IMO KillCam killing the Game

[Gortha]

Hey Guys,

what do you think about some KillCam feature you all know from CoD or BF3 in PS2?

I personally think it´s game breaking and killing the immersion, the feeling playing some real battle.
I don´t want to see who killed me, how and from where he did it.
I want to find him myself, if the killer is still around.

Post you opinions and vote!

Regards
Gortha

[Bags]

>IMO KillCam killing the Game
Not sure how it's killing the game if we haven't even tested it.

That being said, I do not like it.

[Zulthus]

Of course myself and the majority of the playerbase do not want it, but since the COD/BF crowd do the team is going to put it in anyway. Not going to argue about it anymore myself.

[HitbackTR]

Yeah don't want it in the game, in fact put it in the garbage bin with the BFR's. As it was mentioned it detracts from the realism and tactical feel of the game. If I shoot someone I do NOT want them to know where I am located, where I am headed or otherwise and alternatively I don't want to know where the person is located/heading to either if I have been killed by someone.

Oh and just because the COD/BF3 crowd want it in doesn't provide nearly enough justification to put it in. This is not a shot at you Zulthus, merely making a point if thats the case.

[Gortha]

@Zulthus

I only play BF3 on hardcore Servers or Custom-Servers with KillCam OFF and 3D Spotting OFF.

So not every BF3 Player like this "feature"...

Even the NormalBob playing BF3 on Normal Servers does not want to be shown as a sniper.

I am sure the majority of PS2 Players would be against this feature.

I really hope SOE reads this. Well, it´s not the End of the World but IMHO a No-Go in a serious shooter PERIOD ;)

Regards
Gortha

[super pretendo]

Shit, I accidentally voted for no problem, I am against it

[SuperSchnecke]

Gamebreaker for me........and those who like it are those who jump on the next Game when its coming out. So Please Devs, forget that idea. My guess is No1 who likes Planetside likes Killcams..

[DviddLeff]

While not game breaking I don't want it.

[sylphaen]

Any "wait & see" option ?

[CutterJohn]

Its not something I personally would have thought of including, but I do not see how anyone who has played PS1 can say it would ruin the game. PS is in no way known for stealthy, tactical gameplay. You wore bright colorful armor and shot weapons with huge bright tracers, or projectiles that showed up on radar, had a wide array of methods of detection, and could sit dead in places for 5 minutes gathering intel. Oh, and the killspam.

The information gathering abilities of this are vastly overblown. The vast majority of the time it will be immediately obvious who killed you, or at least where it came from. The small amount of time where you or your friends didn't witness the killers location, you mostly won't care because there are tons of other threats in the battlefield. I'm finding it very hard to think up circumstances where the conditions of not knowing where the shots came from and getting valuable intel from said knowledge(such as something going on in the background), and nobody else had access to said knowledge, are met.

I also find it hilarious that people equate this with BF3/CoD, and then say its bad. PS is in the same class of games as BF/CoD, that mix between arcadey and realism, except that PS is further towards arcadey.

[Azren]

Of course myself and the majority of the playerbase do not want it, but since the COD/BF crowd do the team is going to put it in anyway. Not going to argue about it anymore myself.

This. While they keep stressing how they want to please old PS players, it seams that apart from the item names, everything changed to pelase the CoD/BF carebears.

Great startegy by the way; make a game for those players who are first to jump boat when a new shiny BF or CoD comes out instead for those who stuck with PS since it's release.

[Gortha]

@CutterJohn

I played PS1 since closed/exclsuive Beta, several years with breaks and i don´t want it in the next PS - Game.
I know about which game i am talking about ;)

Imagine you are somewhere behind the front hacking a tower or sabotating something.
You meet a enemy and manage to kill him from behind. You are in a hurry, so you directly run where u need to go. Your victim sees on the kill cam where you are running to and where you were hiding. He spawns and directly knows where you are going to and follows.

I don´t like this. It´s noobish.

[PoisonTaco]

It's less frustrating when you know what killed you. In a game where there's many opportunities to die a killcam would help newer players learn from their mistakes and become better at the game.

[Jimmuc]

@Gortha

um you could stick around floating watching everything when your dead in PS1 and it was pretty easy to tell where someone was going after they killed you. plus killing someone from behind the lines pretty much says that your in the area more than an kill-cam.

not trying to be a dick but yea :cool:

[Atheosim]

I'm against kill cams because they are another thing chipping away at immersion, but as an aspect of gameplay I don't think it's that very damaging. Kill cams in cod means that you know where 1 of 16 people are going to be. Kill cam in ps2 means you know where 1 of 1000 people are going to be. And that's uncertain at best.

[CuddlyChud]

I don't think Kill Cams are a problem if they do it like CoD. I like seeing how I died from the enemy perspective. And if the TTK is like PS1's, its not like you'd ever get killed without knowing where the shot came from (unless you got OHK sniped).

[SKYeXile]

dont like it, i dont want people to be seeing my Australian wall hacks.

[Ale]

Kill cams are only valid if:

A) They show a replay of the enemy players view as the kill took place.
B) They can be skipped.

The idea of showing the enemy players current location for a few seconds, aka the battlefield killcam, is stunningly lame.

Full disclosure, I <3 BF3.

[wootgala]

If its going to be a feature in-game, then let it be an option such that you can only see the kill cam if you let others see you when you kill them. If you disable kill cam you cannot see kill cam when someone kills you (instead you see the map) and they cannot see you when you kill them.
I think that should cater to old school PS player and the new ppl.

[Figment]

Killing the game is exagerated.


That said, I don't have a need to see the enemy's positioning. But then I'm thinking of would I want to be seen after I made a kill? It depends on the situation and your options to move and relocate, but depending on the amount of cover present, you don't want to give people your assault plan and position as a cloaker and I can imagine the same goes for snipers.

Having people figure out where the hell I was and what I was doing is a fun element of the game. On top of that, I'm going to encounter the same people for years. I don't want them to know my moves from the first encounter onward. Let them learn and adapt.

Hit indicators containing directional information is enough for me.

[Bitmap]

DO NOT WANT!

Killcams provide free intel and break immersion

[Canaris]

Kill the kill-cam ;)

Not a fan of them myself

[SKYeXile]

Kill the kill-cam ;)

Not a fan of them myself

we can get a replay of that though yea?

[Coreldan]

Rather not, but wont lose my sleep even if it makes it in.

[HitbackTR]

I'm against kill cams because they are another thing chipping away at immersion, but as an aspect of gameplay I don't think it's that very damaging. Kill cams in cod means that you know where 1 of 16 people are going to be. Kill cam in ps2 means you know where 1 of 1000 people are going to be. And that's uncertain at best.

And thats my view also and if it is such an uncertain way of identifying people's locations then why have it in at all? Okay problem solved, chuck it in the bin with the BFR's!

[stordito]

i do not like it either.
in bfbc2 nobody likes it.

on the other side this is not bf or cod if you are really good you may not be spotted by killcam.(your victim might only see part of the background behind you,that could be everywhere)
Also this is not bf, killcam may be a problem if you are lonesniping on a hill or camping as infil but who cares if you are spotted as infantry or vehicle...most of the time you are with more other people that can engage any sucker targeting you and healing you.
And most of the time in PS1 it was hard to sneak as a platoon,you can't hide 50-100 pissed soldiers moving along with vehicles, escort and supports.
in the end the crowd is your shield.

but we'll see ingame...

[CutterJohn]

Imagine you are somewhere behind the front hacking a tower or sabotating something.
You meet a enemy and manage to kill him from behind. You are in a hurry, so you directly run where u need to go. Your victim sees on the kill cam where you are running to and where you were hiding. He spawns and directly knows where you are going to and follows.

You assume the kill cam shows you what happens after you die. It may just show a replay of the last 5 seconds of your life from your killers first person perspective.

But assuming I'm in that situation..

-I know he knows my location when I killed him.
-I can assume he has some good ideas about my probable target. If its some tower, he would know that I was heading for the console.
-I can assume he will be coming after me to prevent that/get revenge.

I'm against kill cams because they are another thing chipping away at immersion, but as an aspect of gameplay I don't think it's that very damaging. Kill cams in cod means that you know where 1 of 16 people are going to be. Kill cam in ps2 means you know where 1 of 1000 people are going to be. And that's uncertain at best.

A toggle would serve you then.

And thats my view also and if it is such an uncertain way of identifying people's locations then why have it in at all?

Because its a popular feature among modern FPSs.



There is more than one way to do kill cams. Some point your camera towards the enemy that killed you. I believe BF2 did this. TF2 does it as well. Others show you in the process of dying. Still others show the point of view of the enemy killing you. Still others just show the enemy after having killed you.

[Coreldan]

I guess the biggest issue could be solved by disabling killcam if killer has cloak enqbled. Should cover infils and snipers.

[Erendil]

My thoughts echo that of many ppl who've already posted. We don't know the specifics of its implementation. But I most likely won't like it - I just don't know yet to what extent...

Generally-speaking I'm not a fan of giving ppl free intel like that without having to put some efforts towards achieving it. IMO the location of enemies shouldn't just be handed to you.

If you want to know the location of the person who killed you and you didn't see or pay attention to the hit location indicators when you were getting shot, the sound of the enemy's weapon getting fired, or the tracers whizzing by you, then you should have to go back to the general area where you got killed and look for the guy.

This especially important for anybody who works away from the meat grinder. Whether you're sniping on the edges of the zerg, backhacking and otherwise causing disruption behind enemy lines, or cleaning up your own back yard, you will often run into situations where there are only a handful of players around, and knowing the location of your killer could make the difference in a mission's success or failure. Even in PS2 where the number of players will presumably be in the thousands.

[DxC]

No only as I dont want to see myself get killed again this is not CoD or Bf3 its Planetside Killcam free please!

[Figment]

Okay, let's first define what these killcams are exactly used for and pull it in a broader perspective (Cutterjohn made a start with that). In which situation you would and wouldn't want to be known about the kills.

Let's start with a killcam overview:

PS post-death cam
PS had a post-killcam spiraling around on you, which was very, very, very regularly used for scouting. In fact, in some cases after you'd get yourself killed at an AMS, you'd use this location to pinpoint for an OS either by yourself or someone else. Of course you could only scout the immediate area around you and see who was trampling or teabagging your corpse, if people were placing new boomers in your direct area and some other things.

However, it also gave you a short time to look at the radar map for three specific things and to make a decision: respawn here/now, or wait for that medic nearby? Would it be worth respawning here or should I go somewhere else? The third of course is that you could look at where all the dots are moving without having to worry about getting shot or having to go there instantly. As such, it definitely helped you plan your next move.

On top of that, as some already mentioned, you got some information about the killer: the hit indicators, the weapon sound, tracers and finally the killspam with name and weapon used. Ultimately though, no specific location unless it happened to be so close up you could see them move of a couple meters in the post-kill killcam. However, it didn't provide specific locations aside from those you already knew from the close quarters engagement.

Note though, that this is not as much a Killcam as it is a Deathcam. Also note that in PS you did not control the cam and that it would eventually stop to spin and forced you to respawn to stop giving you information on that location's area and because it assumed you went afk.

Showing who killed you last with what kind of shot.
Basically this is a kill replay. Games like CoD use this feature. What you can learn from it is what you did wrong and what the killer saw, from which you can derive where he was located. You also get an idea of the weapon used and effort put into the shot and whatever else is seen on screen.

As these replays are typically a set amount of seconds, you get a good idea of what the player was doing prior to killing you. You basically gain more information if an engagement was shorter than killcam time than if it was long as you probably returned fire or took cover in between, making the killcam spend more time focused on the engagement with you rather than other things.

Showing what you did before you died
Rather than showing you what the enemy did, it is a recording of your death from a point of view close to you. It could be a third person view, it could be a rotating or rotatable cam. If it is rotating, you can make out some more details than from a fixed point of view. You can use this to analyse the situation a bit more indirectly to derive similar information as most of the above. It wouldn't always quite show you what the opponent did or does and is therefore more an in between of the CoD killcam and PS deathcam, as it can give you situational awareness you did not have during your death.

It's actually a bit like FIFA and other sportsgame goal replays. Of course the level of interactivity can be changed to even have control over it.

Cam on detected post-death enemy
This is where the camera, rather than providing a replay of the kill or your own post mortem corpse, shows you the player who shot you, typically from the front. World of Tanks does this, but ONLY if the player that fired at you had been discovered by the team or yourself already. In other words, only if its position was already known and you can only see the enemy as long as your team is able to see it and knows its location.

This is actually a pretty reasonable thing to me in their context, since your team was already aware where the player was located and it was also known what they were using. Besides, after you died, you can only ping the general grid location of the map and have to describe it in words. In WoT you can't respawn to do something with the information after all, you take it to the next match. If however the tank in question was out of view range, it was invisible and you do not get to see who shot you and where you were located.

Once you're out and stop looking at the enemy, the cam rests on your corpse in third person. In WoT, since your unit is now out of the match and can't do anything else, you can switch to the views of allied players in order to be a second pair of eyes for them, or use your corpse to scout from. Much like the post-death cam in PS, but with actual control by the player.

In a PS context, this would mean that both cloaked units and units not on radar or spotted would not be zoomed in on, but others would for as long as they would be detected by players on your empire.

No post-death- or killcam
There's also the option to not have a cam at all. Of course you wouldn't know if a medic is coming, nor be able to receive or pass any other up-to-date information.

One consequence this leads to players having to guess more about what happened. In itself shouldn't be a problem, but the more players guess the more they are inclined to yell at the enemy for cheating.

Especially children, teens and immature adults in free to play games... Consider that as well.


There are probably some other hybrids possible as well and they all relay different amounts and types of information. I'd like to know what they have planned so far, for now we can only share what info we think is reasonable and what isn't. I heard the suggestion before that you would get an implant to blurr the killcam, though I don't really see the point: enough info can be gotten from that. Also, I don't really think a lot of people would find value in having to give up an important implant slot for such a thing.

Again, could see how cloakers and snipers would almost feel forced to get that implant though.

[Hmr85]

See, I want the immersion effect and a tad of realism. yes, I do realize this is a sci-fi game. But with that said in all fairness to the sniper/whoever just shot me. I do not think I need to know where their position is.

I know whats coming next "Well Higby said there was an implant or w/e they could use that would hide their position so it did not show them on killcam. Sort of like a Jammer". I am aware of that but how do we know the other implants are not gonna be better? Why should I have to weigh the possibility of sacrificing reduced COF or faster reloading against a jammer just to hide my killcam so other players cannot find my location. Its kind of crap imo.

So no to killcams.

[Shogun]

no killcam. leave it as it was in ps1.

it served the purpose to decide if you would respawn or if there is any chance for a medic coming to heal you.

and if i get a killcam showing me how much effort someone put into a shot that killed me, it will just make me rage to see that purple noobs nonaimed accidentally AoE lasher shot got me killed. there is enough teabagging already. voicemakros are already confirmed, so there really is no need to put in another teabagging instance.

oh and when the killcam get´s binned and frees dev ressources, please use those for vehicle enter animations! then you hit 2 flys with one boltdriver. because both changes would recreate some of the massive immersion that i fear to vanish from planetside.

[CutterJohn]

Showing who killed you last with what kind of shot.
Basically this is a kill replay. Games like CoD use this feature. What you can learn from it is what you did wrong and what the killer saw, from which you can derive where he was located. You also get an idea of the weapon used and effort put into the shot and whatever else is seen on screen.

As these replays are typically a set amount of seconds, you get a good idea of what the player was doing prior to killing you. You basically gain more information if an engagement was shorter than killcam time than if it was long as you probably returned fire or took cover in between, making the killcam spend more time focused on the engagement with you rather than other things.

Showing what you did before you died
Rather than showing you what the enemy did, it is a recording of your death from a point of view close to you. It could be a third person view, it could be a rotating or rotatable cam. If it is rotating, you can make out some more details than from a fixed point of view. You can use this to analyse the situation a bit more indirectly to derive similar information as most of the above. It wouldn't always quite show you what the opponent did or does and is therefore more an in between of the CoD killcam and PS deathcam, as it can give you situational awareness you did not have during your death.

It's actually a bit like FIFA and other sportsgame goal replays. Of course the level of interactivity can be changed to even have control over it.

I like these two. They do not show what happened after you died. They just show you what you did wrong, from both your perspective as well as the enemies, and as such would be a very valuable training aid.

"Well shit.. He could see me the entire time! No wonder he got me!"

[Coreldan]

Dont think the killcam and vehicle animations would be anywhere near comparable amount of work :D

[Vancha]

Unless this was implemented Planetside-style (which was more of a "post-death cam"), I'm having trouble thinking of how this could be done without revealing the position of snipers/cloakers.

This (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36657) is what I'd support, for people who wanted to know how they were killed and where from.

Edit:
I like these two. They do not show what happened after you died. They just show you what you did wrong, from both your perspective as well as the enemies, and as such would be a very valuable training aid.

"Well shit.. He could see me the entire time! No wonder he got me!"
How does that not reveal the location of snipers? They either show you the perspective of the sniper (oh hey, he's behind enemy lines!), or allow you to concentrate on hit indicators and the tracer (all that effort to make sure I shot him in the back and he sees where the bullet came from anyway).

[CutterJohn]

Unless this was implemented Planetside-style (which was more of a "post-death cam"), I'm having trouble thinking of how this could be done without revealing the position of snipers/cloakers.

Why would it matter? They are cloaked. They can move. Meaning they are no longer where you saw them. If you have buddies around they already have a really good idea where they were. If you don't have buddies around, then by the time you respawn they will be elsewhere and in no danger.

[Vancha]

Why would it matter? They are cloaked. They can move. Meaning they are no longer where you saw them. If you have buddies around they already have a really good idea where they were. If you don't have buddies around, then by the time you respawn they will be elsewhere and in no danger.
In Planetside, I mainly tree sniped or tried to flank the enemy. Them knowing simply which side of them I was on could well have ruined my day.

Now granted, PS2 terrain looks to be on a bigger scale, but if I've just spent a load of time scaling a mountain undetected and sniping people who aren't looking in my direction, the one thing I don't want them to do is figure out they're being shot from above and to their left instead of from the direction of the enemy.

[Vancha]

You guys do realize if SOE decides to put it in, they are going to put it in. Regardless if two thousand people wrote in this thread saying "don't add kill cam!"

If they want that feature added, it wil be added. This goes for vehicle animations, instantly boarding the vehicle and other things.

Sucks, but that is just the way it is.
I wonder if that's true...I wonder if nothing in PS2 has been decided based on the community response here?

Things like boarding animations and holstering weapons weren't included for time/performance reasons. It's much harder to implement a load of boarding animations than it is to not implement a kill cam.

[Sabrak]

I actually don't see the point of having a KillCam in Planetside (and so probably in PS2).
If you got killed, it's because you were out of cover, or in the middle of a big battle.

In both case, who killed you doesn't matter, because even if KillCam shows you Mr-X, it could very well have been Ms-Y or Grampa-Z, out in that hundreds VS hundreds battle.

And if you got shot by a lone sniper/shooter in a little skirmish or in a ambush, you're not supposed to know where it came from, for the sake of immersion.

[CutterJohn]

In Planetside, I mainly tree sniped or tried to flank the enemy. Them knowing simply which side of them I was on could well have ruined my day.

Now granted, PS2 terrain looks to be on a bigger scale, but if I've just spent a load of time scaling a mountain undetected and sniping people who aren't looking in my direction, the one thing I don't want them to do is figure out they're being shot from above and to their left instead of from the direction of the enemy.

What about the hit indicators and tracers?

Any time I tried sniping from places other than the zerg front I'd get return fire within a minute. Often much less.

Any time I killed someone as a cloaker they were able to get a shot off at me, or at least turn to face me before they remembered they had their glue gun. Except phoenix pilots, ofc.



I fear you're worrying about giving away information you'll already be giving away.


I wonder if that's true...I wonder if nothing in PS2 has been decided based on the community response here?

Things like boarding animations and holstering weapons weren't included for time/performance reasons. It's much harder to implement a load of boarding animations than it is to not implement a kill cam.

I'm sure they've taken some of it under advisement, and i believe higby really did ask about the possibility of vehicle animations. But this is a tiny, vocally fanatic community. Merely being here means you love PS1. A lot. They don't have to worry about you not playing ps2.. They have to worry about the millions of other people they want playing PS2.

[Vancha]

What about the hit indicators and tracers?

Any time I tried sniping from places other than the zerg front I'd get return fire within a minute. Often much less.
People very rarely seemed to pay attention to hit indicators. The vast majority of people you'd hit and not kill would act like they'd been shot from the direction of the enemy. As for the tracers, you'd make sure as far as possible that people near the target didn't see them (again, people rarely seemed to pay attention to tracers that weren't in their immediate vicinity).

[Knocky]

I do not see what the big deal is.

In PS, you know the direction the sniper shot came from when it hits you. Those around you see the tracer and know where the sniper is.

If snipers piss me off enough, I simply cloak up, grab the wraith, and go own some snipers.

[Vancha]

I do not see what the big deal is.

In PS, you know the direction the sniper shot came from when it hits you. Those around you see the tracer and know where the sniper is.

If snipers piss me off enough, I simply cloak up, grab the wraith, and go own some snipers.
:bang:

[Knocky]

:bang:

Yes I know....however I think we will have to agree to disagree. :D

[Gandhi]

It doesn't upset me nearly as much as the new bog standard killwhoring sniper class plus cloak (though I'm ready to wait until beta to see how it plays out before I get too upset about it).

But I do hope we have the option to turn them off and block them. They're kind of nice in a deathmatch style shooter, but for a persistent world shooter like PS2 I can't see them adding anything useful. And I've heard Higby say that modern gamers expect these kinds of 'bells and whistles', and I think that's true for a CoD clone because how those bells and whistles work are one of the only things that set them apart from each other. Planetside already has something that sets it apart from all other shooters on the market. Nobody is going to look at the massive scale meaningful pvp in a persistent world and then walk away because there's no kill cams. It just won't happen.

[Tikuto]

Depends how kill-cam works in PlanetSide 2.

Personally it could be something as simply as being able to pan around from your position and the screen fades-out from which then you can find your killer and report through Vivox in-game VOIP before passing-out.

[magnatron]

i have to say i don't like the whole kill cam thing, I've never like it in all the games i played that had it. that said higby did have a point about it being rather boring to just watch the map screen while you waited to spawn.

so im thinking we find a way to meet in the middle and keep everyone happy. why not put cams locations on high point on the bases themselves, upon death you get linked to a cam nearest to your location and you get to watch a birds eye view of the battle. this will give away a small amount of intel but not many specifics like just witch tree that sniper was in. and it would be more entertaining to watch than a map screen and it would actually make some small amount of sense.

with all that said i don't feel the kill cam will "kill" the game. and i cant help but to wonder if it will help identify hackers any easier.

[Hmr85]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

What about the hit indicators and tracers?

Any time I tried sniping from places other than the zerg front I'd get return fire within a minute. Often much less.

I fear you're worrying about giving away information you'll already be giving away.

Yeah, because everybodys first reaction to getting shot by a sniper is to immediately turn and look to see where the shot came from.:rolleyes:

99% of all players I have shot have turn and ran for cover. Every good sniper knows you do not shoot them straight up in the direction they are looking. You also do not shoot them in the middle of a group where multiple people can follow your round back to you. You work the outskirts. Its the most effective way of killing and keeping your position concealed.

With that said I have no issue with hit indicators or tracers. I believe they need to stay in the game for balance issues and such. But kill cams are just a no.

No to kill cams.

[BlazingSun]

I don't think it would break or kill the game, but it would definitely add nothing to it and can only make it worse. Better leave it out.

[Shogun]

the difference between hit indicator/tracer rounds and a killcam is, that the systems of ps1 only showed the direction a shot was coming from. a killcam shows the exact absolute position of the enemy.

a sniper could shoot and go back to cover before everybody turns around. a killcam will espose him no matter how good his cover is.
also you forget the z axis. the hit indicator only showed left right back and front.
standing on a roof or cliff and firing down as a cloaker left a lot of players dying without being able to find out the source of the bullets because they were looking the right direction, but too low.
a killcam gives away too exact locations and counters any skillbased hiding.

[2coolforu]

KillCams should not be in game

If you don't know why/how you were killed then there's two explanations

1) You weren't paying attention, you forfeit the right to bitch about being killed
2) The enemy put a lot of effort/sneaking into making it so that you didn't realize they were there

Adding KillCams just kills off stealth/positioning and a whole bunch of other tactics, getting a full detail of who killed you just leads to 'revenging' where people blindly spam nades/run at the place they saw the KillCam at. I see it in Bf3 and CoD 4 all the time.

Hell I like it 'cos it means people come running at me and I get more kills, but Planetside is a game I like to play tactically rather than fast-paced FPS style. I think KillCams ruin all tactical planning, the best part of the game, and give a massive boost to blind zerging, the worst part of the game.

The oft-cited defense is to counter campers, but that doesn't apply to an open game. In COD or BF3 where the maps can be pretty tight then the justification is valid. However in Planetside just jump in a jet or go around that place. If you die to the same camper 4 times in a row and think you need a KillCam, you don't, you're just a muppet to run into a certain death area four times over. Flank him, you should have a general idea of where he is unless you were tossing off or something.

[LZachariah]

For me, if the KillCam is just some unspoken aspect of the game, it's a huge immersion-killer AND it changes Planetside 2's feeling of "this is truly a war" to "this is a televised sport, OOOOOOh, INSTANT REPLAYY! M-M-M-M-M-MULTIKILL!"

If SOE wants to have a KillCam feature in the game, it is my strong, STRONG suggestion that they MAKE IT AN IMPLANT. If a player wants their KillCam, let them choose to slot an Implant that gives it to them; that means 1. They have to spend XP or Resources on GETTING one, 2. The KillCam takes up a slot wherein some other Implant could have been, and 3. Players do not have a KillCam by default.

Also, this could restore (some) immersion by saying that the character has a data feed that hacks the killing-enemy's helmet/weapon systems upon the point of death to transmit information to the faction that just lost a soldier, etc. It would at LEAST be better than "OOOOh, ButtKniferXtreme just sniped SexL0rd69! Let's watch it again in SLOOOOOW MMMMMO! AND THE CROWD GOES WILD!"

So- KillCam being an Implant: what do people think?

~Zachariah

[Shogun]

i have no problem with a killcam implant!

would like a tier system for implants. so that not every combination is possible.

so tier one could be darklight OR killcam OR advanced targeting for example.
tier 2 being surge OR heal OR super sniper scope

the main problem concerning implants in ps1 was, that there were only a few good ones, and so almost everybody had darklight.

[LZachariah]

I definitely agree with that, Shogun. I actually LOVE Implants, because to me, the coolest aspect of Sci-Fi has always been cybernetics. Higby DID say that the system for Implants has been changed for Planetside 2, but that it's "pretty slick" and that he thinks we're going to like it.

And I'm encouraged to hear that you like my KillCam Implant idea; I think that would be the best way to give the BF and MW players what they want, preserve some immersion, and still not have KillCams unbalance what is otherwise a very organic, real war.

Other people? Thoughts?

~Zachariah

[Gortha]

My thoughts echo that of many ppl who've already posted. We don't know the specifics of its implementation. But I most likely won't like it - I just don't know yet to what extent...

Generally-speaking I'm not a fan of giving ppl free intel like that without having to put some efforts towards achieving it. IMO the location of enemies shouldn't just be handed to you.

If you want to know the location of the person who killed you and you didn't see or pay attention to the hit location indicators when you were getting shot, the sound of the enemy's weapon getting fired, or the tracers whizzing by you, then you should have to go back to the general area where you got killed and look for the guy.

This especially important for anybody who works away from the meat grinder. Whether you're sniping on the edges of the zerg, backhacking and otherwise causing disruption behind enemy lines, or cleaning up your own back yard, you will often run into situations where there are only a handful of players around, and knowing the location of your killer could make the difference in a mission's success or failure. Even in PS2 where the number of players will presumably be in the thousands.

This!

You described several sitations very good, where a Kill-Cam Intel can make a difference.

Kill Cam "feature" only benefits lazy players,
it´s unnecessary help for stupid ones,
does not help players to evolve, get better.
It´s the "arcarde"-way more and more young players know, from simple games, from console games. One of the features which takes away effort from the player, the players brain.

It´s the console-way.
It´s just noobish.

No Offense! :evildrop:

[Vancha]

Other people? Thoughts?
I could get behind that. I'm imagining the implant detects the angle of the killing bullet when it entered the flesh and upon death, you get a "bullet-eye-view" that starts at the moment of impact and then "rewinds" it's journey back into the barrel of the gun that fired it (in bullet time, naturally. ;))

[Zhane]

It's mind blowing to me that people are this worked up over something so minor.

It really doesn't matter either way.

[LZachariah]

Yes, exactly, Vancha! The KillCam being an Implant could give SOE tons of room to weave this game-feature back into the lore, and allow it to add immersion. Should we like, submit this to the Devs?

~Zachariah

[LZachariah]

It's mind blowing to me that people are this worked up over something so minor.

It really doesn't matter either way.

Well, if it doesn't matter, and it's very minor, then you certainly won't spend any time involved in this discussion, so go save your valuable time and read some other thread :-) We will continue talking about it.

Bye bye :D

~Zachariah

[Rbstr]

Meh, I don't care much either way.
I mostly find it interesting to watch what the guy is doing...I rarely ever simply do not know where I got shot from.
At least, I think the camera, when you die, should look from your position to the position the killing shot was fired from. Doesn't need to zoom or anything.

[EVILoHOMER]

I like the idea because it shows how you died and feels satisfying and you can also get a nice picture like in TF2.

My only problem comes with Squad spawning, I think that will have a bigger impact on the game. I just hope you wont be able to spawn on your squad mates in enemy territory or it'll become too easy to get around.

[Vancha]

It's mind blowing to me that people are this worked up over something so minor.

It really doesn't matter either way.
Did you not read the thread or something? Typical implementations of killcams will have a significant impact on one of the major roles in the game. Now maybe you think snipers should have to move after every kill and that's fair enough, but to say it'll be the same either way? No. It will change how people play.

[Gortha]

no killcam. leave it as it was in ps1.

it served the purpose to decide if you would respawn or if there is any chance for a medic coming to heal you.

and if i get a killcam showing me how much effort someone put into a shot that killed me, it will just make me rage to see that purple noobs nonaimed accidentally AoE lasher shot got me killed. there is enough teabagging already. voicemakros are already confirmed, so there really is no need to put in another teabagging instance.

oh and when the killcam get´s binned and frees dev ressources, please use those for vehicle enter animations! then you hit 2 flys with one boltdriver. because both changes would recreate some of the massive immersion that i fear to vanish from planetside.

Ohh yes, please, use the free ressources for entering- and exiting-animations!

[Vancha]

Yes, exactly, Vancha! The KillCam being an Implant could give SOE tons of room to weave this game-feature back into the lore, and allow it to add immersion. Should we like, submit this to the Devs?
Sure. I'm all for retaining as much immersion as possible when it seems to be such a low priority on the devs' radar.

[LZachariah]

Well, I wouldn't say that immersion is low on the Devs list of priorities, after all, they're submitting a LOT of text and backstory from multiple points of view, they made the ambiguous "common pool" weapons now come from Nanite Systems, to secure a place in the story for where that technology comes from, etc. I think they want more immersion; that's why I'm actually hopeful that they would consider this idea. That, and I do believe that if everyone had a killcam for free and by default, it WOULD be unbalancing. Especially in this UNIQUELY-real game, wherein a talented Sniper could hold himself or herself up in a tree and literally half an hour and score kills, IF they were talented enough.

One thing to consider is, for a game like MW, the matches can't be longer than like, 10 minutes or something, so learning a person's location is ultimately less important, because there's no real room for long-term plans and tactics. However, in Planetside 2, the ONLY game that closely-resembles ACTUAL WARFARE, positioning and patience are vital.

~Zachariah

[EVILoHOMER]

I think there comes a point when SOE has to stop listening to the community and just do what they feel is right. They know the game better than us as they're developing it and we're only speculating.

I've played lots of MMOs in the past where players moaning on the forums have ruined the game, though I've played lots the developer has ruined them too. Star Wars Galaxies is a great example of both, the game was in the shitter long before the CU and NGE because of the forums. SOE listened to the players and just kept dumbing the game down slowly as people moaned it was too hard. The same thing happened to WoW to where Blizzard now tries to appeal to everyone and the game is a mess and it's happening to SWTOR.

So I'd rather SOE has their own plan and goals for the game rather than the player base. Just as long as they know what to listen to in the future, ignore players wanting changes for personal games like buffs and nerfs. Obviously don't put BFRs in the game if they go on test server and prove themselves to be broken lol.

[Zhane]

I think there comes a point when SOE has to stop listening to the community and just do what they feel is right. They know the game better than us as they're developing it and we're only speculating.

I've played lots of MMOs in the past where players moaning on the forums have ruined the game, though I've played lots the developer has ruined them too. Star Wars Galaxies is a great example of both, the game was in the shitter long before the CU and NGE because of the forums. SOE listened to the players and just kept dumbing the game down slowly as people moaned it was too hard. The same thing happened to WoW to where Blizzard now tries to appeal to everyone and the game is a mess and it's happening to SWTOR.

So I'd rather SOE has their own plan and goals for the game rather than the player base. Just as long as they know what to listen to in the future, ignore players wanting changes for personal games like buffs and nerfs. Obviously don't put BFRs in the game if they go on test server and prove themselves to be broken lol.

More sense than anything else in this thread. While community feedback can be important, we're not game designers, and while you may know what you do or don't want, you do not and can not know what's best for the game. Let them do their jobs and make us a great game.

Armchair game designers = #1 pet peeve of mine

[Lonehunter]

If it's just a camera shot of the person who killed you I don't see it game breaking. An actual rewind of how you died like in Call of Duty would be horrible though.

I don't think either one really belongs in PS, it doesn't fit with the rest of the game. We should know where that sniper bullet came from, or that Tank shell, or who's boomer that was.

[LZachariah]

Sure, in the end, i do NOT want the players to have more power than the Devs themselves, because it would ultimately be impossible to get everyone to agree on everything. I will still love Planetside 2 even if there are default, free KilCams for everyone (and actually, KillCams are one of my biggest worries about this game, and even then, it's pretty minor in comparison to everything I'm looking forward to).

~Zachariah

[Aurmanite]

I think there comes a point when SOE has to stop listening to the community and just do what they feel is right. They know the game better than us as they're developing it and we're only speculating.

I've played lots of MMOs in the past where players moaning on the forums have ruined the game, though I've played lots the developer has ruined them too. Star Wars Galaxies is a great example of both, the game was in the shitter long before the CU and NGE because of the forums. SOE listened to the players and just kept dumbing the game down slowly as people moaned it was too hard. The same thing happened to WoW to where Blizzard now tries to appeal to everyone and the game is a mess and it's happening to SWTOR.

So I'd rather SOE has their own plan and goals for the game rather than the player base. Just as long as they know what to listen to in the future, ignore players wanting changes for personal games like buffs and nerfs. Obviously don't put BFRs in the game if they go on test server and prove themselves to be broken lol.

Hell yes. Forum posters are not game experts. Just because someone has an opinion doesn't mean its worth anything.

[Gortha]

More sense than anything else in this thread. While community feedback can be important, we're not game designers, and while you may know what you do or don't want, you do not and can not know what's best for the game. Let them do their jobs and make us a great game.

