41 replies to this topic

[fandre]

I would like to see a 3D representation of the targeted mech which is always oriented as the target mech. If I see it from the front, the 3D modell is facing me from the front etc.

[OneEyed Jack]

l33tworks, on 17 June 2014 - 06:00 AM, said:

*snip* for space

Are you simple? You argue one side and use pictures that support the other side? Take a look at that car again and tell me which side of you the right side of the car is on in the one where it;s facing you. It's on your left side because you're looking at the front... from in front.

Would a 3D depiction that turned based on the target's facing relative to yours be more ideal? Sure. Is there a chance it will ever happen? No. So in the mean time we deal with what we have, and what we have is the way that makes more sense when using a 2D, static model.

[Sephlock]

Better yet, give us the rotating wireframe mini model that shows damage via color, straight from MW2.

[IceCase88]

It has to do with horrible hit registration. The kind of frustration that makes you want to smash things. Three recent and common problems I have experienced are as follows:

Enemy mech is bearing down on me. I look at the enemy ragdoll and it show its left leg is about to go. I am face to face with them. I fire at its left leg which is on my right side. It registers on its right leg. I adjust fire to compensate for horrible hit reg by shooting the other leg which would be its right leg which is on my left side. Hits register on the right leg. I faceplant on my keyboard.

Another... I am standing behind an AFK, or DCed, mech. I shoot his right leg which is on my right side. It registers on the ragdoll as the left leg. I shoot the left leg shich is on my left side and it registers on the left leg again. Faceplant keyboard again.

Furthermore... i am parallel to the enemy running from the enemy with my right side facing towards the enemy because my left side is jacked. No enemy mechs are on my left. I am taking hits and they only register on my left torso, left arm, and left left. I die. And again... faceplant keyboard.

Hit registration is horrible. The ragdoll is not the issue. It is just a symptom.

[l33tworks]

OneEyed Jack, on 17 June 2014 - 05:25 PM, said:

Are you simple? You argue one side and use pictures that support the other side? Take a look at that car again and tell me which side of you the right side of the car is on in the one where it;s facing you. It's on your left side because you're looking at the front... from in front.

Would a 3D depiction that turned based on the target's facing relative to yours be more ideal? Sure. Is there a chance it will ever happen? No. So in the mean time we deal with what we have, and what we have is the way that makes more sense when using a 2D, static model.

The pictures support the same thing I am saying. I'm not even sure what your on about but you must have misunderstood or are confused.
Yes the right side of the car, when looking at it from the front, is on your left because its facing you. In MWO your paper doll that shows front damage, i.e the same as the front car picture, its the opposite of this. I.e on the front damage paper doll, again the same as the car example yourself used, the hand on your left is actually the left hand of the mech as well, but it should be the right!

The paper doll showing your back is correct.

Further yet the Enemy paper doll is the opposite of your own mech paper doll. Its confusing and wrong on 2 different levels.

Edited by l33tworks, 17 June 2014 - 08:57 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

l33tworks, on 17 June 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

The pictures support the same thing I am saying. I'm not even sure what your on about but you must have misunderstood or are confused.
Yes the right side of the car, when looking at it from the front, is on your left because its facing you. In MWO your paper doll that shows front damage, i.e the same as the front car picture, its the opposite of this. I.e on the front damage paper doll, again the same as the car example yourself used, the hand on your left is actually the left hand of the mech as well, but it should be the right!

The paper doll showing your back is correct.

Further yet the Enemy paper doll is the opposite of your own mech paper doll. Its confusing and wrong on 2 different levels.

No. The paper doll of your own mech is lined up in relation to you. It's facing the way you are facing, exactly as it should be. Just like car tire pressure sensors show the tires, in relation to you. You're in the car, not out front looking at it.


However you're not in your target's cockpit, so the target paper doll is shown as if the mech were facing you, since it's the more common situation.

