The Saboteur is conspicuous by it’s absence in this video, a bit like red faction but not AS destructible that’s probably why you missed it out. Top quality video as always anyway
@@J.PC.Designs Exactly. They could easily solve that issue lmao by making the game way more fun to play in general instead of just being the most broken online multiplayer ever now. Shit become garbage. Load into the game and there is usually an explosion, a fire outside where you are loading in from a blown up car, and then the feed constantly saying who is dead and who killed who ect.
When GTA 5 came out the first thing I did in free roam was driving a car at full speed into a wall to see how much they improved vehicle destruction compared to GTA 4... my disappointment was immeasurable and my day was ruined
It's really funny that despite all the advances in technology, the two best destruction games are Red Faction Guerilla from 14 years ago, and Teardown which was made by like 4 people.
I remember younger me on the PS3 playing red faction guerrilla and wanting more games like it since it felt so unique sucks most devs haven't done that
The Finals, a game by ex Battlefield developers, is an FPS that offers a lot of tool for players to destroy buildings in fun and strategic ways. The destruction isn't as crazy as in Teardown, but you can collapse a building to expose a team camping on the roof, or blast through the ceiling with C4s to surprise them from above. And yes, it does get super chaotic
A game called "The Finals" is in development where the entire map can be destroyed down to the floor, it takes place in a gameshow where teams of 4 fight for cash boxes. They had a 2 week open beta, it was very fun.
@@Backfisch5927 i think its a very cool game, well made, but its only for hyper-competent people. Its only multiplayer. So i am out :/ to old and slow :P
A Superman simulator that comes to mind is Megaton Rainfall. The scale of everything is immense, you can literally visit other galaxies. And you have Superman-like powers too; you have lasers, a ground pound, you can fly (obviously) and telekinesis. The game universe has enemies to defeat on Earth. but if you're not careful your powers will damage whatever city you're fighting in, and the destructible buildings acts accordingly. Of course on such a massive scale, you're sacrificing quality for quantity, but I think the scale alone of the game is amazing.
Just tried it because you made me curious, and only goddamm, did they even play test the freaking game??? This is so freaking janky, you have to hit flying ship that jerk all over the place but you get punished for every missed shot, and that absolutely useless telekinetic power is outright enraging to use, 3/4 times it won't even fire properly if at all, resulting in an instant mission failed because the bomb do so much destruction... To anyone reading this, I do not recommend this game unless you want to pointlessly rage, quickest buy and reimburse I've done in a long time.
@@cbl1199 haha yep, that's the leaening curve of the game. You need to juggle a bunch of enemies while trying not to damage the city too bad. Collateral damage in inevitable. And it actually gets harder from there because as you progress, you get more powers, and then yu have to use the new powers to defeat new kinds of enemies that starting popping up. and of course more enemies to juggle at the same time Not too sure about the janky telekinetic power, maybe just takes a bit of gettig used to. You need to get within a certain range for it to work, and then you just send the bomb as far into the stratosphere as you can
@@cbl1199 we did not play the same game then. It is hard to avoid collateral damage because that is the gameplay. Being an infinitely powerful being with powers that can level cities predictably levels the cities you are trying to protect. It is also playable in VR.
@@xnotasweatx i bet you didn't even play the game if you think it's 'glitchy'. Yes the game is hard and the telekinetic power is hard to control but THAT'S THE POINT OF THE GAME. You're literally a omniscience being that is tasked to protect Earth. You have all this powers yet you have to avoid letting loose to avoid casualties. Of course the game won't be easy
Yep. everybody forgots how physics create the sandbox and gameplay freedom and opportunities and just votes a game where you can play a cat... wow innovation just because that game sold more :D
I remember playing The Incredible Hulk for the ps2 when I was a kid. And after the first level, I distinctly remember never doing anymore missions since I would just spend the entire time in the city destroying buildings and cars because it just looked so cool at the time to see a building fall and get destroyed.
The recent Battle Bit does this beautifully as well, you can feel the rumble of a building from far away and sometimes watch it tumble down to the ground after having spent the match chipping away to reveal enemies behind cover, and more. It's so satisfying to just watch as the building you were in only 5 minutes earlier is gone.
@morrisalanisette9067 money That's why they won't let battlebit on console, and console games are becoming shittier They could have made 2042 extremely well, but instead EA said do call of duty fortnite instead for the money
@@MamatHensem Hard to explain, but it's a type of joke referencing something. Like destruction. He said "this better blow up". Blowing things up is a type of destruction.
@@crestofhonor2349 exactly I’d say we’re about high time ready for a real return of destruction with the current GEN consoles. Probably would have to settle for 30 FPS though
@@ChiquitaSpeaks I agree. We could start adding in real time destruction, to games that it would be a benefit to, with slightly more complex damage models and physics calculations. Once games stop targeting both current gen and last gen expect CPU targets to rise more as companies begin to take advantage of more CPU related features like destruction
I remember playing Red Faction and seeing the fully destructible environments and thinking "wow in the future games are going to be so awesome" But It has taken way longer than it should have for us to get to the level of destruction that I hoped for then. And for many years we only went backwards from that.
destruction isnt easy, its a choice that can complicate a game way more than it needs to be, destruction wasn't an afterthought or gimmick in red faction, it was the entirely gameplay loop. making something destructible is very complicated, making it good is even more complicated, and then making it look good while not breaking the game/ruining performance is almost impossible. You have to basically destroy the topology of every destructible object in the game, or make a procedural way to collapse topology to look like a fragmented version. And then you have to texture the interior pieces/create new topology for backfaces, which in of itself degrades performance, let alone the physics sim to actually make it work.
@@party4lifedude did u read anything i said lol, the games that had destruction were built around it, not made for a gimmick or a little side quest, the difference between destructible environments and no destructible environments is a good extra year+ in dev, + the money, + the performance drop on all hardware.
@@AndrewMiE Guerrilla was awesome, i remember complaining as it didn't had terrain destruction unlike Red Faction 1, but Red Faction 1 had a lack of building destruction
I love how this went from "how games simulate destruction and different ways it could be done" to "we need to make gaming the way it should be and we're all getting scammed"
@@protocetid This is why as the graphics get better, I find myself increasingly getting bored and disinterested in a lot of modern games. Things like physics, A.I., and animations are taking the backseat. It was why I appreciated games like Zelda BotW. The environment felt more than set dressing. I was also pleasantly surprised to see Fortnite starting to implement more destruction, fire spread, and more animations. I hope more UE5 games implement these things in their games.
@@Drstrange3000 it's like dev companies realized $ > quality. once you got that IP youre safe to keep letting games go out because people will pay for what they want to love
We need so much of this in several matters of the entire world!! Reflection about the problem + a good solution, not just complainings and crying nonsense, good solutions is what makes us really overcome problems
When I first got Just Cause 3 for like three dollars on Steam, I gotta say I wasn't expecting much. Imagine my surprise at how realistic and just fun it was to just blow shit up, it looked fantastic and ran like a dream. I later got Battlefield 1 and was blown away once again at how buildings would crumble to pieces when a tank would drive through, or how a plane could crash in front of you, creating a fantastic flaming wreck and crater that would provide cover for you and your squad.
now imagine if just cause 3 actually delivered and complete destruction would be possible i will never understand why a franchise that advertises itself with chaos, destruction and carnage allows the player to blow up only things that are painted red
@@ryszakowyWell, there's only so much they could've done at the time, to be fair. That, and it couldn't be done with EVERY building, gotta have some limits here and there. I understand your point though.
