Destructable environment (let the trees fall down like in RO2)?

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

foln

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 13, 2015
91
13
0
Compared to Red orchestra 2 there is like absolutely no destructable environment in this game. Why?
Considering it wasn't even a performance problem at all for RO2 to have tons of trees that were able to fall down upon explosions next to them, could it possibly be a problem for Rising Storm 2 to have that?
Especially in a Vietnam game being able to have trees fall over upon explosions right next to them would be a really interesting feature to have.

(Disclaimer: I did use the forum search but wasn't able to find anything about this with it. Which kinda surprised me myself.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: smc

VashCZ

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
123
5
0
34
Nah... not important. We have growing grass and hardly to balance bushes... but this gameplay feature is not important.

LOL
 

Jagdwyre

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 2, 2011
564
69
0
What map in RO2 featured trees being destroyed? I don't recall anything like that, most of the destructibility had to do with some fences and parts of rooftops. The rest was objective based objects like doors and bunkers.
 

Lemonater47

Grizzled Veteran
Sep 25, 2014
2,370
144
63
25
Quite a few did. However the tree just exploded into debris. Essentially just disappeared and were replaced by a sort of particle effect.


However Pavlov's house and fallen fighters had quite a bit of destruction. Relatively speaking of course. You could destroy these little mini gazebo things. Plus you could run over traffic light poles with the tanks. They would actually fall over and become a dynamic static mesh. On spartanovka every single house could be destroyed by artillery. Satchels too technically but there's no engineers.


If you want to see a lot of destruct ability just look at heroes of the west. You can blow down fences, destroy trains, explode fuel trucks and even entire buildings (sheds really). All on a single map. An artillery strike in certain area's really changes up the whole thing.


Then RS2 has nothing. Can't even destroy the little fences. Not that it's much of a big deal at all. Just pointing it out.
 

foln

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 13, 2015
91
13
0
Jagdwyre;n2289253 said:
What map in RO2 featured trees being destroyed? I don't recall anything like that, most of the destructibility had to do with some fences and parts of rooftops. The rest was objective based objects like doors and bunkers.

I'd have to check for particular maps myself. I didn't play RO2 in a bit and my memory is a mess. I am 100% sure I saw trees falling down from explosions in RS or RO2 though.
Googling it I found this post which mentions it too: http://forums.tripwireinteractive.c...many-servers-using-bots?p=1481117#post1481117
 
Last edited:

smc

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
73
4
0
Aus
Yeah this is a good question as well as physics objects in general, will these be enabled in final release like KF2 and RO2? Enhances the experience for sure!!
 

VashCZ

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
123
5
0
34
There is no existing physycs, are you crazy? They need to sell cheapest game they can :).
 

Jagdwyre

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 2, 2011
564
69
0
Lemonater47;n2289257 said:
Quite a few did. However the tree just exploded into debris. Essentially just disappeared and were replaced by a sort of particle effect.


However Pavlov's house and fallen fighters had quite a bit of destruction. Relatively speaking of course. You could destroy these little mini gazebo things. Plus you could run over traffic light poles with the tanks. They would actually fall over and become a dynamic static mesh. On spartanovka every single house could be destroyed by artillery. Satchels too technically but there's no engineers.


If you want to see a lot of destruct ability just look at heroes of the west. You can blow down fences, destroy trains, explode fuel trucks and even entire buildings (sheds really). All on a single map. An artillery strike in certain area's really changes up the whole thing.


Then RS2 has nothing. Can't even destroy the little fences. Not that it's much of a big deal at all. Just pointing it out.
Spartanovka is usually what I think of when it comes to the destruction in RO2. All this time I never knew about the poles on Pavlovs though, interesting.
 

smc

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
73
4
0
Aus
VashCZ;n2289275 said:
There is no existing physycs, are you crazy? They need to sell cheapest game they can :).

Oh no I don't mean Nvidia PhysX licensing or anything extreme, just general unreal stock physics already built in to move and manipulate some objects like furniture, items on top and paintings etc. Thats what was used for the destruction in RO2 and HEROS Lemonator?

The physics option is in the menu already so probably add last minute ;)
 
Last edited:

VashCZ

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
123
5
0
34
I don t know... they announced it at least? If they haven't, it is "maybe feature". It is same engine as RO2 and there were no physics for chairs.
 
Last edited:

nilsmoody

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 8, 2014
625
31
0
www.youtube.com
Make the majority destroyable or nothing.

RO2/RS was very inconsistent concerning the destruction. You never knew what was destructable and what not. Many things were unnoticed anyway or was badly implemented.

i don't think this should take priority.
 

smc

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 13, 2017
73
4
0
Aus
VashCZ;n2289288 said:
I don t know... they announced it at least? If they haven't, it is "maybe feature". It is same engine as RO2 and there were no physics for chairs.

No I doubt they would announce anything as it's a minor thing really, but yeah RO2 had lots of physics based random clutter, most maps had this check out Barracks and Apartments or like Lemonator stated Spartanovka had it all. Chairs, buckets, pillows, bottles, jerrycans etc. Make sure you didn't disable physics over the yrs in config.

nilsmoody;n2289302 said:
Make the majority destroyable or nothing.

RO2/RS was very inconsistent concerning the destruction. You never knew what was destructable and what not. Many things were unnoticed anyway or was badly implemented.

i don't think this should take priority.

I'd say if the game didn't have the Frostbite engine, RO2 imo had much more destruction then most other fps games, probably unnoticed (i'm guessing) by many as they didn't investigate or stuck to the old formula for fps shooters or didn't use vehicles, alot didn't even use the cover system according to this forum which i think is just strange. I'm fairly sure a lot of this was implemented to assist the vehicles moving about the map so possible why Vietnam may not get it at, least till implemented.
 

foln

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 13, 2015
91
13
0
nilsmoody;n2289302 said:
Make the majority destroyable or nothing.

RO2/RS was very inconsistent concerning the destruction. You never knew what was destructable and what not. Many things were unnoticed anyway or was badly implemented.

i don't think this should take priority.

I disagree. Making the majority destroyable or nothing might be a move that will decrease the gameplay quality.
On some maps destroyable environment works really great while on others it ruins the balance of the map. So, having it individual from map to map isn't bad at all.
 

kev2go

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 10, 2016
17
2
0
yea i would have expected destructible environments in a current modern developed tactical game with a battlefield. . Then again visuals arent that great for a new game and they are using unreal engine 3 ( still) and not unreal engine 4.
 

Beskar Mando

Grizzled Veteran
Dec 13, 2014
1,573
62
48
Baltimore, Maryland
steamcommunity.com
kev2go;n2293561 said:
yea i would have expected destructible environments in a current modern developed tactical game with a battlefield. . Then again visuals arent that great for a new game and they are using unreal engine 3 ( still) and not unreal engine 4.

Which means jack ****, especially when you say because they are using unreal 3. Look buddy the amount of illogical reasoning by blaming a 3 instead of a 4 to validate [insert feature here] is asinine. The engine doesn't have extreme limitations. I also don't think you understand how PC performance is benchmarked for games by developers to set goals for the hardware required to play them. Unreal 4 wasn't even released when the game was first worked on, get this, Unreal 3 was still being updated during that time. I know, shocking.

To nail my point home, here's a comparison of two games, both on Unreal 3, both on the highest settings possible for the game.
Both of the videos below are on the highest settings for the game.

Medal of Honor: Airborne (2005, Unreal 3):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZJQtv_FFlY

Rising Storm 2: Vietnam (2016, Unreal 3):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-g_JOm-zV_g
note that this is from November meaning art and assets may or may not have been changed since then. (Implies better or more optimized graphics)
 

JokersWarPig

Member
Oct 25, 2009
131
12
18
I think a bit of destruction would go a long way imo. Maps where the Vietnamese rely heavily on tunnels for movement could have collapsible entrances, denying them access to that route. A map with destructible bunkers similar to Phosphate Plant would be cool (it'd be nice to do on Hill 937).
I don't think the game is in dire need of destruction, but if it was implemented it also wouldn't need destruction on the level of Bad Company 2 to be good (even though that'd be awesome)
 

kev2go

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 10, 2016
17
2
0
Beskar Mando;n2293645 said:
Which means jack ****, especially when you say because they are using unreal 3. Look buddy the amount of illogical reasoning by blaming a 3 instead of a 4 to validate [insert feature here] is asinine. The engine doesn't have extreme limitations. I also don't think you understand how PC performance is benchmarked for games by developers to set goals for the hardware required to play them. Unreal 4 wasn't even released when the game was first worked on, get this, Unreal 3 was still being updated during that time. I know, shocking.

To nail my point home, here's a comparison of two games, both on Unreal 3, both on the highest settings possible for the game.
Both of the videos below are on the highest settings for the game.

Medal of Honor: Airborne (2005, Unreal 3):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZJQtv_FFlY

Rising Storm 2: Vietnam (2016, Unreal 3):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-g_JOm-zV_g
note that this is from November meaning art and assets may or may not have been changed since then. (Implies better or more optimized graphics)


Nice try Cherry picking early Alpha build. At lanch, and especially now RS2 looks way better than it did in early build. Besides unreal 3 wasnt designed for Destructive environment in mind, and wouldnt be added to an otherwise finished game, due to needing quite bit of engine overhaul.

At this point UE3 is obselete, it doesnt matter if it was being updated, as even Operating system is still supported for some years after a much newer and superior one is released, for the sake of the legacy users to have relevant security and patches for any potentional bugs and what not. . A future game certainly should use UE4 at this point.
 
Last edited: