External View [A definitive discussion]

An External View yes or no, Multiple choice

  • Yes: an External View for Combat

    Votes: 28 8.8%
  • No: This will break immersion fo me

    Votes: 117 36.6%
  • Yes: I want to know from where I am being attacked from

    Votes: 16 5.0%
  • No: the Scanner is all you need.

    Votes: 103 32.2%
  • Yes: a Simple external ship viewer None Combat

    Votes: 161 50.3%
  • No: Keep everything within the ship

    Votes: 105 32.8%

  • Total voters
    320
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Read the thread. Plenty of suggestions out there to address the combat advantage that the ultra-competitive PvP obsessives are desperate to avoid.

I did - had you read the thread (not blaming you for not doing it - it's a bit long), it would have occured to you that I have posted some of these suggestions myself.

The bottom line is, that the limitations that would be necessary would so severely impact the goal of having a scenic view on the ship, it would be better to have a positional data recorder and then review and edit the data after docking up.

There - full unrestricted third person camera without the ability to exploit it in combat.

The only argument against it is the desire for instant gratification.

Let's consider a simple scenario - Two players out in the middle of space fighting. One in their cockpit, the other in the suggested external view.

With the suggested external view (drone) behaviour, can you now explain this "tremendous advantage"? Can you explain why the individual in their cockpit will have to switch to external view to "stay remotely comepetitive"?

This illustrates the issue in another game.

I wouldn't see the scenario you mentioned as the main problem though.

This is the real problem, which is amplified by viewing range being superior to sensors.
 
Last edited:
This illustrates the issue in another game.

I wouldn't see the scenario you mentioned as the main problem though.

This is the real problem, which is amplified by viewing range being superior to sensors.

OK, thanks for those examples. Very useful!

So your opinion is the increased FOV an external view would give you (as demonstrated by your examples) would equate to your use of "tremendous advantage" and you suggesting you'd have to use it to "stay remotely comepetitive"?

If we compare looking straight ahead in the cockpit, and likewise from a rear external view, I'd agree the FOV given by the external view is larger. However:-
1) I'd argue anyone with a head tracker (eg: TrackIR, EDTracker or Oculus Rift) would have a greater FOV available to them quicker (a drone's position will be fixed and will pivot slowly/slower).
2) Even without such a tracker a pilot can look around their cockpit quickly. eg: Less than a second to look right & back?
3) While in combat the HUD is VERY important. As someone with an EDTracker I can vouch that HUD > FOV. If you lose sight of your enemy the HUD suddenly becomes your best friend. In external view you lose this best friend.
4) There's a number of other accumulating penalties too. eg: If you have any projectile weapons? Well say goodbye to your helping leading targetting sight.

I'm certain if we pitted two pilots against each other, one in cockpit, and one in external view (without a HUD etc), the cockpit pilot would fair better.

So personally I just don't see this "tremendous advantage", infact quite the opposite.


Note: Let's remember we've suggest switching between the views will be time consuming (eg: 4-5 second transition) with the option of you have no control for a period (all) of that too. Panning speeds in external view could also be slow. eg: To look right and back forwards again, could take numerous seconds, and be very disorientating if you're trying to fly too!
 
Last edited:
I did - had you read the thread (not blaming you for not doing it - it's a bit long), it would have occured to you that I have posted some of these suggestions myself.

The bottom line is, that the limitations that would be necessary would so severely impact the goal of having a scenic view on the ship, it would be better to have a positional data recorder and then review and edit the data after docking up.

There - full unrestricted third person camera without the ability to exploit it in combat.

The only argument against it is the desire for instant gratification.

That's a fair cop, I haven't read the whole thread it's true! :D But there have been, to my mind, several reasonable suggestions that do not "severely impact the goal of having a scenic view on the ship".

I don't really like the idea of simply replaying old footage.
 
Note: Let's remember we've suggest switching between the views will be time consuming (eg: 4-5 second transition) with the option of you have no control for a period (all) of that too.

That would make using 3rd person painful though, and pretty soon we'd have people pestering Frontier to remove the delay...

Also, what happens when they introduce avatar gameplay which requires you to jump out of your seat? Is there a 4-5 second transition before you can get up and deal with fires/boarders/whatnot?