You missed Crash N' Burn and Wreckfest when you were talking about car destruction. Both amazing games with great destruction. Wreckfest had it's moments but Crash N' Burn was my all time favorite racing game!
@@J.PC.Designs but no game is perfect. Wreckfest suffers in the driving physics aspect in my opinion. it would be amazing if someone could combine the best of all games in the genre
showing the footage of red faction made me realize that I've played that game and i do remember being legitimately baffled at the physics but for some damn reason its just like lost in memory until you showed it. That shit was actually INSANE for its time.
"the focus of these companies needs to be rethought, rebuild... but for that to happen, first, it has to be ... destroyed!" i never thought there could a better summary of the gaming industry as a whole, but you really have a point here, bravo. and i really really hope you get more attention, your videos are so well made and good, its just astonishing
@@gillespriod5509 I agree, I literally have no games that came out after 2014... Kinda sad that somehow all video game companies forgot how to make great and iconic games
I would question if gamers preffer 30 fps with fully destructible environments or 200fps with no destruction, sadly I've seen how most gamers would turn graphics and environment detail/effects all the way down to gain 10-20fps more.
Physical interaction with the world adds personality to video games along with their destruction of the world map. Makes me miss the first time l played red faction demo and Half life 2 on PC when l was a child.
Really good work, hopefully this reaches out and inspire future game creators. One thing to clarify, what was mentioned as Battlefield 1 & 2 is more precisely Battlefield: Bad Company 1 & 2.
I like how in The Finals, how everything is destructible and you can destroy everything. You can enter in all the buildings too. We need more games like that.
@@BlueShadow-dark23 Why can't more "realistic" games do that? Just make everything server-side. That would be much better if they're pushing realism so hard. I myself don't even care about realism, but some of the mechanics that "realistic" games have happen to be fun. Which is why I find realism so pointless, because many people, including myself, can't even enjoy the games. Not everyone can afford the monstrous computers that are required to run some of these games.
Mercenaries 2 may not have had the most advanced destructable buildings but with the player being able to call down all sorts of heavy ordinance, the possible scale of the destruction was something to behold.
i will take mercenaries 2 and possibility to raise entire cities with medium at best graphics over any just cause that allows player to destroy only things painted red.
Both of the Mercs games were amazing fun. Some of my fondest gaming memories, and a level of fun and freedom that I've rarely seen since. There's just something about a game, that lets you blow off steam after a failed mission, by razing entire towns to rubble.
I remember finally beating that game AND SLAMMING MORE HOURS INTO IT Calling in ordinance and vehicles on the fly was so cool about that game, aswell ass leveling a whole area to kill just a few guys
21:55 a good game that goes in that direction is megaton rainfall. It was getting popular for its realistic type of destruction to the world as well as its vr aspect but lost fame very quickly. I think it serves that job quite well. There is a mod out there that lets you be the villian destroying the world when in reality youre the hero saving them from alien invasions.
the problem with physics based destruction of games, is you need to make an engine that can simulate it. then you need to make structurally sound buildings. the second part is the hard part
thats possible but you need to make a system that not only can simulate different dynamics and events depending on how big the building is but also if its something detailed like an art deco building like the empire state building or a simple modern internationalist building like the sears tower, low density large footprint buildings like malls and schoola only collapse section by section and not all at once unless charges are placed, also an issue in teardown is that when a building disconnected from the ground moves all the furniture and doors are ripped out of the building at slightly higher speeds
teardown(the game witch building were destroied in the begaining) is such a great game. and the best part is you can mod it. i think i have 70+ mods installed that varies from a neclear reactor that explodes when you press a button to a highway witch has russian tanks and if you hit the ammo it slowly starts catching abaze and eventually explodes. its a great destruction game and roleplay game and is worth the 20$ edit: its 20$ not 10. i swear it was 10 when i bought it
@@brix_max Minecraft is super easy to mod so you probs should pay more attention to guides, that being said teardown in steam has the workshop option so all you gotta do is click download on the stuff you want and it’s gonna install itself
teardown is a great technical showcase, but not a great game. it barely runs in real-time. most of the footage in this video was made using the in-game screen recorder that takes a shot of each frame which then get compiled into a video to look smooth, while the game was running at 60 frames per hour.
Red faction guerrilla was incredible for its time!!! I played the demo and instantly fell in love it was awesome and ended up buying RF2. One of the greatest if not thee greatest destruction realistic game I’ve ever played
I have to say, DarkSpace never fails to amaze me with videos like this. Such a great quality content deserve so much more visibility and credit, and need to be seen by big companies **AHEM** Rockstar ubisoft **AHEM**. Keep up the great work bro !
im so happy you metnioned max payne 3 omg. the bullet time where it zooms into the enemy after they die and you can continue to shoot the enemy while the camera focuses on them watching holes being blown through there body right in front of you is so fun.....in the game
This deserves so many more views than it has. The gaming industry needs innovation to survive, and if it continues to recycle the same stale and repetitive games, then we could face another video game crash. Developers need to figure out that making a great game requires time and effort, but right now they’re only concerned with making the most money with the least amount of effort. We’re never going to get anywhere if the gaming industry continues to do the bare minimum. Innovation happens when people think bigger and better than anything before, and then put the time in to make it happen.
@@blackwarrior1897 No, not in the last 20 years, but there *was* a video game crash back in 1983. The market got flooded with cheap copies of the same bland/boring games, recycled over and over again, and eventually people got sick of it so they stopped playing video games altogether. That’s what we’re starting to see happen again with games today. Practically every game these days is some bland loot-box microtransaction bullshit that’s exactly the same as everything else. Developers are putting as little effort into game development as possible and just relying on microtransactions to make a profit. If this keeps up for too long, history could repeat itself and we might have another video game crash like the one that happened in 1983. The gaming industry needs to keep innovating and growing in order to prevent that from happening. That’s what I was trying to say.
I have always loved destruction in games since playing Mercenaries 2 and loving the fact you could bring down buildings, and it is still one of my favorite games. calling in a bunker buster bomb to take out an enemy base was so satisfying. Red Faction Guerilla's destruction was also great. on my longest playthrough there want a single building left standing.
Blowing up stuff in just cause will always be the best things about it just imagine planting bombs underneath a bridge then detonate it and watch the npcs fall to their deaths
You just reminded me of the RDX TNT in The Saboteur, that game was great in general but i particularly liked the destructible environments, you couldn’t blow everything up but enough to make the world feel more tangible/ tactile, the buildings were static but they were packed with nazi watchtowers and propaganda speakers, you could blow up the bridges and fuel depots, the zepplins falling out of the sky with the haunting screech of so much metal rubbing against metal. Damn i miss that studio… (funnily enough called Pandemic) such great games and so many more we’ll never get
I feel if a game is only built on destructive environments/objects, after a while the game gets incredibly boring, sure it's fun for the first 3 hours maybe, but Just Cause games and a lot of these games that are over reliant on destruction just kinda get old after a while. I hope I'm not the only feels this way, and I'm going to make my own comment separate from this to see if people agree.
This is one of my favorite videos so far from the channel! I really like how you described environment destruction across multiple video game genres from different series old and new in detail! My favorite segment is from 14:39 - 15:47 You don't see many racing games with gameplay like this now, as Split Seconds destructable set pieces were a great way of making each event action packed and the outcomes were different each time you drive against your opponents, even if you're replaying a race on the same track. Keep doing your thing with quality detailed videos Dark Space!
A big problem is actually reconstruction, since to immerse the player in the game there must be still an existing environment. What happens after you destroy it? Can you still access it? Will it simulate a 1 week/5 years repair of the building in game? What happens if you disturb the process? After it is completed again will NPCs mention it? What if there were witnesses and you are forbidden from entering the building again? What if a mission is inside there and now it can’t be completed for 1 in game week? Now think how much programming that would take. Now imagine that for every building in a game.
There is also the clever way Crysis did destruction on trees. They basically split the object in two when damaged at a particular spot and added a mesh to patch up the gaps in geometry. I also suspect Battlefield Bad Company did something similar with how walls can be destroyed. Also Crysis 2 has real deformation physics. You can actually deform containers and certain metallic objects scattered around the environment.
7:05 "the battlefield series has always prided itself on destruction" this is just not true. That started with the bad company titled battlefield games. 7:12 That's not battlefield 1 and 2, that's battlefield bad company 1 and 2. Very different thing. Battlefield 1942 came out in 2002 and was the first battlefield game, followed by vietnam, which was then followed up by battlefield 2 in 2005. Bad company came out in 2008 and bad company 2 came out in 2010.
Thank you for mentioning Burnout 3! That is a game that still, almost 20 years later, has some of the most fun car destruction I've seen in a game! I absolutely love Burnout 3 💚
Games like Arma don't have to have amazing looking destructive environment, it just has to be destructive. But there are games that don't need a destructive environment or just don't need to have good looking destruction.
That tech demo for Crackdown three was very impressive at the time, even today it's still cool to go back and watch it. I felt gutted when they scaled back that system, I was really looking forward to them developing that tech further to the point where it could have been used in further games..
I would of really like to see crackdown 3's original vision come to life. I remember microsoft was pushing cloud computing hard due to the xbox one's lack of power in the early years but it never really came into fruition. I think it was obviously cut due to costs like the video here mentions. But to this day I still would like to see some developer pull it off because it sounds pretty promising. With microtransactions and all I think it's pretty sustainable but obviously they want to make as much money as possible with minimal effort and cost.
Some of my favorite games ever were made by just a few people. How can AAA Studios with hundreds of employees and Million Dollar Budgets not manage to make a decent game?
@@thismakesnosense Because the executives are the ones with the final say, and said executives don't actually care about the game, and probably haven't even played a game before either. Indie studios are ran by the devs themselves
I agree with a lot of things in that video but there's one thing we need to consider : teardown is not a game, it's an experience. A game is not just a gameplay mechanic we just wrap in textures, a game is a whole assembly of sounds, musics, narration, gameplay style, graphics and so much more. Teardown is like a concept-car, not made to be industrialized but to show-off what technology has to offer nowadays. In addition of that, a single man has the whole control over his game, companies like ubisoft, rockstar, activision etc don't. Firstly because they have stupid shareholders (hello blizzard, i'm talking about you c:). Secondly because they are not just 20 people in a garage doing their nerdy stuff, they are WAY more than that, everybody has its role and everybody has to follow a development line because hype will shut, players will wait too much, players could stop buying and so on, they are in a constant rush and when in a constant rush you can't suddenly change for a brand new game engine just to put a new gameplay mechanic. Finally you sometime have to sacrifice something for another, they can't make a fully destructive environment, perfect car handling and car destruction physic, have the best graphics etc in the same game, it wouldn't run. I have a pretty decent computer and it's still not enough for most brand new games that are getting released and i know much people who just can't have better specs because it's either too high in price for them or they are just not as avid players as i am. Of course it's a problem that can be solved with consoles but things are that much people play on pc. Plus even very last gen consoles can get a little overwhelmed by performance cost of certain games. In a nutshell : of course we can do MUCH more than what we're doing now but do we need insane realistic physic to have beautiful games ? Does Tunic, Zelda:BOTW, Subnautica or even Outer Wilds have those insane physics ? No and they are still unbelievably good games, they are (imo) what we can call art in video games.
Control was just an awesome game the fact I found out I could mostly destroy everything with a gun or my forces I felt like I was in star wars , it's great news that remedy probably will start or will announce someday the control 2
Two games that come to mind nowadays are Megaton Rainfall, a great VR title that has an impressive sense of scale. Or The Finals, a still in development arena shooter (thanks for correcting) title worked on by previous (DICE) Battlefield developers mentioned. Just something to check out, even if you cant play them or they may not be your style
I am perfectly fine with a map breaking apart around me in a fight with heavy ordinance but I like a game with a solid map (the environment itself) like Halo because it keeps up with the fun of running and gunning (also Forge and custom games) P.S. near total destruction belongs in a game where total destruction is part of the loop (apocalypse sims)
As much as I want that kind of next gen feel, I can understand why most developers don't pursue it for tha sake of emersion, realism, detail, etc. Even with current Gen Consoles, real time destruction is one of the hardest things to simulate, especially when rendering them in an enviroment filled with other destructible elements. It's second to raytracing at being a pain to program and work well. Teardown is a good example of destruction, but since it uses it as it's primary feature it makes sense it works well. Destruction as an implemented feature that isn't the main part of the game will never fly in imited budgets and extended deadlines, let alone crunch culture.
That's what I was also going to say. Physics calculations are stupid hard to simulate and don't even get started on fluid physics and the time and issues with simulating that. Combine that with the weak CPUs from the PS4 and Xbox One from last generation it made sense why real time destruction didn't really evolve last generation
@@crestofhonor2349 There should be a middle ground. I am seeing less attention to detail on newer games than from games on the PS3. I'm seeing more static environments in favor of pretty static environments. Zelda BotW, Control, The Last of Us Part 2, RDR2, and even Fortnite at least put effort. If Devs don't want to implement these features, fine, but I'm annoyed at the marketing with current gen games as realistic when they omit things like physics simulations and better A.I.
Half Life 2 had some destructive elements, for one thing you can pick up many objects and throw them around, beer bottles could be broken, you break windows with a tv. Wooden furniture can be broken and set on fire. When you fight striders in the game, they would sometimes destroy buildings (though this is scripted) a good of example of that is the strider fight in HL2 Episode 2
It was nice to have Split/Second have on there, THAT and MotorStorm Apocalypse had really fun envrionments that's get worse when racing them ( whilst either acitivated or pre-scripted ) it would still be a blast, and with FlatOut taking a charge on destructive vehicle psyhics ( and BeamMG being a game that's leagues ahead of most racers out there atm ) i am so glad you went on about it
I feel like using the matrix as a comparison point was a bit of a wrong idea. Cause it wasn't built to show off the vehicle destruction, it was built to show off unreal 5's new rendering of both lighting and textures
I remember buying battlefield V thinking we could destroy every building and build fortifications and treches everywhere, what a fool. Also one great game that you could have shown in Foxhole, a massively multiplayer top down war game where you can build and destroy your bases
Superman with a destructive environment would be awesome... but frustrating. You'd rather be Zod. Imagine how precise and careful you'll have to be not to knock down entire streets.
Im excited for the game The Finals which has the fully destructable enviroment. More games should have this destruction. It creates a more immersive and cool experience. This also keeps the maps new and unpredictable even if you play the same map 5 times in a row. Im just glad a game in 2023 will have a fully destructible environment. Its disappointing that battlefield games slowly brought down their destruction and definitely brings down the immersion and overall fun in some cases.
TIL from this video: Fully simulated destruction has been in games much earlier than I thought and audio quality in the early 2000s was much worse than I remembered 10:15
another fantastic video. how many hours did you put into this? must have taken ages, but it really paid off. well done. i hope the industry starts listening to people like you. ❤
Been thinking about the Superman thing for a while. It's the perfect solution to his "overpowereness" without having every single enemy type use kryptonite which would get old soon. It would also work for a AAA Power Rangers game. The goal should be to defend the city.
The tools to do this and a lot of simulation stuff is there. Devs just dont bother. Often blamed on hardware resources, yet we get them pushing raytracing which offers marginal visual fidelity inhancements from an already plateuing graphical aspect, and its an absolute resource hog that most existing hardware isnt even compatible with at all.
Which is why there are people like me who say: Realism is 100% pointless in gaming. The more realistic a game gets, the less people get to play it, because not everyone can afford the hardware it runs on.
@@Zayne1013 by that logic, the only value in a game is how many things it can run on to be accessible. Which is a really bad principle to design games on. By that logic, Video games peaked at Pong. (Which could be argued to be true from other angles)
@@117johnpar You missed my point completely. I'm not saying that it has to be bare-bones. I'm saying that it doesn't have to be hyper-realistic to the point that literally only rich people with insane gaming setups could play it. Realism is entirely pointless in games anyway, whether accessible to a wide audience or not. When I'm playing a game, I'm not worried about, "Wow, look at how realistic this is." Because in that case I could just walk outside. No, what I'm looking for in a game is to escape from reality for a bit. Not to be constantly reminded of it.
A game that I used to play on my brothers xbox was called ' Mercenaries 2: world in flames ' it honestly had good world destruction that caused consequences for the player. Sadly the studio had shutdown and the servers are offline.
what do you mean battlefield has always prided itself on destruction? Old battlefield player here. Only the new battlefields have the frostbite physics engine. We only destroyed vehicles and emplaced weapons in the original games, not making holes in buildings
i think ai can be used very well in ai because when conversation and speech ai gets fast and convincing enough, you can legitimately have conversations with npcs and it'll just make up shit on the fly. that'll be awesome especially in vr.
"If a theoretical FPS used full-scale simulated destruction as the foundation of its gameplay it would be a truly next-gen experience." Yep, that is the game "The Finals" summed up. Truly refreshing and amazing experience, love the destruction.
Join Grand RP using my link in the description to get exclusive benefits!
Thank you for watching!
Hi
a
Fully enterable > Fully destrucive
The Saboteur is conspicuous by it’s absence in this video, a bit like red faction but not AS destructible that’s probably why you missed it out. Top quality video as always anyway
@@slyceth that's why I did that one first 😃
Imagine this level of destruction in GTA online... Los Santos would permanently look like a Fallout map
Imagine the amount of sheer destruction a Lazer would cause. It would be terrifying.
Fallout games would have more structures then gta online.
Nah, It's gonna look like 2B2T's spawn
my shitbox pc would form a black hole and kill everyone
@@J.PC.Designs Exactly. They could easily solve that issue lmao by making the game way more fun to play in general instead of just being the most broken online multiplayer ever now. Shit become garbage. Load into the game and there is usually an explosion, a fire outside where you are loading in from a blown up car, and then the feed constantly saying who is dead and who killed who ect.
When GTA 5 came out the first thing I did in free roam was driving a car at full speed into a wall to see how much they improved vehicle destruction compared to GTA 4... my disappointment was immeasurable and my day was ruined
Thank god for mods
@@lstatic21 thank god for beamng drive 😎
not as much as your car was
Lmao
Lol yes because in the trailer there's a scripted mission where you ram a money truck into a destructible wall
It's really funny that despite all the advances in technology, the two best destruction games are Red Faction Guerilla from 14 years ago, and Teardown which was made by like 4 people.
What about Brick Rigs?
I remember younger me on the PS3 playing red faction guerrilla and wanting more games like it since it felt so unique sucks most devs haven't done that
Yeah it feels like the missing ingredient in games
@@lirgamingthings6035 brick rigs destruction isnt that good, its extremely janky, its far from innovative or impressive, fun nonetheless though
Teardown is just minecraft with smaller blocks.
The Finals, a game by ex Battlefield developers, is an FPS that offers a lot of tool for players to destroy buildings in fun and strategic ways. The destruction isn't as crazy as in Teardown, but you can collapse a building to expose a team camping on the roof, or blast through the ceiling with C4s to surprise them from above. And yes, it does get super chaotic
It's pretty fun too, most fun fps I've played. Glad I found it
They need to change the propreties of bullet, so it can make hole in walls or any kind of material
A game called "The Finals" is in development where the entire map can be destroyed down to the floor, it takes place in a gameshow where teams of 4 fight for cash boxes. They had a 2 week open beta, it was very fun.
I legit thought that's what he was talking about at 12:02 for a few seconds
that was only a 2 week beta?? i missed my chance to play it man
No, everything is not destructible.
@lilyeet1980 game fell off hard after the very promising beta
@@Backfisch5927 i think its a very cool game, well made, but its only for hyper-competent people. Its only multiplayer. So i am out :/ to old and slow :P
A Superman simulator that comes to mind is Megaton Rainfall. The scale of everything is immense, you can literally visit other galaxies. And you have Superman-like powers too; you have lasers, a ground pound, you can fly (obviously) and telekinesis. The game universe has enemies to defeat on Earth. but if you're not careful your powers will damage whatever city you're fighting in, and the destructible buildings acts accordingly. Of course on such a massive scale, you're sacrificing quality for quantity, but I think the scale alone of the game is amazing.
Just tried it because you made me curious, and only goddamm, did they even play test the freaking game??? This is so freaking janky, you have to hit flying ship that jerk all over the place but you get punished for every missed shot, and that absolutely useless telekinetic power is outright enraging to use, 3/4 times it won't even fire properly if at all, resulting in an instant mission failed because the bomb do so much destruction...
To anyone reading this, I do not recommend this game unless you want to pointlessly rage, quickest buy and reimburse I've done in a long time.
@@cbl1199 haha yep, that's the leaening curve of the game. You need to juggle a bunch of enemies while trying not to damage the city too bad. Collateral damage in inevitable. And it actually gets harder from there because as you progress, you get more powers, and then yu have to use the new powers to defeat new kinds of enemies that starting popping up. and of course more enemies to juggle at the same time
Not too sure about the janky telekinetic power, maybe just takes a bit of gettig used to. You need to get within a certain range for it to work, and then you just send the bomb as far into the stratosphere as you can
@@jyaw16 glitchy mess: learning curve. Sure bro
@@cbl1199 we did not play the same game then. It is hard to avoid collateral damage because that is the gameplay. Being an infinitely powerful being with powers that can level cities predictably levels the cities you are trying to protect.
