67 replies to this topic

[Flutterguy]

Canonically, I'm pretty sure mechs had a 360 degree view condensed into a screen in front of the pilot. Seems like that would be both tough to implement and not something particularly easy for players to use right.

[jlawsl]

Alienized, on 27 April 2015 - 12:36 PM, said:

rear mirror on tanks? its called infantry support.
mechs with rear mirror or camera?
do you engage backwards?....
usually mechs are supported by recon drones, infantry support or other military stuff.
not to mention dropship and aerial recon.
also, mechs have sensors and radar. we just cant see those monitors.
just install a seismic sensor and you see stuff that come sup from behind^^

LOL, the third person drone...every mech has it, but it can only point forward. I think you just made the OP's post even more valid. We have friggin seismic sensors but have no way to look behind us. Kinda stupid and weird that the seismic sensors only pick up enemy mechs. So, now mechs have IFF seismic monitors? really. lol. The irony.

[GentlemanBryan]

rearview should be one of the non-functioning monitors in the cockpit

Edited by MAVRICK64, 27 April 2015 - 04:46 PM.

[jlawsl]

It should just be another function like holding the control to look without torso twisting. Or maybe even a small blown up screen that pops up like the main map or the team details.

[Pax Bellum]

Alistair Winter, on 27 April 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

No other Mechwarrior games had this feature, so why would you expect it from MWO? It's impossible. Just like multiple targeting buttons (nearest enemy, etc).

Mech 3 and MEch 4 had this feature.

[Impyrium]

TBH, I fail to see why it would be so hard to program a button that simply flipped the camera angle to behind the 'Mech and hid the cockpit mesh. I think everyone has seen the bug which hides the mesh at the beginning of a match. Imagine that, but with an opposite camera angle.

Anything that reminds me I'm piloting a giant walking war machine rather than just playing a FPS with a cockpit graphic is more than welcome.

[Lyoto Machida]

Ironically, we don't have 1906 tech in this game but the Russians had 2612 tech in their revolution of 1917...

Quote

THE VCE exam body has been left red faced after a doctored artwork depicting a huge robot helping socialist revolutionaries during the Russian Revolution was accidentally included in this year’s year 12 history exam taken by 5700 students.
Exams for the popular History: Revolution subject were original supposed to include the artwork Storming the Winter palace on 25th October 1917 by Nikolai Kochergin, which depicts events during the October Revolution, which was instrumental in the larger Russian Revolution of 1917.
But when students opened their exam this morning they found an altered version of the work with what appear to be a large "BattleTech Marauder" robot aiding the rising revolutionaries in the background.

http://www.smh.com.a...1114-29ce7.html

[Zordicron]

I see everyone has forgotten the true reason here. Story time!

in open beta, ehhhh I think it was about 3 months in, there was a thread here on the forums, a theory craft type thread.

"What if....... I put all my armor on the back of my Atlas DDC and walk backwards? Those OP backstabbing lights will be out of luck!! Can't shoot me in the back, I have 100 armor! Can't shoot me in the front, all my weapons are there!!"

I believe various things like "checkmate ravens" was thrown around, etc.

But you see, I am pretty sure Paul saw that thread. "OMG backwards Atlas OP! No way we can put that camera in now! Shooting Fatlas in the back is our only in game counter to them!!" Remember, this was a long time ago.

So there you have it. No rearview camera because the back loaded armor Fatlas would be immune to light mech counters.

Edited by Eldagore, 27 April 2015 - 06:49 PM.

[Whatzituyah]

Eldagore, on 27 April 2015 - 06:48 PM, said:

I see everyone has forgotten the true reason here. Story time!

in open beta, ehhhh I think it was about 3 months in, there was a thread here on the forums, a theory craft type thread.

"What if....... I put all my armor on the back of my Atlas DDC and walk backwards? Those OP backstabbing lights will be out of luck!! Can't shoot me in the back, I have 100 armor! Can't shoot me in the front, all my weapons are there!!"

I believe various things like "checkmate ravens" was thrown around, etc.

But you see, I am pretty sure Paul saw that thread. "OMG backwards Atlas OP! No way we can put that camera in now! Shooting Fatlas in the back is our only in game counter to them!!" Remember, this was a long time ago.

So there you have it. No rearview camera because the back loaded armor Fatlas would be immune to light mech counters.

[Telmasa]

Why not just make one of the [NO DISPLAY] screens in the cockpit a rear-view camera? Seems like pretty easy fluff, to me.

[Lily from animove]

rear mirror is lostech in cryengine.

[0rionsbane]

cry engine is less advanced than the game engine that build mw2 and 3, they both had multiple camera angles and even in mw3 let you shoot to the side or straight up/down with your arms.

basically a lot of the problems is they used the pretty but worse engine to build this game with. cry engine looks great that's its selling point, but it cant handle destructible terrain, multiple camera angels, weapons with two firing modes etc with out being modified, which the devs have proven they are incapable of doing. living legends uses the same engine (modified) and had all of these features, so its both a engine and dev issue.

[Molossian Dog]

If we ever get a rear mirror than as a MC-only consumable.

[zeves]

last time i checked "star citizen" had multiple camera angels including a button to see behind you whenever you want, and they do use cryengine, and bether graphics. so it all boils down to haveing actual skilled game designers.

[Telmasa]

0rionsbane, on 27 April 2015 - 11:26 PM, said:

basically a lot of the problems is they used the pretty but worse engine to build this game with. cry engine looks great that's its selling point, but it cant handle destructible terrain, multiple camera angels, weapons with two firing modes etc with out being modified, which the devs have proven they are incapable of doing. living legends uses the same engine (modified) and had all of these features, so its both a engine and dev issue.

Crysis 1-3 can do all these things and more. *shrug*

[Joseph Mallan]

Alistair Winter, on 27 April 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

No other Mechwarrior games had this feature, so why would you expect it from MWO? It's impossible. Just like multiple targeting buttons (nearest enemy, etc).

IFF transponders and active radar don't need to render a second view.

[Strum Wealh]

Raggedyman, on 27 April 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

So we have sensors that can ID the damage on a mech, a floating cam for 3rd person view, UAVs, ECM, a million and one bits of assorted marvels of engineering and electronics blahblahblah

but
no rear-view mirror

Seriously? Did no-one think of putting a $100 camera and a £50 screen in the cockpit so we could see behind us when reversing the $100,000,000,000 walking-tank!?

Very random thought and undoubtadly not at the top of the to-do-list but the idea got stuck in my head so I thought I would share.

zeves, on 28 April 2015 - 12:50 AM, said:

last time i checked "star citizen" had multiple camera angels including a button to see behind you whenever you want, and they do use cryengine, and bether graphics. so it all boils down to haveing actual skilled game designers.

As explained here and here, it essentially comes down to, "It's unlikely to happen in MWO because the version of CryEngine used does not handle it well natively, and because PGI is unable and/or unwilling to essentially rewrite the game engine from scratch, like the Star Citizen team (apparently/supposedly) did".

[zagibu]

Wiley Coyote, on 27 April 2015 - 12:25 PM, said:

I think it's a limitation of the game engine if I remember previous posts from other users correctly.

0rionsbane, on 27 April 2015 - 11:26 PM, said:

cry engine is less advanced than the game engine that build mw2 and 3, they both had multiple camera angles and even in mw3 let you shoot to the side or straight up/down with your arms.

basically a lot of the problems is they used the pretty but worse engine to build this game with. cry engine looks great that's its selling point, but it cant handle destructible terrain, multiple camera angels, weapons with two firing modes etc with out being modified, which the devs have proven they are incapable of doing. living legends uses the same engine (modified) and had all of these features, so its both a engine and dev issue.

Rebas Kradd, on 27 April 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

A rear-view mirror would require re-rendering the entire space behind you. Needless to say that'd be an enormous increase to draw calls. At this point, it'd basically be fluff.

Yes, previous MW titles had it. Previous MW titles also had a lot less to render.

Strum Wealh, on 28 April 2015 - 03:21 AM, said:

As explained here and here, it essentially comes down to, "It's unlikely to happen in MWO because the version of CryEngine used does not handle it well natively, and because PGI is unable and/or unwilling to essentially rewrite the game engine from scratch, like the Star Citizen team (apparently/supposedly) did".

It wouldn't have to be picture in picture rendering. Just a button that flips to another camera angle without HUD. No multiple viewports needed. Would be easy in CryEngine.

[Joseph Mallan]

Whatzituyah, on 27 April 2015 - 07:00 PM, said:

Whenever I see this picture I remember the Antler Dance Ritual of (IIRC)Cyris 7

[Alistair Winter]

Nightshade24, on 27 April 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:

MW4's had this, and I was pretty sure MW3 had it too if I am not mistakened and a limited degree MW2 had it for 3rd person view.

Whatzituyah, on 27 April 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

I really hope this is sarcastic

Pax Bellum, on 27 April 2015 - 04:48 PM, said:

Mech 3 and MEch 4 had this feature.

Yeah, I was being sarcastic. There's loads of features in the old MW-games that have been excluded from MWO, for one reason or another.