22 replies to this topic

[autogyro]

I hope we have a sufficiently advanced animation system to do justice to the great looking concepts and models. I'd hate to see all mechs with their arms outstretched all the time like a bunch of frankenstein robots.

My suggestion to alleviate this is the same way racing games do their shifting animation. When you shift, or shoot, the arm comes up and stays there for a few seconds before bringing the arm back down. Mechs could do the same, with the arm coming up when aiming and then bring the arm halfway down to the side after say, 10 seconds.

Secondly I hope there's some thought paid to moving and turning animations, especially with fast mechs and tight turns.

[Insidious Johnson]

agreed. I just hope that if they ever decide to add in emotes that they will be extremely HIGH priced vanity items.

[FACEman Peck]

Lets get the 'Mechs to be like Rocky in close quarters. It should be fun.

[MaddMaxx]

Insidious Johnson, on 22 February 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

agreed. I just hope that if they ever decide to add in emotes that they will be extremely HIGH priced vanity items.

I just hope that if they ever decide to add in emotes, they don't.

[Paul Inouye]

So you want us to add an animation cycle between neutral to weapon on target? You do know that's added time to bring your weapons to bear and that reduces your DPS right? A Jenner doesn't have a neutral state like an Atlas would. If we speed up the neutral > weapon on target of the Atlas, it's not going to look very believable.

Just sayin.

[Maverick Howell]

Wow that's 100% true Paul it would slow your DPS. that thought didn't even cross my mind. This is why I'm not a game designer haha.

[CeeKay Boques]

I'm not sure, mechanically, would be the point of NOT having the weapons ready to bear at all times. Storage? Maybe? But as soon as I'm in combat mode, the last thing I need is some arm actuator that brings my arm up and down going out and now I can't fire... all so I don't look like frankenstien.

That being said, I'm hoping that the weapons move in their gimbals in sync with the targeting circle, or that my arms followthe reticule, if they go left or right. At bare minimum, the arms should be able to go 90 degrees left and right and fire in that direction independantly.

[whiskey tango foxtrot]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

So you want us to add an animation cycle between neutral to weapon on target? You do know that's added time to bring your weapons to bear and that reduces your DPS right? A Jenner doesn't have a neutral state like an Atlas would. If we speed up the neutral > weapon on target of the Atlas, it's not going to look very believable.

Just sayin.

Let's stick with believable......imo

[Aegis Kleais]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

So you want us to add an animation cycle between neutral to weapon on target? You do know that's added time to bring your weapons to bear and that reduces your DPS right? A Jenner doesn't have a neutral state like an Atlas would. If we speed up the neutral > weapon on target of the Atlas, it's not going to look very believable.

Just sayin.

Just make sure to code in your developer hacks so you can withstand the punishment the community is going to bring down upon you. Your DPS calculations are no match for my MTPLRM (Mech to Paul Long Range Missiles)

Paul uses battlefield awareness akin to a prey looking out for its hunter.
We use battlefield awareness to make sure we don't accidentally step on Paul's crumpled heap of Mech on the field.

[Paul Inouye]

My Mech can pull other Mechs apart. If I ever see you, I'm gonna pull your arms and legs off and leave your stumpy arse under a magnifying glass for the rest of the match.

[Aegis Kleais]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

My Mech can pull other Mechs apart. If I ever see you, I'm gonna pull your arms and legs off and leave your stumpy arse under a magnifying glass for the rest of the match.

Let's be honest. The only reason your mech needs hands is so it can stick its thumb up it's own bum while the top half of its skull gets blown off (taking the pilot with it)

[CeeKay Boques]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

My Mech can pull other Mechs apart. If I ever see you, I'm gonna pull your arms and legs off and leave your stumpy arse under a magnifying glass for the rest of the match.

We have confirmation of Melee, Hand Actuators, removable limbs, and StumpTech in MWO. Print it!

[Aegis Kleais]

Technoviking, on 23 February 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

We have confirmation of Melee, Hand Actuators, removable limbs, and StumpTech in MWO. Print it!

