On the off chance that you're being serious:
CoD is shorthand for the Call of Duty series of first-person shooters.
External View [A definitive discussion]
- Status
On the off chance that you're being serious:
CoD is shorthand for the Call of Duty series of first-person shooters.
Ah - thanks - that's a console FPS they introduced when the medal of honour series was killed on PC, right?.
Stupid me - sorry for asking.
Last edited:
How is an external drone - mentioned over and over and over - magical? It's a completely legitimate explanation completely in keeping with the game?
How is that any more realistic than the view point you just poo poo'd?
It's a (powerful) feature others have asked for but seems a somewhat different feature. IMHO most people want an external view want to enjoy the "now", not mess about later on.
So the three pirate ships approaching clear as day on the HUD, you can't see, is not a problem?
And then the proposed 4-5 second time delay both in/out of external view? Not a problem?
Some parts of this discussion are becoming rather ****.
Imagine:
I'm an explorer / trader in 3305. I'm reasonably successful and can afford to fit my ship with nice gadgets, including a remote controlled camera unit.
I would definitely be using it to recce asteroids, or around the other side of asteroids, etc., from a safe distance, to make sure there are no hidden dangers.
If I had been in combat and had been hit, I would also use it to check the extent of damage to my ship.
And I would undoubtedly also use it to take 'selfies' to send home to the kids.
I would not consider using it in combat, as it would offer no advantage; in fact, it could be disadvantageous. I might use it, however, in a potential pre-combat situation to weigh up the odds - why would that be considered to be an unfair advantage?
In the history of warfare, people have always tried to assess the enemy's strength before going into combat. Today, remote airborne cameras are used for that purpose (as well as for UAV attack, but I won't get into that nest of hornets!).
So if you have the feature, it can be used. This discussion should really be about how the 'external images', if available, should be presented to the player. 'Full screen' without HUD, cockpit interior, etc., or 'cockpit screen'?
I think, considering the fact that market info and galactic maps are (currently?) shown as full screen without cockpit background, that it wouldn't do any harm to show the external view as full screen, particularly as the detail would be 'nicer'. On the other hand, a dashboard screen would perhaps allow better 'immersion' for those who aren't able to maintain their imagination for a few moments of external view... However, the real answer to that question is, IMHO, moot.
But fer @**$'s sake, stop saying it shouldn't be available. In whatever form it may take, if you don't like it, DON'T USE IT!
Imagine:
I'm an explorer / trader in 3305. I'm reasonably successful and can afford to fit my ship with nice gadgets, including a remote controlled camera unit.
I would definitely be using it to recce asteroids, or around the other side of asteroids, etc., from a safe distance, to make sure there are no hidden dangers.
If I had been in combat and had been hit, I would also use it to check the extent of damage to my ship.
And I would undoubtedly also use it to take 'selfies' to send home to the kids.
I would not consider using it in combat, as it would offer no advantage; in fact, it could be disadvantageous. I might use it, however, in a potential pre-combat situation to weigh up the odds - why would that be considered to be an unfair advantage?
In the history of warfare, people have always tried to assess the enemy's strength before going into combat. Today, remote airborne cameras are used for that purpose (as well as for UAV attack, but I won't get into that nest of hornets!).
So if you have the feature, it can be used. This discussion should really be about how the 'external images', if available, should be presented to the player. 'Full screen' without HUD, cockpit interior, etc., or 'cockpit screen'?
I think, considering the fact that market info and galactic maps are (currently?) shown as full screen without cockpit background, that it wouldn't do any harm to show the external view as full screen, particularly as the detail would be 'nicer'. On the other hand, a dashboard screen would perhaps allow better 'immersion' for those who aren't able to maintain their imagination for a few moments of external view... However, the real answer to that question is, IMHO, moot.
But fer @**$'s sake, stop saying it shouldn't be available. In whatever form it may take, if you don't like it, DON'T USE IT!
Link? By "3PV" I assume you're referring to the topic of conversion of external view?
i'll not be ***** to go back through your 103 page thread to link you the specific post that was shown to you that stated there would be no 3pv..
you have already seen it... you already read it... you just decided you didn't like it so you are continuing this thread... I and many others just normally laugh at you.... but we do occasionally step in and remind you and those who have just arrived...
THERE IS NO 3PV IN THIS GAME.
Nothing magical since external drones are a reality in 2014.
Nothing arcade about it if it is balanced right. This could be by either accepting that external drones are widely available in E: D world and just letting players adapt (let's not forget we are in beta!), or by nerfing the feature (my slight preference to win over the naysayers).
CoD = Call of Duty, the biggest gaming franchise in existence...
No, CoD (EA) killed MoH (Activision), and was designed to do so. Activision is trying to raise the Battlefield series to the same status now.
All games above are available on consoles and PC.
Last edited:
Thats a little aggressive man, tone it down a little if you can.
Moreover, as has been said repeatedly FDEV have hinted that 3pv may indeed be coming in a form that is balanced for gameplay and consistent with their goal of 1pv immersion. Many of the posters here agree to that, and are merely discussing ways to implement it.
You could just read the OP (first post) which is a summary.
Not sure what you mean by this. Lots of people have made lots of points. If we consider the most recent made by FD it does hint at an external view (hopefully) being available:-
Sandro Sammarco said:
Have you considered there's nicer and more constructive ways of making a point?
You always have the option to simply unsubscribe to this thread leaving others to just (politely) discuss the matter?
Last edited:
I see - however, after reading up on the topic you mixed up developers there a little it seems.
Anyhow - given the presentation of the games (large icons on everything, fast arcade gameplay) they appear to be clearly designed for consoles. I admittedly missed the fact that they were ported to PC because I stopped playing FPS games after quakeworld and stopped playing EA games altogether when they introduced origin.
Anyhow - that doesn't contribute much to the discussion.
I don't know how many times the discussion has become full circle now (I personally had the very same discussion in this thread a few pages back and in other games as well).
The advantages of "analyzing positional data" after having docked lie in the completely unrestricted camera use that could be allowed under those circumstances, allowing for some potentially great video footage.
If the data was provided in real time - even with seemingly appropriate nerfs like a one minute timer when switching, locked third person camera, no sensors, no spaceship controls, harsh speed limit and the camera drone emitting a tremendous heat signature, it would still be heavily abused whilst not allowing for scenic views at that stage anymore.
I know that these points have been stated over and over again during the course this thread. I merely repeat them so any dev reading this might not get under the impression that "people want third person view".
Obviously, some people want it and some (like me) consider it absolutely gamebreaking.
I personally stopped raising my backing for Star Citizen because of the way third person is implemented in that game at the current stage (no sensors and that's it), I will play squadron 42 but wont touch multiplayer with a ten foot pole.
The only other option I'd consider viable would be to completely split instances for third person and first person players. It seems problematic as third person users would still partake in the same market and would have an easier time making money, but since singleplayer online players do as well, I don't think it's that relevant anyway.
It might be good idea if the devs enabled 3rd person/external view for last two weeks or so of the Premium Beta. That way can asses what effects if any it has in-game.
I'd really like to have 3PV for taking screen shots etc and if it was enabled for testing would see lot of great videos appearing. Also while in external view maybe fire-button 1 takes screen-shot and fire-button 2 toggles recording video.
I'd really like to have 3PV for taking screen shots etc and if it was enabled for testing would see lot of great videos appearing. Also while in external view maybe fire-button 1 takes screen-shot and fire-button 2 toggles recording video.
Agreed, hopefully this is planned.
Well, as much as I'm for an external view, and as much as I believe it can be offered without any gameplay (combat) benefit, the fact it's not here yet concerns me. If it's not with us at the beginning of Beta (standard) I'm taking that as a sign we're not getting it.
ie: Like you I think it needs to be tested/considered to see if it is balanced/fair etc.
No problem.
I honestly do not understand HOW exactly it could possibly be abused with all of those nerfs.. :S It would seem to be totally useless as a combat aid, given all of those nerfs really.