Armchair game designers = #1 pet peeve of mine

We won´t become friends...

It seems like u are not able to look beyond the rim of your teacup.

A Kill-Cam, doesn´t matter how it´s implemented will change the way players will play. It´s free intel. There are enough examples written in this thread which explain the problems and the difference to no KillCam.

Regards
Gortha

[Snowfake]

I would rather do without it. I dont think it will make a big difference to the game, since 95% of the time we know where we got killed from. Guess it gives me something to watch while I wait to spawn :/
Maybe there can be a cert for cloakers/ snipers so when they kill someone there position is not given away... though would be annouying having to waste a cert.

[Shogun]

it´s just a wrong way to implement nifty "modern shooter stuff" just because other shooters have it, too.

killcams in an arena type or any arcade game are fine. in a warfare simulator like ps2 they just make no sense as long as they are not implemented into the lore like an implant that uses up a spot the soldier could use with other stuff.

i think people are fighting so hard for little things like that, because we fear the loss of immersion. it´s not just the little thing called killcam, it´s a lot of other things that sum up.
to mention just a few things that cut off immersion we know about so far:
killcams for no reason
spawning on squadleader
no holstered weapons
no vehicle enter animations
no possibility to scare off every enemy from a continent because of perm.footholds
and so on.
some of those things are necessary, like holstered weapons had to be sacrificed to get more players on the screen. so the immersion-lovers fight for every little part that is unnecessary or even senseless like killcams.

[Miir]

They don't add anything to the game so I say no go.

But then again... what else do you have to do while you wait for your spawn timer to run down.

[Warborn]

This game which I have never played has been KILLED DEAD by this here feature, I tell ya.

I am going to withhold judgment on kill cams until I play it. I do not really think it would "kill the game" either way though. It's just a kill cam.

[Vancha]

Guys, it's a play on words. He doesn't literally mean it'll cause the death of Planetside 2.

[Hermes]

No problem for me. Didn't even cross my radar (killcam?) as something to worry about. :)

Good points made about immersion - if that's how you see it. Though I doubt it will bother me much, think I might even enjoy it. I would definitely like to see an implant/upgrade that can be equipped to block the killcam with static if you are playing a stealth style.

Think it might even be a neat distinctive trait for the stealth player in that respect - you suddenly die and your armour's black box is filled with static.. there's an elite killer on the loose targeting your squad :D

[Shogun]

@miir
that´s another point...

in ps1 there would have been enough to do while waiting on the spawntimer.
problem was just, it was all locked.
if i had been able to do the things on the map i could do while being alive, like setting waypoints, zooming around, check for CE, i would have been a happy corpse ;-)

instead of a killcam give the corpses some choices. check the map, check leaderboards or merit progression. just don´t lock them to a countdown that shuts off everything else.

[Vancha]

Hell yes. Forum posters are not game experts.
Quite true. Gamers however, often are game experts. Yes, there's plenty of people who's opinions should probably be ignored, but to dismiss them all would be folly.

[Figment]

More sense than anything else in this thread. While community feedback can be important, we're not game designers, and while you may know what you do or don't want, you do not and can not know what's best for the game. Let them do their jobs and make us a great game.

Armchair game designers = #1 pet peeve of mine

You may not be a designer, don't speak for others. Quality of posts will always differ, but discussions and experience sharing can provide new insights to developers. If there are things or ideas they never thought of before, they can consider it or use it as inspiration, testrun scenarios, see if it matters or simply dismiss it if they are confident their design is robust enough.


The only stupid thing is never to voice your opinions, concerns and ideas. Even if some are ridiculous. Will know soon enough.

[Tehroth]

Yeah I don't like a cam showing you the exact position where you are at. I don't mind the game telling you who killed you. Leave the kill cam to Fps games like CoD or BF3

[MpS]

Honestly I'm really surprised they are putting this in the game, frankly I would really, really hate to see them put this into the game. It does take away from the immersion and what about things like hidden snipers? The second a sniper kills somebody they will have to move now rather than keeping their nice secret spot. In all honesty I can't decide if this is game breaking for me or not, I still despise the idea of this and would like to see it removed.

[Vancha]

That would be an awesome way to gain intel on a tower or forward base, feed one of your guys to a sniper and let him explain the layout of what they have and possible weak spots through teamspeak :)
Hah. If people were killing themselves on purpose for this, I think that'd say it all design-wise.

[Raymac]

oh hey, another killcam thread.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but I think killcams can be a helpful inclusion. The COD style can help show you why you got killed and doesn't really give away much information about the killer.

Also, I'm not really seeing the "it breaks immersion" argument. The PS1 rotating view of the body "broke immersion" and it was never a major complaint. Frankly, I think anything during the respawn time other than a blank screen or a tunnel of light where you see your dead relatives would "break immersion". So if you can see what killed you, like the stats of your killer, or a replay of your death, or a map of the battlefield, or leaderboards, I think all those would be better than watching a timer bar tick down.

[Hmr85]

oh hey, another killcam thread.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but I think killcams can be a helpful inclusion. The COD style can help show you why you got killed and doesn't really give away much information about the killer.

Also, I'm not really seeing the "it breaks immersion" argument. The PS1 rotating view of the body "broke immersion" and it was never a major complaint. Frankly, I think anything during the respawn time other than a blank screen or a tunnel of light where you see your dead relatives would "break immersion". So if you can see what killed you, like the stats of your killer, or a replay of your death, or a map of the battlefield, or leaderboards, I think all those would be better than watching a timer bar tick down.

I don't have a problem with any of that myself. If they keep it like PS1 cool. The problem I have is if the killcam zooms across to show the guy who killed you. I feel its giving away his position that you probably wouldn't of known about otherwise. I think this is a big no. So while the camera is sitting there showing him sitting in this tree or next to this rock. I know the first thing I'm gonna do when I come out of re spawn is immediately look for terrain similar to where he is at. I just feel it should not be in there. Just my opinion. So I have to say NO to kill cams.

[BorisBlade]

Any "wait & see" option ?

while i would agree about most things, there is nothin to wait and see about concerning this. It does exactly what people dont like, and most people dont want it. It has no place in a game like this with tactical aspects. Its fine for CoD which is just a braindead zerg game, you rush in you shoot then you die, then rush, shoot, die, again and again and again. There is no strategy other than very very minor movement. Giving away location for free is BS, and quite often you also give away other info such as whats around you or what you can see etc when you kill someone by letting them see the kill cam.

At very least it should be able to be disabled from the senders end and from the receiving end. Either both on/off together or letting you choose which ones are available. At bare minimum you must be able to disable your transmissions of kill shots so you dont screw yourself over when you kill someone.

Kill cams are are not just bad tactically, they are also very juvenile and just promote anger and frustration. You kill em, thats enough, move on. If you really feel the need to be an asshat go use a lame emote or tbag em or whatever, ill have clicked out too fast to even see or hear your idiocy. You dont exactly get happy players when you just rub it in their face with the forced kill cam too. (and no it doesnt help them learn, thats a smokescreen asshats came up with.)

[Zhane]

We won´t become friends...

It seems like u are not able to look beyond the rim of your teacup.

A Kill-Cam, doesn´t matter how it´s implemented will change the way players will play. It´s free intel. There are enough examples written in this thread which explain the problems and the difference to no KillCam.

Regards
Gortha

Hm. Sad that you couldn't become friends with someone who disagrees with you.

[Raymac]

I don't have a problem with any of that myself. If they keep it like PS1 cool. The problem I have is if the killcam zooms across to show the guy who killed you. I feel its giving away his position that you probably wouldn't of known about otherwise. I think this is a big no. So while the camera is sitting there showing him sitting in this tree or next to this rock. I know the first thing I'm gonna do when I come out of re spawn is immediately look for terrain similar to where he is at. I just feel it should not be in there. Just my opinion. So I have to say NO to kill cams.

Yeah, this argument hold much more water than the "breaks immersion" one. I can definitely see what you are saying, especially since I'm the type of player who likes to get revenge on the prick that killed me. I try to do it almost all the time in PS1, but that's exactly why I don't see it being a major problem.

Most of the time when I try to go for the revenge kill in PS1, the immediate battlefield condition changes enough to essentially distract me from that revenge. Sometimes it's a more immediate threat, or the player that killed me has moved or been killed already, or sometimes I need to leave that battle altogether for a rapid response somewhere else.

The point is, in an arena shooter, going after a specific player in a specific spot is easier because you're only dealing with 8-16 enemies. In PS where yuo have over 100 if not much more, that fundamentally changes that dynamic.

[Metalsheep]

I don't like the idea of Kill-cams. They don't really have much place in Planetside, the death-cam in PS1 was good. Usually watching a Kill-cam only makes me rage more over crappy deaths. I would rather see dev time put towards something that adds more immersion to the game.
Like Holstering and Vehicle Animations.

[Graywolves]

http://i.imgur.com/CjetR.gif


How I feel about killcams.

[Vancha]

http://i.imgur.com/CjetR.gif


How I feel about killcams.
You want to rub your breasts on them?

[Vancha]

Kill cams could help in the exposure of hackers though ;) and they will exist.
That's why I linked the thread about replays before. All of the hacker-catching benefits without any of the catches of killcams.

[Metalsheep]

The only way killcams help with anti hacking is if you get their point of view.. and then it's still guess work. If they were 'looking' at you through the wall, how do you know you were't up on radar or not. If there is locational damage and they waxed your head a good three times, how do you know if this is skill or auto aim.



In Planetside 1 the Killspam was a pretty good indicator of a hacker. When 10-20 people start dieing at once to the same guy/MAX unit. Thats a good sign.

You dont need killcams to spot hackers, you just need GMs and Detection software. I don't know if this is true or not, but i heard that GMs in Planetside could look through the view of other players if they wanted to, so they would do this to reported/suspected hackers to determine if they were hacking or not.

[Hamma]

I don't like the idea of killcams but I will wait to see what it plays like.

It would be cool if you could disable killcams of yourself in the options.. course then everyone would have that toggled off. :lol:

[WaryWizard]

How does a kill cam help people learn? Seriously. I cannot fathom a SINGLE instance in which it helps. Someone please tell me how a kill cam is useful in ANY game type other than a 15 min 16vs16 match. I'll try and think of some right now

I am walking down a hallway. There is a door that leads to a somewhat open alleyway. I have a choice of going left or right. I look both ways, and it all seems clear. I decide to go left. After about a second I die. The kill cam shows an enemy walking down an alleyway and turning right. He sees me with my back facing him, and shoots. What did I learn? I should have gone right instead?

I am outside. There are bushes and trees. I am looking around for enemies as I advance. Bullets fly from a bush and I die. The kill cam shows an enemy hiding in a bush that clearly saw me and killed me. What did I learn? Should I shoot every bush I come across now?

I see an enemy running in my direction. I go to shoot, but he makes a sudden movement to the right. My bullet misses by inches, and he opens fire. My gun has a lower rate of fire, and I die. What did I learn? Don't miss?

What have I ever learned from a kill cam that has made me better? Nothing. I knew everything that the kill cam shows. I didn't notice him hiding. I wasn't looking in his direction. I have bad aim. What, is, there, to, learn?

[Gonefshn]

I don't like the idea of killcams but I will wait to see what it plays like.

It would be cool if you could disable killcams of yourself in the options.. course then everyone would have that toggled off. :lol:

That would be a perfectly fine option. Being able to disable it means no one complains about it revealing locations or tactics. And I disagree If I was running around cloaking with a knife I would turn it on! :p

[Tool]

I voted no simply because it really only offers one noticeable benefit, which is a chance to see the different customization options on other players. Which I feel isnt enough of a benefit to warrant its implementation.

[arclegger]

With a game that has as many players as Planetside 2 will.

The odds of you killing someone and the following happens:
They see your killcam/position
They wait to respawn (most likely not exactly at the same spot they died)
They find you (how this happens again is beyond me, enough time has passed that I guarantee you're not in the same position anymore where the player first saw you on the killcam)
That same person kills you because they saw your killcam.

All that happens before you die yourself, or they die again.

The server pop must be incredibly low.

Also, if I die and I see a killcam of 1 guy but the reason I died is because it was a huge 20v20 infantry standoff I don't see how the killcam ruins the game?

For the snipers, I love kill cams if I'm a sniper. I can kill a guy, then go and find a new spot. That guy sees my kill cam and tries to find me at the same spot and I kill him again because I moved 20 yards. Rinse Repeat.

In My Opinion the origin of the killcam into fps games was to get rid of campers (nobody liked campers in the old fps days). Now designers use it to help them flesh out hackers, help new players, and give insight to an experienced player as to why he died. It's not there to break immersion and mess up the guy who's getting the kills.

For the record I'm not in charge of what happens when it comes to killcam, I'm just throwing in my perspective as a player/lover of fps games. I'm for the killcam, but that's just me.

[Raymac]

How does a kill cam help people learn? Seriously. I cannot fathom a SINGLE instance in which it helps. Someone please tell me how a kill cam is useful in ANY game type other than a 15 min 16vs16 match.

OK, I'll tell you how they have helped me personally.
1) They taught me how to aim better. At first I wasn't quite sure how much I would need to lead a target, especially when sniping. Watching how someone was aiming when they killed me helped me zero in my own aiming.

2) I would learn where certain threats were in times that I thought I was behind cover. Granted this is less useful in a game like Planetside where the maps are sooo much larger, however it will still be a useful tool considering the amount of time people can spend in the game. If you are in the same area more than once, you will benefit from learning something the last time you were there.

3) Avoid frustration. If you see that you got killed by a shot that was just dumb luck because the killer was actually aiming at somebody else and you got caught in the crossfire, you can learn that you just got unlucky and shit happens.

Those are just off the top of my head.

[waldizzo]

I'm hoping the kill cam is not like BFBC2 or BF3's. Seeing that guys emotionless but yet smug face bothers me.

[Tasorin]

Of course myself and the majority of the playerbase do not want it, but since the COD/BF crowd do the team is going to put it in anyway. Not going to argue about it anymore myself.

This is why you don't listen to most the crying a community does.

Kill Cam is bad, M'kay.

That is all.

[Hmr85]

For the snipers, I love kill cams if I'm a sniper. I can kill a guy, then go and find a new spot. That guy sees my kill cam and tries to find me at the same spot and I kill him again because I moved 20 yards. Rinse Repeat.

In My Opinion the origin of the killcam into fps games was to get rid of campers (nobody liked campers in the old fps days). Now designers use it to help them flesh out hackers, help new players, and give insight to an experienced player as to why he died. It's not there to break immersion and mess up the guy who's getting the kills.


I got a couple points I want to throw out there. This might be pretty long.

I see what your say sniper wise. That's a pretty good strategy. But hear me out here. I can count on more than one hand numerous times back in the glory days of PS1 when I myself was able to say alive for more than 15 or 20 minutes in 100+ battles raging on Cyssor. With that said that's more than enough time for a player to respawn numerous times and get back out there to try and find me. Its very easy to stay alive when your 600+ yards out up on some hill over looking the entire battle.

What you need to remember is not all players are gonna go running out into the middle of the field looking for you when they can sit back up on a wall or w/e in the middle of a siege and focus in on that spot they just saw you at for their revenge kill. I found my self that kill cams piss people off and makes them more likely to want to come after ya.

My next thing. This is not a 32 vs 32 game. Camping is an extremely effective strategy in PS. Its one of the only games where its really rewarded. Where not talking CS or UT here where its Death Match and people are freaking out because Barnster1337 managed to find the one spot on the level where everybody has to come straight at him. Its can be hard to move around when you have 100+ other players mowing each other down around you. A lot of snipers in PS1 hardly moved at all. Go back and play and pay attention to what they did. If the rare chance they did stop to relocate they never moved more than 20 yards.

My point in this being if I Shot Raymac, sorry bud from behind 100 yards off and he did not see my round inc. He now knows where to look just by watching the killcam. Its kinda crap imo. So my AO has just been compromised.

The one point you put on there and the only point that I could see it helping with is for hackers. I agree it is very effective at helping you identify hackers pretty quickly.
As for the experience on why they died. They can look up at the chat box / combat chat and see where it says HMR85 (Sniper Rifle) Raymac and go oh I got shot by a sniper. That should tell them going forward maybe they should keep their head down next time they are in that vicinity.
Sorry for the long winded response.

[Aurmanite]

With a game that has as many players as Planetside 2 will.

The odds of you killing someone and the following happens:
They see your killcam/position
They wait to respawn (most likely not exactly at the same spot they died)
They find you (how this happens again is beyond me, enough time has passed that I guarantee you're not in the same position anymore where the player first saw you on the killcam)
That same person kills you because they saw your killcam.

All that happens before you die yourself, or they die again.

The server pop must be incredibly low.

Also, if I die and I see a killcam of 1 guy but the reason I died is because it was a huge 20v20 infantry standoff I don't see how the killcam ruins the game?

For the snipers, I love kill cams if I'm a sniper. I can kill a guy, then go and find a new spot. That guy sees my kill cam and tries to find me at the same spot and I kill him again because I moved 20 yards. Rinse Repeat.

In My Opinion the origin of the killcam into fps games was to get rid of campers (nobody liked campers in the old fps days). Now designers use it to help them flesh out hackers, help new players, and give insight to an experienced player as to why he died. It's not there to break immersion and mess up the guy who's getting the kills.

For the record I'm not in charge of what happens when it comes to killcam, I'm just throwing in my perspective as a player/lover of fps games. I'm for the killcam, but that's just me.

I can dig it.

The reaction to the kill cam in this thread is a little overblown. The whole issue has become somewhat sensationalized.

Breaking immersion in an FPS is literally an argument against something...somehow. :blowup:

[Raymac]

My point in this being if I Shot Raymac, sorry bud from behind 100 yards off and he did not see my round inc. He now knows where to look just by watching the killcam. Its kinda crap imo. So my AO has just been compromised.


