This actually sounds a lot like something you'd see in the current crop of VR games. You might have a product here.
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
Lol, the truth is always stranger than fiction. I like my games as unrealistic as possible, immersion is for scuba diving holidays.
Understanding exponential and logarithmic scales, multiplicative and additive errors ... it changes your world view
.
Radar one and why there's more than this single element of gameplay.
Can please anyone to explain me what is "not deep enough gameplay"?! I WANT TO REALLY KNOW. More complex? You want to press four buttons? Press them in fast sequence? Where it is "deep enough"?
I am genuinely confused. It is like I am missing out on whole new level of consciousness.
I am genuinely confused. It is like I am missing out on whole new level of consciousness.
Well, people on RSI forums were pointing to Limit Theory's implementation of a sensor system as a good source of inspiration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8SOZxCXokg.
All I know is, you don't wanna hear that.
Get a room!
Twitch reaction time mechanic vs. knowledge mechanic where the knowledge mechanic = "deeper depth". A slight example of this in Elite would be the kill-warrent scanner vs. the SRV scanner. KW scanner is hold a button for 10 seconds while keeping a target in front of you. It rewards reaction times and is consider simple. Where as the SRV scanner you need to know what the various return signatures mean in order to stand a better chance of locating whatever materials it is that you are searching for and whether or not the upcoming return is a rock, a meteorite, or a man made object. That has more "depth" to it as many people define the term.
As far as radars go people look at something like DCS or BMS being more in-depth because you have to understand how radar cones work and why you need to adjust the tilt and elevation in order to find a target. Then you have various radar modes on top of that depending on what it is you are searching for and how they process returns are different. So you are going to use a different radar setting for a ground target vs. air target vs. sea target, etc..
How radars work in DCS:
[video=youtube;ZpdkwTx0l10]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpdkwTx0l10[/video]
Last edited:
Well, I went trough example of explanatorily pic what Derek posted. Well, passive scan and active scan is what we have in ED. We don't configure them for how strong it is etc. but I really don't know it would make gameplay more engaging. It would weer towards 'space sim' part for sure, but I don't buy arguments mentioned that it would give some sort of advantage over other ships. First of all, gains and potential strategies might be too prone to pure luck and randomness to be any good (how strong your direct beam is really doesn't matter - possibility that ship won't sense your scan gives you no strategic position over him.). Second, if you add NPC ships, NPCs will have to have similar strategies available to them. Considering SC doesn't even have regular NPCs just flying around I don't see how this is achievable with current design and release target.
Edit: SkUnimatrix - ok, that's actually a good example and I thought it myself. Still not sure it would add anything good to space combat though. Also if knowledge is Google then I really question what's the point to make such feature complex. Said that I like SRV scanner, and something similar added to ship scanner arsenal would cool.
Edit: SkUnimatrix - ok, that's actually a good example and I thought it myself. Still not sure it would add anything good to space combat though. Also if knowledge is Google then I really question what's the point to make such feature complex. Said that I like SRV scanner, and something similar added to ship scanner arsenal would cool.
Last edited:
Knowledge would be more understanding how and why something works ala. the DCS Video where he goes through about 15 minutes explaining just 1 radar mode and the radar in DCS Flaming Cliffs is much more simplified than say the real world. But to use the radar in DCS you have to understand the different modes. How it fundamentally works (like a search light with blind spots) and what all the symbology means. A circle contact is marked as friendly by IFF, a square is "unknown". However as he points out "unknown" doesn't necessarily mean "hostile". Then you have to know what the carrots mean at both sides and things like when to use a 60 degree scan mode vs a 120 degree scan mode, etc.. There is a lot of stuff there to grasp and the F-15C is pretty simple compared to other aircraft because all it deals with is Air-to-Air Targets.
