Something went wrong. Try again later

hencook

This user has not updated recently.

224 0 0 3
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

hencook's forum posts

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#1  Edited By hencook

@believer258 said:

Yes, and the third person camera lets you see things that the character cannot by virtue of it being a third person camera. This is inherent, and if you consider it a flaw then you must accept it as an inherent flaw or simply not play third person shooters.

Be careful with absolute statements. I must accept it or simply not play? If I made my own TPS, then that would technically be an option outside the ones you're giving me, right?

How's this?

You cannot go past the speed of light. This is inherent and if you consider it a flaw then you must accept it as an inherent flaw or simply not go past the speed of light. (or someone can link me to that thing where they sped an atom past the speed of light)

You can see people while your character doesn't have line of sight. This is an inherent flaw of TPS's, but it can be fixed to where you can no longer see them due to line of sight.

Fog of War. This was an invented mechanic for the RTS genre. Could there have ever been an RTS game without Fog of War? The Fog of War idea didn't meet too much resistance with RTS games, what is it about TPS's inherent flaws that don't allow for its own style of Fog of War?

Do you think Chess could ever have fog of war? Does that sound ridiculous to you? Because if it does, there's a variant for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriegspiel_(chess) ...So Chess can have it, but it's too ridiculous for TPS's to have it? Mark of the Ninja has third person character restricted awareness. Gears Of War has a compromise that makes peaking around corners difficult...Gears of War actually tried to address the issue with that compromise, so apparently I'm not alone on this. 13% of this poll agrees with me, crappy number but I'll take it. Valkyria Chronicles is a hybrid RTS/TPS game. Each time you move, you exhaust movement points. Would it make sense to let this TPS have character dependent line of sight? Absolutely. You might not prefer it because you prefer the current style of TPS's, and that's fine. I'm not asking you to prefer it my way, I'm simply asking you to understand how it's possible for this to be a good game mechanic in certain games. Understand?

1. Killswitch Engage

2.wrap their Wal-Mart heads around

3. And don't give me that realism shit.

1. My bad, sorry. 2.Sorry if you were offended, was just trying to be edgy 3. Realism is thrown around an awful lot in this thread. I think I suggested it could possibly be used as a good game mechanic to enhance realism, but it's not the basis of my argument. I am no longer giving it to you.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

I don't see the point in having a third person game if you don't get the benefit of the camera being third person. Most of them don't give the character enough design to make them look consistently interesting for 8 hours or so. The only other major benefit is being able to move the camera around the level before returning to the player, which never happens in FPS' because it would take you out of the character and seem jarring.

There are many benefits to third person. Hallway camping, aligning crosshairs before attacking a target and...

K, let's play our favorite third person games in first person.

Metal Gear Solid. No, you cannot see what camoflauge you are wearing.
Tomb Raider. And no, if you look down, you will not see your chest, because in almost all games except Trespasser, you have no feet in first person.
Vanquish or Max Payne. Hope you have fun dodging bullets in first person.
Resident Evil 4. Oh, if you want to do a roundhouse kick, your camera is going to spin really fast, k?
Killswitch Engage. I'm going to let you blind fire, but you have to be staring completely at the wall.
Mass Effect. Have fun commanding your troops in first person, oh wait, you can't see them. (while I think it's bad for you to see enemies in full cover, allies can be a good thing, depending on the situation)
Uncharted. Make your jumps in first person. (Yes, Mirrors Edge did this, but FPS parkour and TPS parkour feel extremely different)
Dead Space: Uhh actually... I guess this could be cool because Isaac has a little hud on his chest that he himself stares at.
Mario. Yes, Let's play MARIO64 in First Person.

Most of them don't give the character enough design to make them look consistently interesting for 8 hours or so.

Spoken so matter-of-factly, but I bet people playing Tomb Raider would disagree with you. Maybe you created a lame Shepard. People love character designs.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

At the same time while some of you folks are saying that that TPS's are "suffering" from this need to remember one thing though: you can do it too.