Oh yeah, pick on the skinny kid. ;)

But seriously, in PS1, it would take more than 1 shot so I would at least know the general direction of where the shot came from. It really doesn't take much practice from there to trace back and find where the shooter most likely is hiding. And even if I am hell bent on revenge (which I would be on you especially lol) the snipers are just back from the front lines so you have tons of regular infantry between us. I may be pretty good, but if I can mow my way through 20 guys just to get to you, I deserve to kill you.

While camping does work better in Planetside, staying in 1 spot is still fairly risky and displacing is usually required.

[WaryWizard]

My next thing. This is not a 32 vs 32 game. Camping is an extremely effective strategy in PS. Its one of the only games where its really rewarded. Where not talking CS or UT here where its Death Match and people are freaking out because Barnster1337 managed to find the one spot on the level where everybody has to come straight at him. Its can be hard to move around when you have 100+ other players mowing each other down around you. A lot of snipers in PS1 hardly moved at all.
http://s3.roosterteeth.com/assets/store/product_1248577812.jpg

If you spend a lot of time to get a good vantage point. The first kill should not give you away. What should give you away is someone following your tracer, and if your good you can keep that from happening with good timing.

[Graywolves]

With a game that has as many players as Planetside 2 will.

The odds of you killing someone and the following happens:
They see your killcam/position
They wait to respawn (most likely not exactly at the same spot they died)
They find you (how this happens again is beyond me, enough time has passed that I guarantee you're not in the same position anymore where the player first saw you on the killcam)
That same person kills you because they saw your killcam.

All that happens before you die yourself, or they die again.

The server pop must be incredibly low.

Also, if I die and I see a killcam of 1 guy but the reason I died is because it was a huge 20v20 infantry standoff I don't see how the killcam ruins the game?

For the snipers, I love kill cams if I'm a sniper. I can kill a guy, then go and find a new spot. That guy sees my kill cam and tries to find me at the same spot and I kill him again because I moved 20 yards. Rinse Repeat.

In My Opinion the origin of the killcam into fps games was to get rid of campers (nobody liked campers in the old fps days). Now designers use it to help them flesh out hackers, help new players, and give insight to an experienced player as to why he died. It's not there to break immersion and mess up the guy who's getting the kills.

For the record I'm not in charge of what happens when it comes to killcam, I'm just throwing in my perspective as a player/lover of fps games. I'm for the killcam, but that's just me.


Camping isn't a big deal in Planetside. In the original it only got frustrating with 3rd person wall hugging, otherwise it was fine.

And the issue isn't the person that spotted you coming back to kill you. It's him having free intel and telling everyone on his side what he saw when he was in killcam.

[General M]

killcam would be bad, stick with the body cam.

[ThGlump]

The odds of you killing someone and the following happens:
They see your killcam/position
They wait to respawn (most likely not exactly at the same spot they died)
They find you (how this happens again is beyond me, enough time has passed that I guarantee you're not in the same position anymore where the player first saw you on the killcam)


This isnt 1vs1. This will happen:

You kill me, i see killcam/position.
Im telling squad where you are - they start shooting at you.
Im ressed by squad, and go kill you.

In that short time you have very little time to relocate, especially when others shoot at you to suppress you in cover.

[VioletZero]

Hating something because it was in Call of Duty

Mounds of essay long responses.

This forum can be quite predictable. :)

That said, I like Killcam. It's a fantastic tool for getting better at the game and it encourages people to move around. Definitely not a bad thing.

[IceyCold]

Although I am against Killcams,; they can serve an extremely valuable purpose for another huge issue that people have been screaming about on these boards:

Hackers

If you have a killcam that shows the moment you were killed and notice that they weren't even aiming at you, or watching you through a wall, or suddenly turned to shoot you while cloaked with no visible clue to give you away; then chances are they are doing something.

That all said, I would rather not have them. Although Higby has said in either a video or a post that they are looking into an implant players can get that prevents you from watching a killcam on them, or something along those lines. They DO seem to understand that for cloakers and snipers that Killcams are an issue.

[VioletZero]

I remember that the reason they're not putting in Bombers or Artillery at the start was because it is not fun to just get killed out of nowhere with no way to defend yourself. And as much as I love Artillery and Bombers, that's a sentiment I agree with. And the same logic applies to cloaking snipers.

Killcam could essentially be the balancing factor for cloaking snipers. So that they can't just sit on a mountain somewhere capping people. Now they have to move around between kills to be as unpredictable as possible.

[Gortha]

I don't like the idea of killcams but I will wait to see what it plays like.

It would be cool if you could disable killcams of yourself in the options.. course then everyone would have that toggled off. :lol:

haha, Hamma :D

Why then put time into developing it!? :lol:

[Graywolves]

No way of dieing is a fun way.



The problem with killcams is the intelligence of the battlefield it gives to someone. It's like going "oh you died, lawl. To feel better have a look at where this guy is and everything around him."


I really don't want every dead person to call out in broadcast or local or w.e "There's a sniper at H12 on the hill in a tree! Go kill him!" or "They have a Galaxy tucked away over here, I know because I died 3 grids away from a sniper and saw it in killcam!"

[Gortha]

How does a kill cam help people learn? Seriously. I cannot fathom a SINGLE instance in which it helps. Someone please tell me how a kill cam is useful in ANY game type other than a 15 min 16vs16 match. I'll try and think of some right now

I am walking down a hallway. There is a door that leads to a somewhat open alleyway. I have a choice of going left or right. I look both ways, and it all seems clear. I decide to go left. After about a second I die. The kill cam shows an enemy walking down an alleyway and turning right. He sees me with my back facing him, and shoots. What did I learn? I should have gone right instead?

I am outside. There are bushes and trees. I am looking around for enemies as I advance. Bullets fly from a bush and I die. The kill cam shows an enemy hiding in a bush that clearly saw me and killed me. What did I learn? Should I shoot every bush I come across now?

I see an enemy running in my direction. I go to shoot, but he makes a sudden movement to the right. My bullet misses by inches, and he opens fire. My gun has a lower rate of fire, and I die. What did I learn? Don't miss?

What have I ever learned from a kill cam that has made me better? Nothing. I knew everything that the kill cam shows. I didn't notice him hiding. I wasn't looking in his direction. I have bad aim. What, is, there, to, learn?

Wow, very good @ WaryWizard.

All a KillCam is good for is to benefit stupid, lazy players with intel they wont have without it.
They know your location, eventually there are even more of your mates to see on the kill cam view.
They also know your equip, your armor, your weapons...
Next they tell all this free Intel their Outfit...

That just idiotic.

I can not understand why some guys like KillCams.

What´s the benfit of it, gameplaywise? Where do u learn?

@SOE
Please save us from the Feature! Please! :rant:

:wantbeta::vsrocks:

[VioletZero]

No way of dieing is a fun way.



The problem with killcams is the intelligence of the battlefield it gives to someone. It's like going "oh you died, lawl. To feel better have a look at where this guy is and everything around him."


I really don't want every dead person to call out in broadcast or local or w.e "There's a sniper at H12 on the hill in a tree! Go kill him!" or "They have a Galaxy tucked away over here, I know because I died 3 grids away from a sniper and saw it in killcam!"

Maybe this is just me, but there is such a thing as a good death.

Not just talking about suicide runs either. A good kind of death is one where you can immediately realize the problem or get some more information out of it.

With the way that the battlefield will be constantly changing, the best way to fix that issue is just to turn off in game chat for people who died. Then this won't be nearly as much of an issue.

[Captain1nsaneo]

Before I go into kill cams I want to spare some words for immersion. Cyssor doesn't feel like a map, it feels like a place. Immersion is how a game tricks us to not think about how it isn't like reality. The difference between God Of War 2 and Xenosaga is that I find GoW more immersive because the characters act and talk like humans and stay true to their personalities even in more mundane tasks. It's like an on-stage play. Xenosaga's characters will just as often tell you what they're feeling which is something no human does. (Try imagining Kratos saying "I AM REALLY ANGRY NOW!" it's nonsensical as he expresses himself through actions not words.)

So what does that have to do with Planetside? As I said immersion is the way a game tricks you into believing it. The best way it does this is through your character and by creating and adhering to an internal logic. To me kill cams and spawning with your equipment in hand are both violations of planetside's internal logic of a war. No vehicle entering animations are a violation of the character. What must be sacrificed for gameplay or logistics must be sacrificed but it takes away from the believability and urgency of the game.

tl;dr: Immersion is hard.

Kill cams. I played on BF2 and CoD4 servers that have it off just because it ruins any chance of sniping for longer than 1-2 kills from a single hard to reach vantage point regardless of distance. This makes me quite biased against it but I recognize that it does help in smoothing out the learning curve and exposing hackers. For example, it helped me learn that MW2 was a bad game and has since saved me quite a bit of money. But these are games where the majority of killing happens inside close distance (~40m). So this gave me the idea for a potential fix.

Don't have kill cam past a certain range.

This will take care of your desire for learning/hacker detection and leave snipers alone. I'd also not have remote explosives cause kill cams which follows the internal logic of needing the killer nearby for them to work. Cloakers would also be immune for logical reasons. This could be justified by saying that implants hijack near by enemy's vision on death for a tactical survey.

[Figment]

@Arclegger: look what you did, now you got them all focusing on the blue texts! xD

That there are 500 other people to fight only matters if you are confronted with 500 other people at the same time and have to pick out that particular person. We're however not playing memory and if you only face 5-25 people (which will happen), then such information is a lot more valuable. :)

However, even in a base siege of PS1, if I know a cloaker is around merely through killspam, I'll start a search, people switch on dark light. If someone who died can tell you exactly how this person did this, from which spot, then by the time he tells you over teamspeak, that guy is only a few seconds from that position. Provided he had a chance to move undetected at all.

Teamspeak: "Cloaker, top east base stairs to wall" -> DL and correct angle -> Kill. Instead of "Cloaker, somewhere near east wall" -> DL search bottom and top + surrounding area" -> cloaker has a few seconds more to gain new situational awareness, check if he/she's been spotted and plan an escape.


What I'd personally be more annoyed with though is that people would learn my infil tricks by accidentally seeing them on cam and start expecting them once they know I'm in the killzone. Though a bit rusty, I still quite able to misguide enemies in thinking I went in direction A, while I went to sit in B. Next time they know I might be the one inside, they may not fall for some tricks. That's really something they shouldn't have learned by peaking over my shoulder, but from experience.

I wouldn't want them to know typical safe spots from where I start an approach on them either, because they'd start checking them. And frankly, if they don't do so on their own, they don't deserve to flush me out.


Thing is, I think most people don't want the game to do too much for the player. Intel gathering is one of those things. :)

A non cam related, but computer assistance related annoyance from World of Tanks is the computer doing the scouting for the player. It is killer on flanking moves as strategy when the computer spots you through spotting rules, it puts a big marker over your head and you on radar for their entire enemy team to see. Whether or not someone had actually noticed you yet. You immediately get targeted by the entire enemy team, who usualy instantly hit you as they got computer assisted aim (little personal skill involved). That doesn't encourage players to become better and sharper, quite the opposite.

Computer assistance for players always impacts gameplay somewhat in the sense it makes things easier for someone. That usualy makes that person lazier and more reliant on the pc. The same is true for intel gathering. Hence I'd go with the least intel providing kill cam myself, though I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it would any particular type of cam be used. :)



Btw, I wouldn't mind someone having to give up an implantslot for killcam. I would mind if you would need to give up a slot for killcam obscuring. Personally though I'd prefer the rule: not spotted by player or his buddies: no chance of cam.

[Vancha]

Hating something because it was in Call of Duty

Mounds of essay long responses.

This forum can be quite predictable. :)

That said, I like Killcam. It's a fantastic tool for getting better at the game and it encourages people to move around. Definitely not a bad thing.
I hate to be "that guy", but aren't you the person who hasn't played Planetside?

Sniping in Planetside was good because it wasn't the insta-gib quick-scoping twitch-shooting sniping of CS, CoD etc. It was the patient hunter. It was about getting into the right position, selecting the right targets and waiting for the right time to take the shot.

Now maybe sniping in PS2 will consist of rushing around, getting quick-scope and no-scope headshots at ranges far closer than a sniper should ever be (20 yards?), in which case yeah, killcams probably won't be a problem.

[VioletZero]

One of the best things about killcam is that it does give away the enemy position of the person who killed them. So that they aren't constantly dying to someone on a mountain somewhere.

This keeps the battles changing and forces people to adapt.

It's more fun to be able to retaliate without having to waste time looking for someone on a mountain somewhere just capping people without threat of being spotted.

[Graywolves]

One of the best things about killcam is that it does give away the enemy position of the person who killed them. So that they aren't constantly dying to someone on a mountain somewhere.

This keeps the battles changing and forces people to adapt.

It's more fun to be able to retaliate without having to waste time looking for someone on a mountain somewhere just capping people without threat of being spotted.

It keeps the battle changing in a chaotic fashion as the meta-game evolves instantly.

There is no point in finding a good place to snipe because it will be discovered in your first kill. You can't set an ambush and reap benefits because the first trapped individual can tell everyone all the information they need.


This isn't matchmaking, we're fighting a legit war with logistics and intelligence involved. Killcams oversimplifies this in the sense that it tells players where the enemy is, what they are using, and how.


There are going to be outfits devoted to air combat who will be able to respond immediatley to "I found X over at Y due to killcam" and now that area is destroyed because instead of denying the enemy intelligence from killing them, they've been rewarded it.



People will want to play Planetside 2 for something different. Not a killfest. There is no acheived learning curve assistance from killcams because it's ultimatley situational as far as learning goes.

The meta-game just dissolves into everyone being aware of everything and that just makes it dull and feel like CoD no matter the scale.

[Figment]

Violet, you may not quite get this now if Vancha is right and you have not played PS, but you should realise that sniping is dangerous enough as is. There are more than a few people that might try to kill you and they will bring aircraft or tanks or even a number of buddies if they have to. Typically though, there are infils out and about in the hills to hunt for enemy snipers. We don't need killcams to find them though, but it does speed up the process if you get exact locations.

Also consider that as a cloaker, you are surrounded by 100 to 400 angry, not to mention crazy technophile bastards or perhaps even worse, dirty red scum commie barbarians, or extremely pleasent, freedom loving, civilized capitalists who tote big shotguns.

You don't exactly want to tell them where you are, were, or might be again. You carefully pick of isolated enemies one at a time. You don't want everyone to instantly get told over teamspeak where you are exactly. That they learn you are in the approximate area makes it hard enough to stay alive already as they'll send angry mobs with Dark Light torches after you. Especially if we're not talking hundreds, but potentially a thousand peopls that might be spotting and firing at you.

[Hmr85]

Violet, you may not quite get this now if Vancha is right and you have not played PS, but you should realise that sniping is dangerous enough as is. There are more than a few people that might try to kill you and they will bring aircraft or tanks or even a number of buddies if they have to.

Also consider that as a cloaker, you are surrounded by 100 to 400 angry, technophile bastards or commie barbarians, or extremely pleasent, freedom loving, civilized capitalists who tote big shotguns.

You don't exactly want to tell them where you are, were, or might be again. You carefully pick of isolated enemies one at a time. You don't want everyone to instantly get told over teamspeak where you are exactly. That they learn you are in the approximate area makes it hard enough to stay alive already as they'll send angry mobs with Dark Light torches after you. Especially if we're not talking hundreds, but potentially a thousand peopls that might be spotting and firing at you.

:rofl: :lol: QFT

[Aurmanite]

@Arclegger: look what you did, now you got them all focusing on the blue texts! xD

That there are 500 other people to fight only matters if you are confronted with 500 other people at the same time and have to pick out that particular person. We're however not playing memory and if you only face 5-25 people (which will happen), then such information is a lot more valuable. :)

However, even in a base siege of PS1, if I know a cloaker is around merely through killspam, I'll start a search, people switch on dark light. If someone who died can tell you exactly how this person did this, from which spot, then by the time he tells you over teamspeak, that guy is only a few seconds from that position. Provided he had a chance to move undetected at all.

Teamspeak: "Cloaker, top east base stairs to wall" -> DL and correct angle -> Kill. Instead of "Cloaker, somewhere near east wall" -> DL search bottom and top + surrounding area" -> cloaker has a few seconds more to gain new situational awareness, check if he/she's been spotted and plan an escape.


What I'd personally be more annoyed with though is that people would learn my infil tricks by accidentally seeing them on cam and start expecting them once they know I'm in the killzone. Though a bit rusty, I still quite able to misguide enemies in thinking I went in direction A, while I went to sit in B. Next time they know I might be the one inside, they may not fall for some tricks. That's really something they shouldn't have learned by peaking over my shoulder, but from experience.

I wouldn't want them to know typical safe spots from where I start an approach on them either, because they'd start checking them. And frankly, if they don't do so on their own, they don't deserve to flush me out.


Thing is, I think most people don't want the game to do too much for the player. Intel gathering is one of those things. :)

A non cam related, but computer assistance related annoyance from World of Tanks is the computer doing the scouting for the player. It is killer on flanking moves as strategy when the computer spots you through spotting rules, it puts a big marker over your head and you on radar for their entire enemy team to see. Whether or not someone had actually noticed you yet. You immediately get targeted by the entire enemy team, who usualy instantly hit you as they got computer assisted aim (little personal skill involved). That doesn't encourage players to become better and sharper, quite the opposite.

Computer assistance for players always impacts gameplay somewhat in the sense it makes things easier for someone. That usualy makes that person lazier and more reliant on the pc. The same is true for intel gathering. Hence I'd go with the least intel providing kill cam myself, though I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it would any particular type of cam be used. :)



Btw, I wouldn't mind someone having to give up an implantslot for killcam. I would mind if you would need to give up a slot for killcam obscuring. Personally though I'd prefer the rule: not spotted by player or his buddies: no chance of cam.

