3p cam orientation abuse.

[avnas]

the is one area of feedback i don't need years of experience to give my two cents in, because other 3p available games have the same problems, and address them in some simple ways.

the problem i see with vision in the game is that primarily, people can look round a corner while standing firmly out of sight. for melee to be visually pleasing it has to be in 3rd person, so flat removing it isn't really an option - but things can be done to the camera to make it harder to abuse the system.

dayz had a plan, i don't know if they implemented it yet, to make the camera snap to the edge of a wall if your character couldn't see around it, the camera continues to move once the character can see in 1p.

resident evil and eternal crusade tried to address major camera abuse by moving the camera to be closer to the back of the character's head and to one side, and able to swap the orientation of camera from left to right.

since a lot of approaches can be identified by footsteps or doors opening, there is no need to see if one wishes to be sneaky. you just have to use your judgement better.

this would increase the value of force sight

 

[SeV]

the is one area of feedback i don't need years of experience to give my two cents in, because other 3p available games have the same problems, and address them in some simple ways.

the problem i see with vision in the game is that primarily, people can look round a corner while standing firmly out of sight. for melee to be visually pleasing it has to be in 3rd person, so flat removing it isn't really an option - but things can be done to the camera to make it harder to abuse the system.

dayz had a plan, i don't know if they implemented it yet, to make the camera snap to the edge of a wall if your character couldn't see around it, the camera continues to move once the character can see in 1p.

resident evil and eternal crusade tried to address major camera abuse by moving the camera to be closer to the back of the character's head and to one side, and able to swap the orientation of camera from left to right.

since a lot of approaches can be identified by footsteps or doors opening, there is no need to see if one wishes to be sneaky. you just have to use your judgement better.

this would increase the value of force sight

3rd person corner scouting is a part of this game, a part of the skills. I think at this point its so ingrained in gameplay that taking steps to 'fix' the non-existent problem is not only redundant but probably counter-productive.

 

[Spock]

Live long and prosper

 

[CC-1119 'Appo']

 

[Lessen]

yeah it's just an essential part of the game, and I like it a bunch since it makes stealth gameplay muuuuuuuuuuch more possible, since you can peek around without being visible. As opposed to having to reveal yourself or just go entirely on other cues like sound.

 

[avnas]

yeah it's just an essential part of the game, and I like it a bunch since it makes stealth gameplay muuuuuuuuuuch more possible, since you can peek around without being visible. As opposed to having to reveal yourself or just go entirely on other cues like sound.

most games consider that to be ruinous abuse

 

[Lessen]

And?

How is it abuse here? Everyone can do it. What's being abused?

I know that in TF2 some taunts are abusable because you can use them to safely peek around corners, and not everybody has those taunts, so that's abuse. But tell me, why is this abuse?

most people play MB2 mostly in third-person. I have my controls set for easy switching (scroll wheel to switch). If you find it difficult to aim in third person, try changing cg_thirdpersoncameradamp to 0.6 (assuming your cg_thirdpersontargetdamp is also set to 0.6, the default.)

 

[avnas]

okay, so imagine you're at the end of a corridor, you're looking down it to see if anyone is coming so you can be a lame projectile rifle MVP

but at the other end of the corridor somebody else is doing the same thing

how is that better gameplay than if they both ran around the corner and had to twitch shoot then run away? you're turning what should be an instant confrontation and fight or flight moment into a waiting game on who can be bothered to wait for the other to come out of cover first

 

[Lessen]

I think you're running on arbitrary assumptions about how shooter games should be. I'm not saying that everyone having third person is strictly better than everyone being limited to first person. It just changes how some things work, mostly by allowing for more stealth, and I personally like that.

