EA DICE Quietly Reveals Destructible Terrain for Battlefield 3

[Logan Westbrook]

EA DICE Quietly Reveals Destructible Terrain for Battlefield 3

Eagled-eyed fans have uncovered some tantalizing Battlefield 3 news in a place that most people wouldn't think to look.

EA Dice has let slip that Battlefield 3 will support the blowing up of walls and the flattening of buildings. This information wasn't announced however, it was tucked away in the description [http://schedule.gdconf.com/session/12139] for a talk at next year's GDC.

In either very late February, or very early March, DICE's Kenny Magnusson will talk about some of the difficulties that the studio faced in creating the lighting for Battlefield 3. Nestled in the description for the talk, among the HDR, particle lighting and real-time radiosity architecture, is a small snippet of text that refers to Battlefield 3's maps as "highly dynamic", "varied," and most interestingly, "destructible." Presumably, Magnusson will speak at length about some of the challenges in lighting a level that can change in unpredictable ways.

This news isn't a huge surprise; after both of the Battlefield: Bad Company [http://www.amazon.com/Battlefield-Bad-Company-2-Xbox-360/dp/B001QXNBJM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1291213174&sr=8-1] games, and Battlefield 1943 featured destructible environments, it makes sense that Battlefield 3 would follow suit. The game runs on a more advanced version of the Frostbite engine, however, we could be in for more detailed devastation than we've seen in previous titles.

Source: CVG [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=278451?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-News-RSS]



Permalink

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

So, I can make a crater to hide in with a grenage, like in Fracture?

Because this shit could easily lead to bugs, exploits, and generally cheap bullshit in multiplayer.

 

[The Rockerfly]

Sounds pretty cool but there is going to have to be a lot of testing to get this right

 

[uppitycracker]

So, I can make a crater to hide in with a grenage, like in Fracture?

Because this shit could easily lead to bugs, exploits, and generally cheap bullshit in multiplayer.

it already ends up being pretty damn cheap in BC2. there is no such thing as taking cover unless it's behind a rock, any form of building and you'll just get blown up, along with the wall, from a gustav.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

So, I can make a crater to hide in with a grenage, like in Fracture?

Because this shit could easily lead to bugs, exploits, and generally cheap bullshit in multiplayer.

it already ends up being pretty damn cheap in BC2. there is no such thing as taking cover unless it's behind a rock, any form of building and you'll just get blown up, along with the wall, from a gustav.

And now imagine if you could blow up the ground. It'd be horrid.

 

[Ldude893]

Not another Medal of Honor in terms of gameplay and expectations, I hope.

 

[Vrach]

Aye, it's awesome, but it ain't really news imo, kinda knew this, or at least expected it with 99% certainty. More importantly though as long as we get airplanes, I'll be happy

Seriously though, it's the one thing I'm mainly missing in BFBC2, that and some partially naval combat would be cool, with modern day destroyers, aircraft carriers and such. Slightly bigger maps in general would be a big plus and I would be absolutely ecstatic if we could get 64 player servers, haven't seen them since cybercafes had some for BF: Vietnam.

 

[Capt. Crankypants]

Yeah....destructible environments. If they want to make this revolutionary, they're gonna have to come up with something like an FPS scale 'World in Conflict' type thing, where the landscape actually is destructible. As has been said though, not sure how good that'd be for the maps to work successfully. Really though, I don't think we'll have to worry about that anytime soon. The tagline should be instead "Buildings will be destructible once again, but a little differently"

 

[Bretty]

So, I can make a crater to hide in with a grenage, like in Fracture?

Because this shit could easily lead to bugs, exploits, and generally cheap bullshit in multiplayer.

it already ends up being pretty damn cheap in BC2. there is no such thing as taking cover unless it's behind a rock, any form of building and you'll just get blown up, along with the wall, from a gustav.

And now imagine if you could blow up the ground. It'd be horrid.

Because BC2 Showed that you could make craters with grens? Nope...

BC2 is one of the most tested and well designed shooters out there. This would lead me to conclude that Battlefield 3 will have the same level of polish and forward thinking design I have come to expect from Dice.

PS. They pretty much have destructable terrain already, so I can only guess how far they are going to take it now.

 

[Vrach]

Yeah....destructible environments. If they want to make this revolutionary, they're gonna have to come up with something like an FPS scale 'World in Conflict' type thing, where the landscape actually is destructible. As has been said though, not sure how good that'd be for the maps to work successfully. Really though, I don't think we'll have to worry about that anytime soon. The tagline should be instead "Buildings will be destructible once again, but a little differently"

Well "Destruction 2.0" works quite well in BFBC2 atm, just that it's limited to buildings and a few scripted objects. What would be really cool is if they could add it to everything, even the actual terrain. Like when an airplane drops a bomb or an artillery strike comes down, you get a nice little crater in the ground with long matches turning maps into a properly scarred battlefield.

It wouldn't just be for looks really, it could provide makeshift cover as the game progresses forward, make some approaches more viable, perhaps even seal off some routes, making it harder for tanks to get through and such.

 

[RobCoxxy]

Please please please be maps of Battlefield 2/Project Reality size and awesomeness!
Or at least make it easy for the Project Reality guys to make PR:BF3.

 

[sooperman]

I was looking forward to Bad Company 3, but I suppose the main series needs an installment here and there. :/

And then people will start tunneling through the ground using explosives... Yeah cant see that being abused.

Battlefield: Red Faction. This will need testing...

 

[Vrach]

Yeah....destructible environments. If they want to make this revolutionary, they're gonna have to come up with something like an FPS scale 'World in Conflict' type thing, where the landscape actually is destructible. As has been said though, not sure how good that'd be for the maps to work successfully. Really though, I don't think we'll have to worry about that anytime soon. The tagline should be instead "Buildings will be destructible once again, but a little differently"

Well "Destruction 2.0" works quite well in BFBC2 atm, just that it's limited to buildings and a few scripted objects. What would be really cool is if they could add it to everything, even the actual terrain. Like when an airplane drops a bomb or an artillery strike comes down, you get a nice little crater in the ground with long matches turning maps into a properly scarred battlefield.

It wouldn't just be for looks really, it could provide makeshift cover as the game progresses forward, make some approaches more possibly etc.

And then people will start tunneling through the ground using explosives... Yeah cant see that being abused.

Dunno, I can't, my imagination probably sucks, could you paint me a scenario? (that wouldn't be intended and incidentally awesome part of gameplay)

Besides, Battlefield series is built on the notion of actual warfare or as I like to call it, mutual unfairness. No, it's not fair for a sniper to hit you from across the map. No, it's not fair for a tank to blast the shit out of you. But since both sides have pretty much equal means, all it adds up to is far more interesting gameplay.

If you want a bland game where all you have is bullets and fully indestructible scenery, go for CoD, I won't blame you, each to their own. Personally, I hate the whole sameness that comes from that and much prefer the gameplay to be more varied, include more improvisation and thus be more interesting, at least for me. I like having my chopper nearly shot down and kamikaze-crashing it into a tank in desperation, I like an enemy UAV raining hell while I'm trying to hide my sorry ass in a building that could come down on me in a second, I like hiding among the rubble of a torn-down building in my ghillie suit and providing cover fire to my team while they grab a flag.

Sure, I get a "goddamn sniper/tank/chopper/UAV/engineer/etc." curse under my breath once in a while when I get pwned, but it's all good fun cause I know the game's still pretty balanced, everything has a weak side and everything has a counter. It adds that much more to the awesome feeling when you counter it, like when you take down a helicopter with a shell shot from a tank, tag it with a tracer dart or even kill the driver (especially if done with a sniper headshot). I love sneaking up to an unsuspecting sniper and jamming a knife in the back of his head or emptying out my magazine on him. It's all a hell of a lot of fun and in the very least, a step up from the old Counter-Strike style gameplay that was practically almost perfected a decade ago.

 

[SilentHunter7]

it already ends up being pretty damn cheap in BC2. there is no such thing as taking cover unless it's behind a rock, any form of building and you'll just get blown up, along with the wall, from a gustav.

Well, considering that most buildings are just sheet-rock and 2x4's, that's not surprising.

Most buildings today only provide concealment, not cover. Especially with the types of ammo used.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

Not another Medal of Honor in terms of gameplay and expectations, I hope.

This will be a game by DICE so they know how to make a balanced and actually fun multiplayer game.
Apparently a lot of people complaining about BC2 must be CoD people playing BC2 like it was CoD.

Cool, I've been meaning to try these battlefield games. As of right now the only FPS I've played this Gen has been killzone 2. CoD doesn't interest me in the slightest, but I've heard nothing but good things about the BF:BC series so far.

The Battletield series has be the pinnacle of online shooters since BF2 for a damn good reason. DICE knows what they're doing.

OT: Sweet news to hear, and just after the announcement of BF:BC2:Vietnam release. Could this week get any better?