Less destructible environments in battlefield 3? Dice explains

4.5
Destruction has become a huge part of the Battlefield franchise. It was first introduced in Battlefield: Bad Company and has since then, become a staple part of the franchise. In an interview with IGN, Karl-Magnus Troedsson, General Manager at DICE, revealed that destruction was not originally intended to be a main part of the series. “When we threw in destruction, with having more dynamic environments in there, it actually worked out pretty well by itself.” He continued, “the destruction didn’t really rupture the whole Battlefield system. It actually was just a nice-add on…”

Many fans would agree that it was a very welcome addition in Battlefield: Bad Company 1, which was later improved in Bad Company 2. However, it has introduced other un-anticipated problems along with it as well. For instance, ”there were some maps that actually, after a while, if you played very long in the same area, you’d just grind down everything to the bottom, which made it really hard sometimes for, like, the defenders in a rush map,” said Troedsson himself. ”When we see these things, [we think] okay, we have to add some covers that actually are not destructible.”

In recent trailers and interviews, it’s been revealed that there won’t be as many completely destructible buildings like there were in Bad Company 2, however, destruction will still play a large role. Though you won’t be able to drop buildings on enemy’s heads in BF3, you will still be able to kill them with falling debris from destroyed walls or structures. Alan Kertz, senior gameplay designer at DICE, shed some more light on this subject when asked whether the player who caused the debris gets credit for the kill or not. He simply replied, “credit is given where credit is due.”

If you played the multiplayer in the 2010 reboot of Medal of Honor, you will notice that DICE did not include any destruction at all. So far, we’ve seen a few things from MoH carry over into Battlefield 3 and now, perhaps, we will see less destructible environments as well.

http://mp1st.com/2011/09/05/less-destructible-environments-in-battlefield-3-dice-explains/

Posted:

Comments

"Less destructible environments in battlefield 3? Dice explains" :: Login/Create an Account :: 63 comments

If you would like to post a comment please signin to your account or register for an account.

KiraPosted:

marcusmonsoon
-Kira-
Klutchizz
-Kira-
CastleCrashers cod fanboys should just be banned from viewing bf topics its so annoying nowhere on cod topic do we go over there and brag about our game you guys bring it up then we defend you just come over here and say yours is better when i bet about less than 1% of people on this forum have played both. i played BF3 alpha but not mw3 i can say that it bf3 was great but i cant talk for mw3 because i havnt played it yet. so CoD fanboys GTFO OUR FORUMS
Wow, what an insightful source you've accompanied your statistics with!

Oh wait, you haven't.
LOL. Dude bf fanboys flame on CoD topics all the **** time!!!

Bf fans are generally above the age of 14. Which equals a more mature fan base.
now with CoD, the fan base is centered around 10 to 16.
Hmmmmm tough choice. CoD fanboys do flame on Bf alot more than Bf fanboys flame on CoD. get over it.


Obviously you don't know your statistics. The average age of a CoD player is anywhere from 12 to 23. The average age of a BF player is anywhere from 12 to 21. So both have there "squeakers" but they also both have there mature players. So yes CoD fanboys do flame a lot on BF topics but the same goes with BF fanboys flaming on CoD topics. Good day sir.


Sorry, had to look for a little bit because you're to dumb to even quote someone right. Anyway, these statistics are true and are very simliar to yours, so by saying my statistics are incorrect, you are indeed saying yours are incorrect also. Nice job....

MatthewSteierPosted:

aimiami12 obviousley the campaign would have more destruction. Its the same with every game, theres stuff in campaign thats bigger and better then whats going to be online, no big deal IMO

Well I didn't notice any difference in BF2 for destructible environments when it came to online or campaign. But generally yeah you might see some neato burrito stuff in game campaigns that can't be online for a bunch of reasons. But there's still going to be better Destruction physics at least.

marcusmonsoonPosted:

-Kira-
Klutchizz
-Kira-
CastleCrashers cod fanboys should just be banned from viewing bf topics its so annoying nowhere on cod topic do we go over there and brag about our game you guys bring it up then we defend you just come over here and say yours is better when i bet about less than 1% of people on this forum have played both. i played BF3 alpha but not mw3 i can say that it bf3 was great but i cant talk for mw3 because i havnt played it yet. so CoD fanboys GTFO OUR FORUMS
Wow, what an insightful source you've accompanied your statistics with!

Oh wait, you haven't.
LOL. Dude bf fanboys flame on CoD topics all the **** time!!!

Bf fans are generally above the age of 14. Which equals a more mature fan base.
now with CoD, the fan base is centered around 10 to 16.
Hmmmmm tough choice. CoD fanboys do flame on Bf alot more than Bf fanboys flame on CoD. get over it.


Obviously you don't know your statistics. The average age of a CoD player is anywhere from 12 to 23. The average age of a BF player is anywhere from 12 to 21. So both have there "squeakers" but they also both have there mature players. So yes CoD fanboys do flame a lot on BF topics but the same goes with BF fanboys flaming on CoD topics. Good day sir.

KiraPosted:

Klutchizz
-Kira-
CastleCrashers cod fanboys should just be banned from viewing bf topics its so annoying nowhere on cod topic do we go over there and brag about our game you guys bring it up then we defend you just come over here and say yours is better when i bet about less than 1% of people on this forum have played both. i played BF3 alpha but not mw3 i can say that it bf3 was great but i cant talk for mw3 because i havnt played it yet. so CoD fanboys GTFO OUR FORUMS

LOL. Dude bf fanboys flame on CoD topics all the **** time!!!

Bf fans are generally above the age of 14. Which equals a more mature fan base.
now with CoD, the fan base is centered around 10 to 16.
Hmmmmm tough choice. CoD fanboys do flame on Bf alot more than Bf fanboys flame on CoD. get over it.


Obviously you don't know your statistics. The average age of a CoD player is anywhere from 12 to 23. The average age of a BF player is anywhere from 12 to 21. So both have there "squeakers" but they also both have there mature players. So yes CoD fanboys do flame a lot on BF topics but the same goes with BF fanboys flaming on CoD topics. Good day sir.

TheBrownGuyPosted:

kind of expected this

aimiami12Posted:

obviousley the campaign would have more destruction. Its the same with every game, theres stuff in campaign thats bigger and better then whats going to be online, no big deal IMO

thePiManxPosted:

... When we see these things, [we think] okay, we have to add some covers that actually are not destructible.


finally!

Soldier_Posted:

That sucks, aw well ill still get it and see if i can completely destroy at least one building.

ZBrushPosted:

dxbeats This game is pure ****.


Obvious troll is Obvious.

dxbeatsPosted:

This game is pure shit.