Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: 1K3 on June 30, 2005, 11:05:21 PM
-
Is the costomizable 1st person view mode too gamey?
-
i dont think its gamey at all because in real life you would be able to move your head in all sorts of angles without even thinking about it.
(Just noticed you are from vegas...which part? If you dont mind me asking)
-
I've not even seen this debate before... so why is it the great debate?
-
Silverado Ranch... South of LV
LV reminds me of how Los Angeles/Hollywood area (where i used to live a yr ago) looked like 10 yrs ago.
(what part of LV youi live in?)
-
The 6views is a bit lenient tho.
It shouldn't be as goddanged restricted as IL2/FB, but it shouldn't offer a "panoramic" six view either.
Here's a mock-up on 6-views I did some time ago:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805665_il2style.jpg)
6-view, IL-2 style. Too restricted.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805627_ahstyle.jpg)
6-view, AH style. Flexible and reasonable, but very lenient
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805705_realstyle.jpg)
My take on "Realistic" 6-view.
-
ah i live near Buffalo and Lake Mead in the summerlin area...yes vegas is growing at an alarming rate, and it drives me insane. I need out of this place lol.
-
I think the problem is to recreate the peripheral zone............
I am not sure what angle of view we get but for sure its at least 90 degrees where as peripheral does take in as much as 130 IIRC.
Yet we see all of the 90 as if focused upon it..............
I think full vector Track IR is / could be the defining approach if not a VR helmet
-
I happen to work with some sight related issues :)
The whole view of 2 eyes covers about 180 degs horizontally and 130 degs vertically. The focused sight covers only about 1,5-2,5 degs (foveal zone, used for reading etc.) but there is also a parafoveal zone of appx. 5 degs whic has some 50% of the accuracy of the foveal zone. Eyes move constantly from one point to another to be able to construct the view we think we see. The peripheral view is good for noticing movement which can then draw the attention and make someone move their eyeys there to check the cause of movement.
Most flight sim games have a max view of about 90 degs and of one eye only. We are practically half-blind in all these games :)
-
Originally posted by 1K3
Is the costomizable 1st person view mode too gamey?
Drugs are bad.
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Drugs are bad.
Oh, I don`t know about that. One time I picked up a really good batch of..........
............................ errrrrrr.........ummmmmmm.... ....
yea, yea. Drugs are bad.
-
God forbid a game be gamey:rolleyes:
-
Well, it could use some improvement BTW :)
Having no six view at all, like how IL2/FB done it, is clearly an overkill. Makes no sense at all. However, the good thing about Il2/FB was that the pilot is forced to check left rear and right rear sides individually - unlike AH where a single 6 view virtually gives out a panoramic view of the 5, 6, 7 O'c at the same time. (the so-called "Linda Blair" view..)
It does help in increasing the intensity of combat maneuvering, and gives the gamers a taste of why having somebody behind your six was such a bad thing to happen.
-
The AH internal view system is huge. I love it. I've been spoiled with its flexibility; and because of that, I can't find peace in many other sims.
gamey? I can't believe this topic needs to be discussed :)
-
The view system is great. No need for a change.
Next subject.
-
"Great", as in "comfortable".
But that's not always good enough :)
-
the views are always the most problematic thing in flight sims. No way you can make anything near panoramic view a pilot gets with a 17" screen on a desk.
There's this view thing you put on your head, that I forgot its name, and pans your views vith your head, but it's still only marginally better. And only few have it.
This is one area where you have to compromise one type of realizm - exact pilot view, for another - pilot SA.
For a combat flight sim, the later is much MUCH more important.
Bozon
-
I agree with the general premise, bozon.
But I must comment that there is always a possibility that such compromises may be overdone, which in turn, has even worse effects to the game as a whole.
Not to mention that the existence of icons alone already offset a very handsome chunk of SA issues in the game.
You get a smaller view than a real pilot? But you can always switch views around quickly and instantly recognize an enemy as far as 6.0d away, without any kind of serious scanning around. Just catch a glimpse of "red" and there he is, icon, distance and all.
There are two things which bother people who are experienced in AH, when they try IL2.
The first is the restriction in visible angles, and the second is the need to check left and right rear views individually to keep track of enemy position.
Unless you have enough practice in this view mode, any first impression of the game would be, "Gee, this game totally blows. If I only had enough visibility as AH, I'd blast every single one of these n00bs out of the sky."
I know because I felt exactly the same. :)
The lack of 6-view is total bogus, but checking left and right rears individually, believe me, is not. Granting a singular view of the entire 6oc area with one flick of hatswitch, is a total overcompensation. It takes a lot out of the aircombat.
Dividing the 6views into two, is at first, going to be difficult to adjust to. However, after a while it really does make sense.