This is not good analysis.
It is over thought.
Full of strawman and red herring.

If a cloaker kills you by the stairs, killcam or not you know where you were and can just as easily communicate the position over a voice chat program.

No one will ever be able to over come your skills and tactics because they watched a brief video of you killing them. Not unless they are a better player than you.

It is always better to have a concise point written in as few words as possible. Longer posts tend to muddle your point.

[Vancha]

One of the best things about killcam is that it does give away the enemy position of the person who killed them. So that they aren't constantly dying to someone on a mountain somewhere.

This keeps the battles changing and forces people to adapt.

It's more fun to be able to retaliate without having to waste time looking for someone on a mountain somewhere just capping people without threat of being spotted.
I think the scale of gameplay you're imagining may be a tad on the low side.

[HitbackTR]

They don't add anything to the game so I say no go.

But then again... what else do you have to do while you wait for your spawn timer to run down.

Run to the fridge and get another beer duh.

[Aurmanite]

I think the scale of gameplay you're imagining may be a tad on the low side.

I think you're imagining that killcams will be implemented in a particular way when we have absolutely no information on how they will work.

If the killcam video shows my crosshair zoomed in on your brain, and delivering a cap to your crown, what positional awareness do you gain? The general direction of where the shot came from? You would get that from the red pain indicator flash anyways.

No one knows how the killcam will work yet, everyone is just theorysiding. A few of you a chicken-little...ing.

[Graywolves]

I think you're imagining that killcams will be implemented in a particular way when we have absolutely no information on how they will work.

If the killcam video shows my crosshair zoomed in on your brain, and delivering a cap to your crown, what positional awareness do you gain? The general direction of where the shot came from? You would get that from the red pain indicator flash anyways.

No one knows how the killcam will work yet, everyone is just theorysiding. A few of you a chicken-little...ing.

Higby said that you can see the hood ornament of a tank in killcam. I feel free to speculate that killcams will be 3rd person angle'd thing.

[Aurmanite]

Higby said that you can see the hood ornament of a tank in killcam. I feel free to speculate that killcams will be 3rd person angle'd thing.

This is still highly speculative. What if you were looking down the barrel of the cannon? You would still be able to see the hood ornament.

I'm not saying anyone's speculation is wrong, only that we should remain calm and breathe.

We don't know enough yet.

[Figment]

If a cloaker kills you by the stairs, killcam or not you know where you were and can just as easily communicate the position over a voice chat program.

YOUR position and the cloakers APPROXIMATE position, not the cloakers EXACT position. Nuance that saves precious seconds in a search. I find 0.5-3 seconds extra time to look around quite significant. Don't you?

No one will ever be able to over come your skills and tactics because they watched a brief video of you killing them. Not unless they are a better player than you.

If the killcam lasts 5-10 seconds? If it's just two seconds maybe, but a cam tends to be longer. Don't know about you, but I do a lot in 5-10 seconds prior to a kill. I mean TTK is around 1-2 seconds and that's usualy within 3 seconds of me starting my move from ambush. Which means they'd learn where and perhaps even how I lay ambushes in detail. Especially if I just got in that spot as they may well have been chasing me at the time. If they just died, all they'd have known was I killed them through some ambush, but not from exactly how the ambush worked. If they'd be able to learn even part of my movement pattern, they could use it against me, particularly in a short distance chase.

We're not talking the CoD sample of someone obvious randomly running around a corner and firing here. There's a lot to learn in that period of time.

So far, even DT has sufficient trouble following me despite their webs to catch infils. If they could see HOW I move through a base even a bit because one of them ran into say a boomer trap and it showed where I was then, ALL of DT would know in the future.

It is always better to have a concise point written in as few words as possible. Longer posts tend to muddle your point.

Let 'm swim. Short answers are usualy interpretable and ambiguous.


EDIT: Note that the word that's key here is, IF. Point people make though is that anything you see gives you info. keep that info to a minimum.

[BigBossMonkey]

I'm hoping the kill cam is not like BFBC2 or BF3's. Seeing that guys emotionless but yet smug face bothers me.

Agreed. If there are killcams, I'd prefer a first person point of view one.

[Vancha]

I think you're imagining that killcams will be implemented in a particular way when we have absolutely no information on how they will work.
Higby said that you can see the hood ornament of a tank in killcam. I feel free to speculate that killcams will be 3rd person angle'd thing.
Whoops.

No one knows how the killcam will work yet, everyone is just theorysiding. A few of you a chicken-little...ing.
Hey, I've yet to say this would kill or ruin the game (or end the world). I've even said I'd be okay with killcam being an implant, but killcams will affect gameplay. Killcams may have their bonuses in other games, but the point is whether it belong in a game on Planetside's scale?

Edit:
This is still highly speculative. What if you were looking down the barrel of the cannon? You would still be able to see the hood ornament.
You'd also still be able to calculate where the shot came from.

Edit II: Now, if killcams were shown from the perspective of the shooter, but all terrain was removed (I've only played the first one, but I'm imagining the blue level interludes in Assassins Creed), then killcams might avoid ruining someone's day, but I sort of doubt that's what they're planning.

[Aurmanite]

YOUR position and the cloakers APPROXIMATE position, not the cloakers EXACT position. Nuance that saves precious seconds in a search. I find 0.5-3 seconds extra time to look around quite significant. Don't you?



If the killcam lasts 5-10 seconds? If it's just two seconds maybe, but a cam tends to be longer. Don't know about you, but I do a lot in 5-10 seconds prior to a kill. I mean TTK is around 1-2 seconds and that's usualy within 3 seconds of me starting my move from ambush. Which means they'd learn where and perhaps even how I lay ambushes in detail. Especially if I just got in that spot as they may well have been chasing me at the time. If they just died, all they'd have known was I killed them through some ambush, but not from exactly how the ambush worked. If they'd be able to learn even part of my movement pattern, they could use it against me, particularly in a short distance chase.

We're not talking the CoD sample of someone obvious randomly running around a corner and firing here. There's a lot to learn in that period of time.

So far, even DT has sufficient trouble following me despite their webs to catch infils. If they could see HOW I move through a base even a bit because one of them ran into say a boomer trap and it showed where I was then, ALL of DT would know in the future.



Let 'm swim. Short answers are usualy interpretable and ambiguous.

I'm not going to do that thing where I quote portions of your post. That's kinda weird.

If someone learns that you attack from behind, that's fine. Unless they have precognition they won't know you're coming before you're there. There will be no sign that you are in the immediate area. If someone gets killed by a cloaker, or notices that someone else did, they will be on the alert anyways.

With regards to reporting someones position...well. You should look into time and relativity. Reporting someones exact position at a point in time is exactly as effective as reporting someones general position at an exact point of time. In either case they change. Again, you're over thinking it.

[Sifer2]

I almost wonder if its one those vanity things where the devs want you to see those pretty detailed character models. So they want to zoom in on them every time you die. :D

Honestly I would rather not see it. You wont be able to turn them off or go to a server without them enabled. So it will just annoy a lot of people. I would rather see them go an immersion route with this game really. That is everything first person all the time. Even vehicle driving. And when you die just fall to ground then black out.

[Hmr85]

I think we need a kill cam video from the Devs right now so we can see what it looks like. :groovy:
Higby are you there?

[Aurmanite]

I think we need a kill cam video from the Devs right now so we can see what it looks like. :groovy:
Higby are you there?

Dude...

[Hmr85]

What? you wouldn't want to see some gameplay? We need to see some footage so we have a Idea of what it looks like.

[Vancha]

I'm not going to do that thing where I quote portions of your post. That's kinda weird.
Charmed, I'm sure.

[Pillow]

Why people enjoy watching themselves when they die and then watch when their corpse getting molested and forced fed nuts is beyond me.

[Rumblepit]

lmao at this one.... its a kill cam, it helps noobs learn the game. this is the purpose it serves. omgwtf just killed me?????? noob now knows what killed him . other then that, its something to do while your spawning. any experienced fps player already knows what killed him and where it came from.

no problem with this all.


if you plan to camp the same location hours on end framing noobs, then i can see issues some may have with it.

[Blue]

I don't particularly like killcams but it will make a big difference how it's implemented. If there is an option for infiltration classes to not reveal one, then I have less of a problem with it.

I did play COD and one thing that bugged me was I had to change my style of sniping to not give myself away on killcams. For example, if I found a great spot to snipe, I would stay zoomed in so they could not see my direct surroundings. However this got my killed several times because I couldn't see an enemy coming up 20 feet infront of me.

There has to be another way of stopping hackers and helping players learn than revealing the location of every person who kills you.

And I am confused about the employee response on "battles so large it won't make a difference"

Not everyone will always be in a huge battle. That's why it's planetside....remember?

Some of the tiny tower skirmishes were my absolute favorite times playing planetside. Especially if it was ever 1v1. Killcams is like playing split-screen halo with a friend. Are you just going to pretend it's not helping you to see where he is?

Once again, ALLOWING A PERK(or implant, or whatever) TO ELIMINATE YOUR KILL CAM, would make the world of difference to me, and I think to many of my comrads.

[Graywolves]

Killcams breaks the metagame on the battle fronts.

[ratfusion]

I voted for killcams for a few easy reasons:

Killcams help new players learn locations and techniques

Killcams help catch cheaters

Snipers that stay glued to one spot deserve to die

The developers cannot afford to cater the game to hardcore players. If killcams help narrow the margin between new players and elite talent, they need to be there.

[CuddlyChud]

I don't understand why people feel like kill cams will suddenly make it so much easier to see who killed you. Given the high TTK of PS1, it was such a rare occasion that you would get killed without knowing where the person who killed you was. For me, the only two that really baffled me were the first time I found out about tree sniping, and a cloaker who threw plasma nades from on top of bunkers. I mean, it took two shots from a bolt driver, and there were hit indicators in the game. It took like 20 rounds from an AMP. If someone killed you with a mag pistol, he was probably right behind you. And if you got killed by a beamer or repeater and you didn't know where it came from, well that's just sort of embarrassing. With a high TTK, it just seems so improbable that you would not know who killed you. Killcams (ala COD) are just a fun way to see what you did wrong, or watch what the other player did right.

[Aurmanite]

Killcams breaks the metagame on the battle fronts.

How?

[Figment]

Just look at these kill cams and tell me you've just not learned anything about a player's strategies/capabilities (type: CoD MW). Particularly #3 at 1:00 shows a lot of pre-kill process about ambushes and it's literally only showing a couple seconds.

Top 5 Kill Cams of The Week: Week 1 (Gameplay) - YouTube

Next time they go after #3 in a warehouse, they'd know he likes to sit way high up to get the drop on people. If you only got the body cam, you'd know the direction of the knife, but not how he got to throw it at you and where he was positioned prior to that move. That's what I mean when talking about infils.

I mean, you get radar, killspam, hit indicators... do you really NEED killcam on top of that? >_> Will it be the end of gaming civilization as we know it? Probably not. Will it have influence on ACCURATE intel sharing? Most definitely.

[Saintlycow]

I can only accept kill cam if it is skip able .
There should be ways to remove it such as Implants

[Raymac]

Just look at these kill cams and tell me you've just not learned anything about a player's strategies/capabilities (type: CoD MW). Particularly #3 at 1:00 shows a lot of pre-kill process about ambushes and it's literally only showing a couple seconds.

But that's exactly why I think kill cams would be helpful. They assist in teaching newer players the game and generally raise the gameplay of everyone.

Sure, it can also lead to "There's so and so on the top catwalk at this place. Take him out." But like you said, that kind of information can happen anyways, albiet it could be slightly slower and less specific without kill cams.

Personally, and I know I'm in the minority, I believe the pros of kill cams outweigh the cons, especially of a player can spend skill points to hide his kill cam.

[WaryWizard]

I think I know what they may do. Have killcam by default. Make it where you can't turn it off. No things in the cert tree to get rid of it. In the store will be an implant that that you can buy, and removes the kill cam.

They'll make soooo much money off of that.

[Hmr85]

SOE just need to incorporate the option to hide killcam and all will be well. The people who don't wont it can have it off and the people who don't care can have it on.

[VioletZero]

The implant to turn off the killcam wouldn't work because snipers would use it. Which would remove one of the best reasons to put it in the game.

SOE just need to incorporate the option to hide killcam and all will be well. The people who don't wont it can have it off and the people who don't care can have it on.

You might as well just remove it then. Because then, suddenly everyone will be pressured into hiding their's in fear of giving away others' positions if they kill anyone.

I think this is a good idea BECAUSE it gives away all the positions. Because of the way that killcam works, it forces the teams to change around and not just sit in the same spots. Since by the time a player can take advantage of it, the enemy team will have moved already.

[Figment]

The implant to turn off the killcam wouldn't work because snipers would use it. Which would remove one of the best reasons to put it in the game.

Hence why - if there'd be a killcam anyway - I'd say make it an implant to see killcam. If you can have audio amp or killcam, I wonder which would be more popular *DEFINITELYPERSONALINTERLINKRADAR*COUGH*.

But it'd make it a choice. Implants are about getting some sort of minor advantage, killcam could be seen as an intel advantage.

EDIT: As for training, developing your own playstyle always trumps monkeying.

[WaryWizard]

The implant to turn off the killcam wouldn't work because snipers would use it. Which would remove one of the best reasons to put it in the game.



You might as well just remove it then. Because then, suddenly everyone will be pressured into hiding their's in fear of giving away others' positions if they kill anyone.


well seeing as how they might as well remove it.

:sniper:Remove it

[Graywolves]

Killcams shouldn't be used for knowing where the enemy is or gaining intelligence.


The purpose of killcams is to help the learning curve.

But as that curve is passed, the killcam becomes a tool for gathering information. A reward for getting yourself killed and a method for getting your side more intel and knowing areas to strike.


Honestly, it doesn't take much effort to learn what killcams provide. (which is very narrow and situational, especially in this game. It's hardly helpful.)

In a minute I could teach a new player more about the game than killcams ever would.


tl;dr - Throwing everyone's location at player's makes the game stale.

[Atheosim]

I wonder if premium members (subscribers) will be able to get certain cash shop stuff for free

[VioletZero]

I wonder if premium members (subscribers) will be able to get certain cash shop stuff for free

Wrong thread?

I'm pretty sure PS2 isn't Freemium.

[Zhane]

Wrong thread?

I'm pretty sure PS2 isn't Freemium.

Last I heard they were considering a subscription option.

[RodenyC]

I think its suppose to be like the DCUO model.Free,Pay certain mount for unlocked stuff,and subscription for access to everything.

[VioletZero]

I thought Freemium was just a smooth way to transition from Pay to Play to Free to Play in MMOs that sucked, not MMOs that started as free to play.

[Roy Awesome]

I really lol'd at the title. The game isn't out yet, how can it kill the game

[ThGlump]

The purpose of killcams is to help the learning curve.

But as that curve is passed, the killcam becomes a tool for gathering information. A reward for getting yourself killed and a method for getting your side more intel and knowing areas to strike.


Ok if there must be killcam, make it educational so ppl will learn.
You have to learn for some time, so you see killcam up to BR10. After BR 10 kill cams are off. You should learn alot till that time and dont need it anymore.

Everyone saying to put implant to disable killcams. That doesnt make sense. Have it off by default (after BR10) and if you want to see how and who killed you, you just get implant that reenable killcams for you (this way it can be done that it doesnt break immersion/lore - some recoding technology or something).

[Conq]

I'm against them putting in a KillCam but honestly, it wouldn't ruin/break/kill the game. People are being drama queens about it.

[VioletZero]

I really lol'd at the title. The game isn't out yet, how can it kill the game

Well, I guess we'll see when the game goes into beta.

That's what the beta is for after all. If it breaks the game too much then we can always remove it.

[BlazingSun]

I'm just thinking of the fun I had in the first game ... sitting in trees with a sniper rifle or as cloaker with grenades guarding a backdoor. That might not be a "fair" way to play, but no need to ruin that with killcams. If you manage to play hide and seek with multiple enemies, the killcam shouldn't ruin it for you. :groovy:

The problem with killcams is, not only do they give away your current position, but most of the time they also show the enemy where you are heading next. No need for that.

If the player posses some intelligence, he will figure out where the enemy is/was most of the time anway .. and if he doesn't .. tough luck.

PS: Wouldn't killcams also make cloakers/infiltrators almost pointless ??

My final verdict: No killcams in PS 2 please!

[DaddyTickles]

Meh... Killcam should only show YOU dying from a close-to and slightly from above 3rd person POV.

Platoons of 10, 20, 30 or more jabbering back and forth mean killcam info will kill the killer quicker than his/her own mistakes and that destroys any element of skill deployed by the killer.

[Notso]

My guess is No1 who likes Planetside likes Killcams..

^That

[Death2All]

I simply don't want kill cams in the game because it gives my outfit mates another avenue to rage with :rolleyes:.


But I think the general consensus of the pole it pretty clear. The majority of the community is against. I know that Higby and the other devs occasionally lurk these forums. We can only hope that they take in the information they're given and please the community of diehard fans that have been with this game since the start and not try to appease the CoD Kiddies who will download the game and drop it in a heartbeat when Cowaadooty 14 comes out.

[Aurmanite]

I simply don't want kill cams in the game because it gives my outfit mates another avenue to rage with :rolleyes:.


But I think the general consensus of the pole it pretty clear. The majority of the community is against. I know that Higby and the other devs occasionally lurk these forums. We can only hope that they take in the information they're given and please the community of diehard fans that have been with this game since the start and not try to appease the faggoty CoD Kiddies who will download the game and drop it in a heartbeat when Cowaadooty 14 comes out.

Die hard fans don't pay the bills.

Die hard fans are responsible for plenty of ruined games.

Also, love the homosexual slur there. Keepin it classy. Keepin it mature. You're clearly the type of person that game studios should cater to.

[Gwartham]

Killcams really really hose Snipers.

Hate killcams.:mad:

[VioletZero]

Killcams really really hose Snipers.

Hate killcams.:mad:

Only if they're glued to one spot the whole time.

[Tool]

I vaguely remember a bit about an implant that blocks killcams. I can't recall where or if it was official at all. Perhaps someone else can confirm it.

Sensor jammer implant with that effect or something for the stealthy types.

[basti]

Killcams really really hose Snipers.

Hate killcams.:mad:

You are confusing sniper and camper here.

[acosmo]

imo killcam would give ps2 more of a sunday night combat feel :\

[Vancha]

Only if they're glued to one spot the whole time.
Do I need to copy/paste my post from the ideas forum? :p

[Sighpolice]

I wouldn't say it *kills* the game but it does ruin tactics, counterstrike is hugely popular and a great game that has a kill cam.. of sorts.. but in any serious match ups it was the first thing to be turned off.

I do agree with OP, I'd rather go hunting for that guy rather than have a unfair mechanic leading me directly to him.

If it works in that when you die your view goes to the GENERAL direction the bullet came from, then fair does (i.e north/east/south/west of your position)

we'll just have to wait and see though unfortunately

[Hmr85]

You might as well just remove it then. Because then, suddenly everyone will be pressured into hiding their's in fear of giving away others' positions if they kill anyone.

That has to be one of the dumbest things I think I have ever heard. I'm not even sure how to respond to this.

Players are going to do whatever they want to do and its not gonna be because they are afraid. Give the players who do not want their position compromised or do not want other players seeing their tactics/ how they play a way to opt out of the killcam. I don't care if its a option in the menu or a implant.

[cellinaire]

It's frustrating and annoying, yeah so I don't want them to implement killcam, but to call it 'game-breaking' is obviously an exaggeration, in my viewpoint.

[Marth Koopa]

As a rambo MAX guy, Kill Cams don't affect me because I'm always on the move.

But kill cams would certainly take away from the guys that love to snuggle up into a nice sport with their sniper rifle and plink off dudes from a distance with little to no moving around

[texico]

Can't seriously have this in a game of PlanetSide's scale. And I don't see the "annoyance" argument either.

-Claim to want to combat annoyance by adding in killcam
-Add in one-shot kill headshots


It just wouldn't swing. If they're in the game, it'll surely be to please the BF/COD crowd. It'll be a massive detriment to the stealthier classes, unless they're somehow immune.

No Go I'm afraid.

[CutterJohn]

BF/COD crowd.

Hate to break it to you, but in the realm of FPSs, PS shares much more in common with BF/COD than other games. It uses the same general mix of arcadey and real. The people that will want to play all three games are the exact same crowd. I know you like to feel superior because you play[ed] PS, but you're not.

Give the players who do not want their position compromised or do not want other players seeing their tactics/ how they play a way to opt out of the killcam. I don't care if its a option in the menu or a implant.

Yes please. Then I'll have a nice advantage over people who mistakenly think it matters somehow. :D

[Azren]

Hate to break it to you, but in the realm of FPSs, PS shares much more in common with BF/COD than other games. It uses the same general mix of arcadey and real. The people that will want to play all three games are the exact same crowd. I know you like to feel superior because you play[ed] PS, but you're not.



Yes please. Then I'll have a nice advantage over people who mistakenly think it matters somehow. :D

There is one diffrence. The BF/CoD crowd will be the portion of the population who leaves PS2 as soon as a new BF or CoD comes out. Those who come from PS, won't.

[Azren]

Well, I guess we'll see when the game goes into beta.

That's what the beta is for after all. If it breaks the game too much then we can always remove it.

Get real, beta is for stress test, don't expect any major changes after it. Beta is kind of same as release version, only diffrence are the bugfixes.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

I will laugh if PS2 has a kill cam.

[Gortha]

With a game that has as many players as Planetside 2 will.

The odds of you killing someone and the following happens:
They see your killcam/position
They wait to respawn (most likely not exactly at the same spot they died)
They find you (how this happens again is beyond me, enough time has passed that I guarantee you're not in the same position anymore where the player first saw you on the killcam)
That same person kills you because they saw your killcam.

All that happens before you die yourself, or they die again.

The server pop must be incredibly low.

Also, if I die and I see a killcam of 1 guy but the reason I died is because it was a huge 20v20 infantry standoff I don't see how the killcam ruins the game?

For the snipers, I love kill cams if I'm a sniper. I can kill a guy, then go and find a new spot. That guy sees my kill cam and tries to find me at the same spot and I kill him again because I moved 20 yards. Rinse Repeat.

In My Opinion the origin of the killcam into fps games was to get rid of campers (nobody liked campers in the old fps days). Now designers use it to help them flesh out hackers, help new players, and give insight to an experienced player as to why he died. It's not there to break immersion and mess up the guy who's getting the kills.

For the record I'm not in charge of what happens when it comes to killcam, I'm just throwing in my perspective as a player/lover of fps games. I'm for the killcam, but that's just me.

Hey arclegger,

thanks for a statement. There are not always Mass-fighting situations, where the KilllCam is less fatal in sense of free intel.


You wont believe it, but there are Clans/Outfits and Squads out there who are able to use Voice-Communication!

If i play with my mates and tell them that you are at a specific position, where u are heading to, because i know it because of the KillCam [B]it will ruin your game[/B1]. You ll be dead in Seconds. No way it´s might be fun for you, when you are rolled by my mates, because of Intel i just got via the KillCam.

Your Sniper-arguments are not valid. Espescially Snipers hate KillCams - and do not like to have to change position because of a KillCam. You are in the minority with your view.


As you can see in the poll results KillCam is not wanted and does in the eyes of most players not benefit the game. There are many good and valid arguments by those who are against KillCams in PS2. Please think about em.

All a KillCam is good for, is making games arcarde-like, less serious, breaking immersion, giving away free Intel (Position, Direction, evetually moving directon Armor, Weapons, Equip, Numbers and kind of other Enemies).
It´s nothing for Planetside2.

Regards
Gortha

[CuddlyChud]

There is one diffrence. The BF/CoD crowd will be the portion of the population who leaves PS2 as soon as a new BF or CoD comes out. Those who come from PS, won't.

And if all PS2 manages to do is keep all the PS1 players, it would probably still fail the same way PS1 did. I'm not saying to add the Kill Cam only to attract those people. I think that it has some positives and some negatives, but overall is a good idea.

[Sabrak]

Only if they're glued to one spot the whole time.

You are confusing sniper and camper here.


I don't understand....
Playing the lone sniper, looking for the right spot to be able to get some kills on isolated targets.... That's not an invalid tactic.

And hey, this is not CoD or CS.
If you're getting shot down by the same (group of) sniper(s) several times, the problem isn't that he's camping, it's that you keep going out there as a defenseless zerg.

Get your ass in a lightning/MBT/air-fighter/cloak suit, or ask people from your squad/outfit to do so, and go out to look for the snipers and hunt them down.

KillCam shouldn't be needed, and shouldn't show you where the guy is.
Just do your work to find where he is and kick his butt.

[HitbackTR]

And hey, this is not CoD or CS.
If you're getting shot down by the same (group of) sniper(s) several times, the problem isn't that he's camping, it's that you keep going out there as a defenseless zerg.

Get your ass in a lightning/MBT/air-fighter/cloak suit, or ask people from your squad/outfit to do so, and go out to look for the snipers and hunt them down.

KillCam shouldn't be needed, and shouldn't show you where the guy is.
Just do your work to find where he is and kick his butt.



This^^^^^^This This This^^^^^

[Hermes]

Get real, beta is for stress test, don't expect any major changes after it. Beta is kind of same as release version, only diffrence are the bugfixes.

Making general statements about how this team is going to manage their beta is pretty odd. Every team is different, every product is different, and they all give different approaches? :)

Anyway. Can we take a peek at the responses in this thread? Everyone who's not against this feature is fairly apathetic - 'wait and see'.

It's not a contentious issue for many people, and im wondering if many of them are as confused as me over the furor here. Is the anti killcam passion just coming from a love of PS1 turning into fear about anything being changed?

I'm nervous as hell about inventories being removed but I'm not sharpening a pitchfork over it as this game is not just a reskin. With enough things changing I need to play the thing before I can justify an angry strong opinion...

..which is what a lot of posts here are coming across as. :D



tl:dr lets not throw our toys out of the pram. :) Let them build the jigsaw before we pick up a bit of sky and claim it doesnt fit anywhere

[CutterJohn]

As you can see in the poll results KillCam is not wanted and does in the eyes of most players not benefit the game.

This is a very biased and self selected group. Not that thats bad. Its just the truth. The people who hang out here are ALL current or ex PS players, and are passionate enough about the game to hang out on the forum for a game thats not even out yet, and people like that are going to be very hesitant about accepting changes to the formula for the game they love.

The vast majority of PS2 players will not care about classes, or f2p, or one shot one kill snipers, or kill cams, or buggies being gone, or lack of vehicle animations, or no customizeable loadouts, or driver gunned tanks, or no ams/ant/lodestar, or tanks with AA, or cloaking snipers, etc, etc, etc, because their first experience with the PS franchise will be PS2. We are a minority.

They undoubtedly want to please the fans, but they also have to make sure the rest of the playerbase is happy, the ones who know nothing about PS1 and won't judge the knew one based on how it changed from the old one.

[Vancha]

^
Saying they won't have a problem with something because they hadn't experienced the better alternative doesn't mean "we" shouldn't try and make it as good a game as possible for them (okay, that's overstating our influence slightly). The game will only become less malleable from here...

[LZachariah]

I'm glad to hear that everyone is thinking deeply about this issue (not that we have ANY final say in what the Devs decide) but one thing I will state is, PLEASE be nice to any Dev that posts on this forum. I'm very grateful that Arclegger read this thread and decided to comment on it. His opinions are quite opposite of mine, but that's the purpose of a thread that is available to everyone; open discussion.

If you are going to disagree with a Dev on this forum, that's completely fine, it's your right, but please do it in a respectful, careful way; these are the people who are MAKING THE GAME FOR WHICH THIS FORUM EXISTS.

Thanks Arclegger, for taking a glance at our considerations.

~Zachariah

[AncientVanu]

The only good thing about a CoD-style killcam is that it can be used to detect cheaters. Other killcams that are not "view through the enemy eyes" and just show you the position of the enemy that just killed you are completely useless.

[CutterJohn]

^
Saying they won't have a problem with something because they hadn't experienced the better alternative doesn't mean "we" shouldn't try and make it as good a game as possible for them (okay, that's overstating our influence slightly). The game will only become less malleable from here...

Sure, but my point is that a game some PS1 vets want may not be a commercially successful formula or popular with the current FPS crowd.

[JHendy]

Here's the thing. The only reason DICE introduced the killcam to Battlefield 3 was because they were intentionally gunning for a slice of COD's market share on console.

Killcam is a console feature, and Planetside 2 is a PC exclusive. Please don't succumb to the market trends, devs.

We can already see that console features like killcam are entirely out of place in a session-based Battlefield game, so what the hell are they doing in a tactical persistent FPS like PS2?

[Coreldan]

Sure, but my point is that a game some PS1 vets want may not be a commercially successful formula or popular with the current FPS crowd.

This. While Im all for keeping true to the first planetside, but comments like "thats why you dont listen to the majority" are utterly ridicilous. Planetside was never a huge success for many reasons. Also, the hardcore minority dont pay the bills, this game will have to attract way larger audience than the current playerbase and you wont do that unless the game mechanics are up to date instead of going with what was acceptable in 2003. Im not saying I want killcam myself, but theres something to think about..

Im also a forum mod on the official APB forums and I see fairly much of the few percrntage of overall playerbase whining how G1 caters to casuals instead of them. REALLY? You are surprised they cater for 90% their customers instead of a handful minority? I get the argument that the casuals often dont stat long while the HC minority plays for a long time, but a game has to be easily accessible, attractive and enjoyable for the majority who dont play st e-sports levels.

[texico]

Hate to break it to you, but in the realm of FPSs, PS shares much more in common with BF/COD than other games. It uses the same general mix of arcadey and real. The people that will want to play all three games are the exact same crowd. I know you like to feel superior because you play[ed] PS, but you're not.




I AM superior in a lot of ways :)


But so what if they share features? PlanetSide and BF/COD are fundamentally different. BF and COD are designed around rounds of instant non-stop fun. PlanetSide 1 was approaching war-simulator. I never said I had anything against BF or COD or games like that; I was on TF2 5 minutes ago. What I do have a problem with is PlanetSide being flooded with mechanics from games like BF/COD/TF2 just because it's what they're doing. And that is the impression I'm getting, what with the iron-sights, the sprinting, the class system, and maybe killcams. THAT is catering for the BF/COD players who wouldn't usually play a game like PlanetSide, and if it's at the detriment to what PlanetSide is about, which I believe some of these moves are, then I'm going to have a problem with it.

[Gortha]

This is a very biased and self selected group. Not that thats bad. Its just the truth. The people who hang out here are ALL current or ex PS players, and are passionate enough about the game to hang out on the forum for a game thats not even out yet, and people like that are going to be very hesitant about accepting changes to the formula for the game they love.

The vast majority of PS2 players will not care about classes, or f2p, or one shot one kill snipers, or kill cams, or buggies being gone, or lack of vehicle animations, or no customizeable loadouts, or driver gunned tanks, or no ams/ant/lodestar, or tanks with AA, or cloaking snipers, etc, etc, etc, because their first experience with the PS franchise will be PS2. We are a minority.

They undoubtedly want to please the fans, but they also have to make sure the rest of the playerbase is happy, the ones who know nothing about PS1 and won't judge the knew one based on how it changed from the old one.

Hey Cutterjohn,

in all games i ever played i played if possible on Servers with KilLCam OFF.
I do it in BF3. I did it in CoD3 MW1, especially at Clanwars it was off. It was
off on CS and CSS.

Kill Cam OFF is a Tournament and Clanwar Standard, it was in the old DECL, it is in the ESL it is in all serious leagues.

When there is competition a Kill Cam is a No Go.
In PS2 is permanent competition.

In casual and Arcade games a Kill Cam may be fun.

Get serious ;)

[Gortha]

This. While Im all for keeping true to the first planetside, but comments like "thats why you dont listen to the majority" are utterly ridicilous. Planetside was never a huge success for many reasons. Also, the hardcore minority dont pay the bills, this game will have to attract way larger audience than the current playerbase and you wont do that unless the game mechanics are up to date instead of going with what was acceptable in 2003. Im not saying I want killcam myself, but theres something to think about..

Im also a forum mod on the official APB forums and I see fairly much of the few percrntage of overall playerbase whining how G1 caters to casuals instead of them. REALLY? You are surprised they cater for 90% their customers instead of a handful minority? I get the argument that the casuals often dont stat long while the HC minority plays for a long time, but a game has to be easily accessible, attractive and enjoyable for the majority who dont play st e-sports levels.

That may all be true,

now let´s try to be honest.

Planetside2 will attract as many players without KillCam as it would with KillCam.

But no Kill Cam will make Planetside2 more challenging! ;)

[Quantumplation]

Jesus christ, 14 pages on a feature we haven't seen in action yet? Not going to read all 11, so I may be repeating some information, but...

Here are several very simple ways this could play out that limit or outright eliminate a lot of the concerns mentioned in the first few pages:

1) Retroactive killcam: The killcam is the last few seconds leading up to the death, not continuing on from the killers perspective.
2) The killcam is actually a series of still screen shots, which inherently give less inforation.
3) There's a killcam jammer feature in the game (which the devs have already talked about) that either blocks people from seeing your killcam, blocks people from seeing you in OTHER PEOPLE'S killcams (so that a nearby person doing killing without a jammer looks alone), a killcam jammer that's a small AOE, so that anyone within it's range has their killcams jammed (prevents someone from giving away your location because they get too close to you), etc.
4) As was mentioned on the r/planetside discussion on it, a range based thing, such that kill cams don't activate after a certain distance away.
5) Skills that allow you to shorten the length that someone sees your killcam down to a second or two.

The point is, we have no information on how this could be implemented or how much fun it adds to the experience. The devs, having playtested it, do. They've done enough, and responded the community enough, to make me feel safe in their judgement: It's clear to me that they're not doing things to "win over the CoD gamer", but that they're trying to create the best experience and the successor that the original planetside deserves. Planetside 2 isn't going to be exactly like Planetside 1, because the genre and the mindset of a gamer have evolved since then. They can't blindly reproduce the same game, because 1) it would fall flat on it's face in the current gaming landscape, 2) We all want something new. Planetside 2 isn't supposed to be Planetside 1 with better graphics. It's not supposed to be Planetside without BFR's. It's an evolution of the genre, and I'm sure the developers know that a lot is riding on them considering SOE's previous track record.

Kill cams make intel-supression an active choice. Considering we have no idea how implants are going to work, or how pretty much any mechanic is going to work, it's ridiculous that so many people are so vehemently against them. They break immersion, but Planetside was never about immersion, and there are so many things that do that to a far greater extent (respawning, for example...). Instead of saying "Nope, I hate these developers for putting kill cams in the game, it's killing the game for me. They are cheap sellouts that just want to make a quick buck.", why not air your concerns about the mechanic itself, think about why it's being added (and no, it's not just "cause COD players want it!"), and then suggest alternate ways the same goal can be achieved without suffering from the same grievances you face. Then, realize that the developers are getting paid to think about/work on this full time, and all they do is think analytically in the same way about the game (with better information and playtesting under their belts) and maybe you'll feel a bit more secure in the developers abilities. And ultimately, if we get in Beta and it sucks, the developers are going to listen: They've shown that they're listening, and insulting them for their decisions isn't helping.

[wasdie]

From what I've read about the killcam it doesn't look like it is going to break the game at all. It's not going to be like Call of Duty's kill cam as that would be to revealing and it's going to be like Battlefield's kill cam as that also would be to revealing.