As for why I like it in that particular situation: I like that each player is allowed to see down the hall without risk and make more informed, less-chaotic decisions. Plus, Jedi/Sith reduce the effectiveness of hiding in cover because they can Sense, and if someone hides in cover then they allow the saberist to close the distance with full FP, giving them an advantage. Plus, the game is objective-based so the attacking team does have an obligation to come out of cover first, eventually. Plus, good suppressing fire or grenade usage can arguably give the advantage to whoever moves first rather than whoever stays in cover.

(The biggest point I sorta made there was just that Force Users are tremendous tactical assets that the rest of the game is basically oriented about. Or maybe my point was that good coordination dominates any kind of abuse.)

Anyway, the main point is that it's preference, not abuse, and it does have legitimate merits, and it is a very long-standing, integral part of MB2. (Not that that's entirely a good reason to not change it. I once made a thread arguing that the devs oughta change the name to something better than Movie Battles II.)

 

[avnas]

I think you're running on arbitrary assumptions about how shooter games should be. I'm not saying that everyone having third person is strictly better than everyone being limited to first person. It just changes how some things work, mostly by allowing for more stealth, and I personally like that.

As for why I like it in that particular situation: I like that each player is allowed to see down the hall without risk and make more informed, less-chaotic decisions. Plus, Jedi/Sith reduce the effectiveness of hiding in cover because they can Sense, and if someone hides in cover then they allow the saberist to close the distance with full FP, giving them an advantage. Plus, the game is objective-based so the attacking team does have an obligation to come out of cover first, eventually. Plus, good suppressing fire or grenade usage can arguably give the advantage to whoever moves first rather than whoever stays in cover.

(The biggest point I sorta made there was just that Force Users are tremendous tactical assets that the rest of the game is basically oriented about. Or maybe my point was that good coordination dominates any kind of abuse.)

Anyway, the main point is that it's preference, not abuse, and it does have legitimate merits, and it is a very long-standing, integral part of MB2. (Not that that's entirely a good reason to not change it. I once made a thread arguing that the devs oughta change the name to something better than Movie Battles II.)

1p increases stealth capability, although i'm not suggesting 1p only. in 1p people are limited to 70 degrees or so of view compared to the fish-eye view from 3p. if you're above somebody they're less likely to see you with 70 degree cam unless they look up than if they have full 3p

surely people who are strong in the force are going to be the best stealth classes. jedi can already disappear, and both sith and jedi can sense round corners like you said anyway, so why can they save the 8 points for sense 3 just to look around a corner in 3p? sense is a lot less useful if you can just peek round a corner.

i think i ironically suggested lean, but it'd legitimately make more sense

 

[Lessen]

3p does increase your situational awareness about what's beside/behind you a good bit, yeah, so in that way it does reduce stealth capability. But it increases stealth capability a ton by letting you look around from a hidden position rather than having to guess what's out there. And by the time someone's close enough to your back/side that you can see them in 3p, it's usually too late for you to react. The 3p side/back camera advantage is more useful for keeping track of enemy movement's in a fast-paced close-range scuffle.

3p isn't fish-eye, it's just a camera floating behind you. If it were fish-eye, it would let you see further to your sides than it actually does. I think you'd be surprised by some of the places you can hide.

The reason Sense is useful when 3p exists is because 3p doesn't let you see behind cover at a distance, it only lets you see around corners and see a very short distance beside/behind you. Sense lets you check for people who are using 3p to watch you from behind cover. So it counters stealth gameplay pretty hard, meaning stealth is effectively nullified if you either are force sensitive or you're coordinating really well (maybe over voice chat) with someone who is force sensitive. So that option exists.

Sense is also fairly useful when playing stealthily, but it's noisy. You have to get Sense 3 to get rid of the constant Sense noise, and even then there's still an activation noise, alerting alert players to your presence.

Lean would certainly "make sense," but video games are video games, and realism is not the highest priority. Note that there are many single player stealth games that give the player a supernatural ability to see-without-being-seen (usually by having some kind of third-person camera or wallhack). Which is fun.