-
I dunno - you get audio clues where the enemy is in IL2. The audio clues are more accurate in il2 than they are in AH - better doppler effect.
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Drugs are bad.
Says who?
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Drugs are bad.
I had no idea Morpheus was a scientologist! :D Maybe he has secret admiration for Tom Cruise? jk bro!
-
Kweassa, what do you have mapped to your hat switch?
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1120382405_suggestion.jpg)
I've been suggesting this for some time, and it wouldn't be that much harder to do.
First, the room for head movement, at least when looking at 6oc angle, should be under a bit tougher restriction. Specifically, when looking directly behind, the ability to move head position "back" and "up" should be greatly restricted.
Then, when the hat key is moved in a sequence of to , it would give out one six view which you could program, and when it is moved to , it would give another which you could program.
Essentially, the total amount of view you would get when checking 6 is the same as it is, but you've got to do it twice, right and left individually.
It may not seem much, and just an aesthetic change which needlessly restricts views, but I guarantee that it is not. Checking left and right respectively makes a lot of difference!
-
Kweassa, thats not a "View" change so much as a "Field of view".
Talk to HT, we have the wide field of view because we are so limited with the equipment we have.
17" flat monitors are NOTHING like the real field of view a person has.
BTW zoom in all the way, then look at that 6 view again. You'll find its right on the money. Thats partly why zoom is in the game.
It ain't broke, so don't fix it, futz with it, or tweak it please!
-
I did a site search for "custom view gamey" and found exactly one post in one thread where someone in 2003 mentioned that using Track IR and custom views might be "gamey." I don't recall anyone actually debating him about that point.
Is there some other forum on a different website where this debate rages? You might have misposted.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
I thought maybe someone had formed a protest and marched in the street and I had missed getting to throw eggs at the crowd.
-
Ghost, having a 17" flat monitor has nothing to do with being able to see too sides of the rear fuselage at once.
If that were the case, how are you going to explain the fact that some of the newer, razor-backed planes that have a much much more limited rear views and essentially has a field of view that is simular to what I've suggested?
The angle of the rear areas aren't changed at all to what we have. The only difference is that you have to check twice.
-
Personaly, I find the competitive aspect of AH to be extremely high and to make it harder would only apeal to those who spend 18 hours a day in the MA. I think the game/realism ratio is way fine for the player who plays about 2 hours per day, and probably too hard for those who play less.
Is kinda like when EQ came out. People spent 20 hours a day playing and leveled to 1000 in 6 days and cried they were bored..
-
Not to sound disrespectful BTW :) but that seems kinda weak argument.. what you mean is the arena populace is so unskilled that when they have to check 6 by "looking over right shoulder" and "looking over left shoulder", they'll suddenly feel that the game is so incredibly hard that they're gonna have fits?!
I don't think so. I think there will be complaints for sure, but after a while I believe it can be easily adapted to. I mean, the average skill level of IL2 players aren't so hot either, but they obviously got no problems in dealing with the totally fubared view system with overly restrictive view angles... they still manage to have fun.
Having to check 6 left and right individually, brings slight changes to tactical maneuvering, and I really believe people can get some great kicks out of it! :) I mean, for instance, the adrenaline rush and panic factor just feels awesome when you have to check left rear and right rear individually! Like, currently, we just hold the hat switch back and maneuver all the way like that... but when you have to do it this way, you scissor to one direction, switch views.. search for the bad guy.. you change direction.. you turn head again.. and search for the guy behind you again... woops! he's not there! Where'd he go? .. and etc etc.. :)
I'm pretty sure both more experienced vets and newbies can really feel into the new intensity of combat maneuvering this small change offers :)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
The 6views is a bit lenient tho.
It shouldn't be as goddanged restricted as IL2/FB, but it shouldn't offer a "panoramic" six view either.
Here's a mock-up on 6-views I did some time ago:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805665_il2style.jpg)
6-view, IL-2 style. Too restricted.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805627_ahstyle.jpg)
6-view, AH style. Flexible and reasonable, but very lenient
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/232_1088805705_realstyle.jpg)
My take on "Realistic" 6-view.
IT'S A GAME, not supposed to be realistic so sit back, have a cuppa coffee and all who want realism fly MSCFS so they can play with all the pretty nobs and buttons.
-
IT'S A GAME, not supposed to be realistic so sit back, have a cuppa coffee and all who want realism fly MSCFS so they can play with all the pretty nobs and buttons.
Then why does HTC even bother modelling historic performance of the planes?
For pure gamey fun, the bogus modelling of Fighter Ace could be a lot more fun than what AH offers, no? No cockpits.. unlimited ammo.. air spawns... inprecise flight modelling.. etc etc.