BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

[Consultant01]

I've seen screenshots of the new engine and it looks amazing, then I saw this article.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060821/20060821005224.html

Some tidbits.

"...the game delivers the series' trademark sandbox gameplay in a universe where nearly everything is destructible."

"The heart of DICE's multiplayer games is the frenetic, unpredictable nature of the sandbox experience, where anything could happen at any moment, and that's what we're bringing to the core of Battlefield: Bad Company's single-player campaign, said Karl Magnus Troedsson, senior producer at DICE. "In a world that's 90 percent destructible, the gameplay possibilities are infinite -- the battlefield is always changing, forcing players, teammates, and enemies to react accordingly. Gamers will have total freedom to adapt to and tackle challenges in creative Battlefield-style ways."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

90 percent destructible? Wowzers! The new engine is called "Frostbite" and I am anxious to see if it is something that they are working toward porting for the PC... ALso, will it take advantage of the new line of Physics Accellator Cards from Ageia (sp?)

I've always wanted to be able to shoot out the base of a building and have it fall on a bunch of infantry... now we can. (On the next-gen consoles anyway).

I wonder if this is what BF3 will be based on for the PC.

[cantfinddeletebutton]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

sweeet that sounds awesome... 90% destructable but that also means longer loading times because you have to load what has been destroyed and what hasn't but still it sounds awesome

[Consultant01]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

as I read closer, I notice "...and that's what we're bringing to the core of Battlefield: Bad Company's single-player campaign, said Karl Magnus Troedsson, senior producer at DICE. "In a world that's 90 percent destructible, the gameplay possibilities are infinite"

I wonder if the destructible world is single player only...because you're right... loading a presently half-destroyed map would take forever and could possibly be impossible as the map is constantly being changed..

If the game takes a snapshot of the current state of destruction and begins loading that, then a tank crushes a pile of rubble and blows a car half way across a street, the map changed and you must now load that change.

That could get ugly in on-line play.

[Mr Pmosh]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

This is for consoles. Not pc.

[pYura]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

I want my excavator

[Consultant01]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

This is for consoles. Not pc.

my point is, that if this is the direction that the BF engine and franchise are taking in the future, the PC version will be just as good or better than the console one.

[troybob]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

Frontlines: Fuel of War will be better

made by the team that brought you Desert Combat.

[imported_Nefarious]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

Making the environment 90% destructable is really difficult especially for PC games that can hold up to 64 ppl in a server. The lag would be enormous if one building were to crumble. Thats probably why Bad Company is for the Xbox 360 and PS3.

[Dandred]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

Sorry to pizs on your fire Consultant01, but can you imagine a PC that would be able to do all that? I don't think people who buy games will be able to afford that kind of rig for quite afew years yet........

And even if a small amount of people could afford it, would the people who make games really care for such a small market?

[Consultant01]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

in the next few years, physics accellerators that take the load off the CPU for the "flying debris" will make it a lot more doable.

Besides, PC Games push the average strength of the end-user system higher every year. It won't be long before 4 GB of RAM, a Dual Core CPU and 512 MB Video Cards are the bare minimum... It's closer than you think. The hardware set on a 360 or PS3 isnt *THAT* much stronger than a lot of PCs.

[FPS[VT_NERD]]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

I'd argue that the PS3 isn't any stronger than current PC's. It has the new cell processor which might help it out a lot, but it only has 512mb of RAM (video and otherwise combined). If you're going to have a 90% destructible environment I would imagine you need more than 512MB of RAM but I'm no expert.

[machstem]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

Frontlines: Fuel of War will be better

made by the team that brought you Desert Combat.

Wouldn't you be dissapointed if it turned out worse than you expected? I'm looking forward to it, if only to give EA/DICE some competition, but you're jumping to conclusions when renders and screenshots haven't even really hit the gaming community. They have some screenshots on gamespot, but nothing says it will look anything like it.

PEACE

[Flanker]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

I'd argue that the PS3 isn't any stronger than current PC's. It has the new cell processor which might help it out a lot, but it only has 512mb of RAM (video and otherwise combined). If you're going to have a 90% destructible environment I would imagine you need more than 512MB of RAM but I'm no expert.

Except that its a pure gaming system, and doesn't have to support an Operating System and all the other crap that we have running on our PCs. You can double that amount of RAM if you want to imagine it's effect on games. And the PhysX processor (PS3 has one) will take care of the collisions, the RAM is just there as a medium between that and the Hard Drive.

[~WPN~Major Ursa]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

I don't think it has to do with pc vs. console strength. I think it boils down to internet connection speed and packet size flow. If a game is single player, then only one person has to see the destroyed environment. Multi-player means that you have up to 64 people seeing AND changing the destroyed environment. That is a massive amount of information that must be sent back and forth between the pc and the server. I doubt the average cable internet connection could handle the additional packet flow without insane lag.

[Dairuka]

Re: BF: Bad Company engine port to BF3? *drool*

I don't think it has to do with pc vs. console strength. I think it boils down to internet connection speed and packet size flow. If a game is single player, then only one person has to see the destroyed environment. Multi-player means that you have up to 64 people seeing AND changing the destroyed environment. That is a massive amount of information that must be sent back and forth between the pc and the server. I doubt the average cable internet connection could handle the additional packet flow without insane lag.

http://www.shadowbane.com/us/

It's been done in an MMORPG.

Yes it had horrible latency problems, and even now, still has pretty bad latency problems, but it is feasable to pull it off.