Cockpit View - [Now Forced per Higby]

[EVILPIG]

I woke up this morning and found that my thread title had been touched without my permission. I feel so violated, yet, I liked it.

[TheRagingGerbil]

Just some real life examples here...

F35:


F16:


MIG17:


Apache:

[EVILPIG]

Is anyone surprised by the overwhelming support of the forced view? I really didn't expect such a strong response. It just affirms my belief in the dev team about the direction they are going

[Immigrant]

Forcing it seems like a good idea. It adds to realism and immersion. If not forced no one will sacrifice visibility for realism and thus it would be like there's no cockpit view at all.

[Really]

This isn't really the right thread, but it's sort of related because people don't seem to care about this cockpit, a place where a great deal of time will be spent for many players, but every other fucking post is about vehicle entry/exit animations, which will be seen for, what 0.1% of the game?

I honestly think I'm dreaming sometimes when I realise how many times I've seen "entry/exit animations" in a thread. Especially when I see things like "entry/exit animations would put PS2 head and shoulders above any other game!". No, it definitely wouldn't. I hope to get into a vehicle maybe 2 times per life, and I fully intend to stay alive for as long as possible - call me crazy but I think everyone else is the same.

Is it seriously just me that's seeing this? I literally cannot convey my indifference towards vehicle entry/exit animations in words. Maybe I should draw a picture or something. People seem to think the game will be an utter failure without them. Epic /shrug from me.

I can, however, see why this cockpit needs to be smaller. As someone who will probably be spending a LOT of time in an aircraft, I think I can speak for everyone when I say it's too big. I don't want a full third of my screen taken up by a HUD, and those bars up the side just don't make any sense - this is the future, right?

Maybe I'll wake up any minute now...

[Malorn]

More apples and oranges.

Track IR gives you left-right and more vertical views, and it's really damn cool since you typically don't have enough hands to have that level of movement normally.

Strictly speaking it is advantage since it allows you to look while turning and see things that would otherwise take the entire aircraft in a different direction. However Track IR doesn't allow you to wallhack through the cockpit. You're still limited by the views exposed by the cockpit. You still can't see down. You can turn your head and look up, but in most cases I don't see that as a tactical advantage. Turns seems like the biggest advantage since you could bank and look left/right or fly upside down and look up to get better ground views.

I think people serious about spending a lot of time in that cockpit should have Track IR as an option. I'm tempted to get it just for PS2 becuase it seems like such an awesome experience. Removing the cockpit takes away from the experience, while Track IR adds to it.

So they're both fruit but far different nutritional value and flavor.

It's one thing to look left/right and up on a cockpit as an independent movement axis, it's another to see through the floor and have far less vision obstruction.

An obstructed vision in the cockpit is part of game design. If they wanted it more open they could have done that. They could still trim back some of the obstructions and move the pilot's viewpoint around to improve things. It's that way for a reason and like it or not it's a limitation everyone should deal with. Maybe they feel the same way about Track IR, but not necessarily. The immersion factor and could certainly outweigh the control requirement. Flying might be easier with a joystick too and not everyone has those.

[DayOne]

Make the cockpit view useful. Extra info about your aircraft etc. and then minimal info if you turn it off.

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Make the cockpit view useful. Extra info about your aircraft etc. and then minimal info if you turn it off.

If it starts making smoke, it's not good.

[Fenrod]

What the hell ? Why cockpit view should be forced ? How am I going to enjoy my customized, over-pimped aircraft if I can't see it with 3rd person view ?

Da shit is this !

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Fenrod

What the hell ? Why cockpit view should be forced ? How am I going to enjoy my customized, over-pimped aircraft if I can't see it with 3rd person view ?

Da shit is this !

3rd person is still in, it's really "Cockpit" vs. "HUD".

[Malorn]

Intentional design vs player comfort

I see this discussion just going back and forth about what a possible advantage is. Some folks saying its nbd, others extrapolating that because X is an advantage Y is also an advantage and then drawing conclusions.

Fundamentally this game has A LOT of things that can be advantageous. The controls you use - joystick, gamepad, mouse, mouse with lots of buttons, cozy chair vs a bed of nails, side-grade weapons that are "better" for certain situations, etc. Lots of things which one could construe as "power" or "advantage"

In this instance I believe it comes down to intentional design. Cockpits obstruct view, just like a tree obstructs view, or grass in the game, or weather effects. All of those have an impact on how easily a player can see targets and identify things. It also has an impact on how effective camoflage upgrades are. Things which are intentionally obstructive are game design. They're there for a reason, they serve a purpose. They aren't player preference- they're rules of the game. You can't ignore them at will. Doing so is effectively a cheat or wallhack for the game because you are seeing something that you were not intended to see.