Damn you sensationalist newspapers! This is beef between me and my arch-nemesis. Stay out of it, or I'll call your editor in chief, Mr. Jameson, and tell him I lost all the photos of Spiderman!

[autogyro]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

So you want us to add an animation cycle between neutral to weapon on target? You do know that's added time to bring your weapons to bear and that reduces your DPS right? A Jenner doesn't have a neutral state like an Atlas would. If we speed up the neutral > weapon on target of the Atlas, it's not going to look very believable.

Just sayin.

Well I dont think it needs to be. We can be clever in its implementation. As I said, tie the animation to aiming, not necessarily shooting. If the player isnt actively aiming with the joystick, e.g. when stationary or afk the arms can be set to a neutral (which is a half raised position, not necessarily down to its side) or when shut down etc. This issue is still a necessary hurdle for shooting one arm left or right, the animation of arm movement to bring weaponry to bear on target. It shouldnt need to take more than half a second to raise arms.

[Paul Inouye]

autogyro, on 23 February 2012 - 03:18 PM, said:

It shouldnt need to take more than half a second to raise arms.

That's means if I'm standing neutral, and I see a Mech walk into my sights, instead of being able to fire immediately, I have to wait 0.5sec to raise my arms. Again, this means I've lost 0.5 sec of damage over time. It may not seem like much but that is enough for him to get a shot off on me, and me potentially dying cause my arms are flopping around.

[Felicitatem Parco]

SUGGESTION

Bipedal animals use their arms to improve their balance while walking, thus allowing for faster lineral travel and improved torso stability.

Therefore, Mechs with arms can operate in two modes:

• Cruising Mode with the arms in a relaxed or swaying animation and arm weapons off-line (+10% Speed, torso weapons +10% accuracy)
  
• Fire Mode with the arms in aiming-position and arm weapons are live (no speed/accuracy buffs)

Would anyone want to dedicate a keystroke to this?

Edited by Prosperity Park, 23 February 2012 - 03:44 PM.

[Morashtak]

Some of the reasons I can imagine that the arms on humanoid types would be pointing down is;

• In transit (aboard a Dropship, etc). A bit more streamlined and able to tie them down better.
  
• ....*

* - Was going to say in a 'Mech bay but that would be dependent on where the weapon mounts are and how the weapon is removed/replaced for maintenance.


Other than that would prefer any weapons in my 'Mech's arms to be as close to the ready position as possible while I'm prowling the battlefield. That pretty much says that any recoil should push the arms more back than down.

Edited by Morashtak, 23 February 2012 - 03:43 PM.

[Benjamin Larson]

Like Zone of the Enders!

/rimshot

[autogyro]

Paul Inouye, on 23 February 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

That's means if I'm standing neutral, and I see a Mech walk into my sights, instead of being able to fire immediately, I have to wait 0.5sec to raise my arms. Again, this means I've lost 0.5 sec of damage over time. It may not seem like much but that is enough for him to get a shot off on me, and me potentially dying cause my arms are flopping around.

As I mentioned earlier Paul, tie the animations to aiming, not shooting. It also depends on how you guys plan to implement the HUD, whether there will be multiple reticules for aim and for convergence of weapons so that you can see that youre not in a fire ready state. Ultimately my issue is one of having such great looking high fidelity mechs have movement animations that make them look too stiff. If melee is to be introduced, unless we are going to get crude ramming and DFA only, punches and kicks will still need to be fluid, to some degree. I personally dont believe implementing lowered arms is a dealbreaker that cannot be overcome, but I defer the decision to you guys.

[CeeKay Boques]

That doesn't stop lowered arms from being a poor combat decision that I would tell my techs to disable. A better plan is to have the arms move with the mouse (or joystick) with the HUD.

That being said, I'm all about fluid, sweet looking movements. I know what you are imagining, the Thor or Atlas that just has their arms locked in place like they're pretending they're 7 year old kids being airplanes down the hallway.

Imagine instead, looking out your side window and seeing your Mech arm, stiff and in place, but jostling as you move, swaying oh so slightly. We don't need to add animations, that limb is attached with Mechtololgy crysis Physics! Its there, but it moves. I bet it'll look like that!