Edited by OneEyed Jack, 17 June 2014 - 09:27 PM.

[Praehotec8]

I asked for this a while back. In my opinion, the all of paperdolls should be represented as if they were radiographs or anatomic drawings. In other words, the paperdolls are viewed as if the viewer was facing them: For the front, the right arm would be on the left, etc. For the rear, the right arm would be on the right, etc. If my description is lacking, check out some anatomic representations on google. If you are not used to looking at such, it can be confusing initially, but overall it is much more accurate and consistent.

The big issue in my opinion, is that the paperdolls are not consistent, and that can confuse people as they are glancing between their mech's and the enemy's.

[PanzerFurrry]

The graphical projection confusion is nothing new, it has been an issue for a very long time and is not limited to MWO. In civil engineering, metallurgy, etc, technical drawings can be made with two different projections: first-angle projection or third-angle projection. Detailed description can be found on wiki page.

In general, most of the world uses 1st-angle projection (as is proposed by OP and others), while Americans and Japanese use 3-rd angle projection. MWO is made with 3-rd angle projection scheme, so it is slightly confusing for people who are used to 1-st angle projection in real life (like, everybody, except USA+Japan).

I would love to see that MWO (and other games) would conform to international standards, but just like imperial/SI system, Fahrenheit/Celsius degrees, 3-rd angle projection is here to stay, unfortunately.

Edited by PanzerFurrry, 18 June 2014 - 04:24 AM.

[l33tworks]

OneEyed Jack, on 17 June 2014 - 09:25 PM, said:

No. The paper doll of your own mech is lined up in relation to you. It's facing the way you are facing, exactly as it should be. Just like car tire pressure sensors show the tires, in relation to you. You're in the car, not out front looking at it.


However you're not in your target's cockpit, so the target paper doll is shown as if the mech were facing you, since it's the more common situation.

Ok, so first you suggest I'm "simple" (for taking a rational approach mind you) and that the car example I used did not support what I was saying, when I clearly explained exactly how it did. You also claim that the car example was in synchrony with MWO's system and your line of reasoning, when its not!

NOR DOES MWO have a proper system, because they flipidy flop based whether the paper doll is showing your own or the enemy mech, using the exact same perspective and method of depicting that paper doll!

In fact they have changed this from CB to the way it is now. It used to be the enemy paper doll was the same as your own mechs, but even then both paper dolls were wrong.

CB enemy mech paper Doll.

Then you ignore pretty much any points I raised and continue to completely misinterpret everything and continue make nonsense points I will get to later.

So explain, how exactly was the car example I used wrong?

Looking at the front of the car as is pictured in the image I posted, it is displayed as you put it, NOT in "relation" to you. I'm going to assume by "relation" you mean everything has to be the same side to the way you are facing, (I would guess because its too hard for you to have to flip any persistent concept of left and right in your head)

Now, Looking at the back of the car, IS in relation to you. Correct?

So how is that the same as MWO's method, where looking at something from BOTH the Front AND Back IS in the same relation to you? That pretty much breaks any kind of spatial reasoning. So the car example supports exactly what I am saying, and the opposite of what you are.

Look.



See they do NOT match up.

I get exactly what you mean saying when you say, "In relation to you", but you are not looking at your mech in relation to you, it clearly says "Front" on there, which means that image is depicting the FRONT of the mech. Why is it suddenly only MWO everything has to be taken in relation to you regardless of perspective?

Lets take a look at the Tyre pressure display you used. Lol? What does that prove. It's The same system I am in support of! Everything is located where it is NOT because it is in relation to you, but because you are looking at the car from the TOP, where your left is also the cars left!. It just so happens this lines up with your view of the world that "everything has to be in relation to where I am facing", by sheer coincidence.
According to you, when you see this button in a car it clearly represents that the air is going to come in from the Left of you and that you are driving a UFO? Surely everything is represented in relation to where you are facing! So it has to mean that!

