Red Faction is why I'm kinda disappointed that CD3's Campaign doesn't offer any real destruction at all, even some basic destruction would have made the city feel less stale / static.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Digital Foundry : crackdown 3 wrecking zone analysis
- Thread starter Anthony Hopkins
- Start date
Red Faction is why I'm kinda disappointed that CD3's Campaign doesn't offer any real destruction at all, even some basic destruction would have made the city feel less stale / static.
Even if it still needed some help from the Cloud, I'd love to see games with that kind of destruction going on.
The platforming is such a huge part of Crackdown 3 that i'm not sure how it would work. A building being destroyed could easily screw things up or make it impossible to get an orb until you get to high enough agility that it doesn't matter. Or they'd have to give you a way to reset the city like an option menu.
Same. I hope THQ Nordic gives us a big new Red Faction game next gen. Destruction is a blast.
Microsoft says its 12 Xbox One's, but I guess you could do it with much less. Assuming that 12 is the maximum power of their cloud destruction tech, currently.
I'm not one of the those people that ever claimed Red Faction had better destruction than Crackdown 3, but, wow, really? That's awful.
The video mentions how cool 4 player co-op would be, Crackdown 2 had 4 player co-op. I wonder if John and Rich will be able to test it if Crackdown 2 ever becomes backwards compatible.
I will say it's MSs fault Because that early trailer certainly implied a different game more focused on destruction that isn't relegated to a arena multiplayer mode. I'm really enjoying the game so I can't say I share hordes opinion on this game but I am disappointed because I wanna see that original vision.
Have Orb physics.
My main issue would the player getting stuck in geometry but I guess that could be accounted for too in some way, you jump and explode through it, shoot through it etc.
I suppose the initial point was to make a game with destructive enviroments using Cloudgine tech. But that was purchased by Epic and left CD3 largely fucked. I suppose they could have cancelled it but after the mountain of shit they got for cancelling SB I guess they thought finishing regardless was the best option.
Why didn't you ask yourself this question when you created that Jimpression thread?
Cloud destruction is a new technique, which all MS studios can improve upon and use in their future games.
The technical analysis of this new tech is way more important than a rant by some random reviewer (yes I don't care about Jim).
That'd break the balance pretty badly. Can't get an orb? Instead of coming back to it later when you have more agility, just destroy the building. I love destruction in games, but i'm not sure Crackdown is the game to carry the mantle of it. It just feels like a weird fit for a game that is primarily about platforming. Now a next gen Perfect Dark could be awesome with destruction R6: Siege style. I also will make whatever sacrifices are necessary for THQ to give us a new Red Faction.
This part reads like sarcasm...
...But this part does not. I just can't even tell anymore
That is exactly how I feel, Red Faction Guerilla is probably one of my favorite games of all time because of the amazing physics destruction and what we are seeing in Wrecking Crew pales in comparison despite RFG running on a 360 and this is apparently running on cloud servers. Plus the destruction is all there in RFG multiplayer as well.
Okay, and what does that have to do with this thread
I believe Cloudgine was acquired by Epic Games late last year; I highly doubt that they weren't close to completing the cloud powered stuff by then (and if that's not the case, then development of this game was even more dire than I had originally expected)
By creating an end product pared back from the initial pitch?
Good video as always, interesting analysis. I'm not going to give my own opinion because I don't really want to be accused of being "mad" or anything like that.
I just want to inform you Dark1x that the video has one redactionally mistake. A kind of important one.
You (or better to say Richard) says the steel structures can't be destroyed. This is wrong. The individual buildings will completely collapse - including all of its steel structure - if you do enough damage to the whole building structure itself. You can't destroy the steel by just causing damage against the steel. You have to "trigger" the whole building to collapse.
We have seen this in a lot of footage already, here is mine example:
Notice how the steel structures break and get destroyed, too. This is possible for every structure on the map.
Other than that - great video as always!
You (or better to say Richard) says the steel structures can't be destroyed. This is wrong. The individual buildings will completely collapse - including all of its steel structure - if you do enough damage to the whole building structure itself. You can't destroy the steel by just causing damage against the steel. You have to "trigger" the whole building to collapse.
We have seen this in a lot of footage already, here is mine example:
Notice how the steel structures break and get destroyed, too. This is possible for every structure on the map.
Other than that - great video as always!
Oh I'm definitely getting a sarcastic vibes based on the "I'm having fun" comments seen in the review thread.
User Banned (2 Days): Antagonizing other members; previous infractions
Make a game? Do you enjoy shitting on this game or something? Did Terry plow your wife?