By that I mean the idea of using the camera from behind cover to see things that are happening that your character cannot see. It is a fundamental part of the game, nay the genre, that players can do this. It is your job as the player to be vigilant about this, to be aware that people can hide behind corners to get the drop on you running by. I understand sometimes you have to play fast and loose but that's the risk you take by running down that empty hallway without throwing a grenade down it or paying attention to radar to see what enemies are close by. My point it, all the powers that people are having a hard time with, also have them, the playing field is level in that regard.

Furthermore, if you are that person who is sitting at the end of the hallway waiting to blast people, you have to remember one thing: your situational awareness is pretty much gone at that point. All you can see is really just down that hallway and maybe a little on either side of you if you are twisting the camera around and if you that, you lose sight of the hallway, the main reason you are there.

Also, while people are saying that it is "unrealistic" to able to do that, remember that when you stacked up against the wall someone can come from what is directly in front of your character but you cannot see them as your camera is facing down wherever you are going. Someone is essentially sneaking up on you while your character is directly facing them. Now tell me that ain't goofy.

What? But this isn't a balance thread. Actually, sure, since you like talking about balance so much, let's talk about it from a balance perspective. (as ridiculous as it is to argue about balancing a whole genre, I am here to entertain)

My point it, all the powers that people are having a hard time with, also have them, the playing field is level in that regard.

The "but anybody can do it, and you can do it too, so it's balanced" point is moot. If a fighter had a light punch that did 100% damage, and everybody could choose him, I GUESS it would be balanced, but it would also be broken, wouldn't it? That's why some fighting games have characters that are banned. They're just no fun. Hallway camping isn't fun, and to the person being dealt the insta-headshot, it's pretty OP. Spare me your "Play to Win" mantra, I'd rather play to win in a game that's fun to play first.

If you're playing a team game, you're likely have a battle line. A sniper for instance, would have the assurance that he can snipe from a tall forward position, given that he knows his teammates are at the correct positions as well, forming a line in which the enemy is unlikely to be able to flank without directly engaging your allies. This doesn't happen in COD because you respawn in random areas of the map, mind you, but otherwise I see this occurring a lot in games.

So far, this is fine in either FPS or TPS. The problem with TPS however, is that snipers are formed in these battle lines from simple hallways... without even requiring a sniper rifle. You're arguing that your situational awareness is lower when you're camping a hallway, but with good teamwork, you can effectively eliminate the enemy's movement into one area (your hallway), risk free. Let's not forget how long these hallways can get! With the right hallway length, a hallway camper could probably just keep one eye out for his next catch to come by, and pop out whenever he wants. A hallway camper gets about 4 seconds to react, a hallway runner gets a fraction of a second until he is headshotted. Theoretically, you cannot take out the hallway camper risk-free. If you try to throw a grenade, not only is he at option to shoot you first, you've also risked a whole grenade on the fact that he might not even be there. This paragraph is hard to argue concretely, seeing that many different variations of the theoretical hallway could exist. He could be sitting next to a laundry chute that an enemy could drop a grenade in, or he could have his back completely walled off. So wait, maybe it is the mapmaker's responsiblity to ensure that no hallway is OP. And generally, every TPS has its hallways and campers.

I just don't see how you can argue hallway camping to have large disadvantages. What's better? Camping in a first person shooter, which is likely in the corner of a room, or camping in a third person shooter, against a hallway where you can peek risk-free? Which one do YOU think has better situational awareness?

you have to remember one thing: your situational awareness is pretty much gone at that point. All you can see is really just down that hallway and maybe a little on either side of you if you are twisting the camera around

Now I might be a big meanie by taking your quote quite possibly out of context here, but my opinion stands that hallway camping is an unholy artifact created by TPS's that FPS's do not have. All forms of camping inherently have their disadvantages, but hallway camping has more advantages than regular forms of camping.