These two guys are in love and are facing each other not even looking at the road in the car while driving forward



This is what you are missing my friend, and believe me if they ever had a Car display that showed something the front of a car you would be confused as hell. When you walk out of your car, do you suddenly consider the headlight that was your left headlight is now your right headlight simply because you walked in front of your car and looked back?

PanzerFurrry, It has nothing to do with that. MWO uses no system, they do it based on exactly how OneEyedJack is interpreting it, every direction always has to be stated in relation to where I am facing. So that your left is ALWAYS the mechs left and the paper dolls left ETC.
Basically all left and right has to match up to you.

Its the type of person that would have lots of trouble playing the original Resident Evil (Or Biohazard) games on the playstation one because the controls are relative to the game character not the direction you are facing, and the type of person that in real life says things like "No your other left!"

Edited by l33tworks, 18 June 2014 - 05:31 AM.

[OneEyed Jack]

l33tworks, on 18 June 2014 - 05:22 AM, said:

a lot of nonsense not worth repeating

Well, you certainly answered my question.

Bear in mind, as you spout your drivel suggesting that I'm the one with difficulties deciphering gauges, exactly which one of us came here to whine about it being too difficult.

While I would have no problem if the gauges were different, I maintain that the way they are is the sensible way, barring a rotating 3D model. The reason being that gauges meant to be read at a glance, as one would expect is a futuristic fighting vehicle (regardless of the realism of said vehicle) tend to be designed to be intuitive to the viewer/driver/operator/pilot, rather than so that the viewer have to rearrange it in their heads before they can react, despite any amount of "skill", intelligence, or training.

As such, the TPMS display is aligned as it is, not by "coincidence", but for the same reason such displays always show the front as up when the diagram is from a top perspective, because it's intuitive. It doesn't even need to be labeled, because everyone already knows it. It would be remarkably unusual were it to be aligned another way.

An intelligent person can easily decipher either one, but it makes no sense to force them to do so while driving.

Similarly, other displays are aligned to make sense to the viewer. In this one

the figure on the left clearly represents the person in the left seat, and the figure on the right, the person in the right seat. Why? Because it's aligned to the perspective of the driver, who is hopefully sitting in the car and facing forward. As you would have it, the figure on the left would be on the right side of the care, and vice versa, because that's the way you would see it looking at the car from the front. Obviously, the makers of Lexus agree with me. Let's continue....

This is the ST 5000B Vacuum Horizon Gyro:

It's representative of similar gauges found in aircraft the world over. It's certainly not definitive, just one I found a good pic of quickly. There are certainly higher-end models, even ones that use a small screen instead of a physical display. But they all, regardless of design, show pretty much the same thing. One line, here represented by a little dot-and-wings and fixed in place, represents the line of the wings of the plane. Another line, drawn onto the mobile face of the gauge in the background, represents the level of the horizon, relative to the plane. I can't imagine why in the gauge, it's the plane that holds static and the planet underneath it that tilts and wobbles, can you?

So tell me, which way would the theoretical plane in the above gauge be banking? Would it be banking left, as read from the perspective of the pilot, or right, as read from the perspective of viewing the front of the damned plane? Were you to be riding in that plane, which way would you want the pilot to read it? And tell me again how your diagram of the front of a car is how on-board gauges should be read.

Edited by OneEyed Jack, 18 June 2014 - 07:11 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

cdlord, on 17 June 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

I actually like the paperdoll, however, I am quoting you because of your signature. I'd like a 3D paperdoll presentation of the enemy mech that rotates based on my perspective of it. If I'm looking at the front, then I see the front, if i'm looking at the back, then it rotates so I see the back on the paperdoll.

Make that option happen ONLY when you have said enemy Mech Targeted. That way pressing R might become something more players would do.

[l33tworks]

OneEyed Jack, on 18 June 2014 - 07:04 AM, said:

Well, you certainly answered my question.