The developers have even said how they'll try out different versions of it in the beta and if it really sucks they won't put it into the final game. I really don't see what all of the fuss is about.

[Coreldan]

That may all be true,

now let´s try to be honest.

Planetside2 will attract as many players without KillCam as it would with KillCam.

But no Kill Cam will make Planetside2 more challenging! ;)

It wasn't so much about killcam only, but there are a crapton of people who don't want stuff like sprinting and ironsights in the game as well, just cos "PS and Quake didnt need them" :D

Perhaps they should just make it a... killscreenie! :D This way you would see your killer from a 3rd person view in a still screen at the time of the killing shot landing. This way you would still get some of the killcams "pros" without getting all the cons, such as several second of free live intel.

[DayOne]

Here's the thing. The only reason DICE introduced the killcam to Battlefield 3 was because they were intentionally gunning for a slice of COD's market share on console.

It's the same as it was in BFBC2...

On topic: A killcam would break the immersion of the game. I get that we can respawn, it's the future and we can be rebuilt almost instantly, culture neural lace style, but being able to see what the enemy saw or just their face for a few seconds just doesn't fit with the game.

If the devs are truly bent on having a system where you know who killed you then do what Battlefront did, have the camera pan around to look in the direction of who shot you.

[Vancha]

Planetside 2 isn't going to be exactly like Planetside 1, because the genre and the mindset of a gamer have evolved since then. They can't blindly reproduce the same game, because 1) it would fall flat on it's face in the current gaming landscape, 2) We all want something new. Planetside 2 isn't supposed to be Planetside 1 with better graphics. It's not supposed to be Planetside without BFR's. It's an evolution of the genre, and I'm sure the developers know that a lot is riding on them considering SOE's previous track record.
In all the pages of this topic, I don't think a single person's claimed that PS2 shouldn't have killcams because PS1 didn't have them. Some people have used PS1 as context for reasons killcams might be detrimental, but I'm pretty sure not one person has claimed PS2 shouldn't have killcams for the sole reason that PS1 didn't have them.

Kill cams make intel-supression an active choice. Considering we have no idea how implants are going to work, or how pretty much any mechanic is going to work, it's ridiculous that so many people are so vehemently against them.
Someone made this mistake already. From what's been said about them, we can deduce killcams will either be close-ups of the killer or from the perspective of the killer. The only question is whether it'll be range-based.

They break immersion, but Planetside was never about immersion, and there are so many things that do that to a far greater extent (respawning, for example...).
Ngrrrrrrr (how do you textually represent a game show's "wrong answer" buzzer?)

I don't think the immersion argument applies much to killcams because I've already explained how killcams could exist in a way that fit in, but what do you mean Planetside was never "about" immersion? It's immersion was something that put it above the shallowness of other games. It's the reason some people are upset about the removal of boarding animations, or holstering weapons.

Instead of saying "Nope, I hate these developers for putting kill cams in the game, it's killing the game for me. They are cheap sellouts that just want to make a quick buck.", why not air your concerns about the mechanic itself, think about why it's being added (and no, it's not just "cause COD players want it!"), and then suggest alternate ways the same goal can be achieved without suffering from the same grievances you face.
Have you not read the thread? This has been done.

Then, realize that the developers are getting paid to think about/work on this full time, and all they do is think analytically in the same way about the game (with better information and playtesting under their belts) and maybe you'll feel a bit more secure in the developers abilities. And ultimately, if we get in Beta and it sucks, the developers are going to listen: They've shown that they're listening, and insulting them for their decisions isn't helping.
I think it was Higby who said that it never crossed his mind that there'd be people who had problems with some of the changes that've been made (I think he used boarding animations as an example). Of course game developers are typically better at developing games than your average joe, but there are still things they might not think of (like people purposefully dying so they can gain intel via killcam, which would be more beneficial than in your typical FPS).

[Tatwi]

If Planetside 2 is supposed to be a game about strategy, then indeed, a "kill cam" would completely defeat that purpose, because it instantly tells the enemy exactly where your team's position is - removing that whole aspect of game play.

Kill cam: dumb idea for this game... or great way to ruin to the game, if that's what you're after.

[juggalokilla]

I'm against the bf3 killcam, but would be fine with a replay style one. Any semi decent player has a good idea where you got killed from anyway. If not, a killcam isnt going to help you much anyway.
As for those saying it takes away from realism, some of you are the same that say we shouldn't die from an AV rocket in the face. Make up your minds....

[Quantumplation]

but what do you mean Planetside was never "about" immersion? It's immersion was something that put it above the shallowness of other games.


Two things: 1) There should have been a "for me and a lot of people I've spoken to" at the end of that. I don't intend to speak for the entire player base, nor do I intend to imply that the immersion wasn't awesome. 2) I more so meant it's not about immersion in the same way Skyrim is. I make the distinction between immersion for the sake of forgetting reality and plunging yourself into the environment, and Immersion in the sense of Eve Online, where you are always cognizant of the fact that it's a game, yet the feeling of being part of a greater war/cause is there, and you're immersed in the politics/tactics/realities of the combative landscape. Planetside, in my opinion, isn't (primarily) about creating a living breathing world of Auraxis, or about completely creating the experience of being a day-to-day soldier in a never-ending war. I always saw the big draw of the Planetside games to be the other type of immersion, the feeling of contributing and having an impact on the meta-game of faction warfare. I may be a poor representative of the playerbase, and some people might think the distinction a moot point, but that's what I meant by that paragraph.


I think it was Higby who said that it never crossed his mind that there'd be people who had problems with some of the changes that've been made (I think he used boarding animations as an example). Of course game developers are typically better at developing games than your average joe, but there are still things they might not think of (like people purposefully dying so they can gain intel via killcam, which would be more beneficial than in your typical FPS).


My point wasn't that the devs would be able to predict the reaction of the community, but that the choices they make have thought behind them rather than just being willy nilly choices as some people are suggesting. I'm not advocating AGAINST the discourse on the topic, but from my brief scan of some of the pages in the thread (and I could have misjudged the balance), it looked like most people were grabbing torches and pitchforks without voicing their reasons other than "I don't like it, it breaks immersion, it's just to appease the CoD fanboys". To the people who are (or are even attempting to) thinking analytically, pinpointing things that are wrong with it, considering the things it's used to accomplish, and offering alternatives, keep it up. My shock and rant was intended more towards the other type of poster.

[Rbstr]

I'm getting, what with the iron-sights, the sprinting, the class system, and maybe killcams. THAT is catering for the BF/COD players who wouldn't usually play a game like PlanetSide, and if it's at the detriment to what PlanetSide is about, which I believe some of these moves are, then I'm going to have a problem with it.

We're calling it more of a war simulator and adding imersion enhancing things like a sprint mechanic and iron sights/real aiming mechanics is catering?
Battlefield is FPS franchise I currently play most and I wouldn't usually play a game like Planetside? I did play Planetside for several years. I liked it a lot. But to say that certain mechanics don't belong in the game through some kind of Planetside purity argument is silly.
Comming back for a while last summer it feels floaty, disconnected, and, frankly it's a crap shooter. The only thing it has going for it, in terms of game mechanics, is the scale.

The less of PS1's acctual fighting mechanics that survive into PS2, the better.

PS1 "vets", and especially current players, need to get over this idea that the new game should conform to junky mechanics that were, basically, the product of techincal limitations when the game was being developed.

[Graywolves]

If you think about the Meta-game, killcams is gamebreaking and useless.

It rewards death with intelligence. The only education it could give is the loadout of killwhores. So now instead of people working together and having fun with their playstyles, we provide an incentive to attempt to be a killwhore with no concideration for the team and free intel on where all the opponents are.

It effectively puts a magnifying glass over the scale making battles feel smaller because the intelligence (as far as opponent placement goes) becomes as small as a CoD map.


The problem isn't the dead coming for revenge, it's him telling his outfit and the rest of the empire.

[Gandhi]

PS1 "vets", and especially current players, need to get over this idea that the new game should conform to junky mechanics that were, basically, the product of techincal limitations when the game was being developed.
I have no problem with the many issues from Planetside being fixed. I don't like the COF system, I don't like the ADAD spamming, the third person camera, the one speed movement, the 'swimming through molasses' feeling you get when jumping and the tons of downtime between respawning and getting back to the battle. Just to name a few.

But I reject the idea that we have to choose between vanilla PS1 or BF3 with 1000 people. This game already offers something no other game does, that's what's going to attract people to it regardless of how the mechanics are handled. As long as they're not terrible SOE basically has carte blanc to try whatever they want. And it seems like instead of taking advantage of that freedom a lot of features are just being copied from other shooters. Killcams, why? Iron sights that block half your screen when you use them, why? One shot kills for snipers, why? Do these things really make Planetside 2 more like what the original tried to be but couldn't be because of what you said, limitations in technology?

[Coreldan]

I have no problem with the many issues from Planetside being fixed. I don't like the COF system, I don't like the ADAD spamming, the third person camera, the one speed movement, the 'swimming through molasses' feeling you get when jumping and the tons of downtime between respawning and getting back to the battle. Just to name a few.

But I reject the idea that we have to choose between vanilla PS1 or BF3 with 1000 people. This game already offers something no other game does, that's what's going to attract people to it regardless of how the mechanics are handled. As long as they're not terrible SOE basically has carte blanc to try whatever they want. And it seems like instead of taking advantage of that freedom a lot of features are just being copied from other shooters. Killcams, why? Iron sights that block half your screen when you use them, why? One shot kills for snipers, why? Do these things really make Planetside 2 more like what the original tried to be but couldn't be because of what you said, limitations in technology?

On the other hand, why NOT implement these? The blockbuster shooters have them, just about any modern shooter has them?

So I'd like to reverse the question, do you really think Planetside can't be what made it amazing even if it has the modern day bells and whistles? What makes you think that the lack of modern and common features on shooters would make it better than having them?

But once again, I don't say I approve all of these features imported from BF and CoD. Some I do, but killcam not really. I'm just.. trying to bring up the other PoV :D

[Bags]

I have no problem with the many issues from Planetside being fixed. I don't like the COF system, I don't like the ADAD spamming, the third person camera, the one speed movement, the 'swimming through molasses' feeling you get when jumping and the tons of downtime between respawning and getting back to the battle. Just to name a few.

But I reject the idea that we have to choose between vanilla PS1 or BF3 with 1000 people. This game already offers something no other game does, that's what's going to attract people to it regardless of how the mechanics are handled. As long as they're not terrible SOE basically has carte blanc to try whatever they want. And it seems like instead of taking advantage of that freedom a lot of features are just being copied from other shooters. Killcams, why? Iron sights that block half your screen when you use them, why? One shot kills for snipers, why? Do these things really make Planetside 2 more like what the original tried to be but couldn't be because of what you said, limitations in technology?

ADAD warping isn't a clunky mechanic so much as terrible net code. AGainst people who don't warp it's fine.

[Graywolves]

On the other hand, why NOT implement these? The blockbuster shooters have them, just about any modern shooter has them?

So I'd like to reverse the question, do you really think Planetside can't be what made it amazing even if it has the modern day bells and whistles? What makes you think that the lack of modern and common features on shooters would make it better than having them?

Even with the scale, if the game feels like CoD or BF3, what's the point of playing? People won't be bought on scale alone.

[Bags]

I would be. BF3 on PS's scale would be worth playing, IMO. Maybe some tweaks would be needed, but I'd settle for BF3's gameplay.

Not saying i don't greatly prefer PS, tho.

[Jaxbrain]

It's important for all stealth based kills to leave the enemy guessing. It's kind of the whole point.

And I'm not talking solely about stealthers, I'm talking about pretty much any kill from outside the enemy's field of vision.

If I get killed by artillery, I don't WANT to know exactly where the flail is. I want to follow the sporadic tracers. If the game just tells me where they are, it absolutely kills the immersion.

[Coreldan]

Even with the scale, if the game feels like CoD or BF3, what's the point of playing? People won't be bought on scale alone.

If the game plays like a game from 2003, why would anyone play it? People wont be bought on scale alone.

Hell, I'd personally love if PS had gunplay anywhere near BF3. It's not perfect, but PS has just about the worst gunplay in any FPS I've ever played.

I don't blame it, it's an old game and limited by that days technology.

I guess this is just something that is too opinion-based to ever really argue properly. I personally see BF3s mechanisms (except for killcam) just about vastly superior to anything PS has to offer on similar front. What makes me love PS much more than BF3 is the rest of the game and the whole idea of it. However, lack of sprint, ironsights, etc are NOT the reason I prefer PS over BF3.

But yeah, opinions, I can't you talk over to like BF3s mechanics and you certainly wont be able to talk me over to prefer PSs ancient and totally lacking mechanics in gunplay/character handling over BF3s.

[Bags]

PS1 had sprint, it was called surge and is vastly more tactical.

[Vancha]

On the other hand, why NOT implement these? The blockbuster shooters have them, just about any modern shooter has them?

So I'd like to reverse the question, do you really think Planetside can't be what made it amazing even if it has the modern day bells and whistles? What makes you think that the lack of modern and common features on shooters would make it better than having them?
Because certain bells and whistles work differently depending on whether they're in a game of Battlefield's scale, or in a game of Planetside's scale.

[Coreldan]

PS1 had sprint, it was called surge and is vastly more tactical.

Another clunky mechanic though. Sprint can easily be combined with not being able to shoot and slowing you down in getting weapon ready while also draining stamina/similar that is shared with implants/other stuff.

Not to mention how annoying it was at low BRs when you were forced to crawl through the continent :D

[Pillow]

Anyone thought of minekills + killcam yet?
What if a engineer gets a minekill when he is in a galaxy or something :P

[Gandhi]

So I'd like to reverse the question, do you really think Planetside can't be what made it amazing even if it has the modern day bells and whistles? What makes you think that the lack of modern and common features on shooters would make it better than having them?

Well that's the question isn't it? Do these things bring the game closer to what we all want Planetside to be? Everyone has a different vision of "the perfect Planetside", obviously.

Honestly I'm not against some of those things I mentioned, I just think they can be done better. I'll use iron sights as an example of what I mean.

In BF3 you'd almost be better off if M1 were rebound to automatically do M2 then M1. Going into iron sights is just something you do before you fire, regardless of the distance involved, regardless of how you're moving. Part of this is the rather low TTK, where the ability to move isn't nearly as important as landing your shots. I'm not against the idea of going into 'iron sight mode' to be more accurate, but there's no reason it should be a requirement at anything under medium range. In fact it should offer zero benefit under 50 meters or so.

Other than that, one thing that's always bugged me about iron sights in modern shooters is that I'm basically making it harder to see what I'm shooting whenever I want to be more accurate. Real guns have actual "iron sights", so the guns in BF3 have them too. There's no thought given to the fact that in the game you're limited to a really primitive single lens camera, whereas in real life we have very awesome binocular vision. Now, Planetside 2 not being a "realistic modern warfare" shooter, do we really need to have the same bulky iron sights? Wouldn't it be an improvement to not block your view of what you're shooting in order to shoot more accurately? Can't we replace them with a little holographic display above the gun? These are questions I'd like to see considered.

And I think that's where a lot of the "disgruntled vets" are coming from. They're feeling like instead of discussing the best way to do things for this game in particular features are being pulled from other games simply because they're successful. The core concept of Planetside is so good that SOE has room to try new things without driving off potential customers, so why not make use of that?

[Sirisian]

I'm still undecided. Honestly I really don't see what the big deal is unless you're camping. However, the previous comment by Higby about having an implant to block kill cams seems like a lame implant. If they cause that much of a problem for certain classes they should probably be removed so players aren't locked into having that implant to play their class correctly.

Should be interesting to see how its implemented.

// edit: Gandhi those are some really good points. They were brought up in the Iron Sights (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=621349&postcount=31) thread which is more suited for that discussion.

[Vancha]

I'm still undecided. Honestly I really see what the big deal is unless you're camping. However, the previous comment by Higby about having an implant to block kill cams seems like a lame implant. If they cause that much of a problem for certain classes they should probably be removed so players are locked into having that implant to play their class correctly.

Should be interesting to see how its implemented.
This is what I thought. A killcam-blocking implant would basically be for snipers/cloakers what sensor shield was for cloakers in Planetside...Something that automatically took up an implant slot when it should have been built into the role.

[Gandhi]

// edit: Gandhi those are some really good points. They were brought up in the Iron Sights (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=621349&postcount=31) thread which is more suited for that discussion.
Yeah, sorry I didn't mean to derail the thread. It's just that kill cams weren't a good example of the point I was trying to make because I think they flat out shouldn't be in the game at all ;)

Although I wouldn't mind something like a camera that binds to a random friendly player when I die, or one that just shows my immediate surroundings.

[BigBossMonkey]

I'm pretty neutral on this, I really am failing to see the big deal.

Especially when Higby says if they don't work they will be removed...

I say wait for the game to hit beta at least before screaming how the game is being killed (Game is in what, Alpha? It is a bit early man...)

[Hamma]

Honestly I think quite a bit of the reason people are so passionate about this issue is they are upset about the current state of gaming.

Gaming as we know it has become very cookie cutter. Most games especially FPS's are made for people with very short attention spans. Many people remember PlanetSide and other games where you didn't have to grind for X hours to get X weapon unlock for your weapon. You could come in the game and have the same weapon as anyone else on the field. Gaming was more based on skill than time as it is now.

They (we) want more from PlanetSide 2 than to be a cookie cutter FPS within a larger world. Sure it will be a large persistent MMO and not a round by round shooter. Where do we make the tradeoff? We are already going to be able to spawn as MAX Units (or whatever class we are) without having to hit equipment terminals. That already takes out a big piece of some of the different strategies you could use to bring an enemy's base down.

