Will houses and object like trees or fences be destructible? If not, it would change the game experience a whole lot. I mean it doesn’t seem really realistic that the houses made out of wood would have the same strength as a metal box and can stop bullets and stop the robots from destroying the house. If houses were destructible it would add a whole new aspect to the game where you don’t feel safe anywhere. I don’t know but it feels kind of over powerd to just run in to a random house and then your safe. It would also be cool if the houses had lasting damages like the robots do. Also explosions would look alot cooler if things actually got destroyed 
Thanks!
2 Likes
It will be hard to workout for the devs. Most games dont have destructible buildings because then, they are quite useless and enemies can always attack. I personally think that smaller machines should be able to break down the doors and windows, and the bigger machines can fire through the windows and doors. It would be way too much work and limitations.
There will be no destructible environment in Generation Zero, sorry! Of course that would be amazing, but it’s demanding a bit too much of this small studio
first off all great job on the game defiantly one of my favorites so far but there are a few things that could be improved like building distruction for example when you run into a barn and rockets are raining down on the barn but you are perfectly fine I think that alone would be a huge game changer and I also agree with the tank AI form the tanks could use an improvement I do like when they charge after you definite scare every time but still on the easy to kill side the other day I took an apocalypse tank out with nothing but the revolver I miss being afraid of them like when I first started the game and if there could be better communication when playing multiplayer I know there’s always discord but if you added an open mic to the game like pub g for example it would bring a more fun aspect to the the game
1 Like
Things like terrain destruction are very hard to implement in an existing game as they normally need to be built in when creating a game from day one. Anyhow considering the small team behind this I’d rather they spend their time on easier things that can bring more depth to the game as destructible enviroments is known for being very intensive. Maybe gen zero 2?
2 Likes
I, for one, am against it. Sounds in GZ are very well made and it’s the sounds by which i locate the enemies. More often than not, i can hear the machines well in advance before they even come to the visual range. And thanks to my 7.1 surround sound, i can exactly pinpoint the direction from where the sound comes from. I don’t need some kid screaming over it.
There are plenty of voice chat options out there, join GZ discord voice channel, use TeamSpeak etc.
that’s kinda what I figured but if there is a #2 all be buy that for sure
oh and thanks aesyle didn’t know there was a GZ discord channel
pretty sure that having voice chat in the game itself would take away from the resources it’s already using and cause more problems anyway.
2 Likes
… or blowing up buildings in my own words as I’m not quite as eloquent as @tene 
I saw @tene’s latest stream (good job, mate - hope you don’t mind me bringing the discussion here) where he talked about building destruction triggered by the new (unintended?) ruins SW of Salthamn. Is this an indication of things to come? Will our currently safe buildings fall apart upon us when attacked by machines?
I kind of hope not. My play style is very much fighting from cover - not taking on 20+ Hunters in a plain field in head-on battle 
Taking that cover away from me would not be appreciated. I see the point though. The buildings should take damage indeed. But they already do that. Windows break, soot marks on walls and ceiling, etc. Now by some kind of magic, the building mend itself and appears as good as new next time I visit it. If it was brought to ruins by the machines, this mending might - I almost dare not say it - probably break my immersion
4 Likes
Oh no! You said the “I” word! 
And cheers man, i actually actively try to not post my content on the forums, because this isn’t the place for self promo, it’s the place for helping the devs spot out bugs and hear feed back on the game. So i usually try to only post when its some sort of “community content” instead of just my regular discussion pieces/news & info or tips and tricks.
I do wonder what people would think of this though… From my general consensus of the forums regular play style, building destruction would throw a lot of people for a spin.
But maybe that’s the shake up that could really engage the community?
There have been many posts on here about how easy it is to just sit in a house and camp out the machines outside it. So maybe building destruction could have some pros in that sense of things…
It would definitely make my more engaged combat tips relevant to folks, so heck i wouldn’t complain! 
1 Like
Just like @Anon302611 I’m torn too. Before the introduction of Rivals and experimental weapons I would have been perfectly happy with the game just continuing the story without any changes to the setting. But then eventually the story would be over and so would the game.
I’ve been playing this game for 8 months now (some of you guys have been playing it for a year) and introduction of new things keeps the game alive.
I think you might be right. It would certainly bring me out of my comfort zone. But I have invested most of my skills in support of the “killing machines from the comfort of your home” strategy. If I can’t rely on that I would have to develop other skills (e.g. “run-and-gun”). So bringing down the structures should give us the opportunity to respec our skills, or increase the level cap, IMHO. Running around meeting machines head on (as you so bravely do in your stream on YouTube) is not going to happen for me
To my mind, destruction of buildings should definitely be part of the game. The larger machines have some serious firepower so you’d think they’d be able to level anything in their path. You shouldn’t just be able to run to a house and go “Ner ner ner ner ner!”. It would greatly add to the sense of jeopardy if, at any moment, the property you were looting could come crashing down on you. Bunkers would become more important as safe havens as they would be less likely to be damaged.
As it stands however, I think it would be a bit late in the day to start implementing such major changes, but, it could definitely be something to consider for a sequel, and, from what I’ve seen, this game does deserve one.
3 Likes
Well, I would opt for static damaged places/buildings.
2 reasons here:
- not everyone would have the same places destroyed, this might/would cause incompatibility and errors when multiplaying. Sever probably would have other parts damaged than you have…
- It would be hard I imagine to implement houses that break…?
Each log-in or restart would ‘rebuild’ these houses, breaking immersion. (more personal to me, this one, but still).
None of this will be with static broken places…
More like Fallout style, I guess (not the STYLE, but the type of destruction).
1 Like
I’d go with Xogroroth on this, more static damaged buildings, like that castle in the north of Himfjäll next to the docks. I really love to shoot the occasional spawning tank from there…
If it would be the other way, then I’d wish a skill respec or even better a rise of the level cap and of course a working protection of gasmasks and clothing at last.
My 2 ct.
2 Likes
Merged three threads all on this same topic.
Thanks,
boston_51
1 Like
BEFORE ANYTHING:
Some see me as a partypooper, I see myself more as a realist.
More, not entirely, lol… there probably is a load of partypooper in me, but…
I try to address issues from a more logical and pragmatical PoV, not so… emotional driven.
Not that I am not emotional at some things: I can be quite hardcore, still…
That being said:
It is a tad odd to me, that folks sometimes ask for things that make other things very hard, or ask for things that does not fit the base idea of the game, or in whatever way make no sense.
Destructible houses is one of them, due to incompatibility in saves from different players, for one.
This would make multi-player a difficult issue.
How do we overcome this issue?
Imagine: Hafjafjafafeld is destroyed for you, but not for me.
Hulapalulablanca then is destroyed for me, but not for you.
How does this work out when we join one another?
How does it work for the saves?
How does this work for missions in named parts?
And this is just one of the issues that I see with destructible houses.
Now, if we implement the Fallout style of broken STATIC houses… the feeling, the immersion, is there, but the issues that comes with breakable houses… is not.
Seems a “best of both worlds” situation to me, no?
Note:
Hell, if there WAS a GOOD way to implement destructible stuff?
HELL BLOODY YES!!!
But for GZ, the small team, the complications, …, this just seems no good idea?
Thoughts?
Destructible terrain question was asked in one of the dev streams. Devs answer is at 01:04:22,
link: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/550826095?filter=archives&sort=time
If it is possible addting destructible houses will be a game changer.