Bear in mind, as you spout your drivel suggesting that I'm the one with difficulties deciphering gauges, exactly which one of us came here to whine about it being too difficult.

While I would have no problem if the gauges were different, I maintain that the way they are is the sensible way, barring a rotating 3D model. The reason being that gauges meant to be read at a glance, as one would expect is a futuristic fighting vehicle (regardless of the realism of said vehicle) tend to be designed to be intuitive to the viewer/driver/operator/pilot, rather than so that the viewer have to rearrange it in their heads before they can react, despite any amount of "skill", intelligence, or training.

As such, the TPMS display is aligned as it is, not by "coincidence", but for the same reason such displays always show the front as up when the diagram is from a top perspective, because it's intuitive. It doesn't even need to be labeled, because everyone already knows it. It would be remarkably unusual were it to be aligned another way.

An intelligent person can easily decipher either one, but it makes no sense to force them to do so while driving.

Similarly, other displays are aligned to make sense to the viewer. In this one

the figure on the left clearly represents the person in the left seat, and the figure on the right, the person in the right seat. Why? Because it's aligned to the perspective of the driver, who is hopefully sitting in the car and facing forward. As you would have it, the figure on the left would be on the right side of the care, and vice versa, because that's the way you would see it looking at the car from the front. Obviously, the makers of Lexus agree with me. Let's continue....

This is the ST 5000B Vacuum Horizon Gyro:

It's representative of similar gauges found in aircraft the world over. It's certainly not definitive, just one I found a good pic of quickly. There are certainly higher-end models, even ones that use a small screen instead of a physical display. But they all, regardless of design, show pretty much the same thing. One line, here represented by a little dot-and-wings and fixed in place, represents the line of the wings of the plane. Another line, drawn onto the mobile face of the gauge in the background, represents the level of the horizon, relative to the plane. I can't imagine why in the gauge, it's the plane that holds static and the planet underneath it that tilts and wobbles, can you?

So tell me, which way would the theoretical plane in the above gauge be banking? Would it be banking left, as read from the perspective of the pilot, or right, as read from the perspective of viewing the front of the damned plane? Were you to be riding in that plane, which way would you want the pilot to read it? And tell me again how your diagram of the front of a car is how on-board gauges should be read.

Man you just dont get it. I'm glad your taking this at least partially constructively now though, but I don't know how much more I can say as its feeling like beating a dead horse.

First of all What you consider is intuitive is not intuitive to me. MWOs way isn't intuitive to me, because its un natural. It's natural for me to be able to place myself in other objects orientation, because I have to do it on a daily basis, as a human being, but twisting reality isn't natural.

When you look at people front on, their right hands dont become their left hands just so it doesn't differ from which side your left hand is.

I am not aware of any real world Displays that use MWO's or your method. So far every example you have used, whether its the tyre pressure monitor or the Altitude indicator/Horizon Gyro is exactly aligning with what I am saying. I think you are confused between an individuals orientation and perspective.

IF we were to take MWOs and your "system" of keeping orientation the same, in order to do things your way it would have to mean this.


Thats clearly not right.

You see how just because the orientation of the display changed, SHOULD NOT CHANGE THE LABELLING, which is what you are saying should happen!

Because in reality matter follows an object no matter which way you turn it. Reality doesn't change based on your perspective. You think if you tilt your head 90 degrees suddenly all the displays mean something different? NO. if you cannot understand this there is no point continuing.

More importantly why would you put the Tyre pressure indicator sideways or upside down? There is no need for it. But in MWO because you are showing both front and back damage, you NEED to have two displays, one for the front and one for the back, because we are using a 2 dimensional image to show two planes of a 3D object, and the labbeling should follow accordingly.

With the car tyre pressure indicator, you only need to show one plane. IF you had to show another, the labelling WILL follow accordingly.

Edited by l33tworks, 18 June 2014 - 08:16 AM.

