Sacrifice of Vehicle Interior Animations & Enter/Exit:

[Cpt-Praxius]

There's been a few threads I have seen so far with many people discussing the state of the vehicle production and the time lines involved in rolling them out into RO2.

I was curious to see how many people view the importance of the interior vehicle animations and the animation of entering/exiting of vehicles.

So here's a poll.... yes as wonderfully useful as polls in these forums can be, here's another poll.

And of course, feel free to post details of why you voted if you like.

"Would you be willing to have no interior vehicle animations or enter/exit animations for vehicles if it meant vehicles and other content would be added into RO2 much faster than 6+ months per vehicle?"

 

[Nikita]

I say it's still too early to tell. Sure, it may have taken Tripwire '6 months' on the first tanks, but until the second pair are released, for all we know they've streamlined the process now that they know what they're doing.

We are getting two new tanks in the forseeable future. In addition, I anticipate that tank development will only get easier as time goes by. Think about how many vehicles are based on the Panzer III or Panzer IV chassis (Stug III, Stug IV, Jagdpanther IV), thereby sharing many of resources? The T70, in turn, serves as the chassis for the SU76, etc... The T34/76 can conceivably give rise to the T34/85, which gives rise to the SU-85... In addition, the M3 Stuart from Rising Storm can also be converted to Soviet service with a simple reskinning, substitution of DT machine guns for the M1919s, and replacement of the American crew with the Russian crew models.

I am NOT saying that developing tanks is easy. I'm just saying that the effort taken to develop the tanking system for the first time (concept creation, crew positions, armor system, AI, animations, dialogue, ballistics...) is not necessarily representative of what is needed for the second set of tanks. Don't get me wrong--it's still a hurdle, but I say we wait and see before saying it's unjustified effort.

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

I say it's still too early to tell. Sure, it may have taken Tripwire '6 months' on the first tanks, but until the second pair are released, for all we know they've streamlined the process now that they know what they're doing.

We are getting two new tanks in the forseeable future. In addition, I anticipate that tank development will only get easier as time goes by. Think about how many vehicles are based on the Panzer III or Panzer IV chassis (Stug III, Stug IV, Jagdpanther IV), thereby sharing many of resources? The T70, in turn, serves as the chassis for the SU76, etc... The T34/76 can conceivably give rise to the T34/85, which gives rise to the SU-85... In addition, the M3 Stuart from Rising Storm can also be converted to Soviet service with a simple reskinning, substitution of DT machine guns for the M1919s, and replacement of the American crew with the Russian crew models.

I am NOT saying that developing tanks is easy. I'm just saying that the effort taken to develop the tanking system for the first time (concept creation, crew positions, armor system, AI, animations, dialogue, ballistics...) is not necessarily representative of what is needed for the second set of tanks. Don't get me wrong--it's still a hurdle, but I say we wait and see before saying it's unjustified effort.

Fair enough, and chances are the progress in developing the tanks will get a bit faster.... but then you have to worry about the transports, such as Half-Tracks..... right now the tanks are designed to have the players locked inside and can not leave the tanks or enter them on the fly. If I remember correctly, the reason for this was because they didn't get proper enter/exit animations done yet for them. (I may be mistaken)

The real problem lies in transports that hold multiple players in multiple positions, who need to enter/exit the vehicles.

^ In that regard, the interior animations of the transports & the entering/exiting of those will be pretty daunting & probably be quite buggy for some time until they're better fine tuned.

And if that's the case, should we all wait for the transports to have fully functioning animations inside the vehicles, as well as fully developed animations for exiting and entering them so they match the existing two tanks........ should we have the transports have no enter/exit animations, and dumbed down (or no) interior animations while the tanks do..... or just to keep everything symmetrical, should everything have the interior animations and enter/exit animations tossed for the time being??

As it stands now, the interior animations of the tanks are not used very often in the first place unless half the crew is killed..... as normally you instantly switch from one seat to the other anyways.

For me.... these features are just not worth the effort at this stage, they don't really do much for me in regards to immerssion, and make Tripwire's work load much greater than it should be.

 

[Sensemann]

If only infantry could ride on the tanks, there would be less time pressure to get the halftracks. On maps like Ogledow and Arad, it's essential that infantry can get into a capzone via transport, rather than walking.

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

If only infantry could ride on the tanks, there would be less time pressure to get the halftracks. On maps like Ogledow and Arad, it's essential that infantry can get into a capzone via transport, rather than walking.

Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I think TWI should sacrifice these eye candy animations so that we can get these vehicles into the game faster.

More larger maps would be designed by many in the community sooner, more content could be pushed into the game faster, more people would flock to the game again to play with all this new content, new maps, and new vehicles..... rather than just sitting around waiting for something new while they're bored from playing the same maps with the same content for months on end.

Added:

I see that so far the poll is pretty close. (7 for - 6 against removal)

 

[how2skate_com]

Tbh I dislike how tanking is right now. The fancy interiors don't fix the broken gameplay.

If they put 6 months in developing a few tanks, I'd rather they don't do any interiors and fix some urgent bugs first...

 

[ikkiewikkie]

I like the interiors and animations in tanks. It would be a step back to leave them out. I think it is good to leave them out as some kind of temporary solution so we can at least use new tanks/APC's and then TWI can add the interiors later on in future updates.

So yes, I wouldn't mind having them left out as a temporary solution but I would love to see interiors added in the future.

Also, I think they should first fix the current tanks before they start making new vehicles. Quality > quantity.

 

[Olivier]

I like the interiors and animations in tanks. It would be a step back to leave them out. I think it is good to leave them out as some kind of temporary solution so we can at least use new tanks/APC's and then TWI can add the interiors later on in future updates.

So yes, I wouldn't mind having them left out as a temporary solution but I would love to see interiors added in the future.

Also, I think they should first fix the current tanks before they start making new vehicles. Quality > quantity.

You might call it a step back but I'd rather say that they decided to go too far in the first place. The level of detail of the tanks is close to what I would expect from tanks that would have been made for a cinema production or for a tank simulator, not an FPS.

 

[Mikeedude]

I myself never view the interior of the tank apart from a glance when i first got the game.
I think it was a bad idea to waste time designing and implementing the full interiors.
Tanks are coming out so slow we may only get 4 more and 2 apc's in the next two years.
It is also holding back community projects, which kept RO1 going a lot longer than it should have.
The idea looked good on paper but considering in combat you won't be checking your tanks interior and never usually last long enough to change positions,it seems a waste of resources.
Considering tanks are rarely on servers at all at the present it makes you wonder if the effort was worth it just to see the hull mger's facial hair.
Exit animations are more difficult but mantling out of the apc would do me.

 

[Fafnir_6]

I like the high-detail damage model of RO2's tanks but the fully-realized interior (while cool looking) is pretty useless but requires SO much work to build for any new vehicles in game (and we need lots). Moving to positions occupied by dead crew mates is realistic but I find it not as fun as the old system in RO1 (maybe a case of realism trumping fun). In any case, an animation to move from one position to another could be replaced with a few-seconds-long black screen saying "moving to Gunner position" accompanied by the sounds of someone clambering through the tank. A fully realised interior is NOT required. Make vehicles easy to build for this game and awesomeness shall ensue.

I can do without entry and exit animations (nothing beyond what is in Mare Nostrum or Darkest Hour should be required - i.e. mantling). But tank entry and exit is absolutely necessary.

Seriously, I played some Mare Nostrum last night and I'd forgotten how awesome the tanking is in it, RO:Ost and Darkest Hour. The tanking is relatively simple and hella fun. Why did RO2 depart from that? Keep the nice RO2 graphics and damage model but bring back easy-to-build vehicles and tank entry/exit (using the MN/DH mechanic of moving to a hatched position to unbutton...to forstall all the insta-exit griping).

Cheers and thanks for putting up a poll,

Fafnir_6

 

[Proud_God]

quality > quantity. I good game keeps me coming back even if there is only 1 map, and a small set of equipment.

 

[Das Bose]

At the rate we're going we won't see HT's until after xmas. No flashy animations or painful detail, just more choice and fewer bugs please. Gameplay is king.

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

quality > quantity. I good game keeps me coming back even if there is only 1 map, and a small set of equipment.

For me it depends on what quantity and quality one's talking about.

For RO2, I don't think Quality (Interior Animations / Enter & Exit) trumps Quantity (more vehicles, more content, more variety)

There is a balance that's required for RO between Quality & Quantity..... I enjoy and appreciate the Quality of the models, textures, the map designs and character movements/abilities..... but Quantity is important for RO, just as it was for ROCA and RO1, where you had variety on what you can pick from, tactics, weapons, vehicles, maps, etc. etc.....

You can do it all with a great level of quality, but it needs to be balanced so that the game doesn't end up with only a fraction of what RO1 had.... or even what ROCA had.

Yes, the level of quality in RO2 has really impressed me.... it impressed me so much that I've played basically every single day since the Beta launch.... right up until January when I eventually got over killed by the limited content.

It's just too repetitive now for me and I'm dying for some new stuff.

 

[Mekhazzio]

I have zero concern with quantity when it comes to armor. A WW2 tank is a WW2 tank is a WW2 tank, they're all going to play almost identically. Putting in a variant that has a slightly different glacis angle and a different radio adds nothing at all to gameplay. A different class of vehicle entirely, like a transport or the good old clown car, that, at least, is a real addition. More tanks, however, are just a waste of time, and a rather inappropriate one when the ones we've already got have serious issues with their armor models.

But exit & entry animations are non-negotiable. You can't have players simply instantly teleport into and out of vehicles. It creates fantastically gamey mechanics, as every single other FPS with vehicles has amply demonstrated, including RO1. Do the transitions right or don't do it at all.

 

[defektive]

Animations and spangly interior appearances should be entirely secondary to fixing the mechanics of the currently broken tank game. The tanking in RO2 isn't poor because of the lack of chassis options; it's a poor experience because of the multitude of mechanical/design shortcomings - which will likely only be exacerbated with the simple addition of more chassis, not improved. The RO2 tank game seems to have all of the tools in place to make it superior to the ROx mods but at present none of that potential is being realised.

The tank game fault list is extensive and has been covered, and re-covered, in various threads throughout these fora. If TWI would like us to compile a concise niggle list into one thread then I

 

[Major_Day]

I like the high-detail damage model of RO2's tanks but the fully-realized interior (while cool looking) is pretty useless but requires SO much work to build for any new vehicles in game (and we need lots). Moving to positions occupied by dead crew mates is realistic but I find it not as fun as the old system in RO1 (maybe a case of realism trumping fun). In any case, an animation to move from one position to another could be replaced with a few-seconds-long black screen saying "moving to Gunner position" accompanied by the sounds of someone clambering through the tank. A fully realised interior is NOT required. Make vehicles easy to build for this game and awesomeness shall ensue.

I can do without entry and exit animations (nothing beyond what is in Mare Nostrum or Darkest Hour should be required - i.e. mantling). But tank entry and exit is absolutely necessary.

Seriously, I played some Mare Nostrum last night and I'd forgotten how awesome the tanking is in it, RO:Ost and Darkest Hour. The tanking is relatively simple and hella fun. Why did RO2 depart from that? Keep the nice RO2 graphics and damage model but bring back easy-to-build vehicles and tank entry/exit (using the MN/DH mechanic of moving to a hatched position to unbutton...to forstall all the insta-exit griping).

Cheers and thanks for putting up a poll,

Fafnir_6

This is all we need,put the fun back into tanking.:IS2:

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I like the way the interior has been done in ROHOS, but it is a shame that it does take so long to create a vehicle. If I am forced to choose, I will take quality over quantity. I know there are a lot of tankers out there, but even more players who prefer playing infantry and to them, a tank is a tank.

One thing though, I do not want instant teleporting in and out of vehicles. I really hated that in ROOST. Next to that, I would prefer that tankers stay within their tanks. I know there may be a small benefit or two to getting out, but again the drawbacks really outweigh any benefits in my opinion. In ROOST, I really hated that tankers would get out of their vehicle and act like infantry and we all know that many players will do exactly that if given the chance. I say this even if TWI decided to implement full enter and exit animations for tanks.

