Remember when you first thought you could level the city

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:00 pm

And roam, and create (I don't know when Sandbox3 is out) and destroy and level the entire city, and run around at maximum speed?

I think that would've been the best campaign ever.
User avatar
Bigze Stacks
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 5:07 pm

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 3:30 am

It would have been pretty amazing to see the destructibility of Lingshan in an apocalyptic NYC. Too bad we can't even knock down a god damned signpost.
User avatar
Eire Charlotta
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:00 pm

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:53 pm

maybe crysis 3 will have a destructible metropolis.

i would have loved to see a sandbox NYC more than anything but imagine the processing power needed. in c1 you could destroy trees and small little houses with few furniture. youll need a whole power plant for the rig that can calculate a collapsing skycraqer with 1000 rooms filled with furniture, stairs, windows and so on. and if you THEN use TAC GUN, omfg
User avatar
Jack
 
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:08 am

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:03 am

you're right men!
i hope you can do that in crysis 3!!
User avatar
Fluffer
 
Posts: 3489
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:29 am

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:54 am

Want destruction think BF3, want to be beat to death with a controller think crysis 2 - 3.
User avatar
Michelle Chau
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 4:24 am

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 9:00 am

all the destruction in bf3 is going to be pre-baked scripted stuff, be cool to see a game with a real world physics system in it, maybe in 10 years
User avatar
butterfly
 
Posts: 3467
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:20 pm

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 3:34 pm

the problem wtih getting REAL WORLD physic's ingame, is that it would A. require like a billion lines of code and B. the laws of physics are most likly wrong and not how what we call physics really works, becuase you cant destroy or create matter right? so what ever is, has always been, and will always be.


also to put something like that into a game, we would also need to know the math behind it, like how we think the universe makes it, and the problem is we honestly dont know
User avatar
SiLa
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:52 am

Post » Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:10 am

^ WE can ignore some rules of physics when doing a game simulation. For example, to collapse an entire sky scraqer, we dont need to calculate every little detail INSIDE the sky scraqer. All we need to do is run a 'kill check' inside the skyscraqer the second it starts collapsing (i.e. to kill whoever is inside, if its a fast collapse), and then run a cull on every object but the first floor (i.e. gut the building). Then we only have to deal with the physics of the objects on the first floor (which we could cull once there was a giant dust cloud). Basically through a little bit of cheating we only REALLY have to calculate the physics of a few dozen objects and the building itself - which is much easier. However, even this would not be possible without a very high-spec PC, and amazingly well done physics threading / coding.

If we really want to simulate every object in every room for all time, then yes, we cant do that at all. Even the highest-end super computers / render farms cant calculate that in a reasonable amount of time (i.e. 30 sec vid in a day), let alone real time.
User avatar
Aliish Sheldonn
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:19 am


Return to Crysis