Cockpits, grass, weather effects, cover, and that awesome night/day cycle. They all serve a purpose to impose limitations on what we as players can see in the game and how easy it is to see things. None of them should be disabled by players. They aren't optional preferences; they're core parts of the game. I don't think any of these types of things are optional, and I'll put up a huge stick if I see that any of them are. Don't like the rain? Don't like how night or the sun obstructs your vision? Too bad, you have to deal with it. Same goes for cockpits. They make things harder for pilots by restricting what you can see, specifically below the aircraft where ground forces typically are. That's an advantage to infantry and ground forces and an intentional disadvantage to aircraft. It will change how you play, and it will change the dynamics of aircraft & ground forces.

Inputs are an entirely different matter. The number of monitors you have, the resolution you run at, the type of controller. whether you use a joystick or track IR or multiple monitors, large monitor or small monitor. Those all provide some advantage or another given the circumstances, but that certainly doesn't mean they shouldn't be player options.

Trying to compare the two is missing the fundamental difference. It's entirely logical. It's not about what affects the game in an unfair way, it's about what is intentional gameplay-affecting design and what is player comfort.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

In this instance I believe it comes down to intentional design.

Then why can't they restrict the vehicle a bit more and not further restrict the already restricted view? Its not a balance consideration. Its pure design. All that fluff about 'restricting the view down' is pure made up justification.


I don't actually mind the idea of a cockpit. Just like I don't mind having the gun on screen for infantry, even though that restricts view as well. I dislike the bad, overly restrictive designs they universally share.




If infantry had to run around like this because of the goggles they are all wearing, people would be peeved. Thats what the view would be like through those goggles that are actually present in game. You can't say its bad. You people brought up the realism and immersion arguments. Well, that image is real and immersive. But nobody is arguing for that, because it would suck.

[Zulthus]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

If infantry had to run around like this because of the goggles they are all wearing, people would be peeved. Thats what the view would be like through those goggles that are actually present in game. If we're espousing realism and immersion now, this is what you are asking for. Is it a 'wallhack' to not have to see that constantly?

That's perfectly fine... it barely restricts your view at all. All you need to see is things immediately in front of you. Otherwise, turn your head (or vehicle.)

[Malorn]

We get it cutter, you don't like the obstruction because you want to see what's down there. I want to see what's behind grass, shrubs, and shadows too but they're in the game for the reason of making it harder for me to see them.

Naturally we prefer unobstructed views and dont' like artificially imposed restrictions. That's why I think the biggest mistake was the we were shown flight without the cockpit and then the cockpits went in. We got a glimpse of the clear blue sky we could have had and then had it taken away. That was a bad thing for them to show us before it was done. But GDC had to happen and flight is one of the cooler things in Planetside...welp.

The discussion we should be having is not whether you can turn on or off cockpits. The discussion should be what is the right level of obstruction for the cockpit and what the developer design intent is.

For example, I dislike the bars on the sides of the Mosquito cockpit. It looks like the Reaver will have similar bars, and we don't know whether the VS one will have them. I think they're too big and occupy too much of the screen. I'll live with it of course if it doesn't change, but I generally don't like that sort of obstruction. But it might be they wanted to make it a little more restricted and all of the aircraft have it. Or maybe it wasn't intended to be that restrictive and they'll change it.

It would help to get some infos from Higby on what the design intent is with the cockpits and whether they can be scaled back a bit to give us a more clear view but still maintain any sort of air-to-ground view obstruction they want to have.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

We get it cutter, you don't like the obstruction because you want to see what's down there.

No. I actually don't care about that. What I don't want is 25% of my screen filled with something that does nothing at all. My vision is already admirably restricted by virtue of playing the game on a monitor. I would actually prefer the cockpit, if it was sensibly designed. They just never, ever are.

For example, I dislike the bars on the sides of the Mosquito cockpit. It looks like the Reaver will have similar bars, and we don't know whether the VS one will have them. I think they're too big and occupy too much of the screen. I'll live with it of course if it doesn't change, but I generally don't like that sort of obstruction.

Pretty much this, exactly. I already said I could live with the cockpit without those bars. As it stands they are just ridiculously restrictive.