It is also playable in VR.
@@xnotasweatx i bet you didn't even play the game if you think it's 'glitchy'.
Yes the game is hard and the telekinetic power is hard to control but THAT'S THE POINT OF THE GAME. You're literally a omniscience being that is tasked to protect Earth. You have all this powers yet you have to avoid letting loose to avoid casualties. Of course the game won't be easy
25:50 "we need to reward the games that innovate, like Teardown"
One month later, Teardown loses Steam's Most Innovative Gameplay award to Stray
Yep. everybody forgots how physics create the sandbox and gameplay freedom and opportunities and just votes a game where you can play a cat... wow innovation just because that game sold more :D
i mean you can interact with nearly every item on shelves, tear up carpets, etc.
@Avardent that definitely sounds like a game 🤔
@@Sevastousforgets, not forgots.
who cares
I remember playing The Incredible Hulk for the ps2 when I was a kid. And after the first level, I distinctly remember never doing anymore missions since I would just spend the entire time in the city destroying buildings and cars because it just looked so cool at the time to see a building fall and get destroyed.
Same!
Same, I also stayed in the tutorial mission since it gives you unlimited health and has never ending enemies
Same but when i started to pay attention to the intro moves i felt the need of doing some missions just to unlock them 😂 i miss those good old days...
@@DarkSpaceStudios there was also that vr game megaton I think that's what it's called its fun to play
The recent Battle Bit does this beautifully as well, you can feel the rumble of a building from far away and sometimes watch it tumble down to the ground after having spent the match chipping away to reveal enemies behind cover, and more. It's so satisfying to just watch as the building you were in only 5 minutes earlier is gone.
that's what battlefield bad company 2 was like. unfortunately no one can create a game as good as it for some reason
@morrisalanisette9067 money
That's why they won't let battlebit on console, and console games are becoming shittier
They could have made 2042 extremely well, but instead EA said do call of duty fortnite instead for the money
@@morrisalanisette9067 He literally named another, game like that too, one that was recently released as well
Megaton Rainfall is really cool because you can actually accidentally fly through buildings, and your heat vision can cut through buildings as well
this better blow up on youtube just the editing and script is amazing
ha... blow up...
@@lucasjohnson6 i did not intend for that to be a pun but now i realise what ive said i shall pretend it was on purpose
Haha, "blow up". I get it. Nice pun. :D
@@Toasted8 what does pun mean
@@MamatHensem Hard to explain, but it's a type of joke referencing something. Like destruction. He said "this better blow up". Blowing things up is a type of destruction.
I’d take a game in 1080p over 4K as long as it had actual destruction physics
Destruction is a CPU effect because physics are typically calculated on the CPU so 4K and 1080p won't change the performance likely
Same. Gameplay depth over pretty graphics and resolution. Games today are more movie like and it sucks, they are boring!
i mean texture/visual is already at high standard nowadays anyways
@@crestofhonor2349 exactly I’d say we’re about high time ready for a real return of destruction with the current GEN consoles. Probably would have to settle for 30 FPS though
@@ChiquitaSpeaks I agree. We could start adding in real time destruction, to games that it would be a benefit to, with slightly more complex damage models and physics calculations. Once games stop targeting both current gen and last gen expect CPU targets to rise more as companies begin to take advantage of more CPU related features like destruction
I remember playing Red Faction and seeing the fully destructible environments and thinking "wow in the future games are going to be so awesome" But It has taken way longer than it should have for us to get to the level of destruction that I hoped for then. And for many years we only went backwards from that.
RF: Guerrilla was so ahead of its time, such an amazing game.
destruction isnt easy, its a choice that can complicate a game way more than it needs to be, destruction wasn't an afterthought or gimmick in red faction, it was the entirely gameplay loop.
making something destructible is very complicated, making it good is even more complicated, and then making it look good while not breaking the game/ruining performance is almost impossible.
You have to basically destroy the topology of every destructible object in the game, or make a procedural way to collapse topology to look like a fragmented version. And then you have to texture the interior pieces/create new topology for backfaces, which in of itself degrades performance, let alone the physics sim to actually make it work.
@@yesyes-om1po If they could pull it off 20 years ago, then there is no excuse.
@@party4lifedude did u read anything i said lol, the games that had destruction were built around it, not made for a gimmick or a little side quest, the difference between destructible environments and no destructible environments is a good extra year+ in dev, + the money, + the performance drop on all hardware.
@@AndrewMiE Guerrilla was awesome, i remember complaining as it didn't had terrain destruction unlike Red Faction 1, but Red Faction 1 had a lack of building destruction
8:20 Bro did a POV: 911 and thought we would not notice.💀
This video just predicted The Finals
I love how this went from "how games simulate destruction and different ways it could be done" to "we need to make gaming the way it should be and we're all getting scammed"
he wasn’t wrong, it’s sad how the majority of the industry’s ambition was sucked out after the late 2000s
@@protocetid This is why as the graphics get better, I find myself increasingly getting bored and disinterested in a lot of modern games. Things like physics, A.I., and animations are taking the backseat.
It was why I appreciated games like Zelda BotW. The environment felt more than set dressing. I was also pleasantly surprised to see Fortnite starting to implement more destruction, fire spread, and more animations. I hope more UE5 games implement these things in their games.
@@Drstrange3000 it's like dev companies realized $ > quality. once you got that IP youre safe to keep letting games go out because people will pay for what they want to love
We need so much of this in several matters of the entire world!! Reflection about the problem + a good solution, not just complainings and crying nonsense, good solutions is what makes us really overcome problems
Welcome to capitalism
When I first got Just Cause 3 for like three dollars on Steam, I gotta say I wasn't expecting much. Imagine my surprise at how realistic and just fun it was to just blow shit up, it looked fantastic and ran like a dream. I later got Battlefield 1 and was blown away once again at how buildings would crumble to pieces when a tank would drive through, or how a plane could crash in front of you, creating a fantastic flaming wreck and crater that would provide cover for you and your squad.
now imagine if just cause 3 actually delivered and complete destruction would be possible
i will never understand why a franchise that advertises itself with chaos, destruction and carnage allows the player to blow up only things that are painted red
thats part of the reason Just Cause 4 was such a huge disappointment, as it appeared they took a huge step back in destruction
@@raidermaxx2324
Facts
@@ryszakowyWell, there's only so much they could've done at the time, to be fair.
That, and it couldn't be done with EVERY building, gotta have some limits here and there.
I understand your point though.
@@ryszakowy?
You missed Crash N' Burn and Wreckfest when you were talking about car destruction. Both amazing games with great destruction. Wreckfest had it's moments but Crash N' Burn was my all time favorite racing game!
@@J.PC.Designs but no game is perfect. Wreckfest suffers in the driving physics aspect in my opinion. it would be amazing if someone could combine the best of all games in the genre
The best example for car and physics environment destruction would be Full Auto 2: Battlelines
For me it's the FlatOut series, made by the same Devs as Wreckfest
He also missed rigs of rods from like 2006 which was also made by the beamng devs back then
*Trail Out has the same crash physics as Flatout*
showing the footage of red faction made me realize that I've played that game and i do remember being legitimately baffled at the physics but for some damn reason its just like lost in memory until you showed it. That shit was actually INSANE for its time.
This is just so well put together, so well written!!!
"the focus of these companies needs to be rethought, rebuild... but for that to happen, first, it has to be ... destroyed!"
i never thought there could a better summary of the gaming industry as a whole, but you really have a point here, bravo.
and i really really hope you get more attention, your videos are so well made and good, its just astonishing
I soo agree!!! I love this dude :D
To modern video game companies and its publishers: "Why fix that's not broken?"
Games are already trash enough these days, before improving the Maps they Need to bring back quality control
@@gillespriod5509 I agree, I literally have no games that came out after 2014... Kinda sad that somehow all video game companies forgot how to make great and iconic games
@@kodak1587 You are missing out many amazing indie games
I would question if gamers preffer 30 fps with fully destructible environments or 200fps with no destruction, sadly I've seen how most gamers would turn graphics and environment detail/effects all the way down to gain 10-20fps more.
Granny said if it ain't broke don't fix it tht could go for everything
Physical interaction with the world adds personality to video games along with their destruction of the world map. Makes me miss the first time l played red faction demo and Half life 2 on PC when l was a child.
You were a child playing hl2?! I guess I should find my cane and suspenders and find my way out of this comment second.
🦕🦖
@@christophermullins7163 I was 14 days old when that came out. I'm a legal adult now.
@@spiritmoon5998 I was -47 days old when that came out. I'm a legal adult now
Really good work, hopefully this reaches out and inspire future game creators. One thing to clarify, what was mentioned as Battlefield 1 & 2 is more precisely Battlefield: Bad Company 1 & 2.
I like how in The Finals, how everything is destructible and you can destroy everything. You can enter in all the buildings too. We need more games like that.
I don't know about the destruction part, unless it's handled in a way that doesn't lag computers. But entering all buildings is a must-have feature.
@@Zayne1013 The Finals destruction is server side, so it doesn’t strain your computer.
@@BlueShadow-dark23 Why can't more "realistic" games do that? Just make everything server-side. That would be much better if they're pushing realism so hard. I myself don't even care about realism, but some of the mechanics that "realistic" games have happen to be fun. Which is why I find realism so pointless, because many people, including myself, can't even enjoy the games. Not everyone can afford the monstrous computers that are required to run some of these games.
Mercenaries 2 may not have had the most advanced destructable buildings but with the player being able to call down all sorts of heavy ordinance, the possible scale of the destruction was something to behold.
i will take mercenaries 2 and possibility to raise entire cities with medium at best graphics over any just cause that allows player to destroy only things painted red.
First one was better Imo
still one of my favorite games
Both of the Mercs games were amazing fun. Some of my fondest gaming memories, and a level of fun and freedom that I've rarely seen since. There's just something about a game, that lets you blow off steam after a failed mission, by razing entire towns to rubble.
I remember finally beating that game
AND SLAMMING MORE HOURS INTO IT
Calling in ordinance and vehicles on the fly was so cool about that game, aswell ass leveling a whole area to kill just a few guys
Megaton Rainfall definitely deserves a spot in this video. An entire earth to explore with whole destructible cities.
And not just cities! Destroying entire planets, travelling to other galaxies too.
Red Faction: Guerrilla is one of my favourite games of all time for this reason. I wish it could have a proper sequel.
21:55 a good game that goes in that direction is megaton rainfall. It was getting popular for its realistic type of destruction to the world as well as its vr aspect but lost fame very quickly. I think it serves that job quite well. There is a mod out there that lets you be the villian destroying the world when in reality youre the hero saving them from alien invasions.
the problem with physics based destruction of games, is you need to make an engine that can simulate it. then you need to make structurally sound buildings. the second part is the hard part
thats possible but you need to make a system that not only can simulate different dynamics and events depending on how big the building is but also if its something detailed like an art deco building like the empire state building or a simple modern internationalist building like the sears tower, low density large footprint buildings like malls and schoola only collapse section by section and not all at once unless charges are placed, also an issue in teardown is that when a building disconnected from the ground moves all the furniture and doors are ripped out of the building at slightly higher speeds
Your videos are always a work of art, and this one is no exception.
Bro ur like one of the few youtubers that actually makes quality videos that immersive and entertaining to watch!
and re-uploads it
teardown(the game witch building were destroied in the begaining) is such a great game. and the best part is you can mod it. i think i have 70+ mods installed that varies from a neclear reactor that explodes when you press a button to a highway witch has russian tanks and if you hit the ammo it slowly starts catching abaze and eventually explodes. its a great destruction game and roleplay game and is worth the 20$
edit: its 20$ not 10. i swear it was 10 when i bought it
I didn't know it was only 10 bucks, I'll definitely grab it
I got it for 15 on Friday and I love it
Is modding it hard? I barely managed to install optifine in Minecraft. I don’t know if i could mod something else
@@brix_max Minecraft is super easy to mod so you probs should pay more attention to guides, that being said teardown in steam has the workshop option so all you gotta do is click download on the stuff you want and it’s gonna install itself
teardown is a great technical showcase, but not a great game. it barely runs in real-time. most of the footage in this video was made using the in-game screen recorder that takes a shot of each frame which then get compiled into a video to look smooth, while the game was running at 60 frames per hour.
Red faction guerrilla was incredible for its time!!! I played the demo and instantly fell in love it was awesome and ended up buying RF2. One of the greatest if not thee greatest destruction realistic game I’ve ever played
Imagine a Man of Steel game with fully destructible Environment... breaking the sound barrier and co...
i've been playing Teardown for just over two years now. i'm so happy to see how much the game has grown
it's great. especially with the dlc
@@TheExileFox you got me you little monster i'm gonna find you (in minecraft)
Nothing makes me happier than seeing someone finally praise Split/Second, especially a youtuber like Dark Space…
I have to say, DarkSpace never fails to amaze me with videos like this. Such a great quality content deserve so much more visibility and credit, and need to be seen by big companies **AHEM** Rockstar ubisoft **AHEM**. Keep up the great work bro !
im so happy you metnioned max payne 3 omg. the bullet time where it zooms into the enemy after they die and you can continue to shoot the enemy while the camera focuses on them watching holes being blown through there body right in front of you is so fun.....in the game
If GTA Online had this, then Los Santos would look like a barron wasteland with nothing but rubble everywhere.
This deserves so many more views than it has. The gaming industry needs innovation to survive, and if it continues to recycle the same stale and repetitive games, then we could face another video game crash. Developers need to figure out that making a great game requires time and effort, but right now they’re only concerned with making the most money with the least amount of effort. We’re never going to get anywhere if the gaming industry continues to do the bare minimum. Innovation happens when people think bigger and better than anything before, and then put the time in to make it happen.
chill, it's a re-upload
Wait, there was a crash before?
What crash? We had a crash over the past 10-20 years?
@@blackwarrior1897 No, not in the last 20 years, but there *was* a video game crash back in 1983. The market got flooded with cheap copies of the same bland/boring games, recycled over and over again, and eventually people got sick of it so they stopped playing video games altogether. That’s what we’re starting to see happen again with games today. Practically every game these days is some bland loot-box microtransaction bullshit that’s exactly the same as everything else. Developers are putting as little effort into game development as possible and just relying on microtransactions to make a profit. If this keeps up for too long, history could repeat itself and we might have another video game crash like the one that happened in 1983. The gaming industry needs to keep innovating and growing in order to prevent that from happening. That’s what I was trying to say.
