Cockpit View - [Now Forced per Higby]

[Nobel]

The same experience for everyone.

This is like asking in PS1 if we should allow people I skip to exit/enter animations and go right into your vehicle.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by elfailo

I guess id Software doesn't understand something is seriously wrong when they hand out millions of dollars in cash prizes to the highest level competition players in the world when they allow them to change their FOV's during tournaments then.

Has it really come to a point where people are so obsessed with balance that even something as insignificant as this causes a stir? If it doesn't matter to players who compete over millions of dollars as a full-time profession, I can't imagine why it would matter to people here, in a relatively casual game that will most likely not feature tournaments.

Forcing one view mode doesn't "add" anything besides an almost imaginary level of fairness. It subtracts. You have fewer options.

Fairness isn't imaginary, and also, if you can choose to change to a 3rd person cockpit view, why wouldn't you be able to choose to turn off vehicle animations? That way people who consider themselves immersed by them can have them on and those who don't have them off? Answer: the affect on balance is not insignificant.

[Trolltaxi]

Force on.

1. It looks great.
2. Veichles will have more realistic flight model in PS2. A great flight model sucks without a cockpit view. They can make it "arcade" like PS1 with HUD or 3rd person, or they can take it serious and add cockpit. Cockpit is the real men's choice.
3. Immersion - already discussed
4. Balance - already discussed
5. Forces more realistic tactics and manouvers. It isn't like a flying camera anymore, it is an aircraft where you can't see what's under your nose. So you need to pitch down - loosing height, gaining speed etc. That makes aiming harder. That works agains hoover-farming. This way flying will finally require skill.

[SniperSteve]

I never liked cockpits, so I would vote that they be toggle-able.

Edit, I am also worried that aircraft are going to be stupid-OP, so maybe forcing them would be helpful to the infantry as it would introduce blind spots.

[Mr DeCastellac]

My vote goes for forced, from a realism standpoint. In real life, you can't disable the dashboard in front of you.

[Vash02]

Originally Posted by Mr DeCastellac

My vote goes for forced, from a realism standpoint. In real life, you can't disable the dashboard in front of you.

You will be able to in a couple of years. I think some aircraft may even have it now.

They use cameras placed on the outside of the aircraft to stream video to the pilots helmet in the direction he/she is looking.

May even be possible to get that third person feel if you just extend a camera on the end of a wire lol

[lolroflroflcake]

Originally Posted by Vash02

You will be able to in a couple of years. I think some aircraft may even have it now.

They use cameras placed on the outside of the aircraft to stream video to the pilots helmet in the direction he/she is looking.

May even be possible to get that third person feel if you just extend a camera on the end of a wire lol

This still wouldn't ever replace a cockpit, as they usually present more information then you can cram onto a helmet visor.

[Malorn]

Whether other institutions choose to be consistent with their fairness is not a reason for PS2 to ignore it.

The things I want to see reduced are not the lower obstruction but the middle/side obstructions. I think a blind spot is good. But its tactical value is lost if it isn't consistently enforced. Infantry can't rely on being in a blind spot if it isn't a blind spot for some pilots. And every pilot with a brain would disable them, rendering the entire feature worthless. It would serve only as an idiot/newbie check. Not the result I think they are going for.

Considering they changed the flight HUD to move the speed/altitude indicators into the cockpit I expect it is not optional. They also said how they didn't like the "floating camera" aspect of flight from PS1. And since roughly 85% of the poll respondents seem to agree with forcing it I don't think you're going to win this one.

You could embrace it and learn to overcome the disadvantages that the obstruction provides and use it as a skill differentiator. That's something I heard many times as a complaint in PS1. This is opportunity for skill differentiation. That and games like battlefield have had cockpits for a long time with obstructions and people learned to deal with it.

[MrBloodworth]

Wow PvP is not PvP. Its won by attrition ( Player VS. Gear ). Your argument is invalid. RPGs are playing the interface, the rendered world is mostly irrelevant.

[Baneblade]

Low visibility should be a con to operating a vehicle. PS's flying cameras gave too much of the infantry advantage away.

[MrBloodworth]

What ever makes you feel better.

[kaffis]

I voted for forced, because I believe in level playing fields, and camera options/capabilities are a big part of that. What we've seen so far is an attractive cockpit, and remains fairly functional. It should be noted that my feelings aren't restricted to air vehicles.

That said, I do think that cockpit occlusion is/should be a big part of how a vehicle is balanced and designed. A cleverly designed cockpit view can promote certain behaviors that then become intrinsic parts of the vehicle balance with external factors like weapons used against it, etc.

I'm on the fence about the current third person view for air vehicles. On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to the notion that they're harder to maneuver in tight landing quarters from the cockpit view, especially since they're VTOL craft meant to be used outside of generously apportioned designated landing zones. On the other hand, this conflicts with my above notes about balance points and everybody using the same tools in combat.

I think the two compromises with 3rd person that I'd feel most comfortable with are the following: 1) Pilots without weapons (Galaxies, at the moment, maybe Liberators depending on how they're equipped and designed) have access to 3rd person camera views all the time, but fighter pilots or Liberator pilots with a nose gun under their control do not. 2) Third person camera views are only available when in a limited "hover mode" meant to be used in take-off and landing, and which provide for severely limited combat potential via locking weapons or crippling maneuverability.

[lolroflroflcake]

I think you guys are over reacting, this isn't low visibility, low visibility is can't see anything at all. This is barely obstructed field of view that makes little to no difference.

[Wargrim]

Forcing cockpit view on players? Are you crazy? You guys argue that you want your immersion, but also have no disadvantage above players who dont use cockpit views, so they shouldnt have that option? Seriously, whats next? Banning joysticks so those flying with mouse and keyboard are not at an disadvantage?

I always disable cockpit views, because i find them pointless and obstructive. If you are really so much more immersed by having the cockpit view on, good for you, but then man up and accept that you might have to swallow a small disadvantage, instead of telling me that my preferences have to be ignored because of percieved unfairness.

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Wargrim

I always disable cockpit views, because i find them pointless and obstructive. If you are really so much more immersed by having the cockpit view on, good for you, but then man up and accept that you might have to swallow a small disadvantage, instead of telling me that my preferences have to be ignored because of percieved unfairness.

Or, you could play on the same level playing field as the rest of us.

Point is, if they add it, it needs to be non-optional. Otherwise remove it completely.

Its not about immersion.