[quote who="Hunam_" reply="11" id="3624412"] Is this a discussion about a non-issue-smooth-turning-arc or combat views? [/quote] It's more about pointing out the hypocrisy of some of the views people have. My other favorite is the "iso sucks because it is hard to aim" vs "iso sucks because it gives a view advantage over top-down".
Will single player be 1-vs-1 only, or will we encounter 3-vs-3, with the other 2 friendly ships being AI controlled?
[quote who="n0vast0rm" reply="8" id="3624369"] Simple: The core gameplay is top down, changing the camera changes way more than getting rid of 16-point-turning. You say they aren't getting rid of top-down, but i'm going to bet that when you go top-down only you will be limiting yourself vs players who use the camera to look around and be able to spot you before you can spot them. Even with whatever zoom mechanic that is going to be used, me be
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="70" id="3624322"] ^ I'd not use this scheme even if they paid me. SPAZ had it right with the mouse controls, but I'd rather play the game using gamepad. And most likely I'd use actual directional control as opposed to relative (as in original SD2). I really hope SD tailors UI to gamepad rather than mouse and keyboard. [/quote] It'll be tailored to a gamepad. They are planning an XBox release.
[quote who="GnarlyFurtardo" reply="51" id="3623983"] I think its important that any HUD elements as well as camera configurations can be controlled/adjusted by the player, because there will be times you want that information and there will be times you won't. I agree that TMI can make things worse but then there's also the problem of Not-Enough-Information if things are not visible because of the perspective or the zoom level. The AI will know where everything is at
[quote who="n0vast0rm" reply="4" id="3623912"] Well i've already spoken about my feelings about combat (don't like where it's going atm) but smooth turning is one thing i can get behind. [/quote] Why are you are more concerned with the addition of new camera control modes than with smooth turning? They aren't getting rid of top-down, but they are getting rid of points.
I don't think I'm convinced. In fact, I'm leaning against a radar display. I want to keep the number of UI elements that I have to pay attention to at a minimum. Adding a radar display, especially if it includes projectiles, is just too much information for this style of game. We're not playing a space sim. We're playing an arcade-y action game with a fixed arena size, and with only 2 allies and 3 opponents max. You could argue that edge tabs would be TMI too, but
[quote who="GnarlyFurtardo" reply="2" id="3623820"] I'd agree with smooth turning - though I feel this is probably a moot discussion as the videos looked like SD is going in that direction anyway. [/quote] It is not too late to do the right thing. (I'm not saying fixed point turning is the right thing, though!) If there are people out there who feel that combat isn't being taken a direction that matches SC/SC2, this is one place to speak up.
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="43" id="3623794"] I am actually in favor of a small simple radar box in the lower right corner. It is very useful, without it any ship off screen is just lost and invisible too you. Subspace had this, so I am used to it. It really can be very helpful to have. [/quote] Sell me on it. Why a radar box versus using off-screen screen-edge indicator tabs? Will the combat arena be that massive? In single-player, will I often be up ag
As an offshoot to the combat camera discussion, I posed the idea that having a free analog 360° turning arc in SCR changes the nature of combat. A free analog turning arc means that your ship turns smoothly rather than turning in jumps. In my opinion, this has a larger effect on combat than any camera angle modification. Is it a good change, or is it a bad change? I am uncertain. Background: The
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="41" id="3623768"] Awkbird mentioned it and I myself don't mind it either as long as there's classic option. But as I said it limits weapon and possibly ship design, 'cause you can't see behind your ship. At least not as far as in-front of you. And I'm not sure if majority of players wanna be assed with figuring out best views for every ship in game like you propose. [/quote] Per-ship may be cumbersome, but customized views
Here are various responses/comments. [quote who="Vaelzad" reply="28" id="3623485"] We are modernizing the game and part of that modernization includes integrating new expectations. To use an obvious example, the original SC2 has no mouse support, if we didn't make the game playable with a mouse I believe that 99.9% (0.1% is the extreme hardcore fans) would rise up in revolt and we'd get the lowest game rated of all time. [/quote] Why are
It may have been the "experience" for the rest of the game, but for combat, it was the "specific mechanics" that made the game memorable.
