Proposal Discussion Post-hoc 3rd person - an easy solution

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Hello,

most of this has been taken from a thread called "external view, a definitive discussion".

Why the need for another thread on the issue, you might ask.

Because the author claiming to keep the top post updated is heavily biased, ignoring major concerns entirely or grossly deforming them in the process and ignores reasonable solutions as a whole.

What's post-hoc 3rd person?

Basically, you run a flight recorder and analyze the data after docking up, allowing for completely free camera movement after you docked up. Think of it as a replay function as in RTS or racing games.

Allowing third person view in real time would open the game up to massive exploits.

The main problem with 3rd person isn't FOV, it's LOS. Here are some 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 the point of FOV vs LOS is further illustrated at 1:45.


ED shouldn't allow me to bypass my cockpit walls or other objects obscuring my line of sight (as illustrated in this 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.

I understand the desire to have third person cameras for video editing and would appreciate them for providing great video footage on video services such as youtube as I think it could provide for viral marketing the game would profit from.

So what's wrong with a completeley free post hoc camera other than not allowing for exploits and denying instant gratification?

 

[ohanluain]

I'm not voting because your poll is incredibly biased and missing options that coincide with what much of the community wants. Just wanted to point that out

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

I'm not voting because your poll is incredibly biased and missing options that coincide with what much of the community wants. Just wanted to point that out

My poll isn't biased, it's a simple question.

You obviosuly disagree with post-hoc free camera analyzes for some reason.

Care to elaborate as to why?

 

[Zvanya]

So what's wrong with a completeley free post hoc camera other than not allowing for exploits and denying instant gratification?

Nothing. But I wouldn't want them to spend any dev resources on it at this time.

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Nothing. But I wouldn't want them to spend any dev resources on it at this time.

Hmm - given something like it is already available to the devs as seen used in trailers, I doubt it will consume all that much manpower.

Valid point though.

 

[Nimrood]

I think that's a great idea. Actually came here to suggest it, but decide to search for the topic first. ;-)

Would be great to be able to see those death defying manoeuvres we do (on purpose of course) in third person.

 

[QuantumTron]

Oh look that's like my poll here

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Oh look that's like my poll here

Sorry - didn't notice - voted - since they are in separate subsections and slightly different in their approach, I think the threads should be able to coexist.

As hinted in the OP, I just opened this thread because I made the proposal in the other thread back in june and was a little disappointed with the OPs biased way of updating the OP.

Moreover, I never read a good post giving valid reasons as to why introducing all these abusive ramifications over a replay feature other than indirectly claiming the desire for instant gratification.

 

[QuantumTron]

Sorry - didn't notice - voted - since they are in separate subsections and slightly different in their approach, I think the threads should be able to coexist.

As hinted in the OP, I just opened this thread because I made the proposal in the other thread back in june and was a little disappointed with the OPs biased way of updating the OP.

Moreover, I never read a good post giving valid reasons as to why introducing all these abusive ramifications over a replay feature other than indirectly claiming the desire for instant gratification.

Oh don't get me wrong I don't disagree with you

I'd just like to be able to replay a moment in time like I've mentioned in my post - done that way would satisfy most people - not all - but most, in my opinion.

Rgds.

 

[SAB380]

My poll isn't biased, it's a simple question.

You obviosuly disagree with post-hoc free camera analyzes for some reason.

Care to elaborate as to why?

Your poll is extremely biased.
The choice you give to those wanting a 3rd person view is inherently negative and sarcastic.
And the choice you give those who may agree with you is entirely self congratulatory.

Frontier have stated that gameplay consideration does not come into play in their decision to lock a cockpit view so even if we agree with 'the ninja argument', its apparently not part of their debate.
And allowing online solo/private group switching back and forth to the 'all' group allows way bigger exploits than any 3rd person view ever would.

There are however better compromises I think than only allowing people to play back footage later (though that could be used in conjunction)

The easiest I think are to allow 3rd person only during hyperspace, supercruise and auto-docking.

 

[Non Grata]

Your poll is extremely biased.
The choice you give to those wanting a 3rd person view is inherently negative and sarcastic.
And the choice you give those who may agree with you is entirely self congratulatory.

The poll also suggests that - other than yes or no - there is only one other potential solution to the issue.

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Your poll is extremely biased.
The choice you give to those wanting a 3rd person view is inherently negative and sarcastic.
And the choice you give those who may agree with you is entirely self congratulatory.

I agree - creating a biased poll was intentional. Whether that is better than creating a more unbiased poll and calling it broken as soon as it yields undesired results is a different question.

Frontier have stated that gameplay consideration does not come into play in their decision to lock a cockpit view so even if we agree with 'the ninja argument', its apparently not part of their debate.
And allowing online solo/private group switching back and forth to the 'all' group allows way bigger exploits than any 3rd person view ever would.

That's a complex point. Being able to switch back and forth between single player online and all online renders most meaningful online interaction rather pointless and imho is a type of arena gameplay. Nobody will switch to the all group when flying a fully loaded unarmed hauler unless they're in a group (and in group only - if they're not it's bait).

Basically, that in combination with the economy not being player-run leaves the all group insignificant. Nothing to gain there but kills from people seeking the same.

Where it does affect the gameplay is whenever players encounter each other or interact - the third person player will always be able to switch to easy-mode, gaining a cheap advantage.

Of course there are suggestions for limitations on camera drones around aplenty, but at that point they would suffice to prevent abuse, post-hoc third person would be vastly superior.

There are however better compromises I think than onl <allowing people to play back footage later (though that could be used in conjunction)

The easiest I think are to allow 3rd person only during hyperspace, supercruise and auto-docking.

sounds reasonable