Sure, the playing field is level, but it still sucks that peeking over corners is a risk-free action. I'm not claiming that it's imbalanced. I'm saying it's lame. You say it's a fundamental part of the game, I say games can change.

Also, while people are saying that it is "unrealistic" to able to do that, remember that when you stacked up against the wall someone can come from what is directly in front of your character but you cannot see them as your camera is facing down wherever you are going. Someone is essentially sneaking up on you while your character is directly facing them. Now tell me that ain't goofy.

It sure is goofy now that you mention it, but it ain't a broken tactic. It's a third person shooter issue that I can concede on and do not care to argue about. It seems that you were trying to use the "If Goofy X is OK, then Goofy Y must also be OK!" argument, but it doesn't hold here because it has little relevance. You can fix third person camera awareness, with character-restricted awareness, but you can't so easily fix it the other way around.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#4  Edited By hencook

Skimming... Looks well presented. I would appreciate it if you added the title of each game being played when you show footage of the game. I also would like to know the game at 9:41!

Best Metroidvania for me- Bioshock
Best USE of Metroidvania- Symphony of the Night given the game's spoiler factor.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

So you want Third Person shooters to obscure vision like Mark of the Ninja?

Oh crap, /thread.

Awww c'mon Oscar, join the debate. And uhh... lemme go look that game up.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

It just kind of feels like you're trying to fix something that isn't broken. The idea of encouraging stealth sounds like a nightmare to me, because I can't think of anything less fun than being killed in a multiplayer game by someone you didn't even know was there. Your idea might work for something like the games you listed, because Splinter Cell and MGS are all about stealth. If they did something like that in Uncharted or Gears of War though, it would drive me insane, because it would just make them play more like First Person Shooters and I'd rather have a different experience.

I think I got you to sort of agree with me here! First off, stealth is only one of the benefits of having character restricted awareness (The other being no cheap corner shots!). And that's fine with me, I'll take your self proclaimed "sort of" agreement. I'll meet you halfway too! I think the unsophisticated, (COD equivalent of TPS) Entry level third person shooters should not have "character restricted awareness". Too difficult to wrap their walmart heads around. But for those of us that enjoy a healthy third person diet (don't picture that), we could stand to benefit a lot from "character restricted awareness".

Reloading isn't risk free. Peeking around a corner shouldn't be risk free either. You should might get shot.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#7  Edited By hencook

That's kinda the point of a third person shooter. That's basically all what Rainbow Six Vegas was, and I played the shit out of that game, and it was fun as hell. If you were good, you could still move forward even with people camping. The game basically taught you to expect someone around literally every corner. You also had nades and C4 to counter it all.

I'm glad you found the hallways of death so fun. I especially liked running down an empty hallway, and suddenly receiving a shotgun slug into my head from a player who one shot me with his shotgun... with blind fire. His character never saw me. Only his camera did. Wait, isn't Rainbow Six suppose to be tactical and realistic? The first R6 games were marketed as being realistic. Oh well, what happens in R6Vegas stays in R6Vegas.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#8  Edited By hencook

@egg said:

Be more reasonable! Fundamentally speaking, TPS will always let you see things your character will not. Yes this includes being able to see opponents from behind cover.. but you act like this is an exception.

What do you want devs to do? Make a cone of vision in the center of the screen, and all enemies outside that circle turn invisible? So like a "fog of war" applied to third person camera? At that point you might as well play an FPS and/or demand that a first person viewpoint be included. As the saying goes, the simplest solution to a problem is usually the best.

So glad you asked!
Generally, we can introduce a desaturated fog of war outside of your character's line of sight. Things are blurrier, the colors are more grayed, and you can't see your enemies.

We can apply this in a few ways...
-The fog of war only applies if your character cannot see the target from any angle he's currently at (in a 360 degree fashion)
-Or, it applies directly to your character's field of vision. You can only see enemies and tracers in his direct field of vision. This might seem too realistic for you, but this actually might make a realistic TPS Tom Clancy possible (and even better than its FPS equivalent). I think the SOCOM series could have benefited from this.
-Apply it to an FPS instead! FPS players can now take cover and they'll switch to third person, but they still can't see past the fog of war.
-Make it an actual buff to turn off the fog of war. Imagine a class that had superior awareness, coupled with a microphone and teamwork.

