Cockpit View - [Now Forced per Higby]

[Really]

This isn't really the right thread, but it's sort of related because people don't seem to care about this cockpit, a place where a great deal of time will be spent for many players, but every other fucking post is about vehicle entry/exit animations, which will be seen for, what 0.1% of the game?

I honestly think I'm dreaming sometimes when I realise how many times I've seen "entry/exit animations" in a thread. Especially when I see things like "entry/exit animations would put PS2 head and shoulders above any other game!". No, it definitely wouldn't. I hope to get into a vehicle maybe 2 times per life, and I fully intend to stay alive for as long as possible - call me crazy but I think everyone else is the same.

Is it seriously just me that's seeing this? I literally cannot convey my indifference towards vehicle entry/exit animations in words. Maybe I should draw a picture or something. People seem to think the game will be an utter failure without them. Epic /shrug from me.

I can, however, see why this cockpit needs to be smaller. As someone who will probably be spending a LOT of time in an aircraft, I think I can speak for everyone when I say it's too big. I don't want a full third of my screen taken up by a HUD, and those bars up the side just don't make any sense - this is the future, right?

Maybe I'll wake up any minute now...

[Malorn]

More apples and oranges.

Track IR gives you left-right and more vertical views, and it's really damn cool since you typically don't have enough hands to have that level of movement normally.

Strictly speaking it is advantage since it allows you to look while turning and see things that would otherwise take the entire aircraft in a different direction. However Track IR doesn't allow you to wallhack through the cockpit. You're still limited by the views exposed by the cockpit. You still can't see down. You can turn your head and look up, but in most cases I don't see that as a tactical advantage. Turns seems like the biggest advantage since you could bank and look left/right or fly upside down and look up to get better ground views.

I think people serious about spending a lot of time in that cockpit should have Track IR as an option. I'm tempted to get it just for PS2 becuase it seems like such an awesome experience. Removing the cockpit takes away from the experience, while Track IR adds to it.

So they're both fruit but far different nutritional value and flavor.

It's one thing to look left/right and up on a cockpit as an independent movement axis, it's another to see through the floor and have far less vision obstruction.

An obstructed vision in the cockpit is part of game design. If they wanted it more open they could have done that. They could still trim back some of the obstructions and move the pilot's viewpoint around to improve things. It's that way for a reason and like it or not it's a limitation everyone should deal with. Maybe they feel the same way about Track IR, but not necessarily. The immersion factor and could certainly outweigh the control requirement. Flying might be easier with a joystick too and not everyone has those.

[Skittles]

Originally Posted by TerminatorUK

It should be forced on if it is to be included otherwise players aren't on an even playing field.

I absolutely do not get you people with this attitude. How the hell is it not an even playing field? If everyone is capable of turning off the thing via the options then everyone is on a freakin' even playing field.

Just because you people wish to handicap yourselves for some unknown reason to some piece of eye candy that Higby thinks is "awesome" doesnt mean everyone else does. It serves no purpose.

From what I can gather from these forums is you people are a bunch of WOW players in a FPS game that want PS2 to be some kind of fantasy RP game with FPS elements to it. Its no wonder Higby and the devs are debating adding AI in 5yrs..

As to EVILPIG's comment about surprise to forced view----------

Unfortunately I am. Which I guess I shouldnt be after lurking here for some time. For whatever reason the people that are FOR forced view think that its going to even the playing field when they go airborne.

Bad news, it wont. You're still going to suck ass in the air vs air campaign or the Air v Ground, because you're hoping that the devs will artificially even the field for you with visual restrictions.

I'd bet that many of those wanting forced views were the same people that cried about surgile, whined about 4x JH, piss and moan about skeet dropping on towers, complain about air v ground, reaver spam, ect ect ect that were all nerfed in PS instead of simply adjusting THEIR playstyle to even the advantage.


Im with CutterJohn on this, and approve his message that FORCED view is limp-wristed.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Erendil

See my rant, above.

You may have justifications, but its still illogical.

Originally Posted by Malorn

It's one thing to look left/right and up on a cockpit as an independent movement axis, it's another to see through the floor and have far less vision obstruction.

More justification on why an advantage is acceptable. But disregarding that, hell i'd be mostly fine with the forced cockpit if they got rid of that awful bracing, and maybe that big red thing in the center. The rest of it is unobtrusive enough.

As for 'wallhacks'.. Umm.. they're having a ghost hack of a magical camera that floats behind your aircraft.

[DayOne]

Make the cockpit view useful. Extra info about your aircraft etc. and then minimal info if you turn it off.

[Fenrod]

What the hell ? Why cockpit view should be forced ? How am I going to enjoy my customized, over-pimped aircraft if I can't see it with 3rd person view ?

Da shit is this !

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Make the cockpit view useful. Extra info about your aircraft etc. and then minimal info if you turn it off.

If it starts making smoke, it's not good.

[Malorn]

Intentional design vs player comfort

I see this discussion just going back and forth about what a possible advantage is. Some folks saying its nbd, others extrapolating that because X is an advantage Y is also an advantage and then drawing conclusions.

Fundamentally this game has A LOT of things that can be advantageous. The controls you use - joystick, gamepad, mouse, mouse with lots of buttons, cozy chair vs a bed of nails, side-grade weapons that are "better" for certain situations, etc. Lots of things which one could construe as "power" or "advantage"

In this instance I believe it comes down to intentional design. Cockpits obstruct view, just like a tree obstructs view, or grass in the game, or weather effects. All of those have an impact on how easily a player can see targets and identify things. It also has an impact on how effective camoflage upgrades are. Things which are intentionally obstructive are game design. They're there for a reason, they serve a purpose. They aren't player preference- they're rules of the game. You can't ignore them at will. Doing so is effectively a cheat or wallhack for the game because you are seeing something that you were not intended to see.

Cockpits, grass, weather effects, cover, and that awesome night/day cycle. They all serve a purpose to impose limitations on what we as players can see in the game and how easy it is to see things. None of them should be disabled by players. They aren't optional preferences; they're core parts of the game. I don't think any of these types of things are optional, and I'll put up a huge stick if I see that any of them are. Don't like the rain? Don't like how night or the sun obstructs your vision? Too bad, you have to deal with it. Same goes for cockpits. They make things harder for pilots by restricting what you can see, specifically below the aircraft where ground forces typically are. That's an advantage to infantry and ground forces and an intentional disadvantage to aircraft. It will change how you play, and it will change the dynamics of aircraft & ground forces.

Inputs are an entirely different matter. The number of monitors you have, the resolution you run at, the type of controller. whether you use a joystick or track IR or multiple monitors, large monitor or small monitor. Those all provide some advantage or another given the circumstances, but that certainly doesn't mean they shouldn't be player options.

Trying to compare the two is missing the fundamental difference. It's entirely logical. It's not about what affects the game in an unfair way, it's about what is intentional gameplay-affecting design and what is player comfort.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Fenrod

What the hell ? Why cockpit view should be forced ? How am I going to enjoy my customized, over-pimped aircraft if I can't see it with 3rd person view ?

Da shit is this !

3rd person is still in, it's really "Cockpit" vs. "HUD".

[SVoyager]

Sorry for the long post but hear me out:
IMHO, I am all for forcing cockpits here. Adds to the realism and immersion factor.

Multimonitor I would like but indeed I think it should be used for something else like a map display or chat boxes, stats or other things. Not the main view. Bigger FOV can be a really huge advantage.
There is however the tradeoff you get by having 2-3 displays in terms of performance. They will lose enough FPS to balance things to some extent.
I don't see someone running tripplehead @ 1920x1080 per screen @ 120fps. You're gonna be running at 30-40fps at best and possibly at lower resolution (depending if you are dual or triple SLI / dual or tripplehead) so the guy who has 120fps and can actually see the difference between 30-60 and 120 will have better reaction time than the guy on a tripplehead with big FOV.

Still the guy who has the bigger FOV would have such a huge advantage that the performance drop would not be enough to compensate, so thats why I prefer to keep it to things like map or stats or chat boxes etc on a second screen. But that in itself is an advange over someone who only has one screen with the minimap and his screen cluttered with chat boxes etc. In this case however, the performance drop of running dualhead would even things out.

If the guy runs on sli or even on tripple sli to compensate, then ok good for him, he deserves it. It's a bit like comparing someone running on a single monitor that can pump the FPS at 120 on a 120hz monitor vs someone who has a middle range vid card running in the 40-50 fps with only a 60hz monitor. The guy on 120hz monitor, 120 fps will have better reaction time, thus giving him an advantage, yet this is not being seen as being a problem (and its not a problem, the guy has a stronger rig, good for him and the advantage difference is not excessive).

All that to say that you have to compare the positives and negatives of each setup. Dual or tripple head is not all positive. I could even bring those that runs with 3d glasses, its not all positive either. Single monitor can have his advantage too over them.

As for Trackir. I am an owner of one and comparing it to FOV advantage is not exactly a good comparison. First of all, if they would support trackir (which I very hope they do), that means that its an extension of freelook that you have in other games. Skilled people can be good with freelook. You could use the POV/Hat buttons on a joystick, keyboard mappings, etc. For trackir users, they need to coordinate their head movement while still driving their vehicles/planes which adds a layer of complexity.

I've seen in many trackir videos, people just trying to look at places not caring much about where they are going, only to return back to front view and either crashing or barely pulling up in time to prevent a crash. The video by Gandhi posted a few posts before this one is such an example. At some point you see him looking around and as he comes back to forward view, he's going full speed into a ship, barely crashing on it. Look at 1:05 of his video.

Skilled trackir users vs skilled joystick/keyboard users can make things quite even in the end. The trackir wont give that much of an advantage and can turn into a disadvantage to someone who aint all that good with coordinating multiple different movements! It is important to compare skilled vs skilled and casual vs casual . A casual trackir user will crash his plane often and might have not crashed it if he were only looking forward in the first place! He got distracted by the trackir itself!

Cheers
.02$
SV

[Fenrod]

Oh. Then just leave Cockpit and HUD. They are both good and some people (including me) like the way it is.

[Tachyr]

All for it being forced

[Bags]

Good post marlorn

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

In this instance I believe it comes down to intentional design.

Then why can't they restrict the vehicle a bit more and not further restrict the already restricted view? Its not a balance consideration. Its pure design. All that fluff about 'restricting the view down' is pure made up justification.


I don't actually mind the idea of a cockpit. Just like I don't mind having the gun on screen for infantry, even though that restricts view as well. I dislike the bad, overly restrictive designs they universally share.




If infantry had to run around like this because of the goggles they are all wearing, people would be peeved. Thats what the view would be like through those goggles that are actually present in game. You can't say its bad. You people brought up the realism and immersion arguments. Well, that image is real and immersive. But nobody is arguing for that, because it would suck.

[Zulthus]

Hey guys, remember that old argument we always used?

"It's not a remake of the original. It's a new game"


Get used to a damn cockpit view. It's for balancing aircraft. You shouldn't be able to see everything at once. The flying cameras in PS1 allowed for easy infantry farming. Cockpits will decrease that and actually make you think about where you're flying.

The cockpit is a perfect size. Some people will nitpick about anything.