LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
If you've played ROBLOX at all, you've probably blown something up and seen what it looks like when you do. The parts of what you blow up simply disconnect and fly from each other.
This could be easily improved with either some small parts, or a simple particle effect.
To expand on that, either parts can shatter and have actual rubble left behind, or parts could "vanish" and a particle effect that looks like bits and pieces flying off could create the illusion of something being broken apart.
Parts and their destructibility could be added in the properties of parts, perhaps a subsection of the properties window labeled "Destructibility", an "Enabled/Disabled" checkbox, and a textbox so you can type in how much a part can stand before being destroyed.
So, you could have concrete that would smash to bits under enough force, or a powerful explosion, or a weak, transparent part could represent glass, and a hit from a melee weapon, being run into, or landing on it could break it.
Not only that, but this opens a good window for scripters, too. A "weapon" could be based on the destructibility property, so places could be based around smashing things with large hammers, and there would be no ability to spawnkill, since the hammers wouldn't work on your Humanoid health.
Aside from time lost creating the update, there really aren't any downsides to this one. It opens windows for new places and is an all-around neat property to be able to utilize.
--
Thanks for reading. |
|
|
If Roblox wants things to be more realistic like I believe they say they do, this is the way to go.
This should definitely be optional. |
|
ShenErziJoin Date: 2009-09-17
Post Count: 5095 |
|
|
|
You can easily do this with trigonometry. |
|
|
This is a decent suggestion, but I'd still just use a frag script. |
|
UlrondJoin Date: 2011-06-23
Post Count: 11962 |
I like it. Support. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"If Roblox wants things to be more realistic like I believe they say they do, this is the way to go.
This should definitely be optional."
Yay! Support! |
|
|
no support. there's a fragmentation script made just for this that works just fine. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"I already suggested this, like, less than an hour ago."
Oh. I'm sorry. I didn't know that this was a thing yet.
In my defense, I suppose this is something used in games already that would be nice to have regardless. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"This is a decent suggestion, but I'd still just use a frag script."
There are quite a few things in this game that can be done with a player-made script, but that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be an in-game feature for it. I also made mention of the idea of a property that affects how easily something is broken, and how that could be used in scripts. There's a lot to do with this idea. |
|
Z007Join Date: 2010-09-14
Post Count: 11729 |
No support. That's the style of RoBLOX. Obvious emphasis on BLOX, meaning BLOCKS. Although they are making some things "more realistic" like hinges, they're doing that because the current ones suck. This'd ruin many games, and overall would decrease the quality of Roblox. It'd be better as a script that you can use if you want to.
Besides, there's already a script for this out. |
|
Kincaid1Join Date: 2010-12-22
Post Count: 585 |
Support, it would add more realism to war games. |
|
Z007Join Date: 2010-09-14
Post Count: 11729 |
It'd also increase lag.
A lot.
If you want it, use the script. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"no support. there's a fragmentation script made just for this that works just fine."
Not necessarily. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"No support. That's the style of RoBLOX."
I don't think a game about being creative should have a style.
"Besides, there's already a script for this out."
It doesn't cover everything in my suggestion. |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"Support, it would add more realism to war games."
Definitely. |
|
Z007Join Date: 2010-09-14
Post Count: 11729 |
The name ROBLOX comes from the words "Robot" and "Blocks" mixed together.
Also, this'd require huge, unnecessary optimization in order for it to work well. |
|
Nigel217Join Date: 2011-04-09
Post Count: 570 |
Heh, I think Roblox's Game Engine can't take more. |
|
|
Have you not been seeing the advances, Nigel? |
|
Klink46Join Date: 2012-07-04
Post Count: 3043 |
The problem is some weapons use different damage things (if you know what I mean)
There's no possible way for ROBLOX Studio to recognize if a weapon hit it OR if the weapon was an explosive.
So, no support.
~Lel are you supposed to be an monklie?~ |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"It'd also increase lag.
A lot.
If you want it, use the script."
Considering that it would display a 2D image whenever a part was broken, it wouldn't lag anymore than smoke, fire or sparkles do, which isn't that bad. |
|
Z007Join Date: 2010-09-14
Post Count: 11729 |
if you're suggesting a 2d image why not make it yourself
and if it's 2d
why the heck would it be worth making |
|
LunarEdenJoin Date: 2010-06-11
Post Count: 19663 |
"Also, this'd require huge, unnecessary optimization in order for it to work well. "
I doubt it. |
|
Z007Join Date: 2010-09-14
Post Count: 11729 |
lol i said that before you said it'd be a 2d thing that isn't even worth making |
|
|
"It doesn't cover everything in my suggestion."
How doesn't it? Besides the obvious properties panel part.
"Considering that it would display a 2D image whenever a part was broken, it wouldn't lag anymore than smoke, fire or sparkles do, which isn't that bad."
Just for saying that, I now realize that you understand very of game development and computers.
"lol i said that before you said it'd be a 2d thing that isn't even worth making"
I'm not sure why you're making a big fuss or being 2D, you're making it seem like making things in 2D is easy. It's really not. |
|