Compare it to BMS:
[video=youtube_share;LiUYrtpW7ww]https://youtu.be/LiUYrtpW7ww[/video]
Side track: A 19-year old from Clayton, Missouri working at a car dealership...lol the onion is great. Clayton is the County Seat for St. Louis County and the "second downtown" for the metro area with most of the banks, financial, and legal sectors working out of there. Well the smart ones that don't want to pay the 1% earnings tax in St. Louis City proper. Clayton is a pretty wealthy area with lots of young professionals starting out their career before starting a family and moving to Town & Country buying a mansion they can barely afford living paycheck to paycheck, but hey I have a 6,000 sq. ft. home or empty nesters who no longer need their huge mansions in Town & Country and want to be closer to the entertainment venues and upper society functions.
But back to Star Citizen land. As I said in my multi crew video a few months ago that both Elite & Star Citizen has to make things interesting. Now some of it is based on social interactions. You better enjoy the people you chat with on Teamspeak because you'll be chatting a bunch while sitting around waiting for things. Remember how travel times in SC between destinations in systems are to take between 10 - 45 minutes traveling at .2C with quantum drive? Remember how people complain about the same travel times in Elite in Supercruise now and that being too much down time? At least in Elite you are having to fly your ship as you are the pilot. But what about the other crew stations? I hope that FDEV has somethings planned for people to do. Same thing with Star Citizen, but the way quantum drive works there I think it's designed entirely to be a mechanic where you get up from the pilot's chair and then do whatever mini game it is you are supposed to do in order to refine fuel on a star farer. Or 'ping' things with sensors. (honk your horn like a Reaper in ED).
There has to be some meaningful gameplay there. Now Elite does have interdictions, which most people seem to find to be more annoying that "fun".
Sensors working as say in BMS for a "C&C/Sensors" station and being able to send targeting data to friends/wingmates in fighters around you could be useful. There were "attack my target" commands all the way back in XvT. You'd assign the target and your wingman would press SPACE to confirm and switch their target. Same if they were being attacked and requested help and you pressed SPACE you'd target their attacker. Believe me in BMS being flight lead is more about managing the rest of the flight, navigating to target, and maintaining situational awareness ON TOP of also having to engage targets. Frankly it can get a bit overwhelming with just one person.
It's also why I don't like flying tube liners in flight sims, especially older aircraft like the 727 and 707 that was designed to have a crew of 3. Now with things like shared cockpits it's amazing what a difference it makes having a second crew member on board. A friend of mine do that in X-Plane with the FlyingJSim 727 & 732. Holy crap that second person to manage systems and radios is a godsend. Unfortunately those are near study level sims and I don't see Star Citizen being anywhere near that level of detail. And Elite certainly not as well.
I like the NPC crewman DLC in prepar3d, gives you a nice feeling of having a crew.
Off topic really but to those talking earlier about how to implement FPS movement in VR without making people throw up, these guys seem to have figured it out. I don't know if this has been talked about here yet.
http://www.downpourinteractive.com/#onward
It looks really interesting and I can see some movement system like this implemented in ED for space legs in VR. If they can sort out frame rate and UI issues, maybe CIG will be able to implement a VR system as well but it's probably too late for them to start now.
http://www.downpourinteractive.com/#onward
It looks really interesting and I can see some movement system like this implemented in ED for space legs in VR. If they can sort out frame rate and UI issues, maybe CIG will be able to implement a VR system as well but it's probably too late for them to start now.
Interdictions are fun half the time in ED - The time you're the one doing the interdicting.
What exactly have they solved?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RehCTRrWM0
I think the big question with vr fps is how to make the controllers feel immersive enough so you get sense of movement.
One way to solve this is to have character move from cover to cover.
second one is to tie character into some kind of vehicle.
Third would be development of cheap affordable threadmill solution (nope wont happen)
4th is to just ignore it and trust that enough people can handle it.
I think people might want to take a look at the 3D Mark VR benchmark suites. As for testing hardware capability - they are not bad, but actually moving around one of them in VR is enough to launch lumpy chunks
SC will have the exact same problem unless they completely redesign their everythings to suit VR.
Last edited:
I think people might want to take a look at the 3D Mark VR benchmark suites. As for testing hardware capability - they are not bad, but actually moving around one of them in VR is enough to launch lumpy chunks
SC will have the exact same problem unless they completely redesign their everythings to suit VR.
Dont worry its "easy!" to do. They can just add it later! We have no idea how VR development works and commonsense has no basis in development what so ever.
- Status