but in that case pooping must be included as well
Srsly guys I think its a good idea to come up with stuff that could be implemented. Nevertheless for the sake of quality u have to sacrifice quantity. To enable the player to ignite the area in game will burn alot of ressources and with this project ressources are scarce. It’s simply not possible to implement everything that was possible at that time.
Burning ressources for little to no immersion improvement is a nogo!
We don’t really know if that’s already implemented in some way, but i don’t get how people external from the DEV team could say things like “it takes too much resources”. I mean, don’t read it badly, we’re not REQUESTING a feature, we’re just suggesting. If i was making a game i would like to have suggestions from what are going to be my future users. I probably will not accept all of those suggestions but still i would love them. So i don’t see the porpuse of saying “That takes too much time”: they probably know how much time they have or resources, so they will think about either accept this suggestion or reject it, right?
I’m not saying “Don’t reply”, i’m just saying that that’s not our concern. I mean, i will surely not suggest something that would change some major feature or something i think would be unacceptable because that would be just egoistic and childish but still…
I would love to see everything burn… But not as badly as FarCry 3. One loose spark and a field would be set ablaze, burning you to a crisp 
I guess that’s part of some quest and the fire is scripted :-/.
I’d like to sneak at night to the smith’s house. Poop on his stair. Ignite the poop. And watch the smith stomp on the poop to put out the fire. I’d sit in the next bush and giggle like a child, happy about the successful pun. Unfortunately @Madsmejki already confirmed there will be no pooping in the streets.
I’m sure they can do it. If there’s a will there’s a way, brah.
they can do everything. but enjoy waiting 10 years for the game to come out.
It won’t take 10 years silly goose.
no, but if you want these types of features, then it will. if you allow dynamic burning, what next, animated pooping, then what?
my meaning is, these features don’t add much, so the input resource to usefulness ratio is very imbalanced.
Surely you guys are really into pooping eh? Those two things are surely at the same level, yeah 
= 
Such fun.
Wow.
Much poo.
I think a decent fire mechanic could add a lot to the game, bandits or armies putting cities to the torch and whatnot. Plus, other people have been listing several other uses for fire, like its use in military strategy. I think it would be awesome if you went to a village only to find that its been burned down by invaders.
Burn witches, burn in hell!
but those things can be and usually are scripted. This topic is about the ability to burn everything yourself. And that would cost a lot of ressources to design i think. Thus it’s unlikely to happen.
you have a point there. Like say if we have a main quest in that village. so you have a god point there, but if i dont remember this wrong. they mention that you could progress with the main story in differents ways?
I am quite astonished how much people would like this “burning environment” option, but I would like to say that my original idea of those fires relays on that what I have experienced in Far Cry 2 and 3.
The arguments I don’t understand are the ones which call the fire propagation unmakeable because it would take a lot of time. The system already exists.
Is there anyone who can guess how much time it really needs to implement an existing system like that (Dunia fire propagation) into the used Cry-engine??
I didn’t mean anything quest related, though. I meant it to be random, so an unscripted group of bandits could spawn and start burning buildings. It would make the game really dynamic and different every time you play it. Need to rest at a nearby inn? Well keep walking, this one’s burned to the ground.
Yes burning things was fun in Call of Juarez 1, I was much more impressed by those fires than the ones in Far Cry 3.
If NPC do a good job of putting the fire out or rebuilding stuff burning down villages might not mess with the story that much but it sounds like a lot of work.
I mostly want the option to burn down structures there are so many scripted levels were your walking through a burning building but they don’t compare to Call of Juarez dynamic fires. Dynamic fires really can mess up your playthrough because they can actually get out of control. NPCs dying could create an interesting uncertainty of going off the scripted standard path.
I don’t really want to burn down the whole world but neither do I want to purposely kill NPCs just to see how the story unfolds but if I lay fire thinking it gives me a strategic advantage and I don’t know if it will have long term consequences that makes things interesting.
I think lighting things of fire would be a good feature but its probably too much effort for what its actually worth,
It could be in some quest but not as a general feature. The focus has to be on other things in my opinion.
Technical: Far Cry 2 and 3 are not using CryEngine. Only the original Far Cry did, and that game did not have such effects. If it was already included in the engine, it would be cool, but as it stands, it would be too much work.
