Actually the technology to create destructible building and such is already in the game - every object can have, "Destruction Data" that changes the model to another if it takes X amount of damage. You can also configure the GECK for debris objects that could fly out.

It would take alot Longer to build a destructible world, as you would have to create multiple copies of each building piece (the good one, the partially destroyed one, the destroyed one, etc). I'm doing this very thing with my mod, in so far as adding destructible Parts to my building (so that players can shoot-out windows, for example).

While I agree that a destructible world would be Awesome, it would also take alot longer to make and I'm sure Bethesda chose wisely to pour its resources into other aspects of Fallout3 that make it such a great game!

My 2 caps,

M

Let me clarify the complexity in constructing distructable environments with a project I'm working on.
Destructable rubblepiles that obstruct the sidestreets of the DC ruins
=> these then open up into shortcuts through the ruins

Every rubblepile requires a number of different models that emulate the current state of a rubblepile during the different stages of clearing via demolition;
there is the pile of rubble untouched (100% intact)
same pile, slightly cleared by demolition (80% intact)
same pile, almost half cleared (60% intact)
same pile, more than half cleared (40% intact)
same pile, almost completely cleared (20% intact)
same pile, cleared except for some debris (0% intact)

Aside from the first pile that is already a given, there are five completely different piles of rubble I have to model, that are as complicated as the first one was to make, no doubt.
Multiply that by the number of different sidestreets and you see the amount of work I have :unsure:

Same for buildings, every building would require a minimum of three partical/destruction models (slightly damaged, moderately damaged and flattened) to make it look semi decent, and more to make it look good.
Advanced graphics just make all that that much more time consuming to produce. It's not really hard anymore to do, just tedious, like long divisions. And that translated into production cost overruns and deadline postponements, especially if it isn't properly implemented during initial design stage.


Acolyte: 2cts to spare, no change needed he likes himself just fine thank you :wacko:
edit: Acolyte is beaten to the punchline :facepalm:

Doesn't one need to take baby steps before learning to walk? Big scale vs small scale destruction are really two different animals? I'm all for destructable stuff but everything gets crazy. Then that brings up a problem. What if a player abuses the destruction option and runs into one part that can't break. The internets would be ablaze with crying foul.

Which is why I'm limiting it to clearence of rubblepiles only Like you said, baby steps.
And I agree on the one-thing-that-doesn't-break-drives-us-mad aspect, which is why i't's only sparingly implemented into any existing games atm.

But being able to lob a mini nuke into that hole in the capitols dome and watch it collapse even further would be entertaining



Acolyte has said it before.., he luuvs blowing stuff up :nod: