Examiner recently spoke with Scott Mitchell, Animation Director on Rainbow Six Siege, about the game’s destructive environments and if there are any limitations in place.
He added, “In the beginning, we were blowing up more pieces of the floor, but again, it then came down to optimization and making sure we were running at 60 fps, and there were a whole bunch of other reasons around that.” And yet the battlefield series has 64 player servers with whole building's that an be destroyed heck look at the bad company series. The game is only 5v5 on tiny little maps on the beta the biggest map was the palace map but even that map was not a huge map for today's aaa game. If you are saying your game engine cant handle the house being destroyed and or cant handle 20 ai's running around i say its time to get a new game engine. Balance ok makes sense to a point because if this game had better bullet/gun balance that wouldn't be a problem. Lets face it in the beta the handguns had the same dps/penetration as a 5.56.
Bad Company had a max of 32, not 64. Even if you mean the later BF4 with 64, BF3 and BF4 had limited destruction due to engine and design reasons. They are not going to go full 100% destruction likely for the purpose of design ,even DICE didn't go full 100% destruction in any of the Bad Company games, they left many things undestructible due to design. They had their reasons and this team has their reasons on why they are not allowing for something to break the game. Also the map sizes don't need to be huge maps, the concept of the game isn't about anything large scale, it also has nothing to do with engine not being able to do it as much as the team likely is not doing it as it leaves too many exploits. I'd rather they focus on fair balance then seek to have a clone of another game or allow for features that can be exploited that hurt the game.
Another game sacrificing great gameplay over a few extra measly frames, what a waste.
Battlefield 4 runs at 720p/900p on consoles, and at only 30fps. If they were striving for 1080p and 60fps, like Rainbow Six is, then the game would be vastly different. Rainbow Six's destruction is also of a very different nature. In Battlefield a wall will just disappear. In Rainbow Six the frame will be left behind. In Rainbow Six the destruction is based on the part of a wall/floor you attack. Whereas in Battlefield if you blow up a wall it blows up in pre-determined sections. Basically, the two games are completely different in nature, performance, and how deeply they handle destruction. They are not comparable.
decent game...but I will get because, Im a fan of series. hopefully ubisoft fix the issue of the game. so i can have fun with it
pass on this game no replay value play bad company 2 lot better destruction in the game and more fun the maps are big. shame dice does not follow the same destruction for the battlefield series. we want to blow shit up and destroy building.
i call bullshit on the interview they are just lazy and dont want to program in good destruction nothing to do with frame rate. you blow something up it should destroy a good part of the wall or floor. we all want destruction fully. not blowing away a small part of the wall and leaving the rest intact. not real physics
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.