What about flying in a gas-giant's atmosphere, where visibility is low and scanners aren't functioning? Third-person becomes unbalancing again, because you can use it to spot your target, and still have time to switch back to cockpit view and sneak up behind them...

The game will expand in ways that are difficult to predict, so Frontier are doing the right thing by keeping their focus tight.
 
OK, thanks for those examples. Very useful!

So you opinion is the increased FOV an external view would give you (as demonstrated by your exampels) would equate to your use of "tremendous advantage" and you suggesting you'd have to use it to "stay remotely comepetitive"?

If we compare looking straight ahead in the cockpit, and likewise from a rear external view, I'd agree the FOV given by the external view is larger. However:-
1) I'd argue anyone with a head tracker (eg: TrackIR, EDTracker or Oculus Rift) would have a great FOV available to the quicker (I doubt these devices would work from a drone's position which will be fixed).
2) Even without such a tracker a pilot can look around their cockpit quickly. eg: Less than a second to look right & back?
3) While in combat the HUD is VERY important. As someone with an EDTracker I can vouch that HUD > FOV. If you lose sight of your enemy the HUD suddenly becomes your best friend. In external view you lose this best friend.

I'm certain if we pitted two pilots against each other, one in cockpit, and one in external view (without a HUD etc), the cockpit pilot would fair better.

Note: Let's remember we've suggest switching between the views will be time consuming (eg: 4-5 second transition) with the option of you have no control for a period (all) of that too.

So personally I just don't see this "tremendous advantage", infact quite the opposite.

The main problem isn't FOV, it's LOS. Here are more examples:

#1: Even with a strictly restricted and close camera view, note how you can see areas that would otherwise be obscured by the cockpit.

#2: Allowing players to zoom out even a little with a locked 3rd person camera allows pilots to view what would otherwise be obscured by the cockpits floor.

In this video, I previosuly posted in this thread, the point of FOV vs LOS is further illustrated at 1:45.

We've had the same discussion a few pages back. Let me refresh your memory: I use 3 24" screens and TrackIR. It allows for quick looking around and a larger FOV.

What it doesn't allow me to do is bypassing my cockpit walls or other objects obscuring my line of sight (as illustrated in this previously posted screenshot).

Third person would allow that. The current implementation of sensors is inferor to plain eyesight when it comes to range. Allowing me to freely look around in third person without the limitations of my cockpits design would aggravate that problem severely.
 
The main problem isn't FOV, it's LOS. Here are more examples:

#1: Even with a strictly restricted and close camera view, note how you can see areas that would otherwise be obscured by the cockpit.[/url]

You are of course correct. If we move our view to a drone, we are looking at the world from a different viewpoint. No argument there. So we are (potentially) seeing things we cannot see from the cockpit.

But, surely that is not the issue. Surely the issue is, does this constitute a game imbalance such that the cockpit view is less effective than an external one? As I previously mentioned, there's a whole list of reasons why you'd be less effective in an external view.

Next time you're in a fight, try NOT using the HUD at all. See what happens when you lose sight of the enemy. And try firing projectile weapons without the help you'd get in the cockpit. Try fighting without knowing the state of your shields, or theirs... etc. The list goes on.

I know when I'm fighting, the moment I lose sight of the enemy, the first thing I do is look at the HUD. What do you do?

Third person would allow that. The current implementation of sensors is inferor to plain eyesight when it comes to range. Allowing me to freely look around in third person without the limitations of my cockpits design would aggravate that problem severely.
Three things here:-
1) Let's consider looking ahead, left and right. An 180+ degree arc. In cockpit I can look at any of that instantly. In an external view I'd have to rotate/sweep the drone around which could take numerous seconds. ie: In many cases cockpit view will give a quicker view, at least ahead. And to look behind, I suspect you'd be able to look behind quicker in cockpit too, than a long sweaping around in external.
2) So what? If I want to sit X kilometers away and look at some dots... does it really matter which view I wish to do it in?
3) While in external view I'm am creating a (small risk). Something could approach which would be obvious on the HUD, but I cannot see the HUD.
 
Last edited:
Given that there are a host of things that one can do to increase tactical advantage such as using a HOTAS, using Track IR or VR, get a larger monitor or a triple monitor setup, use a wider FOV, etc...

Where is the consistency in advocating for balance in game play among all players at the expense of elements that would enhance the game experience?

I don't doubt that 3PV provides some tactical advantage - but at the cost of tactical disadvantages (depending on implementation; but a HUD free or HUD reduced drone view would definetly ramp up the disadvantages) - such that it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for competitive players to play from that view.

And if they can achieve a miniscule scouting advantage in its use despite the advantages, then so be it - consider it another point of mastery on which skilled players can properly differentiate themselves from the pretenders.

The drone solution largely preserves pilot agency as well as gameplay intent. Looking through the camera of a drone that you launch out of combat is completely feasible in today's technology, and much more so in 33rd century (even in a paleo-future environment as Elite is). And it provides marginal at best advantages for competitive players.

On the flip side, the gain is tremendous - the ability to ogle the ships you spend hours upon hours building up and customizing, that Frontier Development spend weeks to months of man hours designing, modelling and implementing as you super cruise through space.
 
Next time you're in a fight, try NOT using the HUD at all. See what happens when you lose sight of the enemy. And try firing projectile weapons without the help you'd get in the cockpit. Try fighting without knowing the state of your shields, or theirs... etc. The list goes on.

I know when I'm fighting, the moment I lose sight of the enemy, the first thing I do is look at the HUD. What do you do?

I look at the HUD. If I had an unlocked third person view, I wouldn't need one though. Losing the gyro gunsight wouldn't be a major issue - I used to play lots of WW2 flightsims that don't have one. With a little practice, it becomes unnoticable. Even going without a crosshair at all isn't a problem - I exclusively play Arma 3 on Hardcore servers that don't allow for a crosshair. In Skyrim, I had no problem perfectly hitting targets with high angular velocity just by aiming over the arrows shaft and targeting ahead.

I'd call the status of shields overrated. In a one on one situation, I try not to be hit and hit the other guy regardless of any shield status.
Since I'd see it when I get hit, I'd know if I had taken some hits and could safely assume that my shields are low, and with a little experience, I'd say it would be quite easy to make a close guess about the enemies shield status. Moreover, there's a visual differentiation telling you if you hit shields or hull.

Three things here:-
1) Let's consider looking ahead, left and right. An 180+ degree arc. In cockpit I can look at any of that instantly. In an external view I'd have to rotate/sweep the drone around which could take numerous seconds. ie: In many cases cockpit view will give a quicker view, at least ahead. And to look behind, I suspect you'd be able to look behind quicker in cockpit too, than a long sweaping around in external.
2) So what? If I want to sit X kilometers away and look at some dots... does it really matter which view I wish to do it in?
3) While in external view I'm am creating a (small risk). Something could approach which would be obvious on the HUD, but I cannot see the HUD.

1. In most cockpit designs, you wouldn't be able to look around in a 180° degree arc because unless you have an elevated glass canopy (rendering you more vulnerable), your six is concealed by one minor object: your ship.

2. It does matter because third person wouild allow you to view these dots from a hidden position behind an asteroid/space station without any risk of being spotted yourself. Minimizing your heat signature because of the ability to turn your sensors off would be a cherry on top.

3. Not if you're looking around from time to time. Depending on how far you would be able to zoom out, you can even see what's behind you without looking around.


Look - I like third person view and the options it would offer to produce great video footage, which would in turn promote the game.

Camera Drones could be implemented provided they have certain drawbacks to mitigate abuse. I would deem 4-5 seconds way too short, there should be a speed limit so the drone can keep up with the ship, the drone should emit a large heat signature and all ship controls are transferred over to controlling the drone as soon as it's out, leaving the ship unsteerable.

At this point however, they wouldn't allow for good footage anymore, which is why I'd avocate for a positional flight recorder letting you edit camera angles and positions completely freely. Imagine setting up a static camera in a dogfights path and have you and your pursuer zip by, the switch to a chase cam etc...

The only point against it is the desire for instant gratification and dislike for watching recorded footage. I for one tremendously enjoyed watching replays of my races in TOCA 2 or Colin McRae Rally after an adrenaline-pumped race, having a smoke and relaxing from it.

Given that there are a host of things that one can do to increase tactical advantage such as using a HOTAS, using Track IR or VR, get a larger monitor or a triple monitor setup, use a wider FOV, etc...

Where is the consistency in advocating for balance in game play among all players at the expense of elements that would enhance the game experience?

I wouldn't call using a HOTAS a tactical advantage - I found mouse and keyboard easier. The only reason I use my HOTAS is because I have a Warthog and I like the haptic.

Allowing for unrestricted 3rd person view would be balanced between players - everyone can use it. The problem is that it's poorly balanced against first person, forcing people to use it in order to not put themselves at a huge disadvantage.

Larger Screens, VR or Headtracking are freely accessible for everyone, so I don't see any imbalance or inconsistancy here.
 
Last edited:
Well it's lucky that FD *are* looking at introducing a restricted/nerfed camera drone or somesuch into the game.

Seriously, does anyone at this point think that they are *not* going to be able to do it sensibly?
 
I look at the HUD. If I had an unlocked third person view, I wouldn't need one though.

So let's follow your statement through?

You and your enemy do a close head to head flyby (as is common place).

In the cockpit you'd instantly be looking down at your HUD and flying probably solely using it for a good few seconds until you get your bearings/sight on your enemy?

Now let's consider the suggested external view. You're suggesting you'll be in effect panning around in external view trying to find your oponent, while also trying to control your craft effectively? And remember the suggestion is any external drone won't be able to pan around your ship quickly, instead it will move around your ship so a change of angle would take numerous seconds?

Can you imagine trying to turn your ship around, and "fish around" with your external view at the same time, trying to pick up the enemy who is somewhere behind you? Is it best for you to turn up, down, left or right? The HUD tells you immediately, but you'll need to slowly pan around and look around first. Will you wait to turn? Or will you commit to a direction which more than likely could be the worse of your choices?

This seems to be describing someone who is worse off than having a HUD. I can't see the "tremendous advantage" you mention? Are you able to explain this "tremendous advantage" in the simple combat scenario above?
 
Last edited:
Well it's lucky that FD *are* looking at introducing a restricted/nerfed camera drone or somesuch into the game.

Seriously, does anyone at this point think that they are *not* going to be able to do it sensibly?

I doubt that their solution will fully satisfy the main contributors to this thread. Personally I'm happy to wait and see on that one.
 
I doubt that their solution will fully satisfy the main contributors to this thread. Personally I'm happy to wait and see on that one.

I concur. I'm getting more and more skeptical that we'll get an external view with "reasonable functionality".

Going to be interesting though :)


Seriously, does anyone at this point think that they are *not* going to be able to do it sensibly?
I'm getting concerned TBH! The standard beta is out in a week. Any external view surely needs to be given some good time in game to be tested. So if it's not in there (soon) I take that as a bad sign!
 
Last edited:

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
I'm getting concerned TBH! The standard beta is out in a week. Any external view surely needs to be given some good time in game to be tested. So if it's not in there (soon) I take that as a bad sign!

The Standard Beta 1.0. Bear in mind that there will be more smaller updates in due course. Premium Beta escalated to 2.2 in the end.
 
I concur. I'm getting more and more skeptical that we'll get an external view with "reasonable functionality".

I am actually hopeful that remotely controlled drones could provide more than just an external view. For example, they could carry scientific instruments, tools for prospecting, mechanical arms to grab and move cargo canisters (as an alternative to scooping, especially for bigger ships)...

Make them varied, make them reusable, and drones could provide quite some interesting gameplay.

(Also I could imagine that a small drone might not have the full flight assist capabilities of a real ship. Maybe only a "flight assist light" that does cancel rotation, but not movement, which could produce a similar feeling as steering a probe in Kerbal Space Program with SAS ON.)
 
I look at the HUD. If I had an unlocked third person view, I wouldn't need one though. Losing the gyro gunsight wouldn't be a major issue - I used to play lots of WW2 flightsims that don't have one. With a little practice, it becomes unnoticable. Even going without a crosshair at all isn't a problem - I exclusively play Arma 3 on Hardcore servers that don't allow for a crosshair. In Skyrim, I had no problem perfectly hitting targets with high angular velocity just by aiming over the arrows shaft and targeting ahead.

I'd call the status of shields overrated. In a one on one situation, I try not to be hit and hit the other guy regardless of any shield status.
Since I'd see it when I get hit, I'd know if I had taken some hits and could safely assume that my shields are low, and with a little experience, I'd say it would be quite easy to make a close guess about the enemies shield status. Moreover, there's a visual differentiation telling you if you hit shields or hull.

