FE2 ships also had rear-facing cameras. I guess the Pilot's Federation outlawed these since.
Gunner = Arcade Action Cam for the 12 yr olds?
- Thread starter MyHammer
- Start date
FE2 ships also had rear-facing cameras. I guess the Pilot's Federation outlawed these since.
I am not a big fan of guilds either, but that has nothing to do with the previous games. I have done the guildwars and LOTRO guilds and stuff. I just don't want to see it in Elite dangerous. There are plenty of games that do that kind of stuff. I would prefer ED to be a bit different. One of the reason why I bought the game as that it was online, but didn't have guilds in it.
Last edited:
Dude I think you got caught up in the argument, I dont want to hide my intentions here I´d like to see them keep their original design choice as mentioned in Mike Evans post:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/8589-3rd-person-view/page4 post 48
But my argument you quoted is about only implementing 3rd person gunnery, and not having first person at all, same with Elite 2 which had both modes first person and third person.
Last edited:
Lets really break this down, what would the first person tactical view be? Directly working one turret and aiming it like an arcade game? If you do that, turrets are worthless, gunners are worthless, so you have to be able to control all the turrets at once.
How do you control all the turrets at once, and from a first person view? Well, you can't just have say a camera on top of the ship that you view the scene from, because you need to be able to see in 360 degrees because of turrets on different parts of the ship, and again it will be useless if your ship is blocking half your view. Following from this, you have to then make the ship invisible if you can't see around it like you can in the 3rd person view. You also can't lock the camera to ship movements, it has to be independent, both because its too frustrating and thus useless to target while someone else is spinning around, and also because locking it isn't playable in VR without making people ill.
Now you have an invisible ship, and a reticle floating in space detached from anything. You have just created the 3rd person view but without the ship being visible. Wait though! The ship position and orientation is crucial to know where your turrets are and what you can fire at, so you have to have a visual representation of that orientation. Now you have recreated the 3rd person cam, but instead of the nice ship in center view, you have the same thing but with a little orange hologram on view somewhere to know the orientation.
You end up with the exact same effect, but made slightly less useful. Nothing is sufficiently "first person" about this, you just have the 3rd person cam from a very slightly different angle.
Well, what about sitting in your chair looking at a tactical display? Well ignoring all the lore reasons this would be beyond silly, from a game play perspective you don't want the primary way someone plays a game to be sitting in a chair, looking at their monitor of a scene of their avatar sitting in a chair, looking at a monitor of the thing you actually just want to be seeing in the first place. Beyond that reason, what is this tactical display going to show exactly? Is it literally just going to be your character, looking at a monitor, showing the 3rd person tactical display (or the first person version that is no different in action, except the ship isn't visible)?
What *is* a first person view? I haven't heard one good answer to this.
I've heard "controlling a turret like the millenium falcon!" which is thrown out the window as a possibility for a ton of reasons. I've also heard "sitting in your seat looking at a tactical display!" but nothing of what is ON that tactical display. For simple gameplay practicalities of controlling all the turrets in 360 degrees unlocked from the ship view, that tactical display is basically going to HAVE to be the 3rd person cam.
So really, thats what it comes down to, the 1st person view is going to be the 3rd person view but looked at on a pop up display.
... What fun.
If you really have no idea then why post against using one....
I believe if you had read this thread you would know that a common theme is turret switching. Something which would be require cooperation between crew members, you know cooperative game play for a multiplayer feature and all. Rather than one crew member using God cam 200m away from your "crew" and "ship".
In fact the ideas in thisnthread sound much more like what Sandro posted about additional camera views in this game and how they would be handled.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/10769-No-rear-view-blinkered-dogfighting/page6
... What fun....(fun being subjective and all)
And yes, we are fully aware that turrent switching (be it via a display in the cockpit or the turret) cannot compete with the eyes of God. It's not about "ULTIMATE POWER", but a feature that both fits with the base game and encourages cooperation between crew members. Kind of lucky we don't have instant ship transfers when you think about it now...
This forum will light up with angry posts soon enough anyway as "crew killer wings" become a thing. Griefers joining crews to merely find out ship locations before jumping with their anaconda wings to put them down. Instant ship transfers would only have aided them.
Last edited:
Are you just trolling ?
I have never heard such utter rubbish.
(1)How do you control all the turrets at once.
In that case with you sat in the pilots seat as the game is now how are they working now, nothing changes. if your target is above you the turrets on the bottom of your ship don't fire. even in 3D god cam its not going to change, you are not shooting from the 3D cam only targeting, the turrets do the rest.
(2)Well, you can't just have say a camera on top of the ship that you view the scene from, because you need to be able to see in 360 degrees because of turrets on different parts of the ship.
Well if the turret can not see the target then its not going to fire anyway this makes not difference if you are in 3D or 1st person, and you manage you fly and use you ship at the moment with out 360 so what make that any different. some one in 1st person will be able to see just as well if the 1st person view is on or in the turret, you just switch turrets the same as you would switch weapons.
(3)
I Will Skip some as its is just silly
(4)The ship position and orientation is crucial to know where your turrets are and what you can fire at.
Well if the turret cant see the target then you cant switch to that turret, it would just switch the one that could.
Not saying the 3D view is not better as I just think it will be to easy to use and that is going to make a lot of player switch to SOLO
A 1st person view is going to be harder and make for more interaction between the gunner and CMD and may balance the game play a bit better. it would defiantly look better, as cant see them using a 3D view over a turret view in a starwars film can you ?
Sounds like it would be a lot of switching.
I do worry the gunner role might be a bit too simplified though, yes it would be good if some of the fun comes from a requirement to coordinate effectively, but I am not sure 1st person turret switching is the best way to do it.
I am not good at thinking up fun gameplay, but I guess co-operation is about managing shared resources, like the PD, or the ship orientation which all are dependent on.
Perhaps the gunner could have the ability to allocate total WEAP power on a per weapon basis, this sounds like it would add complexity and increase requirements for cooperation in a more interesting way than having the gunner turret switch.
It would also have the benefit of losing the one way relationship of the gunner being dependent on the pilot for orientation, since it adds a mechanism where the pilot's forward facing weapons array is also dependent on the gunner for power. So what was a one way dependent relationship becomes a co-dependency.
Which then means the pilot ALSO benefits from communicating orientation changes, rather than just the gunner.
Last edited:
If you want to ALSO have the ability to view one turret from a first person camera view? Ok, whatever I don't even care, go for it if they would bother to implement it. It will be useless, and an absolute waste of time for anything beyond role playing but it doesn't effect me, I don't care. However, if you want that to be THE multicrew gunnery, and you want the 3rd person tactical view eliminated, that's when it's going to bother me.
I'm sorry that this has to be said over and over and over again, but a turret view does not work. The gunnery cam has to, without exception, be completely divorced from the ships movement. There isn't a way to make that work with a manned turret in any acceptable way. You could either have the ship invisible so you can continue to see whats going on, or you have the camera rotate and look at the hull point blank half the time. People seem to be forgetting every aspect of this game has to work in VR and this idea of manning an individual turret does not work. Anything that takes view control away from you doesn't work in VR.
Like I said though, if you want it as an option, I wouldn't care if frontier wanted to put it in, but it would be useless for anything but role playing. The idea you're going to be switching between turret stations on the fly to track a target in 3d space is laughable. It's pure fantasy based on an idea of make believe in your head, it doesn't work as an actual game, hell it wouldn't work in real life. You're not going to have 1 guy running to every gun on a ww2 bomber, they're each going to be on their own gun, which is the only way it would even remotely work in elite as well, but you're also not going to get that many people networked onto 1 ship together. It would also be an incredibly boring experience for Small Beam Turret Gunner #3.
First person direct turret control also implies arcade style aiming and shooting of a gun, which, even if you had 7 friends to jump into your anaconda, are they really going to have better accuracy than the computer manning the turrets themselves? No, they're not. If their accuracy is worse, why would you ever use crew gunners? Well, either 1) again, role playing, or 2) because manned guns are ridiculously overpowered to make up for their incredibly poor human tracking and time on target.
The multicrew gunner is already on the verge of being useless, if not already so (i think a second corvette is going to help you a little bit more than someone flying your fighter and someone aiming your turrets with an extra pip...). There has to be a reason to use them, a reason to HAVE a gunner in the first place. All these things being suggested, from having to stare at a virtual monitor (nevermind that staring at a virtual monitor while sitting in your chair makes NO SENSE from a lore perspective when the you sitting in that chair is already a virtual hologram and they could just beam the tactical view to you directly instead of beaming a view of you staring at a monitor showing you the tactical view), to looking at a turrets point of view individually, make an already questionably useful job 10 times more useless. Who is going to want to use it ever?
There are 2 things butting heads here, a playable game, and make believe. I'm not saying make believe as an insult, I'm trying to make a distinction. Some people want to play a video game, a system of calculated rules that are balanced to create an overall enjoyable experience that is grounded in those rules. You press A you jump, you pick up the rocket launcher, it shoots rockets, you grab the flag you win, you add efficient engineering to your beam and it now fires X amount longer, you flick FA off, lateral thrust, apply some boost you out turn and get on someones and blow them up, etc.
What other people want is make believe, again not being said in a derogatory way, but make believe in the sense of a group of friends playing a loose game of D&D. Something where it doesn't matter that you hit A + B with the best timing, or knew the best min maxing for your weapons and how to outmaneuver your opponent, something where you say "i want to climb that tree and have a look around". Something where you can do whatever you want, because its all imaginary with a few rules here and there to keep some things grounded.
Thats what turret mode is. Its not a fun game, it's role playing. Frontier has made the right call here. They've put in something that is the most useful without being game breaking, something that the vast majority will want to use.
If you only want a first person view, well, just pretend the 3rd person gunner view is a screen your commander is looking it. Thats not very hard is it?
I'm sorry that this has to be said over and over and over again, but a turret view does not work. The gunnery cam has to, without exception, be completely divorced from the ships movement. There isn't a way to make that work with a manned turret in any acceptable way. You could either have the ship invisible so you can continue to see whats going on, or you have the camera rotate and look at the hull point blank half the time. People seem to be forgetting every aspect of this game has to work in VR and this idea of manning an individual turret does not work. Anything that takes view control away from you doesn't work in VR.
Like I said though, if you want it as an option, I wouldn't care if frontier wanted to put it in, but it would be useless for anything but role playing. The idea you're going to be switching between turret stations on the fly to track a target in 3d space is laughable. It's pure fantasy based on an idea of make believe in your head, it doesn't work as an actual game, hell it wouldn't work in real life. You're not going to have 1 guy running to every gun on a ww2 bomber, they're each going to be on their own gun, which is the only way it would even remotely work in elite as well, but you're also not going to get that many people networked onto 1 ship together. It would also be an incredibly boring experience for Small Beam Turret Gunner #3.
First person direct turret control also implies arcade style aiming and shooting of a gun, which, even if you had 7 friends to jump into your anaconda, are they really going to have better accuracy than the computer manning the turrets themselves? No, they're not. If their accuracy is worse, why would you ever use crew gunners? Well, either 1) again, role playing, or 2) because manned guns are ridiculously overpowered to make up for their incredibly poor human tracking and time on target.
The multicrew gunner is already on the verge of being useless, if not already so (i think a second corvette is going to help you a little bit more than someone flying your fighter and someone aiming your turrets with an extra pip...). There has to be a reason to use them, a reason to HAVE a gunner in the first place. All these things being suggested, from having to stare at a virtual monitor (nevermind that staring at a virtual monitor while sitting in your chair makes NO SENSE from a lore perspective when the you sitting in that chair is already a virtual hologram and they could just beam the tactical view to you directly instead of beaming a view of you staring at a monitor showing you the tactical view), to looking at a turrets point of view individually, make an already questionably useful job 10 times more useless. Who is going to want to use it ever?
There are 2 things butting heads here, a playable game, and make believe. I'm not saying make believe as an insult, I'm trying to make a distinction. Some people want to play a video game, a system of calculated rules that are balanced to create an overall enjoyable experience that is grounded in those rules. You press A you jump, you pick up the rocket launcher, it shoots rockets, you grab the flag you win, you add efficient engineering to your beam and it now fires X amount longer, you flick FA off, lateral thrust, apply some boost you out turn and get on someones and blow them up, etc.
What other people want is make believe, again not being said in a derogatory way, but make believe in the sense of a group of friends playing a loose game of D&D. Something where it doesn't matter that you hit A + B with the best timing, or knew the best min maxing for your weapons and how to outmaneuver your opponent, something where you say "i want to climb that tree and have a look around". Something where you can do whatever you want, because its all imaginary with a few rules here and there to keep some things grounded.