Yeah. I've thought about this. Destruction in the campaign could work but only if limited to objects featured at different "mission areas". Like, enemy structures and the like could collapse and break apart. You just couldn't have the whole world work that way.
Yeah, I told Richard to add a note. We tried to replicate this but were unable to. Buildings would never go down so we missed something. It looks like you can't actually destroy then so much as they fall after a certain threshold has been reached.I just want to inform you Dark1x that the video has one redactionally mistake. A kind of important one.
You (or better to say Richard) says the steel structures can't be destroyed. This is wrong. The individual buildings will completely collapse - including all of its steel structure - if you do enough damage to the whole building structure itself. You can't destroy the steel by just causing damage against the steel. You have to "trigger" the whole building to collapse.
We have seen this in a lot of footage already, here is mine example:
Notice how the steel structures break and get destroyed, too. This is possible for every structure on the map.
Or you could design your campaign around the fact that every Building is destroyable. Why wouldn't that work? Make good alternatives for reaching places. I am sure a good design team could very well make it work, it just wasn't the focus here once they went with "full destruction only for MP"
Yep, exactly. After you have done enough damage to a building (simply destroy as many walls on a single building as you can) it will basically "trigger" the complete collapse, kind of like in the old Gamescom demo.
OP
OP
One positive that might happen from this, are the things they learnt from wrecking zone May help future games.
Even if WZ is jank it is unlike anything that's been done before.
Even if WZ is jank it is unlike anything that's been done before.
The idea I originally thought for the campaign destruction was to have the buildings rebuild after a while. Construction cranes appear around the building and it rebuilds / respawns after little while. Maybe make certain platforms / buildings indestructible if they stop progression of course. Also you won't have a fully powered up agent to late in the game, so total destruction would only really be possible late in the campaign anyway.
Yes THQ should definitely give Red Faction another game, I'd be there day 1.
Functionally for the end user, how is WZ any different or better than, say, Red Faction?
Positive: Doesn't require the same amount of local compute power.
Negative: Requires an internet connection.
I'm sure it's possible, but it kinda comes down to what do you gain from doing that? Would Crackdown with destruction integrated into the campaign make for a better Crackdown experience? I'm not sure it would, based on what people go to Crackdown games for. I think on it's barest level platformers are not a game that meshes well with destruction. Something like agility orbs are platforming challenges. Given the ability set you have and your present character progression, can you get to that orb up there? If not, come back later when your character has grown more and you have more movement tools. It's slightly metroidvania-ish in that regard. Allowing the ability to bypass that would be fun in the way that destruction always is, but I don't know that it would enhance the game. I think there are other genres and Microsoft IPs which would benefit way more from destruction technology.
That's a neat implementation idea. Keep critical buildings from being destroyed, but allow others to be destroyed. I could see that working! It sounds like a challenge to do well since there's a lot of permutations to consider, but game design ain't easy in general.
Terry is plowing no ones wife.
His wife is too busy plowing him these days.
OP
OP
It's an online MP.
But even if it is no better then red fraction,
The devs/ms may still have learnt things from it, which could spark or help future projects.
it would just mean the game needs to be designed around the concept of a fully destructable map in the first place. its not like we never had games in the past that were designed with a big focus on physics. that would of course mean a lot more budget is needed for this.
There just isn't a need for nonsense like this. Really.
OT: I've yet to try this game, but I truly hope the next push for cloud tech in such a fashion is more successful.
I don't know if it would make for a better experience, but isn't Crackdown also about blowing shit up, I think it would be fun to level a whole city.
Doing this stuff and leveling a whole city Block in the process seems like fun:
And I also think it would be hard to do well with a functioning campaign, but that maybe just shows that this game was pushed out the door and not really an ambitious project for MS.
Red Faction 1 in 2001 featured destruction of most of the MP levels in 2001 (on PC, don't know about PS2).
It would work fine. It just wouldn't be Crackdown. Put that in some other game. What we got is awesome.
Was same on PS2.
It was a little different in the original game - Geomod was its own thing. There were very basic physics applied but really, you were just carving up geometry. Very neat for 2001.
Lol MS probably adversely affected cloud services for gaming that are featured in CD3 than promoted them
Massive failure on their behalf considering how much effort wasted on this and all the made up marketing that came with CD3 and when the console launched.
ps3ud0 8)
Massive failure on their behalf considering how much effort wasted on this and all the made up marketing that came with CD3 and when the console launched.
ps3ud0 8)
Yeah probably not easy but like you say, game design isn't easy either. I'm sure the clever developers would figure it out.