[Merged] Planetside 2 & TrackIR - Page 9

kaffis · 2012-03-21, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by Lokster

I can't believe the amount of negative feedback this issue is receiving. It would be simple to integrate, it would be useful to those who don't use the hardware in that they could still "freelook" with a hotkey, it would be awesome for those who spend the $130 on the hardware.

I fail to see a downside. Other than programming costs; which would clearly be minimal, if any, as most of the code is written already by the manufacturer. The only programming snag would be having to model more of the vehicle interiors (which they will already do when the implement vehicle entering/exiting animations -- allbeit after launch).

I support this idea and would probably buy the hardware if PS2 implemented it.

Look, it's not that it's not cool technology. It clearly is. I love anything and everything Virtual Reality, including the full-blown VR arcades that popped up for a while in the 90's. And it's a fantastic addition to a Simulation gamer's awesome $8,000, 5-monitor, full joystick and flightpedal rig, etc. And you'll notice that most of the games that support that cater to that type of gamer.

But you'll also notice that those games don't do very well at expanding beyond that target market. Because the guy with 1/5th the FOV, trying to fly with his mouse and keyboard, and without a surround sound setup tries it out, gets absolutely plastered by the hardcore guys with the advantages their awesome, expensive setup gives them, and tells his friends "yeah, don't bother. You need to drop thousands of dollars to be competitive."

I don't want PS2 to be that game, so I don't think building in compatibility for those features is a good idea. Joystick support and perhaps support for a UI-only second monitor is as far as I think the game should go, since dual monitor is common enough, and budget joysticks can be had for ~$20.

It's not that the features aren't cool, it's that I don't want PS2 to have a barrier to entry. That's the entire point of going Free to Play, is to make it so there's no excuse not to be able to play, and keep those world populations up.

Skitrel · 2012-03-21, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by kaffis

Look, it's not that it's not cool technology. It clearly is. I love anything and everything Virtual Reality, including the full-blown VR arcades that popped up for a while in the 90's. And it's a fantastic addition to a Simulation gamer's awesome $8,000, 5-monitor, full joystick and flightpedal rig, etc. And you'll notice that most of the games that support that cater to that type of gamer.

But you'll also notice that those games don't do very well at expanding beyond that target market. Because the guy with 1/5th the FOV, trying to fly with his mouse and keyboard, and without a surround sound setup tries it out, gets absolutely plastered by the hardcore guys with the advantages their awesome, expensive setup gives them, and tells his friends "yeah, don't bother. You need to drop thousands of dollars to be competitive."

I don't want PS2 to be that game, so I don't think building in compatibility for those features is a good idea. Joystick support and perhaps support for a UI-only second monitor is as far as I think the game should go, since dual monitor is common enough, and budget joysticks can be had for ~$20.

It's not that the features aren't cool, it's that I don't want PS2 to have a barrier to entry. That's the entire point of going Free to Play, is to make it so there's no excuse not to be able to play, and keep those world populations up.

This simply isn't the case with Arma, it's beneficial and increases immersion, it doesn't create a skill gap though.

kaffis · 2012-03-21, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by Skitrel

This simply isn't the case with Arma, it's beneficial and increases immersion, it doesn't create a skill gap though.

I don't follow. How can something beneficial NOT create a "skill" (I'd go with "effectiveness") gap?

Here. Vanu weapons are the only ones that get crosshairs. TR and NC can still aim down sights, but Vanu are the only ones that provide HUD elements within the helmet.

That's a beneficial feature for Vanu. Are you saying it wouldn't create a skill gap?

FastAndFree · 2012-03-21, 09:08 AM

That is a terrible comparison.

A better one would be: A player has a gamer mouse with extra buttons

He sets the medpack button to his mouse so he can effortlessly push it in the heat of battle while the other player needs to reach for the F keys in the middle of the firefight.
Does this create a skill gap?