9:13 Didnt know Andrew Tate was in Red Faction developers team
THATS WHAT I THOUGHT LMFAO
Lmfaoooooo
AI & Destruction are two things i wish gaming industry would focus on.
Isn't it funny when old games that have limited budget and old technology better than games with unlimited budget and new technology?
@@IskenderCaglarM41B441 like?
@@delayedcreator4783 Fear, dead space, old nfs's, half life.
Need better hardware and servers for any of this to happen in online games. Offline, sure, its already possible.
@@Onigatana Then make it offline first.
"in Earth's Defence Force you defend earth... with force"
now that's my humour
i haven't heard infected mushroom in years!!
I have always loved destruction in games since playing Mercenaries 2 and loving the fact you could bring down buildings, and it is still one of my favorite games. calling in a bunker buster bomb to take out an enemy base was so satisfying. Red Faction Guerilla's destruction was also great. on my longest playthrough there want a single building left standing.
WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Mercenaries 2
Blowing up stuff in just cause will always be the best things about it just imagine planting bombs underneath a bridge then detonate it and watch the npcs fall to their deaths
You just reminded me of the RDX TNT in The Saboteur, that game was great in general but i particularly liked the destructible environments, you couldn’t blow everything up but enough to make the world feel more tangible/ tactile, the buildings were static but they were packed with nazi watchtowers and propaganda speakers, you could blow up the bridges and fuel depots, the zepplins falling out of the sky with the haunting screech of so much metal rubbing against metal. Damn i miss that studio… (funnily enough called Pandemic) such great games and so many more we’ll never get
I feel if a game is only built on destructive environments/objects, after a while the game gets incredibly boring, sure it's fun for the first 3 hours maybe, but Just Cause games and a lot of these games that are over reliant on destruction just kinda get old after a while. I hope I'm not the only feels this way, and I'm going to make my own comment separate from this to see if people agree.
@@FrenchFries2 agree completely. Just cause is boring trash imo.
I love domestic terrorism, very entertaining!
This is one of my favorite videos so far from the channel! I really like how you described environment destruction across multiple video game genres from different series old and new in detail! My favorite segment is from 14:39 - 15:47 You don't see many racing games with gameplay like this now, as Split Seconds destructable set pieces were a great way of making each event action packed and the outcomes were different each time you drive against your opponents, even if you're replaying a race on the same track. Keep doing your thing with quality detailed videos Dark Space!
and it's a re-upload
A big problem is actually reconstruction, since to immerse the player in the game there must be still an existing environment. What happens after you destroy it? Can you still access it? Will it simulate a 1 week/5 years repair of the building in game? What happens if you disturb the process? After it is completed again will NPCs mention it? What if there were witnesses and you are forbidden from entering the building again? What if a mission is inside there and now it can’t be completed for 1 in game week? Now think how much programming that would take. Now imagine that for every building in a game.
my question is why nobody wants to work together
The amount of good looking 3D rendered graphics in your videos is alone a reason to subscribe.
subscribe for re-uploads
@@FUCKINGRI0T tf is the short on your channel?
There is also the clever way Crysis did destruction on trees. They basically split the object in two when damaged at a particular spot and added a mesh to patch up the gaps in geometry. I also suspect Battlefield Bad Company did something similar with how walls can be destroyed.
Also Crysis 2 has real deformation physics. You can actually deform containers and certain metallic objects scattered around the environment.
1:23 that transition was so smooth
9/11 but in every single game with destruction
7:05 "the battlefield series has always prided itself on destruction" this is just not true. That started with the bad company titled battlefield games.
7:12 That's not battlefield 1 and 2, that's battlefield bad company 1 and 2. Very different thing. Battlefield 1942 came out in 2002 and was the first battlefield game, followed by vietnam, which was then followed up by battlefield 2 in 2005. Bad company came out in 2008 and bad company 2 came out in 2010.
Thank you for mentioning Burnout 3! That is a game that still, almost 20 years later, has some of the most fun car destruction I've seen in a game! I absolutely love Burnout 3 💚
I think destruction with correct music makes the event becoming more memorable, just like in need for speed the run and split/second
Games like Arma don't have to have amazing looking destructive environment, it just has to be destructive. But there are games that don't need a destructive environment or just don't need to have good looking destruction.
Great video, thank you. I new all of this, glad I see the proof now
i wanna fly into maze bank like my unc did in 2001
This is why I’m excited for The Finals. It uses a fully destructible environment made by former Battlefield devs.
Burnout 3 was such a master piece of a game, I'm really happy to see you bring it up so many times here, keep up the good work!
So was FlatOut 2. :)
That tech demo for Crackdown three was very impressive at the time, even today it's still cool to go back and watch it. I felt gutted when they scaled back that system, I was really looking forward to them developing that tech further to the point where it could have been used in further games..
I would of really like to see crackdown 3's original vision come to life. I remember microsoft was pushing cloud computing hard due to the xbox one's lack of power in the early years but it never really came into fruition. I think it was obviously cut due to costs like the video here mentions. But to this day I still would like to see some developer pull it off because it sounds pretty promising. With microtransactions and all I think it's pretty sustainable but obviously they want to make as much money as possible with minimal effort and cost.
just imagine if AAA studios cared less about money and more about making good games
That last montage was so good. What we all have been through together over the years. "shed's tear"
There’s something special for how us humans love destruction and destroying shit
24:19 And this is the very reason why I don't give two craps about AAA titles these days. I LOVE playing modern indie games though
Some of my favorite games ever were made by just a few people. How can AAA
Studios with hundreds of employees and Million Dollar Budgets not manage to make a decent game?
@@thismakesnosense Because the executives are the ones with the final say, and said executives don't actually care about the game, and probably haven't even played a game before either. Indie studios are ran by the devs themselves
I agree with a lot of things in that video but there's one thing we need to consider : teardown is not a game, it's an experience. A game is not just a gameplay mechanic we just wrap in textures, a game is a whole assembly of sounds, musics, narration, gameplay style, graphics and so much more. Teardown is like a concept-car, not made to be industrialized but to show-off what technology has to offer nowadays.
In addition of that, a single man has the whole control over his game, companies like ubisoft, rockstar, activision etc don't. Firstly because they have stupid shareholders (hello blizzard, i'm talking about you c:). Secondly because they are not just 20 people in a garage doing their nerdy stuff, they are WAY more than that, everybody has its role and everybody has to follow a development line because hype will shut, players will wait too much, players could stop buying and so on, they are in a constant rush and when in a constant rush you can't suddenly change for a brand new game engine just to put a new gameplay mechanic.
Finally you sometime have to sacrifice something for another, they can't make a fully destructive environment, perfect car handling and car destruction physic, have the best graphics etc in the same game, it wouldn't run. I have a pretty decent computer and it's still not enough for most brand new games that are getting released and i know much people who just can't have better specs because it's either too high in price for them or they are just not as avid players as i am. Of course it's a problem that can be solved with consoles but things are that much people play on pc. Plus even very last gen consoles can get a little overwhelmed by performance cost of certain games.
