189 replies to this topic

[Mechteric]

DrxAbstract, on 10 January 2016 - 08:03 AM, said:

1. Did you somehow miss those rocks or buildings when you walked by them?

2. A quick glance at radar shows if teammates are parked behind you.

1. There's a reason we have rear-view in our cars. Sometimes, we don't notice or forget things unless they are significant. Small rocks or logs off in the peripheral don't always get brain-share.

2. The mimi-map is small and can become crowded if many mechs are in close proximity, it can be hard to tell if they are directly behind or off to the side just enough to get by.

[martian]

DrxAbstract, on 10 January 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

-snip-

Your own words, boy:

DrxAbstract, on 09 January 2016 - 11:15 PM, said:

Rear-view cam was utilized... never.

You said that "Rear-view cam was utilized... never." - it's your obligation to prove it. That's how discussions work. When you say something, you must prove it.

But thank you for a good laugh. Sorry, but the fact that some random fan webpage does not mention rear-view camera really can't serve as support for your claims that nobody ever utilized rear view. Especially, if it consists of nothing than a few short paragraphs of text.

Your attempts on backpedaling are really comical, so thanks again:

DrxAbstract, on 10 January 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

Can I prove that portion? Not exactly

DrxAbstract, on 10 January 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

Which I also do not need to prove

DrxAbstract, on 10 January 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

None of that requires me proving anything other than my word.

Edited by martian, 11 January 2016 - 08:57 AM.

[Bud Crue]

So to summarize this thread:

OP: I'd like a rear-view camera feature.
Response post type A: Sorry, unlikely if not impossible for technical, or game play reasons.
Response post B: It is possible, cuz I say so and/or know of games that have such a feature.
Misc responses to A and B: Mock, humor or agree (with one or both of A and and cite to other video games in support of same.

Repeat for 5 pages.

Well played. All of you.

[Khobai]

If we had rear view cameras we could also have rear mounted weapons.

And we could have atlases walking backwards at the enemy while shooting.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 11 January 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

If we had rear view cameras we could also have rear mounted weapons.

And we could have atlases walking backwards at the enemy while shooting.

That was actually an exploit in Tabletop. Rear-facing weapons had a lower BattleValue than front-facing ones, so people loaded their entire arsenal to the rear of their mech, put all of their torso armor to the rear, and then literally walked backwards into combat.

[therealswilly]

I'd love a ******* rear view.

So I know where the **** I'm stuck on.

[himself]

*ahem*

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Quickdraw

[CDLord HHGD]

I'm pretty sure we beat this horse to death back in 2012 or 2013......

[himself]

cdlord, on 11 January 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure we beat this horse to death back in 2012 or 2013......

Clearly wasn't beaten hard enough because there still isn't a rear-view camera.

[CDLord HHGD]

himself, on 11 January 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Clearly wasn't beaten hard enough because there still isn't a rear-view camera.

Just because you beat the horse (and you shouldn't) doesn't mean he'll "pony" up.

[himself]

cdlord, on 11 January 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

Just because you beat the horse (and you shouldn't) doesn't mean he'll "pony" up.

Squeaky wheel, etc. etc.

[Marcel Bekker]

Ahem, I am not sure if it was already brought up, or how familiar all of you are with how it is depicted in Classic BT, so I will just explain how exactly a Mech Pilot supposedly views his/her surroundings, according to the fluff/lore.

You see, the cockpit viewports are merely an emergency feature, the pilot instead has a holographic image projected onto the neurohelmets display, which compresses a 360 degree view of the battlefield into 160 degrees, gathered by sensors/cameras around the mechs head. The forward 90 degree cone, the cone in which a human is able to clearly see details, is displayed normally. The other 40 degrees to each side are progressively more compressed and less detailed due to this compression, but since this in the peripheral part of our field of vision, this is usually not a negative factor. It allows the pilot to pick up on movement or bright flashes in his peripheral field of view, so that he has a basic awareness of the full 360 degrees around his mech without the need to turn his head around... which is not as easy as it sounds, since these neurohelmets are by necessity quite heavy and bulky.



Of course, that also means that as battle damage mounts, more and more of this holographic FoV becomes useless, garbled or blacked out.

So, let us see... would it be possible to implement a solution similar to this? Right now, I can not see why not.

