals, when you destroy a wall, all the debris disappears immediately. Talk about immersion..

I'm not sure how.

To my understanding, this is a like a server thing.

Its not even saying it can't be done in a game, merely very hard to do in a online game. Even in The Finals, it has a that lower player count and no vehicles based on just how taxing that concept is to servers. So you'd need some revolunary tech to really pull that off.

 

[pasterpl]

The last good battlefield was bf4 on xb360, they should have carried in that direction but ea will be ea.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I long for the day when realistic destruction in games would be as commonplace as having autosave. And not a "feature" that is to be celebrated.

At least this is a good rumor to be associated with.

Can't think of anything as game-breaking to me where I have a gun that can shoot holes in a car but can't shoot a hole in a door lock or hell... a glass window so I have to backtrack half a level to get a key, when there was a window right there.

 

[Mobilemofo]

no.

TitanFall 3 likely still being made, but I see zero reason for this to be a "instead" thing

Doesn't really make sense...

lol I like the wild, out there style of the game, but I do find it funny that many overlooked a lot of the um....questionable things in The Finals and simply didn't put the connection together that it was done by the BFV guys lol



New Free To Play MP game made by some of the ex DICE guys....the ones that said "don't like it, don't buy it" from BFV crew. lol



Yea...soooo that has nothing to do with that. Dear god, lets keep the conversation about the tech involved with this instead of this whole triggered crying thing man.

The destruction in each BF has progressively gotten more and more complex by default, as in the destruction in BFBC2, is more complex then from BFBC1. From BF3, BF4, BF1, BFV and 2024, it has gotten more complex.

From pre-scripted, to physics based, to weapon penetration based on material, to tanks damaging buildings based on movement, to going thru buildings 100% thru.

As someone that has played all the BF titles, I can very much confirm that is a progressive upgrade objectively, as in each game is adding more and more and its getting more complex. I don't now if I can say any title had a step back in this regard.

This is not debating the idea of some bluehaired person talking about things they thing make moral sense in BFV lol This is telling you the fucking thing you are talking about was never actually downgraded or had much if any steps back.



? Can't? Based on what? Like...objectively provide evidence to show us something on PS3 was done with any BF, that is doing something the new ones can't..... I've heard this myth more times then I've seen it proven and it seems that most who don't even actually play this IP keep spreading this weird myth about those titles.

So what's the excuse for no destruction? Obviously, your being a bit of a simpleton. Clearly the hardware is capable. Evidently, I never seen this weird "myth" about going on with yourself about...

 

[EDMIX]

So what's the excuse for no destruction?

Clearly the hardware is capable. Evidently, I never seen this weird "myth

The irony

States "no destruction" and then states they've "never seen this weird "myth"" while fucking saying the fucking myth itself.


You can't make this shit up.

So if you haven't played the BF series since PS3, I don't know if you really have a place asking any of this, you don't even know enough about those games to make the claim to start any real valid discussion. It makes more sense to start the conversation with "is there destruction" not "excuse for no destruction" as you don't really know what your are talking about.

BF4



BF1



BFV



BF-2042






So I'm not really sure where this myth of "no destruction" has come from and its sounding like a lot of it is from people who don't even play theses games lol I don't know if its possible to play any of em and not notice a tank blowing out a wall behind you lol

So..we going to have to give you that good ole ignore bud, when you start debating factual, proven things, its time for you to go to that shadow realm with them myths lol

have a good one =)

 

[simpatico]

Destruction has been mostly removed from the game since BC2. I miss blowing open every sniper nest with the tube. Hopefully they go back to that instead of just cut scene destruction during the match. It actually mattered to gameplay back then. BC2 still the most fun I ever had in a MP FPS.

 

[EDMIX]

Destruction has been mostly removed from the game since BC2

Yea, that factually isn't even remotely true, if anything its gotten more advanced since BFBC2.

I think what some of you might be saying is the ratio from static objects and destructible objects increased in favor of static objects the bigger those maps became.

To say "removed" factually simply isn't true.

The amount of it vs the static objects has changed as those maps got larger with each game, I think if anything that is where the conversation should be regarding the next title.

In that respect, I'd like to see smaller maps, with just the destructible objects vs larger maps with less.

 

[simpatico]

Yea, that factually isn't even remotely true, if anything its gotten more advanced since BFBC2.

I think what some of you might be saying is the ratio from static objects and destructible objects increased in favor of static objects the bigger those maps became.

To say "removed" factually simply isn't true.

The amount of it vs the static objects has changed as those maps got larger with each game, I think if anything that is where the conversation should be regarding the next title.

In that respect, I'd like to see smaller maps, with just the destructible objects vs larger maps with less.

There was barely any static back then. The end of a long match would just be a field of rubble. New BFs just have cut scene destruction. Cool, but much less impactful on moment moment gameplay.

 

[Romulus]

"Most realistic destruction physics in the industry."

What does that even mean these days? Its a shame, but nobody is pushing that anymore. Maybe 10 years ago that would be exciting but destruction isn't even a thing anymore outside a few examples.

 

[Phase]

meh nvm. Edmix is making some good points.

