Forum Discussion

Gterror8's avatar
Gterror8
Seasoned Traveler
3 years ago

Battlefield 7 (the future of destruction physics)

In recent years, game developers have made significant advancements in creating more realistic and immersive gaming experiences, and one area that has seen considerable progress is destruction physics. As technology continues to evolve, it is possible to imagine a future where game destruction physics creates an even more convincing and interactive environment. In this topic,I would like to explore the potential future of game destruction physics and how it should look like.

The first aspect that future game destruction physics should strive for is to create a more realistic and dynamic environment. Currently, many games feature predetermined destruction animations that lack depth and interactivity. In the future, destruction physics should be able to create more organic destruction effects, where buildings and structures can be damaged in real-time and respond realistically to the forces applied to them. Players should be able to use a variety of tools to manipulate the environment and see the effects of their actions in real-time.

The second aspect that game destruction physics should consider is the impact of destruction on gameplay. Destruction physics should not just be a cosmetic feature but should have real consequences on the game's mechanics. For example, if a player destroys a building that is housing an enemy faction, it should weaken their power and provide an advantage to the player's faction. Alternatively, players should be able to use destruction as a strategic tool to create new pathways or ambush enemy factions.

Lastly, the future of game destruction physics should focus on providing players with a sense of agency and control. Players should be able to choose how they want to interact with the environment and the destruction physics, creating a unique experience for each player. Whether it's through different weapons or tools, players should be able to customize their destruction experience to suit their playstyle and goals.

In conclusion, the future of game destruction physics is an exciting prospect that promises to create more immersive and realistic gaming experiences. By focusing on creating dynamic and interactive environments, integrating destruction into gameplay mechanics, and providing players with agency and control, game developers can create a future where destruction physics is a central and essential component of gaming.

10 Replies

  • I would suggest playing BF1.  That game had great destruction.  You could literally raze a building to the ground, which as you said, makes players change their tactics, for example instead of pushing down the center of the map, you would have to flank since the buildings no longer afforded good cover.  This game doesn't have that and I suspect either they didn't have time to implement, or didn't have resource, or it wasn't part of the overall design.

  • sk1lld's avatar
    sk1lld
    Legend
    3 years ago

    I suspect with 128 players in the game the game engine has reached it's limit with destruction.

  • @sk1lld Just another reason DICE should drop the idea of overcrowded 128 player maps. A more polished 64-player experience with proper destruction would be far more enjoyable. Sometimes less is more.
  • If they want to have better physics in the game, they should first of all start by using the BFV or BF1 core, because those games were not as sterile and plastic, they actually felt like a living world with a soul. Physics and movements was always way better, especially in BFV.

  • @skates15 I don't remember whole buildings being destroyed in BF1 and I'm pretty sure BFV had much more destruction overall than BF1.
  • Tank2042Man's avatar
    Tank2042Man
    3 years ago
    @SlipperyLiz4rd Sometimes?

    More like every time with the main battlefield releases.

    Every battlefield game apart from BC1 and BC2 which couldn't handle 64 players on that generation of console were 64 player.
  • skates15's avatar
    skates15
    3 years ago
    @Tank2042Man I believe one was a church and another was a storage type building. You did have to give it a lot of damage tho. Most games the buildings would take normal damage, cap moves on, etc., but some of those buildings would go down to a nub if you kept destroying it. I found that out much later in the game and thought it was interesting.

About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion

Discuss the latest news and game information around Battlefield 2042 in the community forums.15,974 PostsLatest Activity: 9 hours ago