Removal of tactical view

[Nikita]

Originally Posted by >< f4ct0r...13

In the end, we have to accept that there are two very distinct schools represented in these forums.

One school wants as many computer aids as possible.

Another wants a unique experience.

I respect it, but have no idea why school #1 doesn't leave RO:OST's kid brother alone, and go where there are already (much better) games built for them.

Wait--you want US to leave?

Hey, I'm a bit of an elitist too when it comes to a good multiplayer FPS... I tell all of my friends to their faces that their beloved Halo, CoD, and Battlefield games are just pedestrian corn feed for the masses, but you're taking things a little far over one (or two) of the most miniscule, inconsequential features of the game.

I hope you recognize that there are things about realism that are subjective.

If you were designing your ideal first-person shooter, it's clear that you'd make it like fighting in a life-support-esque diving suit. Your vision is limited, you can't tell when a bullet hits your suit in the knee, you have no way of telling how tired your suit is, and you were plopped straight into battle with a compass and a map with no directions or orders.

If we were designing our ideal first-person shooter, however, it's clear that we'd make it feel organic, like you're an actual person, not someone inside a suit. We like the idea of almost feeling a bullet smashing our thigh, or our breath pounding in our exhausted lungs. We want to see the flash of a thrust bayonet out of the corner of our eye. We want to remember our Lieutenant pointing at the Conveyor Tower and the Grain Elevator before the battle and describing the assault plan.

We feel that, in a way, the human body is a sort of computer-assisted device.

When you put your hand into a blazing oven, your brain reflexively tells you to withdraw it. When something moves in the corner of your eye, light-sensitive photoreceptors send an instant intelligence report to your brain.



In fact, you can argue that in reality, you'd be even more 'computer-assisted' than in RO2.

• Your brain would trigger a strength-boosting, pain-dulling adrenaline surge upon seeing an enemy emerging from behind a corner, swinging a rifle.
• You would have three-dimensional hearing that would tell you if the gunshot you'd just heard was on the floor above you or in the next hallway.
• You would have the sense of touch, allowing you to feel the subtle vibration of footsteps.
• You'd be able to instantly recognize friends, aquaintances, and rivals among your platoon-mates at considerable distances, facilitating friend/foe identification.
• You'd smell the stench of burning cordite in your soon-to-explode tank.
• You'd feel how much force you were putting into a grenade throw or rifle butt swing.

To you, your game is more realistic. To us, the current game is more realistic. We can agree to disagree. It's a different definition of realism, no matter how you put it.

You always have the freedom to pursue your own vision of realism and make a mutator that meets your own standards. That's the beauty of Tripwire's modder-friendly philosophy.

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Originally Posted by Nikita

Wait--you want US to leave?

Hey, I'm a bit of an elitist too when it comes to a good multiplayer FPS... I tell all of my friends to their faces that their beloved Halo, CoD, and Battlefield games are just pedestrian corn feed for the masses, but you're taking things a little far over one (or two) of the most miniscule, inconsequential features of the game.

I hope you recognize that there are things about realism that are subjective.

If you were designing your ideal first-person shooter, it's clear that you'd make it like fighting in a life-support-esque diving suit. Your vision is limited, you can't tell when a bullet hits your suit in the knee, you have no way of telling how tired your suit is, and you were plopped straight into battle with a compass and a map with no directions or orders.

If we were designing our ideal first-person shooter, however, it's clear that we'd make it feel organic, like you're an actual person, not someone inside a suit. We like the idea of almost feeling a bullet smashing our thigh, or our breath pounding in our exhausted lungs. We want to see the flash of a thrust bayonet out of the corner of our eye. We want to remember our Lieutenant pointing at the Conveyor Tower and the Grain Elevator before the battle and describing the assault plan.

We feel that, in a way, the human body is a sort of computer-assisted device.

When you put your hand into a blazing oven, your brain reflexively tells you to withdraw it. When something moves in the corner of your eye, light-sensitive photoreceptors send an instant intelligence report to your brain.



In fact, you can argue that in reality, you'd be even more 'computer-assisted' than in RO2.

• Your brain would trigger a strength-boosting, pain-dulling adrenaline surge upon seeing an enemy emerging from behind a corner, swinging a rifle.
• You would have three-dimensional hearing that would tell you if the gunshot you'd just heard was on the floor above you or in the next hallway.
• You would have the sense of touch, allowing you to feel the subtle vibration of footsteps.
• You'd be able to instantly recognize friends, aquaintances, and rivals among your platoon-mates at considerable distances, facilitating friend/foe identification.
• You'd smell the stench of burning cordite in your soon-to-explode tank.
• You'd feel how much force you were putting into a grenade throw or rifle butt swing.

To you, your game is more realistic. To us, the current game is more realistic. We can agree to disagree. It's a different definition of realism, no matter how you put it.

You always have the freedom to pursue your own vision of realism and make a mutator that meets your own standards. That's the beauty of Tripwire's modder-friendly philosophy.

Wow. That was exaggerated to the max. You're trying way to hard, and that's indicative of juvenility. Really does take any authority out of whatever you're trying to say.

However, I know what you're saying. you want a computer to play for you, while you watch. You want your skills to be simulated, not earned.

I have to admit, the thing about "bio-suit" or whatever, made me think of a HUD with all kinds of blinking lights showing in someone's face.

Your last paragraph is the most telling. You have no regard for how this community has been split.

[PhoenixDragon]

Originally Posted by >< f4ct0r...13

180 degrees of vision. Whoo boy, we're separating the men from the boys now!

"keep your head on a swivel" - "watch your buddy's back". These are WW2 era peripheral indicators, not a computer to remove the lax from you and tell you where to look.

I think you're missing the point. In real life, without turning your head or even moving your eyes very much, you have about four times the viewable area as you do in RO2. Anything in that area is immediately visible, without having to turn your head to scan around. The result is that scanning the same visible area takes two (For a mostly flat engagement area) to four (For an area with significant height) times longer in-game than it does in real-life, and someone can pop out in an area that would be clearly visible from your point-of-aim in real-life yet be off-screen in-game.

Even for a perfect simulator, you have to make adaptations to fit the interface you have. If your argument is realism, you have to make adaptations to that interface, or what you get is inherently less realistic. It's just more clunky. It's just that some people correlate "clunky" with "realistic," even when it's not.

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Originally Posted by PhoenixDragon

I think you're missing the point. In real life, without turning your head or even moving your eyes very much, you have about four times the viewable area as you do in RO2. Anything in that area is immediately visible, without having to turn your head to scan around. The result is that scanning the same visible area takes two (For a mostly flat engagement area) to four (For an area with significant height) times longer in-game than it does in real-life, and someone can pop out in an area that would be clearly visible from your point-of-aim in real-life yet be off-screen in-game.

Even for a perfect simulator, you have to make adaptations to fit the interface you have. If your argument is realism, you have to make adaptations to that interface, or what you get is inherently less realistic. It's just more clunky. It's just that some people correlate "clunky" with "realistic," even when it's not.

In real life, you experience tunnel vision too. Again- in real life, if you don't look, you don't see. In this game- if you don't look, your computer sees. Really? Does making a kill after your computer tells you what to do make you proud?

The argument isn't even about realism. It is about the desire to have a game that requires player skill instead of computer input.

I've heard every excuse to justify computer aided playing. In the end, it is little more than the ugly, ugly, culture of entitlement...retching into the mouth of FPS games.

[Nikita]

Originally Posted by >< f4ct0r...13

Wow. That was exaggerated to the max. You're trying way to hard, and that's indicative of juvenility. Really does take any authority out of whatever you're trying to say.

However, I know what you're saying. you want a computer to play for you, while you watch. You want your skills to be simulated, not earned.

Juvenility? Me? Who's accusing everyone of wanting a computer to play the game for them? Who's asking other community members to leave? Who's accusing everyone else of being entitled?

Come on, f4ct0r, I remember you from Ostfront. Be reasonable.

[PhoenixDragon]

Originally Posted by >< f4ct0r...13

In real life, you experience tunnel vision too.

You already experience that in-game, too. It's very amusing to watch someone else playing a game, and noting how much more of the field you notice than what they do. Tunnel vision is nothing to do with a physically-restricted field of view, but with mental focus on a single point resulting in missing other, even blatantly obvious things. Even a guy walking right by you in a gorilla suit. The most amusing example I can think of from RO2, and coincidentally most damning to your position: The huge number of people who did not even know peripheral markers were in the game until someone pointed it out to them, because they never noticed the grey/white blobs at the edge of their screen. That is tunnel vision.

This isn't a case of people trying to make the game boost them beyond what they'd be able to do in an identical real-world situation, but an attempt to reduce the artificial handicap imposed by the interface hardware. There are some good tweaks that could be done with the peripheral indicators (And in fact, are being done) to bring them even closer to what you could expect in real-life.

I've heard every excuse to justify computer aided playing. In the end, it is little more than the ugly, ugly, culture of entitlement...retching into the mouth of FPS games.

You keep making up positions for other people, but that doesn't make them true. Being unable to see more than a ~70-degree wide area at one time is not realistic, and that is what matters to many people. Try actually confronting the points people are making instead of making up your own motives to attribute to them.

Of course, if we really wanted to get down to silly levels, computer gaming is computer-aided gaming. I'm betting you're quite happy with the computer-aided mechanics that happen when you click the mouse, rather than having to type out the exact bit-stream that your computer will interpret in order to pass on data to the server to confirm that you just shot someone. That's a computer aid, I suppose. But I doubt even you would complain that it's an example of the game playing itself for you.

[Golf33]

The computer is helping your trigger manipulation too. Ever noticed how your avatar never snatches the trigger, and it always breaks at the perfect moment for your shot? You don't see that in real life either. But if I wanted to introduce a random chance that your trigger pull might make you miss, or a slight random delay between you clicking the mouse and the weapon firing, I'm sure you'd object. So much for skill versus watching a computer play?

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Originally Posted by Golf33

The computer is helping your trigger manipulation too. Ever noticed how your avatar never snatches the trigger, and it always breaks at the perfect moment for your shot? You don't see that in real life either. But if I wanted to introduce a random chance that your trigger pull might make you miss, or a slight random delay between you clicking the mouse and the weapon firing, I'm sure you'd object. So much for skill versus watching a computer play?

Excellent example, but now you cross into a level that is far removed from enemy icons appearing on the map, or peripheral indicators.

But now that you mention it... Wouldn't that have been a novel addition? Something original, instead of the same tired blinking lights? I would play with it and cope, unconsciously grateful that the enemy couldn't see my icon on the map.

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Originally Posted by PhoenixDragon

You already experience that in-game, too. It's very amusing to watch someone else playing a game, and noting how much more of the field you notice than what they do. Tunnel vision is nothing to do with a physically-restricted field of view, but with mental focus on a single point resulting in missing other, even blatantly obvious things. Even a guy walking right by you in a gorilla suit. The most amusing example I can think of from RO2, and coincidentally most damning to your position: The huge number of people who did not even know peripheral markers were in the game until someone pointed it out to them, because they never noticed the grey/white blobs at the edge of their screen. That is tunnel vision.

This isn't a case of people trying to make the game boost them beyond what they'd be able to do in an identical real-world situation, but an attempt to reduce the artificial handicap imposed by the interface hardware. There are some good tweaks that could be done with the peripheral indicators (And in fact, are being done) to bring them even closer to what you could expect in real-life.



You keep making up positions for other people, but that doesn't make them true. Being unable to see more than a ~70-degree wide area at one time is not realistic, and that is what matters to many people. Try actually confronting the points people are making instead of making up your own motives to attribute to them.

Of course, if we really wanted to get down to silly levels, computer gaming is computer-aided gaming. I'm betting you're quite happy with the computer-aided mechanics that happen when you click the mouse, rather than having to type out the exact bit-stream that your computer will interpret in order to pass on data to the server to confirm that you just shot someone. That's a computer aid, I suppose. But I doubt even you would complain that it's an example of the game playing itself for you.

I've heard it before! Scientifically, it makes sense, but the result is a computer telling you where your targets are. Recon planes tell you what's everywhere too- in real time.

Hell, if you blind fire at PIV icons (that your computer saw through smoke), you'll even hear the *snick* of a hit, and your avatar will yell out "I GOT HIM!".

C'mon, we're playing through the medium of a computer, but must the above scenario be possible? The overall community says yes, sadly.

Intellectually correct or not, there are things in a WW2 era game that wreck the experience, and for me (and others). The flashing lights and the removal of the puzzle of combat is very bad.

I am so sad that the replay-ability of the game is wrecked by the flashing lights. Instead of having to figure out a moving puzzle that is never the same twice, I follow computer icons around.

[Cwivey]

The seeing Peripheral Indicators through smoke is being fixed (Or has been) in the beta. The hit sounds have reduced /removed for Realism and Classic. Recon plane indicators are not real-time, with them being delayed to all units other than the commander by around five seconds, and they do not move as the target moves until the recon plane flies over again. And they do not show players under cover.


Lets see, if i start up RO2, join a server and let all them computer aids work away while I watch, guess what happens.

Fuck all.

You need skill in the game to survive, you have to aim at the enemy yourself, you have to click at the right times yourself, you have to know when not to move or when to haul ass out the way of a grenade. The indicators help, but don't make you a better player. I could know where every single player on the map is, but I will still more than likely get my arse handed to me because the other guy was better, using superior tactics or just plain lucky.



The rounds I've played in-game never work out the same way each time, people are in different spots every time, people capture objectives faster or slower than last time. I get lucky one time and dodge a bullet, other times it hits me in the face. Maybe my grenade lands next to the target in the window, killing him instantly, maybe it bounces just short and falls right back onto me. There are so many random features and actions in any single game that games will not play in the exact same way every single time. Want to know why? Because we're dealing with people, not some pre-set coded AI, told to do specific tasks when the player reaches a certain point. Understanding the whole moving mass of the enemy team is a damned tough puzzle to crack, and I doubt I ever will because it changes all the time, it shifts as the game progresses, as players get hit. Hell, maybe even their team has a commander who can manipulate the team to completely steam-roll mine in ways I never imagined.


Oh and everyone has these aids, so everyone's on level footing so in the end, it still comes down to skill regardless of how you try to flip the argument about.

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Individual Skill > Computer Aids

*Aids*

[Cwivey]

Originally Posted by >< f4ct0r...13

Individual Skill > Computer Aids

That's what my point was, glad you got it.

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Originally Posted by Cwivey

That's what my point was, glad you got it.

Then why do you defend recon planes?