 

[Cultivator]

Agreed, which is one of the reasons why I think TWI should sacrifice these eye candy animations so that we can get these vehicles into the game faster.

More larger maps would be designed by many in the community sooner, more content could be pushed into the game faster, more people would flock to the game again to play with all this new content, new maps, and new vehicles..... rather than just sitting around waiting for something new while they're bored from playing the same maps with the same content for months on end.

Thats the main point why all of my "clan"mates (10+ guys) quit playing Ro HoS in the last few month. And the last one who kept playing with me told me yesterday that he is also realy sick of the all the little stock maps which he played more than 400 hours now. The Classic Mode is nice, but without new content its also not realy fun. So he told me that he will stop playing now till we have new bigger maps,......... and halftracks

And i can

 

[Mike_Nomad]

I have zero concern with quantity when it comes to armor. A WW2 tank is a WW2 tank is a WW2 tank, they're all going to play almost identically. Putting in a variant that has a slightly different glacis angle and a different radio adds nothing at all to gameplay. A different class of vehicle entirely, like a transport or the good old clown car, that, at least, is a real addition. More tanks, however, are just a waste of time, and a rather inappropriate one when the ones we've already got have serious issues with their armor models.

Ah..... there is truth - Mek dislikes tanks. Your bias is showing.

But exit & entry animations are non-negotiable. You can't have players simply instantly teleport into and out of vehicles. It creates fantastically gamey mechanics, as every single other FPS with vehicles has amply demonstrated, including RO1. Do the transitions right or don't do it at all.

Odd you should say that.... In RO and DH, both of which are very successful, had no entry and exit anims. We can do without them here too.

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

I like the way the interior has been done in ROHOS, but it is a shame that it does take so long to create a vehicle. If I am forced to choose, I will take quality over quantity. I know there are a lot of tankers out there, but even more players who prefer playing infantry and to them, a tank is a tank.

One thing though, I do not want instant teleporting in and out of vehicles. I really hated that in ROOST. Next to that, I would prefer that tankers stay within their tanks. I know there may be a small benefit or two to getting out, but again the drawbacks really outweigh any benefits in my opinion. In ROOST, I really hated that tankers would get out of their vehicle and act like infantry and we all know that many players will do exactly that if given the chance. I say this even if TWI decided to implement full enter and exit animations for tanks.

In all the previous RO's that had vehicles/tanks, I never saw tank jumping as any real problem since those who hopped out of their tanks did so because their tanks were basically ready to blow up due to being shot up by other tanks and anti tank classes..... which meant that if they did hop out, they're right in the sights of whoever has been shooting the crap out of their vehicle and thus, quite an easy target.

But having the slim chance of getting out of an almost destroyed tank and surviving long enough to either help as infantry, or to get to another tank, or some other tactic, is better than being locked inside the vehicle until you die.... or worse.... being locked inside a tank that's been disabled so badly that you can't shoot back or move anywhere.

And so far since the original Beta launch, I still can't get the K button for scuttling to work, so I'm stuck inside the tank until someone comes along and blows me up..... which is a real waste of my playing time.

..... But exit & entry animations are non-negotiable. You can't have players simply instantly teleport into and out of vehicles. It creates fantastically gamey mechanics, as every single other FPS with vehicles has amply demonstrated, including RO1. Do the transitions right or don't do it at all.

Well since no other decent FPS that i've played, or have seen being played, has fully animated and detailed enter/exit animations (and most just have instant spawn in/out of tanks like what exists in ROCA/RO1), what you seem to be demanding doesn't seem very practical.

You make it sound like incorporating these functions (as being non-negotiable) is something so simple to do, that every other game developer, including TWI, should have no problems implementing into their games.

But if it's really that simple to do and should be done without question... how come nobody else has yet to do it decently in their games?

Even BF3, for all it's so-called wonder, doesn't have enter/exit animations involved in their tanks, APC's or aircraft.

Do the transitions right or don't do them at all?

Then I'd prefer they don't do them at all & focus on getting the vehicles into the game without them.