3 replies to this topic

[Aegis Kleais]

Have a look:



This was the concept art for the Hunchback cockpit. Of course, as we all know, concept art is used to help visualize a concept, and what we can get in-game can be quite a bit different.

I for one LOVE the photo-realistic look in the concept art.

But it raises a couple of usability questions. First I know that PGI will not bring the game to the real of Flight Simulator when it comes to requiring the user to be intimately familiar with each knob and control. This is fine; the operation of the Mech should be automated (having the in-game avatar move to flip controls and press buttons where appropriate)

And secondarily, the panels presents a unique challenge. What good are having customized panels of information if everything we need is readily available on our HUD? (chances are if our HUD is taken out, console electronics will be too). I mean, I LIKE having all these monitors, especially if they provide useful information that can be easily read to provide supplemental information about different parts of my Mech.

But to what end is PGI going to bring us into the game world? To me, SO MUCH of the simulation aspect I love about MW comes from steps taken to help me feel like I'm actually in the pilot seat, operating this beast. There's a type of nostalgia knowing that though the machine IS advanced, it really comes down to the pilot, and how well he interacts with the instrumentation in the cockpit, to bring what that chassis can do to bear on the battlefield.

It's a precarious position; I'd love to hear what PGI has in store for it.

[Broceratops]

i dont know what PGI is doing but i'm pretty sure this is not the direction they're taking. it kind of would be cool if you had no hud so you had to look around your cockpit to find info like damage and ammo and whatnot, but it's totally not player friendly.

i'm just hoping they don't see the game as mostly complete and are still working on CW. that was a pillar and we haven't heard anything about it for a long time.

[Aegis Kleais]

I'm a big usability proponent; and sadly, as you get more sim-realistic, often, it becomes less and less user-friendly.

But I think a large part of that can be offset if we just provide a proper training video and allowed people to take battlemechs out into a closed field for personal testing.

To me, the perfect balance would be:

More Photorealism
Proper interaction with environment (cracks, frost around rim, raindrops down screen)
Proper physics interaction (shadows cast across console, smoke inside cockpit when highly damaged, red warning floodlights, etc.)
Only most pertinent data available on HUD, other data must be glimpsed from monitors.

The monitors would allow you to customize what you want where, and hopefully aside from a free look and zoom toggle to read the displays, there could also be keybinds which forcibly move your FOV to that display and zoom in for a quick evaluation.

To have EVERYTHING provided to me through the helmet HUD feels cheap, in a way.

[Orzorn]

I've been wondering how they're going to fill those non-connected screens in my mech. We have a (non-functioning) kill counter, a partially functioning ammunition counter (on some mechs it works, others it doesn't, and even others it shows but does not update), and a fully functioning (from what I recall) heat sink display.

They still have about 4 or so screens to fill on many mechs.