I don't blame people for being worried and passionate about an issue like this. I am willing to wait and see - but I'll admit I have a little fear underneath it all as well. I want a game that brings me back to where I was back then rather than a game I will burn out on in a month because it's the same as other games.

And that is the tightrope that the developers have to walk.

[Tool]

Honestly I think quite a bit of the reason people are so passionate about this issue is they are upset about the current state of gaming.

Gaming as we know it has become very cookie cutter. Most games especially FPS's are made for people with very short attention spans. Many people remember PlanetSide and other games where you didn't have to grind for X hours to get X weapon unlock for your weapon. You could come in the game and have the same weapon as anyone else on the field. Gaming was more based on skill than time as it is now.

They (we) want more from PlanetSide 2 than to be a cookie cutter FPS within a larger world. Sure it will be a large persistent MMO and not a round by round shooter. Where do we make the tradeoff? We are already going to be able to spawn as MAX Units (or whatever class we are) without having to hit equipment terminals. That already takes out a big piece of some of the different strategies you could use to bring an enemy's base down.

I don't blame people for being worried and passionate about an issue like this. I am willing to wait and see - but I'll admit I have a little fear underneath it all as well. I want a game that brings me back to where I was back then rather than a game I will burn out on in a month because it's the same as other games.

And that is the tightrope that the developers have to walk.

Big developers usually follow the money > innovation thought process. The buisness aspect is always present regardless of hopes or goals. A necessary evil for the industry to continue but often leaves it stagnant and repetitive.

If you don't try to innovate you often fail. However if you don't play on accepted successes, you generally fail harder and with worse consequences.

Like you said, balance is a big part.

[ThGlump]

Great summary Hamma. Thats why there is that much uproar with any mechanics taken from "modern" shooters.
We know what we want. Better game that was planetside1. Devs see way to make game better in incorporating mechanics from BF/COD while keeping planetside core mechanics. And thats what bugs ps1 vets, and then we yell about it :)

We are old grumpy folks, remembering good old games, fighting against younglings whose knows only modern games, over game mechanics. Sadly we will be overpopulated by them, so even if we yell all day, they will make game for them.

[Rbstr]

We are already going to be able to spawn as MAX Units (or whatever class we are) without having to hit equipment terminals. That already takes out a big piece of some of the different strategies you could use to bring an enemy's base down.

Saying nothing about the ability to acctually blow up the spawn tubes:
You're really saying that removing helpless spawning is a bad thing? The shittiest thing in the world is spawning just to die with no hope. Reguardless of the game being a persistent world or round based.

We are old grumpy folks, remembering good old games, fighting against younglings whose knows only modern games, over game mechanics. Sadly we will be overpopulated by them, so even if we yell all day, they will make game for them.
This is a complete misscharacterization of the of posters on this forum that want gunplay to be substantially different from PS1.
You think my 2003 join date on a Planetside forum is because I've only ever played COD and BF?..fuck I've never played COD. PS1 was the very first online FPS I ever played.
You want me to bottle your views in a little jar:
Grumpy old PS1 vets that don't want to have anything work differently than it does now, simply because they can't be assed to learn something new.

[Figment]

Sure, but my point is that a game some PS1 vets want may not be a commercially successful formula or popular with the current FPS crowd.

And what isn't what the PS1 vets want, is by definition a commercial succes?

And what if neither what the PS2 devs want or PS1 vets want is a commercial succes?

If we all know what's a commercial succes in advance, why are we discussing here? Sorry, but did you ask the masses what a succesful formula is? What if all these games were a succes DESPITE of a couple bad formulas in it?


Just saying, if you have an argument that cuts three ways and no evidence to back it up because it's basically moot, especially if it's an alternative to something that already worked pretty damn well, no need to bring it up. And please, don't make the (FPS) game industry into a new Hollywood. EA is doing that already.



But is anyone here saying PS1 failed because they lacked some minor features that "modern" FPS games have? (Read definition of "modern FPS" as: "game franchises that have remained almost unchanged as they've been selling the exact same games for the last 10 years in new graphics and on occasion with some new multiplayer maps next to a new single player campaign").

So if it had a proper killcam that showed your death and basically gave you a negative last impression because they rubbed in that you got killed would have actually made you want to play again? xD

So if we got killcams for EVERY SINGLE TIME you got spawncamped FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE KILLER, ... that'd been a good thing, how?

[Raymac]

We are already going to be able to spawn as MAX Units (or whatever class we are) without having to hit equipment terminals. That already takes out a big piece of some of the different strategies you could use to bring an enemy's base down.

No offense, Hamma, (because I have tons of respect for you) but that may be one of the most inconsequential and petty things to be apprehensive about that I've ever heard voiced about the game.

It does speak to a larger issue that I see voiced very frequently, and this kill cam debate is another perfect example of it. Some people, in my opinion, are making gigantic mountains of himalayan scale out of tiny ant hills. I read about all these things that are going to "ruin" the game like kill cams, and tank pilots controling main guns, and lack of vehicle enter/exit animations, and classes, and the inventory, etc. etc. I just think their effects are being vastly overstated.

When you have a game like Planetside 2 that is on this massive of a scale with a persistant world, it is such a giant paradigm shift to all other "cookie cutter" type games that even features like the more controversial ones discussed here won't really make a hill of beans when you look at the whole picture.

(I may be totally wrong and something I think is minor may have the effect of breaking the game. Also, on the flip side of the coin, there may be something minor that we've seen that we think is totally awesome that will not make the game any better at all, like the level of graphical detail.)

TL;DR I think we have a tendency to lose sight of the forest for the trees.

[Hamma]

Saying nothing about the ability to acctually blow up the spawn tubes:
You're really saying that removing helpless spawning is a bad thing? The shittiest thing in the world is spawning just to die with no hope. Reguardless of the game being a persistent world or round based.

It was just an example of the many changes we have seen thus far and one that could be used as a tactic in PlanetSide 1 (I was thinking of destroying the equipment terms). There are plenty of other ways to spawn and die with no hope even with this mechanic removed :lol:

No offense, Hamma, (because I have tons of respect for you) but that may be one of the most inconsequential and petty things to be apprehensive about that I've ever heard voiced about the game.

Again just an example of one of the changes made to appeal to the masses. Is it bad? Maybe.. maybe not. It's certainly not on the forefront of my mind.

I do agree though saying one feature is "Killing the game" is stupid :lol: If anything it will be a combination of changes.

My post was just to describe the passion folks have for the debate - they are tired of the status quo of gaming. I was using a few examples to back up my post is all.

Substitute any change in my post and it's the same. :lol:

EDIT:

For all the negatives there are plenty of positives. A better territory control system, a better command (mission) system, and a better flight model. People have a tenancy to focus on the negative no matter how inconsequential. Actually that's a good idea for a new thread..

[Infektion]

NO KILL CAM!!! !.... I REPEAT!!!! NOOOOOO KILL CAM!!!!!!

[Raymac]

Again just an example of one of the changes made to appeal to the masses. Is it bad? Maybe.. maybe not. It's certainly not on the forefront of my mind.

I do agree though saying one feature is "Killing the game" is stupid :lol: If anything it will be a combination of changes.

My post was just to describe the passion folks have for the debate - they are tired of the status quo of gaming. I was using a few examples to back up my post is all.

Substitute any change in my post and it's the same. :lol:

Yeah, I realize I was kinda cherry picking a side point you were making and not really your main thesis which I actually very much agree with. Planetside is very much a unique game so there are many inherant risks when you blaze a trail. Some common features they are incorporating, some they are going completely off the reservation. This will also mean that some things will be a hit and some things will be a miss.

There's nothing wrong with having trepidation about something we are so passionate about. In most games, it doesn't really matter to gamers if they fail or not because there will be a similar game coming out soon enough. With Planetside, we have waited 8 years for this and who knows how long before we see something similar. That's why the stakes and the passion are so high for us fans.

[Gandhi]

When you have a game like Planetside 2 that is on this massive of a scale with a persistant world, it is such a giant paradigm shift to all other "cookie cutter" type games that even features like the more controversial ones discussed here won't really make a hill of beans when you look at the whole picture.
I know I said earlier that being unique gives you some room to play around with new concepts, but it doesn't give you license to go crazy with ideas. Just like it doesn't give you license to carbon copy the rest of the game.

Look at SWTOR as an example. Their big thing is voice acting and story, the rest of the game is a carbon copy of WoW in a different setting. Server population has been dropping steadily, people are already asking for mergers and the forums are full of disappointed fans. The fact that there was zero innovation over WoW in the actual gameplay is something I've heard criticized over and over again when talking to people about it.

Besides, at the end of the day these aren't optional features we're talking about. They're the core gameplay mechanics that you'll be using constantly, and those definitely can make all the difference in your enjoyment of the game.

[ShowNoMercy]

They are increasing the TTK, and while some may be ok with the idea of trying to find a camper only to be killed repeatedly and think it is "challenging" and/or "fun", your average player will not. Best you can hope for is a hardcore server, but don't call it a game breaker you can always skip it. The noobs need tools like this to reduce the learning curve.

[SuperMorto]

simples............

Kill cam "on" takes longer to re spawn but you get to see where killer was,

Kill cam "off" takes less time, but you see nothing, and then carry on playing the game like a hero rather than a zero.

Job sorted!

[Tool]

I know I said earlier that being unique gives you some room to play around with new concepts, but it doesn't give you license to go crazy with ideas. Just like it doesn't give you license to carbon copy the rest of the game.

Look at SWTOR as an example. Their big thing is voice acting and story, the rest of the game is a carbon copy of WoW in a different setting. Server population has been dropping steadily, people are already asking for mergers and the forums are full of disappointed fans. The fact that there was zero innovation over WoW in the actual gameplay is something I've heard criticized over and over again when talking to people about it.

Besides, at the end of the day these aren't optional features we're talking about. They're the core gameplay mechanics that you'll be using constantly, and those definitely can make all the difference in your enjoyment of the game.

Very well said, a very few new gimmicks on top of what players have already played to death the past 10 years or more isn't going to have much of a future. The formula for mmorpgs was perfected with wow, the only positive step forward is either another genre in mmos or some true innovation.

I honestly believe Sony and smedly both see this and set in motion a series of goals to create a unique mmo and a prospective future for ps2. Their comments about future sandbox elements gives me hope for an interesting future.

A new coat of paint over the old planetside wouldn't lead to the success some expect without changing the formula. Its a challenge for Sony and it seems they took it seriously.

[Figment]

Again just an example of one of the changes made to appeal to the masses. Is it bad? Maybe.. maybe not. It's certainly not on the forefront of my mind.

If people said way back that RTS games would never work for the masses, because all people played in terms of arcade combat games was *insert random game* Operation Wolf...

Yeaaah.


"For the masses" arguments are NEVER. EVER. well argued reasons to do something, often more of an excuse to do something you know is 'wrong' in the eyes of "experts" on the matter (can be scientists or engineers, but can often be fans of anything). Basically "fans" are being put aside with things like "these stupid nerds, what do they know and hey they are probably the minority compared to the masses. No the masses, they are the new awesomesauce".



Anyone recognise themselves here? :p



"The masses" like and buy pretty much everything as long as it is pitched well to them and they understand or relate to it (or in some cases: don't understand at all, so it must be good - but that needs a special sales pitch). Usualy when someone says "we changed it to appeal to the masses" it means they changed it without any really good argument and usualy to fit their own plans or that of a specific target group.

Why do you think a lot of low speed jet aircraft didn't use turboprops, but jet propulsion? Because "it's seen as more modern by the masses", never mind that it's less fuel efficient below around 500 kph. It may be seen as more modern because a certain tech is used, but that does not guarantee a better product. Not even if products of the same kind sold better (to a different market?). It just means you need to improve your pitch.

If you are a consumer who is okay with such arguments... eh. Second grade products can be enjoyable too. Doesn't mean sometimes you don't need something new either, but have it be selected on merits, not on really superficial arguments.

[Lord Cosine]

However, it also gave you a short time to look at the radar map for three specific things and to make a decision: respawn here/now, or wait for that medic nearby? Would it be worth respawning here or should I go somewhere else? The third of course is that you could look at where all the dots are moving without having to worry about getting shot or having to go there instantly. As such, it definitely helped you plan your next move.


I think this is a great point. Adv.Medics had a hard enough time rezzing zerg.
I remember hearing those sad medic emotes "Adv. Med please for the love of god don't tap, I beg you PLEASE!" If a player's camera was watching an enemy player they would hit their respawn button as soon as possible and rarely give the adv.medic a chance to reach them.

Additionally if ps2 uses a kill cam that follows your killer then it could muck with Gal Drops/Max Crashes because it would also give away the movement of the entire group. The dead man at the backdoor of a facility would know that the troops decided to target Gen or Tubes or CC.

Extra additionally there is no feedback that you are being observed. In ps1 if you saw a corpse you knew that someone was watching. There is no in game feedback to tell when a kill cam has stopped transmitting your location. You can't break line of sight to that corpse to protect your next movements, instead you would have to sit on their corpse humping them for Xseconds before moving on.

[Shogun]

i would hope IF killcam has to be ingame, it would just be a replay of the last shot and not a realtime transmission of what the killer does after the shot!

i was fine with the corpsecam of ps1 because it was predictable. corpse on ground means spy danger.

and about the question why we are so negative about some things...
the positive things are mostly great and we see no need to start many posts about them. but negative things may be changed, if the devs know about them. i guess most problems are no gamebreakers, but every small problem that is solved doesnt sum up with the others any more. and the smallest problems seem to be the ones that are most easily changed. putting in an off switch for the killcam for example would not take much effort in coding.
so we all fight on the fronts we see the biggest chance to succeed first.

[Beagle]

I see a good 15 pages in this thread and I get the feeling most of it reflects the first and last couple of pages of "Killcam ruining the game SoE selling us out the designers don't know how to make their own game"

Angry posts about PS2 "selling out" and "going for the CoD audience" do not help. People are seeing Killcams and can't stop themselves from imagining their dreams of sniping from the same spot for half an hour being crushed, or that it will somehow ruin everything you do, or something similar.

Consider that the people who live and breathe this game and design it for a living and, as you can tell through the quality and volume of community interaction we've had, are huge fans themselves, actually know what they're doing and that if they're considering Killcams there's probably a good reason! Consider also that if these Killcams don't end up working out for the reasons the designers want them to, they'll be removed anyway.

What if a Killcam really does help new players immensely? There is no point making your feedback contribution to the development of this game something like "SoE sold out, going for the console kids, Killcam will ruin PS2". If their idea is they want to sell out and just go for the biggest market and screw their vets, then why do they spend so much time working with you here?

Please - don't use the excuse of being a self-styled grumpy old man to give poor feedback to the most enthusiastic, transparent, competent-looking devs I've seen in recent memory, and let's wait and see for Killcams in how they help the actual game instead of getting all worked up over nothing. Every post that conveys only passionate fear of a new game mechanic without realistic concerns as to why just dilutes any good feedback the thread could offer.

[Figment]

Consider also that if these Killcams don't end up working out for the reasons the designers want them to, they'll be removed anyway.

Yeaaaah SOE trackrecord suggests they always do that with things that end up hurting the game. ;)


And you did actually miss some proper discussion in the middle, even if a lot of it comes down to what you said. It's not just fear though, seems to be mostly experience with other killcams. :)

[Beagle]

Yeaaaah SOE trackrecord suggests they always do that with things that end up hurting the game. ;)

May as well jump ship now then :lol:


And you did actually miss some proper discussion in the middle, even if a lot of it comes down to what you said. It's not just fear though, seems to be mostly experience with other killcams. :)

Totally, I just think it's really bad to have a lot of it come down to what I said. If it were all that kind of proper discussion you're talking about this would be a really important thread for Devs to read - as is I see a lot of knee-jerk reactions and a lot of these posts (particularly in the Iron Sight thread) strike me as "modern shooters are the devil".

[FRIENDLYUNIT]

I'm an emphatic no. I want a "thinking persons shooter" experience from PS2.
If I wanted any CoD or BF elements I'd just play that.

[Marsgrim]

How would it work with cloakers??

Cloaker infiltrates a base, kills a defender from a good camping spot covering a few doorways for example. Dead guy on voice comm "Yeah he's in the corner by the crate".

Cloaker has to move to a less optimal position,or if darklight is in the game he's found in seconds.

In short, kill cam is good for FPS deathmatch but not for any objective based game with bases to defend/attack.

[acosmo]

How would it work with cloakers??

CLoaker infiltrates a base, kills a defender fomr a good camping spot over a few doorways for example. Dead guy on voice comm "Yeah he's in the corner by the crate".

Cloaker has to ove to a less optimal position.

In short, kill cam is goodfor FPS deathmatch but notfor any objective based game with bases to defend/attack.

excellent point.

-1 killcam

[Lord Cosine]

So here is a question.

What are all the possible benefits of the various types of death cams. And how could they be redesigned to fit within a tactical mmofps while still maintaining their positive traits.

For instance a camera that shows players the dude who killed them may be helpful to new players, as it would shed some light on the particulars surrounding their death and give them some insight into player tactics and positioning, however it gives away cloaker/sniper positioning and seems to be frowned upon by a lot of hardcore players. Is there a way to rework that kill camera so it gives away less tactical information while still helping new players learn how to play.

Perhaps these benefits could be worked into some other feature to leave the ps1 death cam intact?

[Mirror]

I honestly dont think the game needs it. I'd prefer to be paying attention and waiting on a rez rather than watching how I died.

[Vancha]

What are all the possible benefits of the various types of death cams. And how could they be redesigned to fit within a tactical mmofps while still maintaining their positive traits.
As I've said, what if you could choose to save a TF2-esque replay upon death? Simply putting a delay between someone dying and being able to see what happened would solve everyone's problems with this I think.

[Figment]

@Lord Cosine: see my post at the top of page 3 (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38804&page=3) for some examples. :)