Oh, did I forget to mention the catch?
We can control the FOV, which offers pretty much the same advantage that a third person view does, so that feature was murdered in it's crib for no particular reason.
Last edited:
The Planetary landing and planetside missions discussion Thread
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mexican(mexico) nexus
Oh, did I forget to mention the catch?
We can control the FOV, which offers pretty much the same advantage that a third person view does, so that feature was murdered in it's crib for no particular reason.
I like the idea of a rear vision view. It would just be a camera mounted on the rear of the ship. You can still steer the ship but your view is from the camera. I also would not mind a pop up in the corner showing the rear camera view and your forward view. This is nothing more then picture in picture. It is not immersion breaking (damn how I hate to have to justify that), as we have it today. Watch a show and use picture in picture to view a different channel, so in game you have the forward view and a smaller rear shot if you activate it. All your choice as would be side view same thing a camera mounted your viewing from. Nothing we don't have today so should be fine.
.
Calebe
.
Calebe
I believe if you check actual facts rather than spout hyperbole because you didn't get what you wanted, those of us that didn't want a first person game turned into a third person game also had the support of the many of the devs who's vision of the game didn't include third person in the first place, hence why it didn't have one.
They eventually caved in to some degree to those who just didn't get what the game was about but they did it in quite a clever way and gave something that kept them quiet but actually has less functionality than you'd get looking at someone else's ship from a Sidewinder.
Still makes me chuckle.
yes but FD need to grow up and realise that they cant sell their game from a 1st person pov, not one piece of their marketing or showing off has made much use of the standard 1st person view, let alone relied on it, and with good reason, 3rd person views make things look awesome
I think a live view maybe the wrong way to go but a greatly enhanced camera would work fine, if the camera could record from different positions for later playback. So after landing on a potato I could then playback the view from another angle, showing my great landing, buggy disembarking and then switch to view form my ship as it returns to orbit looking down on my buggy. So long as none of it is live even FD's lunatic notion of it breaking immersion or somehow offering some form of advantage is left intact. IF they add to that some basic camera tricks, swoop, pull back, rotation, etc, which can be applied when viewing the replay - hey instant youtube goodness, great promotion for ED and lots of cool ways for everyone to look at the amazing graphics so as not to notice its another dead potato world much like the last 99 they visited
Last edited:
I think ed is better without 3rd person.
Personally i hate 3rd person games and that is the reason i won´t get star wars battlefront (if they don´t have first person only servers). I just hate the idea that i can peek over corners. I feel that games with only 3rd person view feel weird even when they are designed to play that way.
Personally i hate 3rd person games and that is the reason i won´t get star wars battlefront (if they don´t have first person only servers). I just hate the idea that i can peek over corners. I feel that games with only 3rd person view feel weird even when they are designed to play that way.
Nice planet renderer; ED can do it better, and (sorry), but you wont see 'third person'.
Last edited:
I know but I said an option to view in the third person, not third person as standard. Agree FD will do it better.
Last edited:
Only worlds without an atmosphere for now. Atmospheric landings were in FE2 and FFE, so they're probably coming, but not for a while. Maybe one of the Horizons season updates, or maybe not. We don't know just yet.
Season 3 if you are lucky, much more likely to be 4 or 5.
Given progress to date and the fact Frontier are hiring more people, I'll bet it is sooner rather than later.
Would be nice to know if the appearance of planets with atmosphere will change in Horizons, although you can't land on them yet. They are adding tessellation/displacement mapping anyway.
Well, I'm sure we all hope you are right.
I would not be at all surprised if Earth is the very last place we can land on. They have to do atmospheres, and thus weather, plus, I imagine, surface water. That is a big chunk of work. They also have to eventually do the flora and fauna generation and, for the fauna anyway, movement and behaviour. Another big lump of work. Then they have to do populated planets, with cities, and people and all that stuff. Only once they have done all that lot can they think of doing Earth. And because it is Earth, we will expect the animals to be 'right' and the ciries to be not only right, but in the right place, and so on, and so on.
However, we have certainly seen that FD want to do that sort of stuff 'right' from the effort they have put into the stellar forge, and the generated objects, as we are now seeing with the teasers for Horizons. Assuming they are still getting the sales they need (and the problem here is the quality of the game on top of the infrastructure is nothing like as good as that infrastructure), I certainly see DBOBE insisting that they do a good job, or not bother (shame they don't apply that to the game).
NO..................
Yes we do. It has been explicitely stated world with an atmosphere will not be part of Horizons.
Last edited:
What happens with planetary landings if we land on Earth?
... or any planet with cities.
Or will the game just magically prevent us from doing so ?
... or any planet with cities.
Or will the game just magically prevent us from doing so ?