[Roadkill]

Bud Crue, on 11 January 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

Response post B: It is possible, cuz I say so and/or know of games that have such a feature.

For clarity, a rear-view camera (or rear-view mirror) isn't feasible because CryEngine isn't good at picture-in-picture. It would cause a significant drop in frame rates.

However, a rear-view toggle like what we had in MW4 is completely feasible. CryEngine is perfectly capable of support a single camera that can look in any direction. A hat switch (or other toggle) that changed your entire view to look to the rear would be spiffy.

Whether or not anyone wants that due to the impact it might have on stealth is an entirely different question.

[Ace Selin]

himself, on 11 January 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Clearly wasn't beaten hard enough because there still isn't a rear-view camera.

Because we dont need one and it would ruin some tactical aspects of the game.

So NO Rear View camera needed as far as im concerned, especially not when we have seismic and 360 retention modules.

[Cancer Warrior]

Just replace 3rd pv with RV. Easy as done except it won't ever happen with all the light player QQ. Just look at what their QQing has done to Assaults! No point in playing them anymore. And yet they still cry about assaults! Purty soon they (assault mechs) won't be able to move faster then 25kph and won't be able to torso twist at all!

[himself]

Ace Selin, on 11 January 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

Because we dont need one and it would ruin some tactical aspects of the game.

So NO Rear View camera needed as far as im concerned, especially not when we have seismic and 360 retention modules.

It wouldn't ruin any aspects of the game besides some heavies and assaults being able to retreat backwards and not get snagged on random debris. Neither of the modules you mentioned assist in this regard.

Roadkill, on 11 January 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

Whether or not anyone wants that due to the impact it might have on stealth is an entirely different question.

It won't do anything to stealth gameplay, period. Anyone saying otherwise should have their opinion disregarded, because even if you ignore Modules like Seismic Sensor, you still have directional damage indicators, and you don't even need a module for those.
Lore mentions the Quickdraw being able to fire backwards with its arms. I think that would be a neat feature of that mech.

[RebJohhny]

Ace Selin, on 11 January 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

Because we dont need one and it would ruin some tactical aspects of the game.

So NO Rear View camera needed as far as im concerned, especially not when we have seismic and 360 retention modules.

pretty much this, with those 2 modules and having 3rd person view available we do not need a silly rear view mode as well.

it would ruin aspects of stealth game play which is important for lights to not get one shot by other mechs, especially for lights with only short range weaponry.

[himself]

RebJohhny, on 11 January 2016 - 06:15 PM, said:

pretty much this, with those 2 modules and having 3rd person view available we do not need a silly rear view mode as well.

it would ruin aspects of stealth game play which is important for lights to not get one shot by other mechs, especially for lights with only short range weaponry.

This non-sense again. I'm beginning to think it's the same person using alt accounts to echo themselves.

[LordNothing]

it still boggles my mind that this game cant do something that was seemingly trivial in mechwarrior 2.

[EAP10]

*jumps into thread*

Wow. 98 posts of what seems to be repeating material, after reading through all of it. Let me chime in.

Damage Indicator vs. Rear View Camera

Damage Indicator: You see that you are getting damaged AFTER you get hit by whatever weapon happened to hit you. This means that without practiced awareness you can be caught off guard.

Rear Camera: With this, if you check it semi often, you have a pretty good chance to see potential harm coming your way before the enemy even fires.
Imagine you see a Dire Wolf while your in your Jenner, and you go around behind him at about, lets say 300 meters for a sneaky attack.
You suddenly see him turn around, (because he saw you in the rear camera) and before you can get to cover he kills you with whatever weapons he has. How would you feel?
I would feel kinda cheated.

Seismic is different, as it only works up to a certain amount of meters, (I don't remember exactly) and it only shows blips when you are still.
A rear view camera would make it super easy to check behind you, which would have major negative affects on people that try to be sneaky.
Damage indicators, on the other hand, tell you when you get hit, so you can adjust accordingly.

The only type of rear camera I would support would be module based, and aimed at the ground maybe 20 meters behind the mech, so all those people out there that get stuck on rocks can finally rest assured.


(P.S. sorry for wall of text, funny how a small idea can evolve into a monster of a post.)

Edited by EAP10, 11 January 2016 - 07:36 PM.