DUST Search - Semi-Destructable Envrionments the less memory intensive option.

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Semi-Destructable Envrionments the less memory intensive option.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.08.10 00:42:00 - [1] - Quote We all know that the more you want to destroy an envrionment the more memory it takes up to do it. The more bullet holes you put into something the more the poor little ps3 has to remember that condition. So things like craters and smashing entire infrastrucutre into peices would be a lovely dream we have to get real and understand it wont be possible this generation. So to compromise with the limited amount of memory why dont we have objects we can expect to destroy? and obstacles we can remove? something that may only have 3 states total, good health, injured, and destroyed. Maybe some objects get erased when destroyed such as lightpoles to lighten the memory load. Lightpoles and like items should be to run over, doing so eliminates it entirely like any other vehicle. Barricades (the thick metal fingers and walls) could be witteled away with anti material weapons making it less effective for cover but still provide excellent anti splatting measures. Civillian Vehicles and some infrasturcutre can explode when exposed to alot of damage. Some structures will remain an additional hazard when destroyed such as reactor shielding at a power station leaking harmful radiation or lights the structure has. All buildings with interiors should have automatic doors, they start neutral on npc maps but on player owned maps belong to the defender. Once you own a door it does not let anyone in unless its hacked from the other side. Altenratively doors can be destroyed with appropirat tools such as the remote explosive. Roadways could have tank traps to prevent vehicle travel a logi and other infantry can easily hack them to 'disarm' the trap making it easy to roll over. Other infantry can hack them back to bring them to a raised state. Altenratively they can be destroyed after alot of antimaterial effort. Buildings should also have armorplas for glass areas they will stop the first few bullets but will eventually break. Add your semi destructable envrionment suggestions. They can be tactial, functional, or just plainly cosmetic destruction.
Avenger 245 Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 477	Posted - 2012.08.10 01:06:00 - [2] - Quote Remote explosive for door breaching would be cool. Along with some form of a flash bang would make viable breach tactics
Abner Kalen Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 100	Posted - 2012.08.10 02:44:00 - [3] - Quote I really hope their ultimate goal for launch includes depth of field blur, damage to concrete blocks & other minimal cosmetic damage (that can be kept track of on the PS3 client, not on the server) dynamic per-pixel shadows, and also including Enlighten like they originally planned to do back in 2009. If the game looks half as good as this 2 year old game, I think it will have a chance of competing with Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3 & Black Ops 2: Gears of War 3 multiplayer carnage Granted, the more players on the battlefield the PS3 is sending & receiving that much more packets and needs to multitask accordingly, so not all cores are utilized for rendering graphics, however I believe the PS3 does have the graphics capibilities to support brilliant 1080p with all of the great Unreal Engine effects we've come to love (minus Unreal's dependency on long-distance environment maps). August 21st can't come soon enough
Thor Thunder Fist Better Hide R Die 79	Posted - 2012.08.10 02:45:00 - [4] - Quote DEATH TO THE LAMPPOSTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kitt 514 Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 94	Posted - 2012.08.10 03:14:00 - [5] - Quote something that everyone should keep in mind is the server load, and client loads. destructible environments have trade-offs, and its not something that i think dust really needs at the moment. perhaps when the PS4, and the UNREAL 4 engine are released, these things can be implemented. Also, keep in mind that even at release, dust will not the the final product. EVE is a completely different game than it was 9 years ago, and ccp has already comitted to the same update cycle.
Abner Kalen Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 100	Posted - 2012.08.10 04:23:00 - [6] - Quote Kitt 514 wrote: something that everyone should keep in mind is the server load, and client loads. destructible environments have trade-offs, and its not something that i think dust really needs at the moment. perhaps when the PS4, and the UNREAL 4 engine are released, these things can be implemented. Also, keep in mind that even at release, dust will not the the final product. EVE is a completely different game than it was 9 years ago, and ccp has already comitted to the same update cycle. Semi-destructable environments are a client-side "effect". Lamp-posts and other items that vehicles can "move" might be the only items that should be tracked by the server. As you'll see in the Gears of War video that I posted above, you can see concrete getting hit and pieces crumbling and sliding down the sides. Same goes for bullet indents in metal, bullet decals, tank tracks, and other things that can be tracked in the game client (on the ps3 itself). It would be nice if a few things were tracked server-side, like craters caused by grenades and missiles, and various other destruction effects, however I'd agree they aren't necessary.
Aijul ZionTCD Legacy Rising 55	Posted - 2012.08.10 04:54:00 - [7] - Quote Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.08.10 05:02:00 - [8] - Quote Aijul wrote: Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs. Which is also why some of these destructables would self remove like broken tanks will. Blow a door up and the nanites dissolve it. ect ect
Abner Kalen Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 100	Posted - 2012.08.10 05:56:00 - [9] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Aijul wrote: Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs. Which is also why some of these destructables would self remove like broken tanks will. Blow a door up and the nanites dissolve it. ect ect Sure, per-pixel shadows might be quite alot if pushed to a very long draw distance, but the PS3 has more power than most games utilize. The core architecture is actually quite amazing. I know that people often compare Crysis & Unreal Engine, and that they are different, so I'm not sure this is a very good video to post, however I'm pretty sure Unreal is just as powerful as Crysis - here's a demo of Crysis multiplayer, and it would be nice if Dust looked this nice: Crysis PS3/Xbox multiplayer comparison Oh, also do you notice the assault rifle you can see through the reticle on the rifle itself? No "helmet-cam zoom". I hope they bring this back, it's just way more realistic. Someone else said "Ditch the Halo zoom" and I'd agree with that.