[Haji1096]

If Enemy Mech is facing towards you:

Right Arm, Right Leg, Right Torso == Left Visual

Left Arm, Left Leg, Left Torso == Right Visual

Mech facing away:

Right Arm, Right Leg, Right Torso == Right Visual

Left Arm, Left Leg, Left Torso == Left Visual

[LastPaladin]

CapperDeluxe, on 16 May 2014 - 06:51 AM, said:

When the enemy target paper doll is R on visual Left and L on visual Right (as it is currently)

• See enemy paper doll has weakened armor on visual left leg.
  
• Thats not the left leg, because R is on left side.
  
• Shoot the leg on the left.
  
• Unless they are not facing you, in which case shoot the right.
  
• But when I'm on the left side of the mech, not directly in front or behind, is that the leg facing me
  
• That's the left leg.
  
• No its the right leg opposite me.
  
• Brain explodes. (ok this doesn't really happen, but can lead to drinking more alcohol)

I save myself a lot of headaches with this method:

1. Shoot a leg.
2. If the paperdoll lights ups, keep shooting that leg.
3. If the paperdoll doesn't light up, shoot the other leg.

[Choppah]

The entire issue can be resolved by making the paper doll slightly different for front and rear. I think the simplest fix would be to remove the greyed out arms, legs and head, or change them to a different color for the rear torso paper doll.

[LordKnightFandragon]

MeiSooHaityu, on 16 May 2014 - 05:29 AM, said:

Something like this would always be a nice alternative

I would love that option. Gives me a much better idea how banged up the mech actually is.

[OneEyed Jack]

l33tworks, on 18 June 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

Man you just dont get it.

Oh, I get it alright. I get that you have problems with it, not that there is a general problem with it.

I also get that you can't back up your claims aside from mislabeling gauges and responding to facts with insults.

I won't be responding again. You can pat yourself on the back and tell yourself you won, if it makes you sleep better at night.

[fandre]

If it would be to effortfull to implement a 3D rotating paperdoll, they could at least replace the target mechs paperdoll with a static 2D image of the targeted mech from front and from back with color overlay indicating dmg.

+You can more easily recognise the targeted mech and its loadout.
+You dont have to think about which side of a mech is the right side on the paperdoll.

Edited by fandre, 20 June 2014 - 01:59 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Its not har dto undertsan dthe paperdoll, ALL paperdolls work the way from your angle of view.

your front and back from your point of view is, LEft is left, and right is right.

Your opponents front is L is right and right is left. Thats how it is when someone stands in front of you.
His backpaperdoll, is also correct, when you are behind him, the left is left and the right is right.

The real issue comes, when you want to analyse where to shoto at when you head to an opponent from the back. because legs and Arms are not showing their damage on that paeperdoll. So you have to look at the front paperdoll to analyse the oppoennts arm and leg status. But now you are looking at the wrong paperdoll which is morrored. So what you see on the right is actually his left. this si a bit confusing how human mind works.

My suggestion would be adding arm health status also on the Backview paperdoll. Thsi way people would only have to focus analysing one operdoll of they come at a mech from behind.

Or just give is the good old 3D paperdoll indicatign damage with a red colorisation. thsi also would help newbies to get used identifying where the hitboxes of a mech really are.

Edited by Lily from animove, 20 June 2014 - 02:43 AM.

[Lily from animove]

l33tworks, on 18 June 2014 - 05:22 AM, said:

See they do NOT match up.

I get exactly what you mean saying when you say, "In relation to you", but you are not looking at your mech in relation to you, it clearly says "Front" on there, which means that image is depicting the FRONT of the mech. Why is it suddenly only MWO everything has to be taken in relation to you regardless of perspective?

FRONT, does not mean frontview, it just means front armor status. The front is in relation to your mech, because his front is in front of you (but not facing you). And in this view, the left is on the left, and the right oon the right. This difeers when an opponent is facing you, because then you look at him FROM the front.