KrazeyVIII · 2012-03-21, 10:35 AM

This would hurt the game IMO.

As cool as it us, in ARMA2 you still have the option to turn your head without using TIR.

In PS2, if you do NOT have the hardware then you will not be able to turn your head. Even if the option is available for a player to have a head moving system via control modifiers they are still at a disadvantage because they have to give up doing something else to achieve the same vision goals (harder time strafing, aiming, changing weapons, reloading, etc.). So someone with TIR will have a MASSIVE advantage over you.

Also, they want to stick to the game feeling like a mainstream FPS. In mainstream FPS if you sneak up on someone from the sides or behind (can't see their front) you expect to not be seen.

It is a very cool idea, don't get me wrong, but I don't feel it would fit in in PS2. Having TIR in ARMA2 already gives you a huge advantage even though other players can tilt their heads with their mouse+modifier just because it's so much easier to do. This would turn into the quad-core difference in PS1 where if you didn't have one then you were already at a disadvantage.

*edit*

I won't get flustered if it's implemented in the future, but I do feel that it gives player that have it and advantage. I used the word massive up higher but that's definitely over exaggerating.

kaffis · 2012-03-21, 10:36 AM

Yeah, I was exaggerating with the comparison. It was intentional.

The point is, though, that if it's not a big advantage because it's not a BIG benefit, then it's omission isn't a big deal, right? The more you guys declare how awesome it is, the more I worry about how much at a disadvantage somebody who doesn't spend that >$100 will be at.

Algo · 2012-03-21, 10:40 AM

Not having head movement on infantry is not a big deal when you can spin on a dime anyway to get sa.

Not having freelook on cockpit vehicles (atv's, aircraft, buggies etc) would be a bit meh tho

Skitrel · 2012-03-21, 10:51 AM

No more so at a disadvantage than the person flying air with a m+kb compared to the person with $400 worth of joystick, pedals and throttle controls.

The same effect can be acquired through simply turning the mouse, it doesn't increase what can be looked at at the same time, it doesn't increase the FOV, it just allows people to look around in a different manner. That's all. While you're right, the gameplay advantages are small and it's not big deal, if cockpits for vehicles aren't a major difference in the game then why add those? If animations for enter/exit aren't a major difference then why add those? If, etc etc. The point is that a surprisingly high number of people have this bit of kit now, and you can build one yourself for 5$ with a few LEDs that works just as well (the software is the important part really). Adding something that can add so much to the game in terms of immersion, fun and just generally making it feel awesome isn't a bad thing, even if ultimately it wouldn't matter too much if it were not in the game.

I'm pretty sure everyone here can relate to that argument, as I'm pretty sure there was absolutely nobody against enter/exit animations.

MrBloodworth · 2012-03-21, 10:53 AM

Does TrackIR really matter if there is no cockpit?

FastAndFree · 2012-03-21, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Does TrackIR really matter if there is no cockpit?

As long as your view is affixed to the direction your aircraft is pointing freelook is a big deal, yes

Originally Posted by kaffis

The point is, though, that if it's not a big advantage because it's not a BIG benefit, then it's omission isn't a big deal, right?

The problem is that we are talking about 2 issues here and they get mixed together : freelook and TrackIR support.
Freelook would be useful for practically everyone. TrackIR would make it more simple to use for those who have it.

Originally Posted by kaffis

The more you guys declare how awesome it is, the more I worry about how much at a disadvantage somebody who doesn't spend that >$100 will be at.

I also keep saying that flying with a throttle lever and rudder pedals is the most awesome thing since sliced bread.
Would you say the fun I get from them puts regular keyboard pilots at a disadvantage?

Skitrel · 2012-03-21, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Does TrackIR really matter if there is no cockpit?

Cockpits confirmed. GDC footage of flying was temporary.

kaffis · 2012-03-21, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by FastAndFree

I also keep saying that flying with a throttle lever and rudder pedals is the most awesome thing since sliced bread.
Would you say the fun I get from them puts regular keyboard pilots at a disadvantage?