 

[EDMIX]

There was barely any static back then. The end of a long match would just be a field of rubble. New BFs just have cut scene destruction. Cool, but much less impactful on moment moment gameplay.

There was 100% static buildings back then, as in you could not 100% level any map in the past BF titles no different then in the current.

Like in the Arica Harbor map, you had structures that could be destroyed yes, you had some that could not.



As in, you could not blow up this structure here or the bridge beyond it that had the MCOM station or something.



The ending of this map also has those large structures where the last 2 MCOM stations are where those buildings cannot be brought down.

The fact that in both 2042 and BFBC2, the map has it as a static thing very much shows that was based on a design thing for a map balance type thing, but I don't recall any map where you could level everything or something.

 

[simpatico]

There was 100% static buildings back then, as in you could not 100% level any map in the past BF titles no different then in the current.

Like in the Arica Harbor map, you had structures that could be destroyed yes, you had some that could not.



As in, you could not blow up this structure here or the bridge beyond it that had the MCOM station or something.



The ending of this map also has those large structures where the last 2 MCOM stations are where those buildings cannot be brought down.

The fact that in both 2042 and BFBC2, the map has it as a static thing very much shows that was based on a design thing for a map balance type thing, but I don't recall any map where you could level everything or something.

I'd like to see them work towards an Arica Harbor with 100% destructible buildings rather than metropolitan cities that have a building fall over midway through the match. A lot of the new maps just feel like big team COD with vehicles.

 

[Mobilemofo]

The irony

States "no destruction" and then states they've "never seen this weird "myth"" while fucking saying the fucking myth itself.


You can't make this shit up.

So if you haven't played the BF series since PS3, I don't know if you really have a place asking any of this, you don't even know enough about those games to make the claim to start any real valid discussion. It makes more sense to start the conversation with "is there destruction" not "excuse for no destruction" as you don't really know what your are talking about.

BF4



BF1



BFV



BF-2042






So I'm not really sure where this myth of "no destruction" has come from and its sounding like a lot of it is from people who don't even play theses games lol I don't know if its possible to play any of em and not notice a tank blowing out a wall behind you lol

So..we going to have to give you that good ole ignore bud, when you start debating factual, proven things, its time for you to go to that shadow realm with them myths lol

have a good one =)

Bless. He's gone full retard. Clearly, what we are asking for is the destruction that bfbc2 displayed. Was super satisfying bringing down a building on top of players..absolute chaos.

 

[EDMIX]

I'd like to see them work towards an Arica Harbor with 100% destructible buildings rather than metropolitan cities that have a building fall over midway through the match. A lot of the new maps just feel like big team COD with vehicles.

Well you see, I think that makes much more sense, cause from what I played in all the newer releases, is that they still have static, they still have destruction, but its more spread out as the maps got larger and larger.

I think the balance might be a 90% or 80% thing as to keep some structure for balance to keep it competitive.


Regardless, I'm in favor of smaller maps as the sacrifices made to have those maps imho wasn't really worth the trade off. What we've seen from the new physics based destruction stuff in 2024 feels like a missed opportunity to have that simply spread out thru out the map in a more even fashion if they just made it smaller.

Phase lol nahhh, we just not a sheep to just assume features, if its factually there, like can be proven, I'd rather start the conversation with a fact and move from that.

 

[simpatico]

Well you see, I think that makes much more sense, cause from what I played in all the newer releases, is that they still have static, they still have destruction, but its more spread out as the maps got larger and larger.

I think the balance might be a 90% or 80% thing as to keep some structure for balance to keep it competitive.


Regardless, I'm in favor of smaller maps as the sacrifices made to have those maps imho wasn't really worth the trade off. What we've seen from the new physics based destruction stuff in 2024 feels like a missed opportunity to have that simply spread out thru out the map in a more even fashion if they just made it smaller.

I imagine a smaller city where you can actually take down a 7-10 story building with C4, tubes and vehicle hits. I like the destruction being a big focus of the strategy. For my tastes they've been going further and further in the wrong direction with every release since 3. BC2 still has the best sized maps. I do like there being one very small silly map where it's just a bloodbath. I think it was called Metro in BF3. Don't need any Oblivion sized maps at all.

 

[EDMIX]

I imagine a smaller city where you can actually take down a 7-10 story building with C4, tubes and vehicle hits. I like the destruction being a big focus of the strategy. For my tastes they've been going further and further in the wrong direction with every release since 3. BC2 still has the best sized maps. I do like there being one very small silly map where it's just a bloodbath. I think it was called Metro in BF3. Don't need any Oblivion sized maps at all.

That would be really hard to do with server side stuff along with vehicles, but I think its worth the effort.

In terms of Metro, I love the map too as its one of my favorites, but I'd argue that is the map when BF3 launched that many kept saying wasn't really "BF" and "ohhh now its like Call Of Duty" lol Yet that is one of the funniest maps of BF3 and its remake in BF4

So I think a balance of those smaller, tight maps along with larger vehicle based ones like BFBC2 sized can be a good balance. I'm not against a large map, merely every single last map can't really be that and maybe we were better off when that was like 1 or 2 maps per game we got some epic sized map like that or something.

2042, like almost every map is this massive thing.