[quote who="n0vast0rm" reply="26" id="3623452"] I wish Reiche and/or Ford would provide some input on what they would and wouldn't change if they made another SC, i feel most of these "modernisations" are taking the game too far away from the SC roots. [/quote] You also have to consider that the last game in the franchise came out in 1996, and Sony's revolutionary Dualshock controller came out in 1999. On the PC end, consider that in 1993, a year after SC2, DOOM was
[quote who="Volusianus" reply="21" id="3623396"] Quoting Awkbird, reply 7 I'll be honest: the combat video gave me immediate traumatic flashbacks to SC3's failed 3D melee camera mode. |Snipped| I dislike it as much as (if not more) than some of you, but to its credit, there WAS a featu
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="18" id="3623364"] Ahh... but it isn't. Top down space combat is, at it's core, all about Pattern Recognition Addiction. ::snip:: [/quote] It's easier for me to recognize that I'm going to hit you when you are in the pattern of my cross-hairs. How's that for Pattern Recognition? I understand your stance, even when you are misapplying it. You believe that locking the player into a top-do
It's easier to look down the barrel to aim certain weapons than it is to aim radially like a clock. Again, it's situational. There are times when I'd use different camera modes. Being locked into just one view is a disadvantage.
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="13" id="3623338"] ^ it's not an FPS game. As in: it has cover mechanics. FPSs don't have cover mechanics. It was built to be played in TP only. Fallout on the other hand... http://www.kotaku.com.au/2015/11/the-big-question-do-you-play-fallout-4-in-first-or-third-person/ More than 50% play it strictly in FP view
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="11" id="3623328"] As long as a pure top down view is an option, then there is no problem. You will find that the vast majority of players choose the top down option, and those that honestly like 3D isometric view all share one thing in common... they suck at the ship combat part of the game.[/quote] Since I like both, I'll have to prove you wrong once SuperMelee comes out. The camera is a weapon. I'll choose the right view for the righ
So that we have a frame of reference of what SC3 did... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLoANR3MURs No perspective, no controlled zooming, fixed camera, can't see the front of your ship (which made mycons suicidal). Essentially, it was top-down 3D-ified rather than true 3D. When was the last time you played a modern game with these limited camera controls? Compare that vid to the SCR combat vid, and you'
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="1" id="3623208"] The lip sync is the last thing I'd worry about in this game. Like literally. [/quote] You say that... But if they are voicing the aliens, and the syncing and facial movements aren't great, it will hurt immersion. Case in point? "Life is Strange." That game would have been much more enjoyable if they had the same model expressions shown in the SCR sample video. That tech that SD is using is amazing.
[quote who="Vaelzad" reply="4" id="3623232"] I think the feature that would please everyone is to be able to set what the default position is for your combat camera. I know there are going to be people who are equal parts top down vs Iso. [/quote] Yes. Thank you. Set the default camera angle (0° 1st/3rd person to 90° top-down). Set the default camera rotation (360° available). Set the default zoom (up-close to full solar s
My general comment in this area is that I thought that the lip-syncing was spot on. You guys weren't kidding when you talked about how smooth it would be. But... Question... Will the aliens be voiced? And Will you lip-sync their mouths/communication organs to their dialog? If so, wouldn't that mean that they were speaking English since their words matched up so well with their mouths? Or will they appear to speak like a badly dubbed Godzilla movie?
Vaelzad, can you post a better video showing off the camera versatility of the engine (max angle, max zoom, top-down mode, etc)? Otherwise, this thread will fill up with "I hate isometric combat!" messages.
[quote who="n0vast0rm" reply="10" id="3623195"] It's all fine that you can change the view but then do you not have an unfair advantage of people in isometric view can see further than someone who is in top down view?[/quote] My take is that it is a balanced advantage if we can change our camera at any time (and if changing the camera is easy and is bound to the mouse or right gamepad stick). I might choose iso for long-range guided missile combat, but move to top-down for mo