I recommend playing the game for a while longer to get a better appreciation for how it actually is and how all its parts fit together, but, at the same time, it is interesting to see suggestions from the perspective of low experience. There is some value to them.

 

[avnas]

But it increases stealth capability a ton by letting you look around from a hidden position rather than having to guess what's out there.

so it's a skillcap. interesting. what happened to good oldfashioned soundwhoring? like my first example, it doesn't help you at all with stealth, since you can look down an empty corridor, see there is nobody there, and they're just around the opposite corner. you're just extending the uncertainty by 1 corner.

if anything being able to look round a corner also devalues positioning and hiding at a distance. why would you go out of melee range if you can just hang on the corner and wait?

if the game WAS 1p only, to hide in DOTF side as sith i'd go to the furthest side from sith spawn in the platforms, but to achieve the same viewpoint and the same level of concealment, i just need to be around the corner near the security consoles.

 

[Lessen]

I don't know how you see that as a skill cap, but I would really suggest you keep your opinions a bit more open and try to appreciate the game for what it is.

Also, I don't think the sound design is good enough to have the same effect. I DO use sound heavily in conjunction with 3p to increase my situational awareness.

When you're looking down an empty corridor, you know that there's a very large possibility that there is someone guarding the corridor from cover, and, if you have Sense, then you can even see them. Tell me, what about that situation bothers you?

edit: noted your edits. Editing my reply :
3p gives you AND the enemy an increased capacity for stealth, meaning that you have to live with the fact that there might be people watching you from any corner. Sense lets you devour this problem. So there's no problem here.

"why would you go out of melee range if you can just hang on the corner and wait?"
I have no idea what you're asking.

"if the game WAS 1p only, to hide in DOTF side as sith i'd go to the furthest side from sith spawn in the platforms, but to achieve the same viewpoint and the same level of concealment, i just need to be around the corner near the security consoles."
I have no idea why this is a problem.

 

[avnas]

I don't know how you see that as a skill cap, but I would really suggest you keep your opinions a bit more open and try to appreciate the game for what it is.

Also, I don't think the sound design is good enough to have the same effect. I DO use sound heavily in conjunction with 3p to increase my situational awareness.

When you're looking down an empty corridor, you know that there's a very large possibility that there is someone guarding the corridor from cover, and, if you have Sense, then you can even see them. Tell me, what about that situation bothers you?

edit: noted your edits. Editing my reply :
3p gives you AND the enemy an increased capacity for stealth, meaning that you have to live with the fact that there might be people watching you from any corner. Sense lets you devour this problem. So there's no problem here.

"why would you go out of melee range if you can just hang on the corner and wait?"
I have no idea what you're asking.

"if the game WAS 1p only, to hide in DOTF side as sith i'd go to the furthest side from sith spawn in the platforms, but to achieve the same viewpoint and the same level of concealment, i just need to be around the corner near the security consoles."
I have no idea why this is a problem.

have you played tom clancy's ghost recon phantoms? it's a pretty fun game that's specifically partly stealth based. it suffers from many of the same percieved problems. while the mechanic may be justified by being there for stealth, it actually leads to people sitting there waiting for people to be past the point of no return and then just jumping out and lazily ambushing them.

that doesn't happen in 1p games, if you set up an ambush in a 1p game, you have to set yourself up at at least 40 degrees to one side of the enemy so you're outside of their camera relative to their direction of travel.

but in 3p games they just sit right in the middle of where everyone is going and wait for them to be vulnerable.

the difference is that the first one makes them vulnerable the entire time, and it involves some thought in positioning. the second one you're just lazily waiting for people to walk down a corridor before you use your camera positioning to hit them before they see round the corner. that's not even an ambush, it's more of a boringbush.

standard 3p also ruins small cover ambushes, like if somebody's waiting for you round a pillar, you can always see them before you pass them, giving you time to block.