Actually, yes. Mouse and Keyboard pilots are rarely competitive with joystick pilots, in my experience with games that attempt to offer both in a pitch/yaw/roll/thrust flight model. Throw in that the Scythe may have some linear motion in the vertical and horizontal axes, as well, and I think that pretty well dooms the keyboard.

This is a somewhat less concerning issue, as capable joystick hardware can be had for, as I said above, ~$20, and isn't an issue with infantry at all, and a minor issue (at best) with vehicles.

Also, the problem with maintaining that freelook is useful to everyone is simple -- it is, but it is much *less* useful to those who don't have a ready way to control it without suspending control of their motion while they do. Whether that suspension of control is taking your hand off your mouse to use numpad hotkeys, or holding a button/key to toggle your mouse/joystick from controlling your vehicle to controlling your freelook.

Keys and joystick hat switches are ultimately pretty lousy at freelook, because they're not analog inputs. They work best to snap your camera to alternate fixed angles, which is inferior to analogue freelook because it's more disorienting and makes tracking targets at the edges of the fixed angles difficult.

So, yes. Freelook is useful to everybody. However, it's MORE useful to people with capabilities like TrackIR or VR displays which can track head motion, and that translates to an advantage.

Skitrel · 2012-03-21, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

Actually, yes. Mouse and Keyboard pilots are rarely competitive with joystick pilots, in my experience with games that attempt to offer both in a pitch/yaw/roll/thrust flight model. Throw in that the Scythe may have some linear motion in the vertical and horizontal axes, as well, and I think that pretty well dooms the keyboard.

This isn't true. The top 10 pilots on BF3 are made up of 7 m+kb and 3 joystick users. Most pilots on Arma prefer m+kb over joystick. There is a certain level of extra precision that a mouse has over a joystick, while a joystick makes holding turns easier it does not make tiny precision aiming adjustments easier.

As for free look, free look in cockpits is a given, it's a standard in flying vehicles now and we can expect it, that means it'll be compatible with track IR, whether the devs physically implement it or not it'll be possible to make it work. The extra work that is really wanted here is the addition of porting freelook to the infantry too, that's really what's wanted here. We all know it'll work for flight already, that or there's going to be a feature people expect in their flying vehicles missing.

HalfManHalfGod · 2012-03-21, 12:18 PM

delete

HalfManHalfGod · 2012-03-21, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

Actually, yes. Mouse and Keyboard pilots are rarely competitive with joystick pilots, in my experience with games that attempt to offer both in a pitch/yaw/roll/thrust flight model. Throw in that the Scythe may have some linear motion in the vertical and horizontal axes, as well, and I think that pretty well dooms the keyboard.

This is a somewhat less concerning issue, as capable joystick hardware can be had for, as I said above, ~$20, and isn't an issue with infantry at all, and a minor issue (at best) with vehicles.

Also, the problem with maintaining that freelook is useful to everyone is simple -- it is, but it is much *less* useful to those who don't have a ready way to control it without suspending control of their motion while they do. Whether that suspension of control is taking your hand off your mouse to use numpad hotkeys, or holding a button/key to toggle your mouse/joystick from controlling your vehicle to controlling your freelook.

Keys and joystick hat switches are ultimately pretty lousy at freelook, because they're not analog inputs. They work best to snap your camera to alternate fixed angles, which is inferior to analogue freelook because it's more disorienting and makes tracking targets at the edges of the fixed angles difficult.

So, yes. Freelook is useful to everybody. However, it's MORE useful to people with capabilities like TrackIR or VR displays which can track head motion, and that translates to an advantage.

I don't understand you argument. Why limit the games features? I suppose people with larger monitors or dedicated voice comms for their outfit translates to an advantage but you're not whining about those...

The game should NOT be limited to the lowest common denominator. Otherwise why not restrict what hardware can play the game?