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.08.10 06:19:00 - [10] - Quote Abner Kalen wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Aijul wrote: Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs. Which is also why some of these destructables would self remove like broken tanks will. Blow a door up and the nanites dissolve it. ect ect Sure, per-pixel shadows might be quite alot if pushed to a very long draw distance, but the PS3 has more power than most games utilize. The core architecture is actually quite amazing. I know that people often compare Crysis & Unreal Engine, and that they are different, so I'm not sure this is a very good video to post, however I'm pretty sure Unreal is just as powerful as Crysis - here's a demo of Crysis multiplayer, and it would be nice if Dust looked this nice: Crysis PS3/Xbox multiplayer comparison Oh, also do you notice the assault rifle you can see through the reticle on the rifle itself? No "helmet-cam zoom". I hope they bring this back, it's just way more realistic. Someone else said "Ditch the Halo zoom" and I'd agree with that. Unfourtunately the gallente assault rifle uses a camera for a scope.

Drake Tsuka Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire 19	Posted - 2012.08.10 07:33:00 - [11] - Quote damn i want to be able to blow up those towers people camp on, and it would look cool seeing those things come down.
Abner Kalen Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 100	Posted - 2012.08.10 07:36:00 - [12] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Abner Kalen wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Aijul wrote: Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs. Which is also why some of these destructables would self remove like broken tanks will. Blow a door up and the nanites dissolve it. ect ect Sure, per-pixel shadows might be quite alot if pushed to a very long draw distance, but the PS3 has more power than most games utilize. The core architecture is actually quite amazing. I know that people often compare Crysis & Unreal Engine, and that they are different, so I'm not sure this is a very good video to post, however I'm pretty sure Unreal is just as powerful as Crysis - here's a demo of Crysis multiplayer, and it would be nice if Dust looked this nice: Crysis PS3/Xbox multiplayer comparison Oh, also do you notice the assault rifle you can see through the reticle on the rifle itself? No "helmet-cam zoom". I hope they bring this back, it's just way more realistic. Someone else said "Ditch the Halo zoom" and I'd agree with that. Unfourtunately the gallente assault rifle uses a camera for a scope. I really hope they don't get lazy and have one scope for every gun type - that some guns have one type of scope, and other guns have other types - or based on mods you can buy. How cool would that be, to modify your various main weapons?
Iron Wolf Saber BetaMax. 2867	Posted - 2012.08.10 07:43:00 - [13] - Quote Abner Kalen wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Abner Kalen wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Aijul wrote: Dynamic per pixel shadows might be too much. We'll all be playing at 10FPS with everything else going on, the horror! I think if destructive environments are too resource intensive, certain structures which are part of the level geometry (not static props) can "fake" destructive modeling. For example, take a look at this video made in the Source Engine. (Which is actually weaker than Unreal Engine 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7MYttLnHpA I've never worked in UDK, but with the Source SDK, map geometry such as walls or floors are composed of brushes. These brushes can also act as physics objects, and yet still compose the level geometry. As seen in the video, the wall is being "destroyed" when shot at as it is composed of hundreds of these pre-shaped physics brushes. So instead of real-time DMM, it can be faked. Lamp posts could have a trigger state in which when they are hit, instead of dynamically fall over, they play an animation in which they are scripted to fall over upon enough impact. Sure it might look cheap, but it frees up the load on the SPUs. Which is also why some of these destructables would self remove like broken tanks will. Blow a door up and the nanites dissolve it. ect ect Sure, per-pixel shadows might be quite alot if pushed to a very long draw distance, but the PS3 has more power than most games utilize. The core architecture is actually quite amazing. I know that people often compare Crysis & Unreal Engine, and that they are different, so I'm not sure this is a very good video to post, however I'm pretty sure Unreal is just as powerful as Crysis - here's a demo of Crysis multiplayer, and it would be nice if Dust looked this nice: Crysis PS3/Xbox multiplayer comparison Oh, also do you notice the assault rifle you can see through the reticle on the rifle itself? No "helmet-cam zoom". I hope they bring this back, it's just way more realistic. Someone else said "Ditch the Halo zoom" and I'd agree with that. Unfourtunately the gallente assault rifle uses a camera for a scope. I really hope they don't get lazy and have one scope for every gun type - that some guns have one type of scope, and other guns have other types - or based on mods you can buy. How cool would that be, to modify your various main weapons? Unfourutnate its not a launch feature maybe post launch.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]