Thats what turret mode is. Its not a fun game, it's role playing. Frontier has made the right call here. They've put in something that is the most useful without being game breaking, something that the vast majority will want to use.
If you only want a first person view, well, just pretend the 3rd person gunner view is a screen your commander is looking it. Thats not very hard is it?
Last edited:
I suspect NPC multi-crew would indeed unbalance, and that is the concern.
Thats what I think about when using SRV turret - before all this discussions lately I was pretty sure its a legit view from the camera placed above the gun. As you said, not hard at all. Still I think 3p gunner view just look rubbish but hey, 2 more days and we will check the system ourselves.
Last edited:
Nuarb, thank you for making your point of view clear. I disagree with you and think the third person turret god cam is both lame, lazy and not inline with the vision the developers intended for the game. The provided quote by Sandro states this very clearly. Great that your happy, I'm totally thrilled for you. Myself and many others simply are not happy with it, for the reasons flogged to death in this thread already. I have no interest in prenteding that a third person camera is not just that, but thanks for the "pro tip" - didn't buy this seasons content to play make believe when certain feature fall very short of expectations. I'll be sure to apply your logic to my purchase of Season 3, when pretend I have purchased it, but actually don't until its completed and I can judge every feature to ensure its actually worth while.
Last edited:
Ok, got your attention.(Apologies to all the 12yr olds out there)
There are several parts I do like about multicrew, but I think I should adress
what bothers me about it at the first glance:
Its clear that FD takes the route here to an Arcade sort of gameplay which breaks
a lot rules of the ed universe, and one of them is that cam view.
I am not against the 360 view, what bothers me is that its not immersive in
the sense of being physically possible in any way. If FD would have
made it more schematic, so that the ship itself is a rendered wireframe and the spacebackground is replaced with something else, I would be able to believe
I have some sort of tactical view which is rendered by the ships computer.
But having like a "real" 360 degree cam which is not even existant (or can you shoot it down?) is by all means totally destroying any immersion (for me)
Sure, many of you will like it, but I had hoped FD would somehow maintain
some consistent ingame rules with their features.
Update:
In the thread I gave an example why for some players the fun can be spoiled be unlogical gameplay features:
In a movie, you expect when a person leaves the screen on the right side that it would appear after the cut on the left side. That`s a learned logic of how films work in general. If that doesn´t happen you might not really be able to put a finger on it, but it nudges on the back of your brain, and you might feel slightly irritated. Of course, editors use that in certain cases to make a movie more dramatic.
I think the same thing is happening in ED when certain rules are being ignored or put aside in favor of "fun-gameplay". Some (a lot?) players, get that uneasy feeling when the logic of the gameworld is compromised with certain (mostly new) additions which breaks ingame rules and therefore their fun is spoiled to some extent (some other compromises to gameplay have been accepted and are learned like instatransfer after death, etc.)
The solution would be for FD to find a compromise, where you still can have fun, but it won´t give you that nudge in the back of your brain.
In regard to the gunner view, it wouldnt hurt the fun, when you have a more holographic (however this is implemented - there were some nice ideas already mentioned in the thread) style of view, where you actually see a difference to the "normal/real" view of the universe. That would IMHO restore the immersion (still not solving the cmdr hologram transfers across the galaxy, but thats another story).
Wireframe? why ship sensors 'can' see all this what is so bad about it being able to give you a full 3d representation? I mean we are already working towards that with our current tech level in the military? So i'm not sure why this is considered 'bad'? or breaking immersion? it seems way way way likely that irl we will have this quite soon as well, only difference being we will use vr/ar equipment for it, but that's it? So yeah, I don't see how it is 'bad' or such?
You might think of it, "They are doing this because it is a game" and while it certainly can be true, with the tech of the then future vs what we have now, it really seems trivial?
Last edited:
I wasn't trying to be snarky and 'win a fight on the internet'. I don't want anyone unhappy with something that they enjoy, but what solution can you think of that doesn't have all the problems I've gone over? Specifically direct turret view, because that is either broken in VR, or useless in added value. How do you have a direct turret control that is usable in VR for the vast majority of players? How do you have direct turret control that is better than just letting the computer do it?
If you wonder about why the devs years ago would say what they did about being in the cockpit, then have a tactical view like that, I think you have to look at the realities I was bringing up. I imagine they ran into the exact same issues, that #1 direct turret control had no value, and #2 it wouldn't work with VR.
Again though, I don't want anyone unhappy with something that they really like, and if frontier wanted to offer the choice of switching between the 3rd person tactical view directly, or having it appear on a large screen in front of you while you sit in the chair, I would be totally happy with that. I think that is really the option that would make the most amount of people happy, and no one would lose out. You give people the option of viewing it directly, or viewing it while grounded in the cockpit on a screen. That wouldn't really be any different than old flight sims letting you select direct hud modes, cockpit modes, 3d cockpit modes, etc. You would choose what you prefer but everyone gets the same info.
well, that really depends how its done, MC PVP will be just like CQC, a feature that will fade away due to many players will not use it, because connection issues, and so on.
NPC crew will be used all the time by PVE players, that is for sure.
Because it will just be +1 pip and better turrets, which is rubbish in all honesty. It adds nothing to the game, besides even more + on the easy mode.
Without a more complex implementation than we have, I'd be happy with NPC crew just appearing sat in the gunnery chair or whatever, and nothing else changing.
Last edited:
As an arcade operator, I take serious offense to you classifying the gameplay offered by the gunner position as 'arcade'. I will have you know, sir, that games like Ferrari F355 Challenge offer more simulation than the entirety of Elite Dangerous.
I demand my compensation in tickets and Tootsie Rolls. :B
(it's clear that they decoupled the gunner camera from the ship in part to reduce motion sickness and confusion, but maybe Frontier should offer a build that has SRV turret cams that rapidly change from turret to turret depending on what turret is in range of the target and where the pilot is juking to avoid getting shot at. We can both watch the forum complaints roll in.)
I demand my compensation in tickets and Tootsie Rolls. :B
(it's clear that they decoupled the gunner camera from the ship in part to reduce motion sickness and confusion, but maybe Frontier should offer a build that has SRV turret cams that rapidly change from turret to turret depending on what turret is in range of the target and where the pilot is juking to avoid getting shot at. We can both watch the forum complaints roll in.)
It's been said already more then one time in this thread, it's not basically the full 3d quality render itself what lowers the immersive experiance (for me), but that this view is not different from what we see in game as "real" environment, like for example the cockpit view. To distinguish "real" from "rendered" (however good that render is), I think we need some differentiation (not necesseraly wireframe, but some "effect" to make it visible clear that this is a rendered image (assuming that the ships computer reads sensor data and creates a 3d hologram of the battlescene for the gunner) and not a magical cam outside of our ships). Please take the time to read the thread from the beginning. Thanks!
Last edited:
Ok, got your attention.
There are several parts I do like about multicrew, but I think I should adress
what bothers me about it at the first glance:
Its clear that FD takes the route here to an Arcade sort of gameplay which breaks
a lot rules of the ed universe, and one of them is that cam view.
I am not against the 360 view, what bothers me is that its not immersive in
the sense of being physically possible in any way. If FD would have
made it more schematic, so that the ship itself is a rendered wireframe and the spacebackground is replaced with something else, I would be able to believe
I have some sort of tactical view which is rendered by the ships computer.
But having like a "real" 360 degree cam which is not even existant (or can you shoot it down?) is by all means totally destroying any immersion (for me)
Sure, many of you will like it, but I had hoped FD would somehow maintain
some consistent ingame rules with their features.
I think I have your solution: http://www.x-plane.com/
Please... those "hardcore gamers" are such a pain... please enjoy the !@#$% game!!!
ITS A GAAAAAAAAME
if this was implemented the "realistic" way it would be realistically BORING. and a problem. because how could you track MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TURRETS MOUNTED IN DIFFERENT PLACES of the ship at the SAME TIME? I only can see the solution to be the use of multiple monitors... if frontier is OK to, along with the update, give me one secondary monitor for each hardpoint my ship can load... but I slightly doubt it.
Sorry if I sounded mean, but damn son... just chill and enjoy. arg
ITS A GAAAAAAAAME
if this was implemented the "realistic" way it would be realistically BORING. and a problem. because how could you track MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TURRETS MOUNTED IN DIFFERENT PLACES of the ship at the SAME TIME? I only can see the solution to be the use of multiple monitors... if frontier is OK to, along with the update, give me one secondary monitor for each hardpoint my ship can load... but I slightly doubt it.
Sorry if I sounded mean, but damn son... just chill and enjoy. arg