Humbly, I would suggest that you are slightly crazy if you think most people would find playing that easier, or the path of least resistance! :p

I'm getting concerned TBH! The standard beta is out in a week. Any external view surely needs to be given some good time in game to be tested. So if it's not in there (soon) I take that as a bad sign!

I'd say it was simply a low priority item, especially if they design it so as not to affect gameplay as the ultra-competitive PvPers are worried about. In essence then, it is just for the scenery with no gameplay elements... therefore low priority.
 
So let's follow your statement through?

You and your enemy do a close head to head flyby (as is common place).

In the cockpit you'd instantly be looking down at your HUD and flying probably solely using it for a good few seconds until you get your bearings/sight on your enemy?

Now let's consider the suggested external view. You're suggesting you'll be in effect panning around in external view trying to find your oponent, while also trying to control your craft effectively? And remember the suggestion is any external drone won't be able to pan around your ship quickly, instead it will move around your ship so a change of angle would take numerous seconds?

Can you imagine trying to turn your ship around, and "fish around" with your external view at the same time, trying to pick up the enemy who is somewhere behind you? Is it best for you to turn up, down, left or right? The HUD tells you immediately, but you'll need to slowly pan around and look around first. Will you wait to turn? Or will you commit to a direction which more than likely could be the worse of your choices?

This seems to be describing someone who is worse off than having a HUD. I can't see the "tremendous advantage" you mention? Are you able to explain this "tremendous advantage" in the simple combat scenario above?


That depends on the implementation of camera drones - if they are implemented the way I mentioned above, they wont offer an advantage. But as I said, they wont allow for good footage at that point anymore.

Anyway - let's wait and see what FD do. I'm afraid it will be something leaving both sides of the argument dissatified - i.e. leaving room for exploits whilst not allowing for good footage at the same time.

Post hoc 3rd person would solve that Problem Imho.
 
External view was never practical for combat in Frontier and FFE.

Slightly off-topic, but FFE's external view was incredibly useful in combat, because unlike in ED you could stop time and have a look around. My general combat strategy (especially with the larger ships) was to stop time as soon as something appeared on the radar, scan round until I found it, select it as a navigation target, then autopilot towards it firing lasers. A boring solution, but an extremely effective one.
 
There is no breaking of immersion since third person drones are a reality in 2014, and because you can opt to not use the feature in the first place.

This pointless argument has been dead, buried and the zombie shot to death several times already.

Pointless? Shot to death?

Only because you want it to be pointless.

Frontier themselves have made it clear the First Person Only design choice is related to the immersive feel they are trying to create for the game. This design decision is being stuck to as far as I can tell so it is not dead and buried.

There are people who just don't like it and therefore poo poo anyone who brings it up just like you poo poo me.

Frontier have not stated that drones are out of the question but their implementation would be cockpit based. Thus you would still be "in your head" looking at a screen or something.

There is going to be no third person external view with the player outside their head in Elite: Dangerous unless Frontier have changed their mind on going for the "you in your head" approach.
 
That depends on the implementation of camera drones - if they are implemented the way I mentioned above, they wont offer an advantage. But as I said, they wont allow for good footage at that point anymore.

Anyway - let's wait and see what FD do. I'm afraid it will be something leaving both sides of the argument dissatified - i.e. leaving room for exploits whilst not allowing for good footage at the same time.

Post hoc 3rd person would solve that Problem Imho.

The solution is simple.

A photo-journalistic role for players where external cameras can be fitted to ships and used from the the cockpit, the data recorded and viewed full screen and edited once landed.

That way players could get their full screen captures without having to break a fundamental design decision of Frontier.
 
The solution is simple.

A photo-journalistic role for players where external cameras can be fitted to ships and used from the the cockpit, the data recorded and viewed full screen and edited once landed.
I'm sure this would be very popular with some.

But for many it doesn't address the key point of external view. To better enjoy the moment!

That way players could get their full screen captures without having to break a fundamental design decision of Frontier.
External view needn't "break a fundamental design decision of Frontier". Cockpit should be the place to play the game from. But other views are better suited to other purposes. No one is suggesting playing the game from external view. Only enjoying looking at the game from external view :)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom