309 replies to this topic

[Bansheedragon75]

JagerWulf, on 08 September 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

I did try to find it, the only comment I could find is by someone called midga http://icrontic.com/...o-is-incredible
but I could find NO statement about the cry engine 3 on any rear view problem the engine could have, your turn to find a link.

If you read a few more pages ahead you will see this.

Dragonlord, on 07 September 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

Gonna amend my statement in regards to rear view.
After doing allot of searching and reading around the forums, I have found no official statement on it.

But from what I have read I have found the following.

Its not impossible to add it, but its very difficult to add and may not make it into the game at all due to the difficulty of adding it.
I'm no expert on the issue and dont know what the reason is, just summing up what I have found about rear view.

If you want more info on it there are countless threads on the subject you can read through that should answer your questions about it.

[the great skratsby]

An after match camera, a sort of 'payoff scene' which is in many shooters, replay saving and a more interactive Mechbay would be wonderful imho. Sort of like the PGR/Forza/TDU games, where you can observe your vehicles in great detail.

Considering MW has always had a focus on personalisation and customisation, as with MWO it would make sense to have it; and in the long run passively incentive spending on cosmetics and whatnot.

Though third person during gameplay, as the others are saying - no, no, no.

[Kurayami]

i want my replays with free flight cam and Duncan Fisher voice comments (so sad its impossible) and my mech bay with all around camera thing so i could oogle my shiney new Timber Wolf when i manage to salvage one.

Edited by Kurayami, 09 September 2012 - 03:38 AM.

[Rand Anthroe]

After reading all of these posts it is obvious to me that most people on these boards don't really know the tech of battletech. i have been playing the table top game for over twenty years and i have played ALL of the mechwarrior game titles. i can understand people not wanting third person view and that is fine but they should DEFINATELY offer top down view! Any number of dropships in orbit can do top down views and switch the info to a mech computer.
If anyone dares to say that this is untrue then you need to go into battletech tech manual and read it! There are also several battletech reading books that the mechwarrior talks about ship intel giving the upperhand in top-down view. As for this guy earlier talking about "double blind" tabletop game- only if you were on a planet alone and had no ships in orbit.
I still would like to see third person but if they say it is unfair (which doesnt make sense if everyone can do it) then they should allow mechs to enter a top-down view over the entire landscap. only mechs outfitted with anti-radar type tech should be immune from sight.
Regardless i am going to play this game and have a blast doing so. 3rd person, having it or not having it is not a game breaker to me.

[Adridos]

Rand Anthroe, on 09 September 2012 - 04:23 AM, said:

After reading all of these posts it is obvious to me that most people on these boards don't really know the tech of battletech. i have been playing the table top game for over twenty years and i have played ALL of the mechwarrior game titles. i can understand people not wanting third person view and that is fine but they should DEFINATELY offer top down view! Any number of dropships in orbit can do top down views and switch the info to a mech computer.
If anyone dares to say that this is untrue then you need to go into battletech tech manual and read it! There are also several battletech reading books that the mechwarrior talks about ship intel giving the upperhand in top-down view. As for this guy earlier talking about "double blind" tabletop game- only if you were on a planet alone and had no ships in orbit.
I still would like to see third person but if they say it is unfair (which doesnt make sense if everyone can do it) then they should allow mechs to enter a top-down view over the entire landscap. only mechs outfitted with anti-radar type tech should be immune from sight.
Regardless i am going to play this game and have a blast doing so. 3rd person, having it or not having it is not a game breaker to me.

The command console they announced seems similar.

But you don't know a lot about CryEngine 3 not to know, streaming more than one view is impossible, thus I assume it will only be some kind of symbolised map like in BF2.

[Kurayami]

actually possible, but only if second etc view is simplified (no hdr\aa\fxa etc) or there would be major fall in performance (about 30%) or if second etc view is toggled (no pip) but here lies another cry eng problem - inability of current api to change view fast enough. - based on official cry eng 3 pip tread (in which people actually found some kind of solution for pip but it is still flawed)

Rand Anthroe people want mw4 style 3d person which is give unfair advantage over 1st person. i doubt anyone will play in top down view because of major disadvantages with targeting. its all good on tt, where you just trow dice (or for command console where you just give orders on that matter) but totally useless when it comes to piloting on a field against 1st person view users.

[Elder Thorn]

there should not be a 3rd person view in battle.

a recording option would be nice, but at the current stage, there are other things that are more important, imo.
if we get a recording option later, it would be cool to be able to freemove the camera when watching it.

[Ps10n1C]

Adridos, on 09 September 2012 - 04:33 AM, said:

The command console they announced seems similar.

But you don't know a lot about CryEngine 3 not to know, streaming more than one view is impossible, thus I assume it will only be some kind of symbolised map like in BF2.

Code debate again... sigh... Why it needs more than 1 view, they just need to relocate POV behind the MECH and that's it. I just have wrote that we shouldn't discuss coding here. There are much more specialised places for that, so this one is off topic.

I am not quoting Adridos on purpose, just giving an example. For god's sake, leave that to DEV team.

BTW, TT version has it's own limitations, so shooting Janner running 120 around 3 atlai is very possible on TT and doesn't require any FPS skill. In this game, that's not the case. You need to have very good aim to do so...

Edited by Ps10n1C, 09 September 2012 - 06:33 AM.

[buttmonkey]

rear/side view cameras could work very well, while your checking your rear view you would be oblivious to somebody coming over a hill directly in front so it adds balance.
the same applies for the birds eye/top-down view as you would have to save space for the tech on your mech and while your in this view mode you would be unaware of a sniper for example who could take advantage of this, which balances it again.

im not sure on the specifics but it would add another tactical role to have a mech capable of switching to a birds eye view.
both are good ideas,

i just hope the cy engine issue isn't as hopeless as it would appear to be.
but if the problem is that 2 images can't be displayed simeltaniously, then switching camera modes could be a solution, the whole screen will change as long as the loading time is acceptable, if it takes 5 secs or 10 secs o reload the screen then that is a problem.

and i have finally thought of a way to have 3rd person fairly so bear with me
if the mech has some kind of tech that can gather visual info through cameras and create a 3rd person perspective and relay that to your neurohelmet, then such tech should for example weigh the same as an ac20. this would mean a tactical edge for the team at the expense of weaponry/armor. and it should be something limited to 1 mech per match, otherwise you could end up with 5 on your team and drastically reduced firepower.

just an idea

Edited by buttmonkey, 09 September 2012 - 06:38 AM.

[CryoKitten]

Salut. I guess I do question slightly the fact that in such an advanced society, they do not have the ability to equip cameras to the top of their mechs in order to see things over hills/buildings or a zoom. I believe that yes, 3rd person can give one a disadvantage. But I think it could be plausible that certain mechs, such as the ones that are less focused on BATTLE persay and more about speed or distraction, could have the ability to, WHILE THEY ARE NOT IN MOTION, look out from a camera equipped on the top of their mech.

They could not walk while examining through the camera, nor could they aim missles or anything of the sort, but quick little mechs that need to check their surrounding area could get a quick peek before heading off to do whatever they need to do. Yes, it could allow them to see over a hill or past a building of sorts, but because they could not lock and aim they would still have to expose themself to the other mech before actually being able to attack.

I feel that that is an entirely plausible idea, and there is no true advantage besides being able to see an enemy that they may not have been able to previously see, which in this kind of society does not seem like something so amazing. If anything, it's a danger to use it because while in the camera view observing surroundings, a mech could come up behind you and wreck you without you being able to change your point of view in time to react.

But I'll probably get flack for this idea.

I think we can all agree that 360 view in mech lab and 3rd Person in replays after kills/deaths would not break immersion and would instead be a fairly enjoyable add-on to this already very competent system.

[Kurayami]

Ps10n1C, on 09 September 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

...

so reading previous page to see why exactly there will be no 3d person view in main gameplay is not for you i see. that's not to mention top of this page.

buttmonkey, on 09 September 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

...

rear\side cant be implemented now, birdy thing - command console in future (used only to command troops so no running'd'gunning)

no its not but thats in long term. for now it is.

i already suggested something like that.

Kurayami, on 08 September 2012 - 06:41 AM, said:

actually when it comes to modes - there was commanders feature in first teaser, so maybe it would be possible to add spy drone, that is hower behind mech, giving some buggy black-and-white video feed with some junk on it maybe with severally limited view modes (nightvision etc) . it could be module subsystem with slot and weight requirements and of course it should be easily destructible (decent size, low AP, can be targeted). this way it could be use by both 1st person users to peek around hill (scouts will be glad) and by 3d person lovers who could use it as 3d person view. but will not give any side advantages (weight, takes a module slot, need reloads, destructible, damasking, crappy video feed, limited additional detection modes) - but than again i doubt people demanding 3d person would agree to this (as a sneaky type and future proud Raven user i would totally use it)

and yes its useless - we will have sensors and BAP for this purposes. no video feed but advanced detection and targeting without drawbacks

CryoKitten, on 09 September 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

...

again sensor bap command console etc. please read about existing systems as for advanced ect - sci-fi cant be judged be normal science.

CryoKitten, on 09 September 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

I think we can all agree that 360 view in mech lab and 3rd Person in replays after kills/deaths would not break immersion and would instead be a fairly enjoyable add-on to this already very competent system.

someone should make a pol for this.

[Ps10n1C]

Kurayami, on 09 September 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

so reading previous page to see why exactly there will be no 3d person view in main gameplay is not for you i see. that's not to mention top of this page.

