17 replies to this topic

[Aerandar]

One suggestion that comes to mind is to have some rear view mirror (and/or side view mirrors) in the cockpit. This could be just something really simple put in the cockpit, much like the rear view mirrors or perhaps the rear-facing cameras what we have (or can get) in our 21st century cars.

Actually, with the camera option, a rear (and/or side) facing camera displayed on one or more of our in-cockpit viewscreens would be pretty cool. This should be pretty easy to add in, and I'd say a realistic option to put in too; I know I'd sure as heck want to be able to see behind me if I were mech-brawling in the 31st century. You could even charge a fistful of credits for the features, or make it a module, if you'd like.

Now, I know that mirrors are sooo last millenia, like Prada shoes, but maybe we can bring that retro style back? 8D

[Adridos]

CryEngine 3 doesn't support this.

And from waht I've learned you could possibly do it, but then it would lag the game to no end.

[focuspark]

Adridos, on 04 February 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

CryEngine 3 doesn't support this.

And from waht I've learned you could possibly do it, but then it would lag the game to no end.

That's not true. I think what Adridos means is that every additional view requires a scene render and CryEngine has a hard enough time with a single view keeping 60 FPS.

[Aerandar]

Hmm. I'd think that a really basic rendering in a fairly small rear view mirror would not be a drag on net resources, particularly since the small rear view mirror is blocking an equally small portion of the forward facing window. It would be like first eliminating 2-5% of the view forward (say, the corner of the view) to replace it with a picture of what is behind you (so a net sum of 0 more to draw on screen). It would probably actually be really easy to do from a coding perspective if people want it. Anyway, just an idea.

Thanks,
A

[Kell Commander]

Maybe a rear view camera on one of the not used screens, however a mech doesn't have a back window in the cockpit. Mirror would defy physics (as far as battlemechs running on fusion engines don't).

[Silencer84]

While true that it only replaces screen that has to be rendered anyway, It still has to compute a whole new perspective, and I fear large resource deficits. Though, I'm no expert on graphics engines.

All in all a nice Idea, but as far as I'm concerned it can be saved until the game is far out of beta.

[INSEkT L0GIC]

Rather than displaying on a separate cockpit monitor "always on" what about having it as a PIP option / with its own Module like how the Advanced Zoom is handled?

Edited by INSEkT L0GIC, 04 February 2013 - 11:18 PM.

[Adridos]

Aerandar, on 04 February 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

It would be like first eliminating 2-5% of the view forward (say, the corner of the view) to replace it with a picture of what is behind you (so a net sum of 0 more to draw on screen).

If it only was that easy...

[Aerandar]

INSEkT L0GIC, on 04 February 2013 - 11:18 PM, said:

Rather than displaying on a separate cockpit monitor "always on" what about having it as a PIP option / with its own Module like how the Advanced Zoom is handled?

Actually, that's a good example of how to do it. The rear view would be with a PIP option which would simply show what behind you rather than what is far ahead of you. It should take an approximately equal amount of resources as the PIP zoom option does now, which is probably easy to do now.

[Noth]

Aerandar, on 05 February 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Actually, that's a good example of how to do it. The rear view would be with a PIP option which would simply show what behind you rather than what is far ahead of you. It should take an approximately equal amount of resources as the PIP zoom option does now, which is probably easy to do now.

the PIP zoom take little resources because it just zooms in on what is already rendered. Making a pip of something behind you you is basically rerendering something, thus takes a lot of resources.

[Adridos]

Aerandar, on 05 February 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Actually, that's a good example of how to do it. The rear view would be with a PIP option which would simply show what behind you rather than what is far ahead of you. It should take an approximately equal amount of resources as the PIP zoom option does now, which is probably easy to do now.

Do you guys know why does the advanced zoom module suck so horribly? You guessed it, they had to make it a simple zoom instead of a PIP in order to actually have something that resembles a PIP and doesn't make our PCs cry.

[Pachar]

I understand that they're currently working with CryEngine 3, but if it can't do this most basic of things that so many video games have then maybe it's time to get a rendering engine that can handle more than a forward view.
I believe that being able to see directly behind me is a basic feature that should have been integrated since day one. That it isn't there yet is weird, but the thought of not having it in the final release seems ludicrous to me. I don't want it as a module, and putting it as a module option would be upsetting to me as I don't want to waste precious tonnage or module slots. Make this a standard feature, change rendering engines if you need to, this NEEDS to happen!