It could be designed to be only available outside of combat, where it would not activate until you are outside the range of any other players ship etc.. how could that possibly be abused in any way? Especially combat..
Answer is: it couldn't be!
It just seems like a very narrow train of thought that so many people in here seem to have about something that a very high percentage of people would like to have in this game.
It was in the last elite games, and everyone seemed to enjoy those.
3rd person view for non combat (read NON COMBAT, balanced and designed to ensure this) and an OPTION to disable this view if you should choose not to use it.
And also, how about a 3rd person view for single player mode? Does anyone have any issues with that TOO? :S
It will be abused exactly how its abused in other games --->
Bottom line is, 3rd person 'handicaps' only handicap the lone player. Anyone working with a wingman can have all the visual advantages 3PV offers and relay that visual info to his mate who is sat ready and waiting primed and ready in 1st person to act on the 3PV intel he's receiving.
The bit I highlighted is the one that would concern me the most, and the one where the silly "don't use it then" arguments fall down. Sometimes you have no choice.
And this circular argument rolls on and on and on....
+1
That's probably the only way it'll find its way into ED, if at all.
That was suggested numerous times early on in this thread, but as ever those advocating 3PV conveniently ignored it.
Last edited:
If I believed that would be the case - everyone would be forced to play in external view to be on a level playing field -I wouldn't be so in favour of an external view.It will be abused exactly how its abused in other games --->
Bottom line is, 3rd person 'handicaps' only handicap the lone player. Anyone working with a wingman can have all the visual advantages 3PV offers and relay that visual info to his mate who is sat ready and waiting primed and ready in 1st person to act on the 3PV intel he's receiving.
The bit I highlighted is the one that would concern me the most, and the one where the silly "don't use it then" arguments fall down. Sometimes you have no choice.
And this circular argument rolls on and on and on....
So if we explore your example of the wing man in external views some how being a benefit to the two of you? Let's remember that this wing will most likely have no hud to start off with. So how will his external view be of tactical advantage over what he could see from his cockpit? Put yourself in this suggested external view, with nameless little dots flying around you, with no information on them at all? Is that useful?
Add to this the suggested time delay deploying/docking your drone (external view), so if he should come under attack and want to get back to the cockpit, he's a sitting duck for 4-5 seconds?
An if the panning/rotation speed in external view is slower than the speed you can look around in cockpit view?
So I'm confused how a wing man playing in external view may be of more benefit than a player in cockpit view?
Can you give me an example of what I'm missing?
Please ignore the poll. It's broken and the options are pretty poor (IMHO). Threads were merged so we're stuck with it.
Last edited:
Ok I just thought of a perfect idea
The 3rd person view, which would be a drone camera you deploy... could be targeted and DESTROYED by another player if they tried using it in combat.
These camera drones would be very expensive! Not many people would want to use them in combat Also they would explode and damage your ship..
Such technology for these camera drones exists today on earth in real life so.. to suggest 1000 years in the future that tech will not exist and should therefore not be in the game is just silly really, so just based on balance is not a good enough reason really.
Do war games omit night vision scopes because they give you an advantage? NO, because they are a fact of life in modern warfare. If something exists then you use it to your advantage. You don't just ignore the fact they exist because of "balance" in a game. Well you *could* but it would be making the game rather unrealistic by doing that.
The 3rd person view, which would be a drone camera you deploy... could be targeted and DESTROYED by another player if they tried using it in combat.
These camera drones would be very expensive! Not many people would want to use them in combat
Also they would explode and damage your ship..Such technology for these camera drones exists today on earth in real life so.. to suggest 1000 years in the future that tech will not exist and should therefore not be in the game is just silly really, so just based on balance is not a good enough reason really.
Do war games omit night vision scopes because they give you an advantage? NO, because they are a fact of life in modern warfare. If something exists then you use it to your advantage. You don't just ignore the fact they exist because of "balance" in a game. Well you *could* but it would be making the game rather unrealistic by doing that.
- Status