IMO KillCam killing the Game

[texico]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

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]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

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]

Originally Posted by Coreldan

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]

Originally Posted by Gortha

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"

Perhaps they should just make it a... killscreenie! 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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Quantumplation

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.

Originally Posted by Quantumplation

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.

Originally Posted by Quantumplation

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.

Originally Posted by Quantumplation

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.

Originally Posted by Quantumplation

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]

Originally Posted by Vancha

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.

Originally Posted by Vancha

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]

Originally Posted by texico

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]

Originally Posted by Rbstr

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]

Originally Posted by Gandhi

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