[Antarius]

Pachar, on 05 February 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

Make this a standard feature, change rendering engines if you need to, this NEEDS to happen!

i guess you arent realy familiar with programming / programming a game. Change the Engine, is not quite so simple, it would be easier to start from scratch instead of rewriting this game for an other engine. (so no, this not gonna happen).

the cryengine is good for high-quality games, but needs much power to run it

For this point, rear camara, i had the same idea, because of rear-weapons from some Mechs, like the Atlas (they made them simply front). But as the guys above said, this cost a lot of rendering. (if you dont know how rendering works, use wiki, its not an easy or cheap process) even if you lower the qualaty of the camara its still need to check, are there object, what dimension have this object (this works with "rays" usually) than paint the textures on them and this all the time.

Only thing i guess would be "possible" to implement would be a rear-cam with 1pic/0.25sec, would cost much less, but gives you only lagging picture.

[focuspark]

Adding any additional angles means rendering a whole new scene. The size is only a fraction of the cost of rendering. Using a separate display actually makes it more expensive than doing some kind of overlay (aka PIP), that is unless we're talking about one of those monitor looking things in the 'mech cockspits... in which case you realize that's just an art asset and anything displayed on it would need to be rendered, right?

And before people start bashing on CryEngine3 for being "limited", the problem isn't that CryEngine3 is weak. The problem is that it's too powerful and it allows too good of graphic to created; basically it's not limited enough. So, the designers went hog wild and made WMO beautiful with laser burns and everything... that takes a lot of GPU horsepower to generate. If CryEngine were more limited and/or the devs has planned PIP ahead of time, thus keeping beauty a secondary factor, it might have been possible.

That said, DX11 is around the corner and might be a decent solution - at least for NVIDIA GPU owners. Might be for AMD/ATI as well... but I don't know those boards as intimately.

[Pachar]

It's not that I don't understand the cost, it's that I don't understand why it wasn't considered from the beginning.
I do understand that this game renders beautifully with the current engine, and that it's very graphics intensive to do so. I also know that the programing on changing to another engine is prohibitive, my point is that this is a major problem not a little one. Getting shot in the back is the most frustrating of deaths to me, and it's far to easy for me to follow someone else and shoot them in the back without them even knowing that I'm there if they're receiving fire from anywhere else. If there's some solution on the horizon great, but releasing the game without a way to see behind you is something I can't understand because A) it's an integral part of so many games out there today that use the first person perspective, and B)it makes so little sense due to current technology that it makes it harder to suspend disbelief with everything else.

[focuspark]

Meh, fair enough. Having a blind spot makes the game more fun to me. Each to his own.

What I would like to see, and would be little cost, is a 360 degree radar that shows all 'mechs within 200m of your 'mech.

[Antarius]

• FPS have nearly never a backcam, CS, Call of Duty, HL... (simulation have it sometimes, if it doesnt mess with balance, what it could in this game)
  
• basicly i believe they thought about it at the beginning but for a compatitive, teambased game like MWO its nice to have some "weak spots" which your team have to cover.
  
• If you get your back shot out without knowing... you should better watch your "damage dummy" in the right lower corner of you cockpit, if you back armour gets a quite amount of damage you probably have an Mech behind you and should act with this knowledge

[Aerandar]

Antarius, on 05 February 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

• FPS have nearly never a backcam, CS, Call of Duty, HL... (simulation have it sometimes, if it doesnt mess with balance, what it could in this game)
  
• basicly i believe they thought about it at the beginning but for a compatitive, teambased game like MWO its nice to have some "weak spots" which your team have to cover.
  
• If you get your back shot out without knowing... you should better watch your "damage dummy" in the right lower corner of you cockpit, if you back armour gets a quite amount of damage you probably have an Mech behind you and should act with this knowledge

It a shame that rear view cameras couldn't make it in considering that this game tries to be simulation-like and this feature makes perfect sense. I do appreciate that having a weakness like this could make the game more interesting, but I really don't like having to rely on looking at damage I've already taken to find out that an enemy was behind me. I'm more of a fan of pro actively reacting to an enemy I spot approaching than to being dumb up until the knife is already stuck 10 inches up me rump.

Anyway, I'm not sure I'm buying the suppositions that the inclusion of a PIP rear view replacing another part of the forward view would draw such drastically resources to show particularly if the image has reduced resolution, range, and refinement (and I code for work), but It's not worth debating about it when none of us have direct access or knowledge of the exact details of the relevant code in Cry engine and MWO.

Alright, I suppose I'm done. Thanks for adding your discussing the idea a little with me.

A