In a nutshell : of course we can do MUCH more than what we're doing now but do we need insane realistic physic to have beautiful games ? Does Tunic, Zelda:BOTW, Subnautica or even Outer Wilds have those insane physics ? No and they are still unbelievably good games, they are (imo) what we can call art in video games.
I can already imagine the GTA online full of planes crashing into buildings
The amount of effort and quality you put in your videos is honestly quite insane. Very well done, lad.
Thank you! I appreciate your kind words
Control was just an awesome game the fact I found out I could mostly destroy everything with a gun or my forces I felt like I was in star wars , it's great news that remedy probably will start or will announce someday the control 2
Two games that come to mind nowadays are Megaton Rainfall, a great VR title that has an impressive sense of scale. Or The Finals, a still in development arena shooter (thanks for correcting) title worked on by previous (DICE) Battlefield developers mentioned. Just something to check out, even if you cant play them or they may not be your style
The Finals is not a BR game, it's an Arena Shooter.
@@slushoknight There might be a BR gamemode.
21:08 maybe you’d like megaton rainfall
Your series is uplifting me. Thank a ton.
I am perfectly fine with a map breaking apart around me in a fight with heavy ordinance but I like a game with a solid map (the environment itself) like Halo because it keeps up with the fun of running and gunning (also Forge and custom games)
P.S. near total destruction belongs in a game where total destruction is part of the loop (apocalypse sims)
As much as I want that kind of next gen feel, I can understand why most developers don't pursue it for tha sake of emersion, realism, detail, etc.
Even with current Gen Consoles, real time destruction is one of the hardest things to simulate, especially when rendering them in an enviroment filled with other destructible elements. It's second to raytracing at being a pain to program and work well.
Teardown is a good example of destruction, but since it uses it as it's primary feature it makes sense it works well. Destruction as an implemented feature that isn't the main part of the game will never fly in imited budgets and extended deadlines, let alone crunch culture.
That's what I was also going to say. Physics calculations are stupid hard to simulate and don't even get started on fluid physics and the time and issues with simulating that. Combine that with the weak CPUs from the PS4 and Xbox One from last generation it made sense why real time destruction didn't really evolve last generation
@@crestofhonor2349 There should be a middle ground. I am seeing less attention to detail on newer games than from games on the PS3. I'm seeing more static environments in favor of pretty static environments.
Zelda BotW, Control, The Last of Us Part 2, RDR2, and even Fortnite at least put effort.
If Devs don't want to implement these features, fine, but I'm annoyed at the marketing with current gen games as realistic when they omit things like physics simulations and better A.I.
Half Life 2 had some destructive elements, for one thing you can pick up many objects and throw them around, beer bottles could be broken, you break windows with a tv. Wooden furniture can be broken and set on fire. When you fight striders in the game, they would sometimes destroy buildings (though this is scripted) a good of example of that is the strider fight in HL2 Episode 2
Yeah, that's one of the big things that the Source engine introduced.
i absolutely love how rey just caught this stray outta no where 17:07
6:22 Thats BF4
7:14 Thats BF: Bad Company
7:19 Thats BF: Bad Company 2...
It was nice to have Split/Second have on there, THAT and MotorStorm Apocalypse had really fun envrionments that's get worse when racing them ( whilst either acitivated or pre-scripted ) it would still be a blast, and with FlatOut taking a charge on destructive vehicle psyhics ( and BeamMG being a game that's leagues ahead of most racers out there atm ) i am so glad you went on about it
I love split second
I'm surprised Wreckfest never got a mention, that game is criminally underrated.
LMFAO 4:55
JUST LIKE MY REAL LIFE
😭😭😭😭😭
I feel like using the matrix as a comparison point was a bit of a wrong idea. Cause it wasn't built to show off the vehicle destruction, it was built to show off unreal 5's new rendering of both lighting and textures
I remember buying battlefield V thinking we could destroy every building and build fortifications and treches everywhere, what a fool.
Also one great game that you could have shown in Foxhole, a massively multiplayer top down war game where you can build and destroy your bases
Superman with a destructive environment would be awesome... but frustrating. You'd rather be Zod. Imagine how precise and careful you'll have to be not to knock down entire streets.
12:45 this aged well. weve got the finals now
Im excited for the game The Finals which has the fully destructable enviroment. More games should have this destruction. It creates a more immersive and cool experience. This also keeps the maps new and unpredictable even if you play the same map 5 times in a row.
Im just glad a game in 2023 will have a fully destructible environment. Its disappointing that battlefield games slowly brought down their destruction and definitely brings down the immersion and overall fun in some cases.
yep that's why the embark devs left and made the best shooter I've ever played
TIL from this video: Fully simulated destruction has been in games much earlier than I thought and audio quality in the early 2000s was much worse than I remembered 10:15
as im watching this series as of now, it's literally everything i could ever want from a gta style game
Ace of spades was a game that had great destruction physics.
another fantastic video. how many hours did you put into this? must have taken ages, but it really paid off. well done. i hope the industry starts listening to people like you. ❤
it's a re-upload
Been thinking about the Superman thing for a while. It's the perfect solution to his "overpowereness" without having every single enemy type use kryptonite which would get old soon. It would also work for a AAA Power Rangers game. The goal should be to defend the city.
The tools to do this and a lot of simulation stuff is there. Devs just dont bother. Often blamed on hardware resources, yet we get them pushing raytracing which offers marginal visual fidelity inhancements from an already plateuing graphical aspect, and its an absolute resource hog that most existing hardware isnt even compatible with at all.
Which is why there are people like me who say: Realism is 100% pointless in gaming. The more realistic a game gets, the less people get to play it, because not everyone can afford the hardware it runs on.
@@Zayne1013 by that logic, the only value in a game is how many things it can run on to be accessible. Which is a really bad principle to design games on. By that logic, Video games peaked at Pong. (Which could be argued to be true from other angles)
@@117johnpar You missed my point completely. I'm not saying that it has to be bare-bones. I'm saying that it doesn't have to be hyper-realistic to the point that literally only rich people with insane gaming setups could play it. Realism is entirely pointless in games anyway, whether accessible to a wide audience or not. When I'm playing a game, I'm not worried about, "Wow, look at how realistic this is." Because in that case I could just walk outside. No, what I'm looking for in a game is to escape from reality for a bit. Not to be constantly reminded of it.
A game that I used to play on my brothers xbox was called ' Mercenaries 2: world in flames ' it honestly had good world destruction that caused consequences for the player. Sadly the studio had shutdown and the servers are offline.
what do you mean battlefield has always prided itself on destruction? Old battlefield player here. Only the new battlefields have the frostbite physics engine. We only destroyed vehicles and emplaced weapons in the original games, not making holes in buildings
I feel the two leading destruction games at the moment are BeamNG and Teardown each in their respective genre
i think ai can be used very well in ai because when conversation and speech ai gets fast and convincing enough, you can legitimately have conversations with npcs and it'll just make up shit on the fly. that'll be awesome especially in vr.
"If a theoretical FPS used full-scale simulated destruction as the foundation of its gameplay it would be a truly next-gen experience."
Yep, that is the game "The Finals" summed up. Truly refreshing and amazing experience, love the destruction.
Yep first thing I thought of glad I wasn't the only one. Would've loved to hear what he'd say about that game.
The finals brought what crackdown 3 wanted to do to reality
That transition at the beginning when you went through the door in teardown was nasty my good sir