 

[Lessen]

hm. We need to clarify the scope of what we're talking about. See: Sense 3 exists, therefore: in the context of theoretical optimal play, someone would only ever get ambushed like that if every allied force user on their team was dead. So we must not be talking about theoretically optimal play.

In pubs against weiners, you can certainly get a buncha lazy ambush kills on lazy uncoordinated players by just sitting in a hiding spot and slashing when they get close. But this is only true because they are weiners, so I don't see it as a problem with the game. Imagine if the game were very popular and had Overwatch-style matchmaking, and so it had an evolved metagame and an expectation that everyone is going to stick to the plan. If this were the case, gunners would always let saberists lead the way to nullify ambushes (with Sense and blocking). This is not the case. The MB2 community is full of lazy weiners who can be killed with lazy strategies.

I don't see this as a problem with the game itself. It's a game balanced around high level play but played by low level whiny jerks. Maybe it has a problem with its marketing. That's why I wanted to change the name to something more tactical and less Star Wars Roleplay

Also: Even still, as a gunner, you're not completely out of options against saber ambushes. You can nervously check every corner, pre-fire in antipaction of an ambush, switch to Melee and be ready to do a jump kick or a sweep kick. These aren't the best options in the world, but they're options! And really, as a lone force-insensitive jackass with a blaster rifle, how many options do you expect to have against a patient, territorial Sith Lord? This is why we bring Jedi.

 

[avnas]

hm. We need to clarify the scope of what we're talking about. See: Sense 3 exists, therefore: in the context of theoretical optimal play, someone would only ever get ambushed like that if every allied force user on their team was dead. So we must not be talking about theoretically optimal play.

In pubs against weiners, you can certainly get a buncha lazy ambush kills on lazy uncoordinated players by just sitting in a hiding spot and slashing when they get close. But this is only true because they are weiners, so I don't see it as a problem with the game. Imagine if the game were very popular and had Overwatch-style matchmaking, and so it had an evolved metagame and an expectation that everyone is going to stick to the plan. If this were the case, gunners would always let saberists lead the way to nullify ambushes (with Sense and blocking). This is not the case. The MB2 community is full of lazy weiners who can be killed with lazy strategies.

I don't see this as a problem with the game itself. It's a game balanced around high level play but played by low level whiny jerks. Maybe it has a problem with its marketing. That's why I wanted to change the name to something more tactical and less Star Wars Roleplay

Also: Even still, as a gunner, you're not completely out of options against saber ambushes. You can nervously check every corner, pre-fire in antipaction of an ambush, switch to Melee and be ready to do a jump kick or a sweep kick. These aren't the best options in the world, but they're options!

you can't really argue that 3p cam is going to lead to higher skill levels

 

[eksha]

what a weird fucking discussion. jka has always been a third person game with an ability to use first person. there's nothing more I can add here...

 

[avnas]

what a weird fucking discussion. jka has always been a third person game with an ability to use first person. there's nothing more I can add here...

non-argument being as i never suggested 1p only

 

[Lessen]

I never said anything about skill levels. I don't see a relationship between camera settings and potential skill level. I think it so fundamentally changes the nature of the game that it changes the kind of skill required, and, as always, I ultimately see it as a matter of preference.

From my opinion, first person (by comparison to third person) reduces the amount of clear information available to the player, which forces them to make more "fuck it" type guesses, which... uh... reduces the skill level a little, I guess? Anyway, I don't care too much about that topic.

non-argument being as i never suggested 1p only

On that note, what you DID suggest was making some extremely complex third-person code to allow third person gameplay while somehow NOT allowing corner-peeking. This would be convoluted as hell, both from a gameplay and a code perspective, and it's just wildly unnecessary when you play the game enough to see how it all fits together.

 

[eksha]

non-argument being as i never suggested 1p only

what I mean, is that it's perfectly fine and there's not a single reason to change 3p. if you want to get instakilled behind every fucking corner, then just pick a different game. this is stupid