External View [A definitive discussion]

[smartroad]

Haven't read the full thread being 114 pages long!!

I look at it this way: I am playing a game. I don't need it to be realistic , just believable (heck I am piloting a ship, in space, capable of going faster than light!).

The external view in the Frontier games was great. While I was zooming through the solar system, it broke the monotony of flying in a straight line. I could have a look at my ship, admire its features (I loved the Lion ).

Trying to fly it in that mode was impossible for me so I had to return to the cockpit view. The 'camera' could be static so if you move the ship it rotates in the view of the it rather than being able to put it behind the ship and fly like that. Aside from being able to manoeuvre the ship, all weapons, scanners etc could be disabled to further reduce 'cheating'. Maybe keep it so you can't zoom too far out. Or as soon as the ship detects a hostile vessel or something too close you are dropped back into the cockpit?

For me, at the end of the day, an external view is all about being able to admire the ship I am in and the environment I am wizzing through

 

[Tek]

I agree killable drones seem unnecessary. But if the explanation (& nerfing) is done under the explanation of a drone? No problem there surely?

I had a long drive home today from Newport Beach, California today and I gave the camera drone idea a lot of thought. Now I think a deployable drone for an external view would be sort of awesome. When deployed, it should be visible to other players and it would immediately let locals know if you were in 3rd person view and the drone could be designed to look really cool. I don't think it should be destroyable. I also think the drone's camera view should show what it can see when deploying from. and docking to, the ship during the deployment/docking process.

+1 for camera drones!!

 

[NeilF]

I also think the drone's camera view should show what it can see when deploying from. and docking to, the ship during the deployment/docking process.

That's my thinking on it too! A 4-5 second transition showing the view from the drone as it's deployed/docked.

 

[Gwenydd]

I had a long drive home today from Newport Beach, California today and I gave the camera drone idea a lot of thought. Now I think a deployable drone for an external view would be sort of awesome. When deployed, it should be visible to other players and it would immediately let locals know if you were in 3rd person view and the drone could be designed to look really cool. I don't think it should be destroyable. I also think the drone's camera view should show what it can see when deploying from. and docking to, the ship during the deployment/docking process.

+1 for camera drones!!

I think this sounds pretty useful too. But I think the drone should automatically shut down and return to the ship if you fire your weapons.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I don't think it should be destroyable.

Explaining why it would not be able to be destroyed would require a significant sprinkle of handwavium.... After all, it is, in effect, a tiny ship and would have tiny shields and a tiny engine, therefore probably a low top speed too.

As an aside, would proponents of the external view drone expect it to be able to super-cruise with the ship? The normal hardpoint / landing-gear / cargo-scoop hatch closure requirement would reasonably also apply to the drone deployment hatch. If able to super-cruise independently of the ship, what would happen if the ship were to engage hyper-drive?

 

[NeilF]

Explaining why it would not be able to be destroyed would require a significant sprinkle of handwavium.... After all, it is, in effect, a tiny ship and would have tiny shields and a tiny engine, therefore probably a low top speed too.

As an aside, would proponents of the external view drone expect it to be able to super-cruise with the ship? The normal hardpoint / landing-gear / cargo-scoop hatch closure requirement would reasonably also apply to the drone deployment hatch. If able to super-cruise independently of the ship, what would happen if the ship were to engage hyper-drive?

Don't care about handwavium. As long as the mechanics fit on OK that's fine for me. We're in a universe where for some reason you can't fly any faster than X hundred metres per second, and a universe where if you die you come back to life against elsewhere.

A drone that is so small, it doesn't get his by accident does cause me any problems... ie: I'd rather have a feature that sits nicely in there for gameplay, than is contrived and painful just to be realistic?

[handwavium]
ps: Don't forget when you supercruise and hyperspace you're in a bubble of bent space time, within which any matter is held perfectly relative to you.
[/handwavium]

 

[Completely Harmless]

+1 to that kind of drone.

I'll hug him and squeeze him and call him Wheatley.

 

[Nomadski]

I only want a drone if it cries out spaaaaaaaaaace as its launched!

Really, I don't care what macguffin is behind it, I just want to see my ship, and its backdrop in beautiful high fidelity for screenshots with zero HUD visible.

 

[Rog]

Explaining why it would not be able to be destroyed would require a significant sprinkle of handwavium.... After all, it is, in effect, a tiny ship and would have tiny shields and a tiny engine, therefore probably a low top speed too.

As an aside, would proponents of the external view drone expect it to be able to super-cruise with the ship? The normal hardpoint / landing-gear / cargo-scoop hatch closure requirement would reasonably also apply to the drone deployment hatch. If able to super-cruise independently of the ship, what would happen if the ship were to engage hyper-drive?

If it kept inside the ships warp 'bubble', why not?

 

[NeilF]

If it kept inside the ships warp 'bubble', why not?

Great minds and all...

[handwavium]
ps: Don't forget when you supercruise and hyperspace you're in a bubble of bent space time, within which any matter is held perfectly relative to you.
[/handwavium]

 

[Robert Maynard]

If it kept inside the ships warp 'bubble', why not?

Great minds and all...

Depending on how long an excursion such a drone would be expected to have, the warp bubble might need to be quite large.

With a large warp bubble, any debris in close proximity to the ship at the point of departure would go with the ship. I would imagine taking a canister or two along for the ride could get quite interesting, especially if a crash stop from super-cruise was initiated....

 

[NeilF]

Depending on how long an excursion such a drone would be expected to have, the warp bubble might need to be quite large.

With a large warp bubble, any debris in close proximity to the ship at the point of departure would go with the ship. I would imagine taking a canister or two along for the ride could get quite interesting, especially if a crash stop from super-cruise was initiated....

I'm very confused why you're arguing against simple game mechanics - an exterior camera which can be used in supercruise/hyperspace.

So you'd be happier if there was no external view at two times when game mechanics wise, it's the absolutely safest time to have it? - ie: You're alone so cannot use it for any advantage at all?

And all because of some handwavium reason? :S


Just keep the mechanics/explanation/nerfs simple - And a drone fits all of them IMHO. No need to have it destroyable or lost in space if you hyperspace etc

 

[NeoRacer]

Still going on about drones?! I dont get it..why cant it just be a 'camera' view, why does it have to be a 'drone'???

 

[Robert Maynard]

And all because of some handwavium reason? :S

The handwavium is required to explain how an entity, not attached to the ship, is expected to stay at a variable position in relation to the ship in the event that the ship leaves normal space and enters super-cruis or hyper-space, and survive the journey.

If that is not required, no handwavium necessary....

 

[Rog]

Still going on about drones?! I dont get it..why cant it just be a 'camera' view, why does it have to be a 'drone'???

It's one of the things put forward to help those who don't want any 'immersion breaking' going on.

Originally not very keen on the idea, but mostly in favour now just to keep the game feeling 'real'.

 

[NeoRacer]

You can pretend its Angels if you (they) like? There's all sorts of things that can break immersion but at the end of the day, its a game. Its all pretend. A magical 3p view can be used, or not? Just dont use it if it breaks immersion. Most people will be left scratching their heads and Im talking about the mass audience, not 20 ppl on the forums. I dont see why attaching it to a polygon 3d model of some kinda drone is gonna help either way, its kinda actually.

It's one of the things put forward to help those who don't want any 'immersion breaking' going on.

Originally not very keen on the idea, but mostly in favour now just to keep the game feeling 'real'.

 

[NeilF]

The handwavium is required to explain how an entity, not attached to the ship, is expected to stay at a variable position in relation to the ship in the event that the ship leaves normal space and enters super-cruis or hyper-space, and survive the journey.

If that is not required, no handwavium necessary....

Answer A:-
It's caught in the same hyperspace time dilation trans space void inter warp vortex (HoTDoTSPoViWoV for short). Any nearby objects within the same "bubble", as they do not emit the same transwarp resonation field (as emitted by the ship and drone), are simply not dropped into the HoTDoTSPoViWoV.

Answer B:-
Most people won't care what the explanation is.

 

[Rog]

You can pretend its Angels if you (they) like? There's all sorts of things that can break immersion but at the end of the day, its a game. Its all pretend. A magical 3p view can be used, or not? Just dont use it if it breaks immersion. Most people will be left scratching their heads and Im talking about the mass audience, not 20 ppl on the forums. I dont see why attaching it to a polygon 3d model of some kinda drone is gonna help either way, its kinda actually.

Well if the simple choice was doing it that way, and with nerfs (to keep PvPers happy) OR not having anything at all, what would you choose?

It's hardly the biggest deal here.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Still going on about drones?! I dont get it..why cant it just be a 'camera' view, why does it have to be a 'drone'???

you know exactly why people feel that way. You dont agree and that is fine, but please dont keep asking questions you have already asked and had answered multiple times.

As I have said in the past, personally my stance is so long as it has zero effect in combat for affecting balance or it is in offline only I could not care less what is offered, but from what I can tell on what you have said, even that is not going to make you happy, and FD have made it very clear what you seem to want is not going to be added in.

So either accept it or look for other games which may be more to your tastes. Star Citizen offers a very unrestricted external view.

ED is a game which when flying your ship is from your commanders eye, and unless FD completely backtrack from this you are SOOL on your anything goes external view. Your best bet of getting anything IS a drone imo as that would not completely backtrack as it would still be used from the cockpit of your ship and could be from your commanders eyes (I personally imagine it like a periscope in a sub).

Ultimately though none of our opinions matter, if you really want to complain to someone talk to the organ grinders not the monkeys

 

[P4UL]

It's A GAME!

I'm all for immersion in games, but not at the expense of a camera view so that I can actually see what I'm playing!

If I buy a cool ship I would like to be able to actually SEE it!! I want to see it in space and watch as it explodes when the many "griefers" destroy it.

Are we going to have toilets in the game? Because it would break the immersion if you can't go for a CRAP once a day.. because, I'm sure you know what would happen if you never go for a CRAP right? And you have to sit still for hours in that cockpit.. it's going to STINK in there! That would be totally unrealistic. Gotta keep the immersion.

Oh yeah I forgot, you don't even EAT in this game... such immersion. No wonder your commander doesn't need a toilet.

So we can't have a 3rd person view because it would be unrealistic, but we also don't need to eat, sleep or do other *ahem* things.. it's a wonder the human race is not extinct by the year this game is set in.