Neither is for you. I was THE ONE in previous page, to which you refer, who quoted a previous post - why exacly 3rd person is not good in this game. So YOU get back one page before this and read my PREVIOUS post. I just stated after that - I don't approve code debating (if is it possible or not to do something, insead if it is A GOOD IDEA OR NOT) in this forum, at least in this thread, which isn't mentioning code debate.

And last argument I gave about TT was in favor to no 3rd person. But you didn't get it because you havent read my previous posts.

Edited by Ps10n1C, 09 September 2012 - 02:46 PM.

[Obitus Nex]

Egomane, on 08 September 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

And what will stopping you from quick switching between the two views, Obitus? You still see more then you should and can react to it.

A good point. I was thinking that fog of war could play a factor for this. If you don't have LoS, you don't see it. For example, there could be an Atlas sitting right on the other side of a hill, but you wouldn't lnow he is there unless someone else has LoS. Even then, you wouldn't "see" him, only get a pip on the radar that something is there. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see 3rd person, as it would cause a lot of issues. Just throwing ideas out there for and against

[Kurayami]

Ps10n1C, on 09 September 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

..

there is nothing code related to 3d person - only to rear\down and that is what i meant by my comment (all code comments are about rear\dow\side). if it was not clear than sorry.

Obitus Nex, on 10 September 2012 - 03:15 AM, said:

...

but you will see other side of cliff which will give you tactical advantage in maneuvering. or if you see only things that in your los than game will be really awkward with all those buildings\mechs etc spawning from nowhere. and its not needed with sensors\bap\command console implemented.

for all treads about it and for all pages and suggestions i yet to see one that will fit requirements - it should not give advantages or disadvantages to ether side why still being playable and it need to be done in a way people would want to play with it. - and all of this while requiring adequate resources to implement - not some 5 years of coding new api for 100 top coders of cry eng 3. And that is exactly why all those treads and discussions are kinda useless and result only in trollig\flaming and also - why devs don't want to even try to find solution to main gameplay any further and thinking about new game mode instead. so maybe instead of inventing bicycle all over again (3d person is just what Ps10n1C stated is) you should try thinking of another GAME MODE? or at least put this to a halt until further notice of said mode? (im also pretty sure that in PvE will be classy 3d person mode)

Edited by Kurayami, 10 September 2012 - 09:10 AM.

[Ryvucz]

I wouldn't mind being able to look at your mech if they have a PvE, then I'd love to have the option there. (MechWarrior 2 fan)

Edited by Ryvucz, 10 September 2012 - 03:11 PM.

[Captain Seasick]

No.

Just bleepin' no.

3rd person view with vehicles: the ruiner of all immersions ever.

Edited by Captain Seasick, 11 September 2012 - 07:39 AM.

[Petit Mort]

So, the 3rd party view was brought up in another thread and directed back here (to keep the other thread on topic)

As the debate rages on, it seems that the information breaks down as thus:

PRO:

• Fun
  
• Similar to other games
  
• Prevents motion sickness (I myself suffer from this, which limits me to 2 games and then I have to take a break)
  
• Causes only the most hardcore "simulation" fans to leave and find a new game

ANTI:

• Gives advantage to those wanting 3rd party view
  
• Forces those wanting a "simulation" experience into not having one (in order to remain competitive)
  
• Alienates those wanting a 3rd party experience

Of course there are others, but this is what most arguments basically boil down to.

Well, what if there were a compromise?

Since the problem isn't with "simulator" view folks playing with 3rd party view matches, the best way to ensure both parties are happy is to give them a choice. Simply create a selector switch in the options menu to the effect of "Simulator view only matches"

That ensures that those who want "pure" simulator matches can have them, while those what want a 3rd party view (or don't care either way) can play in matches where 3rd party view is allowed.

It goes without saying that when you toggle the "Simulator view only matches" to on, 3rd party view is disabled.

[DanottiTR]

I would love to see my mech from the 3rd person view without effecting the game play may be at the begining of the game for a limited time and at the victory screen.

[Magik0012]

The only 3rd person cam I would personally want would be used strictly to take screenshots..
- the only mechs you can see are friendly or dead
- no control over your mech while in 3rd person, strictly camera movement to get the shot you want


That being said, I kind of like what Petit Mort proposed. Make it a match option. One that defaults to SIM VIEW.

[Petit Mort]

Magik, Whatever it defaults to isn't as important as making it known that it's an option.

Seems like just one more thing to argue over.

A: SIM VIEW 4 LYFE!!!
B: 3RD PARTY VIEW 4 LYFE!!!

C: Compromise!

A: DEFAULT TO SIM VIEW!!!
B: DEFAULT TO 3RD PARTY VIEW!!!

C: *sigh...