" At that point you might as well play an FPS"

Careful there Egg, I might be able to name even more third person shooters for you to play in first person.

As the saying goes, the simplest solution to a problem is usually the best.

I freely admit that this is whole fog of war camera is too complex for the COD crowd. A game like Tomb Raider does not need this solution. If you're seeing people popping out of cover and instantly getting headshots however, I can't think of a better or more natural solution.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#9  Edited By hencook

@egg said:

How is this even a question?

To say you should only see what your character sees is literally just saying the game should be an FPS. =(

K, let's play our favorite third person games in first person.

Metal Gear Solid. No, you cannot see what camoflauge you are wearing.
Tomb Raider. And no, if you look down, you will not see your chest, because in almost all games except Trespasser, you have no feet in first person.
Vanquish or Max Payne. Hope you have fun dodging bullets in first person.
Resident Evil 4. Oh, if you want to do a roundhouse kick, your camera is going to spin really fast, k?
Killswitch Engage. I'm going to let you blind fire, but you have to be staring completely at the wall.
Mass Effect. Have fun commanding your troops in first person, oh wait, you can't see them. (while I think it's bad for you to see enemies in full cover, allies can be a good thing, depending on the situation)
Uncharted. Make your jumps in first person. (Yes, Mirrors Edge did this, but FPS parkour and TPS parkour feel extremely different)
Dead Space: Uhh actually... I guess this could be cool because Isaac has a little hud on his chest that he himself stares at.
Mario. Yes, Let's play MARIO64 in First Person.

There are a TON of reasons why third person shooters are cool. They let you see the character you control, your movement, and your surroundings. But the camera lets you see what your character cannot. So please don't tell me to just go play an FPS instead. Give me a good reason why you want players to be able to see each other from full cover.

Avatar image for hencook
hencook

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

3

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#10  Edited By hencook

@hunter5024 said:

@hencook said:

@hunter5024 said:

How about they just jerk your reticle a bit when you pop out of cover since your character is moving? Obscuring the players vision doesn't seem fun to me.

How would you feel if a grenade was tossed at you from a person that was behind cover and you couldn't even see that person? It's not fun.

Restricting the player's ability is not always inherently bad. You can't shoot diagonally in Megaman. You can't shoot a gun forever, you need to reload. If the player's third person camera is restricted to what the character can see, the player will simply have to rely on other information like sound or teamwork.

I want to like third person shooters, but I find the concept largely flawed. Currently, third person shooters are camping oriented because movement incurs risk of being seen by someone you can't see.

I don't think third person shooters are camping oriented because of the risk of being seen, they're camping oriented because games like gears of war have made the camping concept so prevalent in the genre. Also I don't see how restricting the players vision would help your problem of being killed by players you can't see, it would exacerbate it.

"If you can see the enemy, the enemy can see you. Oh, except in Third Person Shooters."

On the contrary, if you restrict a player's vision, it WOULD help because stealth would matter. Frankly, in most TPS games you can't even see where your opponent has his camera turned. You can sneak up on someone in an FPS game, but if you tried this in a TPS, the opponent might already have his camera on you, and you wouldn't know it! Remember MGS2? You actually had to peek out the corner in a few spots of that game. The game even told you to use shadows as an indicator. Maybe these mechanics were underutilized, but I appreciated them. Splinter Cell's multiplayer had a unique twist where one side had to play in first person grunts, and the other played as third person operatives. While the grunts had superior firepower, the operatives had stealth and enemy position information, so it was a great tradeoff.

It's hard to justify why you'd want players to be able to see their enemies from behind complete cover, so help me out here. Maybe you could have it as a sort of temporary buff?