![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
So, yeah, there are three things, that I've heard or thought about so far about the way material is displayed and zooming in OC:
1.: Some people dislike the new, more realistic style of the textures. I'm neutral to this, but I think, the old textures made the materials more distinguishable (gold looks in OC sometimes like sulphur to me, liquids look too solid to me). So, I would like to hear some honest opinions from the devs to this.
2.: When you zoom in, you can see artifacts and the 'cubey' form of the landscape. I can remember, that PeterW (?) once made an algorythm, that made the landscape smoother, when zoomed in. What's the reason, that it isn't implented yet?
3.: Also, when you zoom out, the game lags pretty bad. Additionally, 3D objects like the clonk look also artifacted. To the first point: I think it's pretty inevitable, but what if a scenario designer can limit the zooming range? This way you could also give some scenarios more atmosphere, if you limit the zooming range to 200%-300%. To the second point: Antialiasing? Is is possible to applicate a smoothing effect only to objects?
I hereby license the following file(s) under the CC-by license
1.: Some people dislike the new, more realistic style of the textures. I'm neutral to this, but I think, the old textures made the materials more distinguishable (gold looks in OC sometimes like sulphur to me, liquids look too solid to me). So, I would like to hear some honest opinions from the devs to this.
2.: When you zoom in, you can see artifacts and the 'cubey' form of the landscape. I can remember, that PeterW (?) once made an algorythm, that made the landscape smoother, when zoomed in. What's the reason, that it isn't implented yet?
3.: Also, when you zoom out, the game lags pretty bad. Additionally, 3D objects like the clonk look also artifacted. To the first point: I think it's pretty inevitable, but what if a scenario designer can limit the zooming range? This way you could also give some scenarios more atmosphere, if you limit the zooming range to 200%-300%. To the second point: Antialiasing? Is is possible to applicate a smoothing effect only to objects?
I hereby license the following file(s) under the CC-by license
> 1.: Some people dislike the new, more realistic style of the textures. [...] So, I would like to hear some honest opinions from the devs to this.
I like them. It shows pretty nicely that OC is not a mere evolution of CR and that it does not try to be.
> 2.: When you zoom in, you can see artifacts and the 'cubey' form of the landscape. I can remember, that PeterW (?) once made an algorythm, that made the landscape smoother, when zoomed in. What's the reason, that it isn't implented yet?
Lack of time, mostly, I guess. There has been some progress on this recently though, and I am confident that this will make it into a future release. This is the relevant thread.
> 3.: Also, when you zoom out, the game lags pretty bad. Additionally, 3D objects like the clonk look also artifacted. To the first point: I think it's pretty inevitable
We could make use of LOD and see how much this improves the situation. I didn't notice any lag on my computer however, so I didn't think about this any further yet.
> But what if a scenario designer can limit the zooming range?
Scenario designers can already, there is the SetPlayerZoomByViewRange function.
> To the second point: Antialiasing? Is is possible to applicate a smoothing effect only to objects?
You can activate antialiasing in your graphics driver and see whether things look better. We might eventually introduce an option for this in the graphics settings.
![[pl]](/mwf/flags/pl.png "Poland")
Yes, and even if anti aliasing was applied to everything, it would not be noticeable on terrain.
Limiting zoom is a good idea, and algorithm used back then was hq2x, 3x, etc. I think....
Yeah, I too, look forward to it's implementation in game and mipmapping textures(large resolution when zoomed in, small when zoomed out)
Limiting zoom is a good idea, and algorithm used back then was hq2x, 3x, etc. I think....
Yeah, I too, look forward to it's implementation in game and mipmapping textures(large resolution when zoomed in, small when zoomed out)
![[gb]](/mwf/flags/gb.png "United Kingdom")
Yes, better landscape zooming is something I want to get at somewhere for the next release. It's a bit tricky as I have zero experience in this and have to get a feel for the performance issues involved. Plus, yeah, time. Sorry.
I fully agree by the way. Imho zooming should not be left to the player. The scenario should set that X pixels are visible (FoW!), the game should then set the zoom accordingly.
Note however that I'm probably a bit biased because my mouse doesn't have a scroll wheel, so I would never be able to change zoom around.
> 3.: Also, when you zoom out, the game lags pretty bad. Additionally, 3D objects like the clonk look also artifacted. To the first point: I think it's pretty inevitable, but what if a scenario designer can limit the zooming range?
I fully agree by the way. Imho zooming should not be left to the player. The scenario should set that X pixels are visible (FoW!), the game should then set the zoom accordingly.
Note however that I'm probably a bit biased because my mouse doesn't have a scroll wheel, so I would never be able to change zoom around.
I find the idea that X pixels are visible to be bad.
Think about 16:9 monitors vs 4x3 ones :/
I'd say that we just should have FoW, preferably raycasted, that limits view and leave zooming to the player, simply not rendering objects outside of FoW
Think about 16:9 monitors vs 4x3 ones :/
I'd say that we just should have FoW, preferably raycasted, that limits view and leave zooming to the player, simply not rendering objects outside of FoW
> Note however that I'm probably a bit biased because my mouse doesn't have a scroll wheel, so I would never be able to change zoom around.
That's no excuse, you can use the keyboard to zoom. (It was F5/F6 at one point.)
> Note however that I'm probably a bit biased because my mouse doesn't have a scroll wheel, so I would never be able to change zoom around.
You can also zoom using the F5 and F6 keys for that exact reason. I like the zoom future quite much and use it extensively... in a battle I zoom in a bit so I can better concentrate on what is going on and when it's over I zoom out again to get a quick overview of the situation. It has also proven to be very useful for debugging problems with the 3D rendering code.
> in a battle I zoom in a bit so I can better concentrate
Exactly the kind of situation where you can't reach for F5. Currently I would have to press Fn+F5 even. And that's my whole point: The upsides of this approach are very limited to one way of controlling Clonk. I would prefer an approach that's more useful in the general case.
>I would prefer an approach that's more useful in the general case.
"In the general case" so that players without a mousewheel are "generally" better off? The current implementation allowed for the player to adjust the zoom himself - while it would not be a bad thing when the scenarions suggested a zoom level, it currently already is that way that players with a mouse wheel can have optimal zoom all the time - and not only "generally". I use the zoom feature intensely.
No offense, but what you suggested (fixed zoom level, iirc?) sounds like "I don't have a mouse and therefore Clonk should be playable with the keyboard without a mouse - oh, and please remove the advantage the mouse players have over the non-mouse players" :)
> I would prefer an approach that's more useful in the general case.
Could you elaborate? How would that look like?
Vague on purpose, I don't have a good idea myself. I just feel like using the wheel for something like this is wrong. If people use it extensively (see above post), then it should not be something that's unavailable to some other players.
Hm, one idea could be to try a different type of Soldat-scroll: Zoom out the farther the mouse is from the center.
Hm, one idea could be to try a different type of Soldat-scroll: Zoom out the farther the mouse is from the center.
>If people use it extensively (see above post), then it should not be something that's unavailable to some other players.
I may be wrong: But can't we assume that nearly everyone who plays computer games should have a mouse with a wheel? :S
That still sounds to me like saying: "Mouse control should not give any advantage when aiming, because there can be players who play with a laptop's touchpad"
And even if you do not have a mousewheel - did you try putting the zoom on, for example, R and F to see whether that works for you?
>Zoom out the farther the mouse is from the center.
I am pretty sure at least my game experience would not benefit from that :/ - I guess that works in Soldat because only the relative angle of the cursor to your character is important and not the real position on the map?
Well, apart from the technicalities: I don't want to press any buttons at all. The amount of zoom that makes sense is within very close bounds at each given situation. Factor three maybe, tops. Controlling that manually is practically by definition a nice-to-have feature that should be removed for just about anything that provides actual gameplay value.
>Well, apart from the technicalities: I don't want to press any buttons at all.
Kind of counter-productive in a computer game ;)
>for just about anything that provides actual gameplay value.
I can not think of a plan yet to remove the zoom feature with keeping the current dynamics (and with making sure that you do not zoom when you don't want to, for example)
>Zoom out the farther the mouse is from the center.
we had this in the early test - it turned out to be horrible, i bet newton can remember me complaining about how bad it was. you dont always want to make the camera move each time you move your mouse. sometimes you need to look to the right, but act with your mouse left from your clonk.
Well, it wouldn't move, just zoom. Most mouse positions should make you end up somewhere you can battle easily, while going to the border should give you an "overview". Something like that.
But zooming while using the mouse actually changes the absolute mouse position on the map, right? that is quite counter productive if you want to click something.It works in Soldat because the mouse position is not important - only the angle. And hey, as Mimmo said before: We actually tried it that way in the beginning and it turned out to suck
Another idea: Automatically zoom in when enemy Clonks are near...
![[ca]](/mwf/flags/ca.png "Canada")
I don't really like the idea of a camera moving by its own; in games like GTA4 where the camera constantly resets itself always drove me insane (you seriously have to keep twiddling the joystick around just to keep the damn thing looking in one direction).I would suggest not to have the camera do anything by it's own. While it is rare that mice don't have wheels nowadays, there could be better methods of operating the camera than having some rage-inducing auto-camera (perhaps binding the zoom-in/zoom-out to more ergonomic keys).
I would very much prefer a non-rage-inducing camera myself, obviously. Note that we have a much easier problem here than 3D games, where for technical reasons you almost never have a good view of at least half your immediate surroundings. In 2D, we are just talking about how good you can see stuff that is directly in front of you - and whether you can see things that are far away.
It should hardly be impossible to find a good compromise. I looked at the OC gameplay videos, and they do show a very clear pattern of zooming in when the enemy was near and zooming out when he was far away. Automating this should be trivial. I would not be so quick to dismiss the idea.
It should hardly be impossible to find a good compromise. I looked at the OC gameplay videos, and they do show a very clear pattern of zooming in when the enemy was near and zooming out when he was far away. Automating this should be trivial. I would not be so quick to dismiss the idea.
>Another idea: Automatically zoom in when enemy Clonks are near...
"Ah, let me snipe down that running Clonk with a musket - FUFUFU why did his teammate come close to me now?!!?"
Or even: "I want to see what my ally does with that cannon on the left site of the screen. FUFUFU I can't because I am fighting!?!?!"
I always hated it when the camera did anything on it's own - and in the worst case you would still have to control it by saying "please DONT do anything on your own right now"
Date 2010-12-07 11:46
I have been thinking about this exact problem - I actually like it. Pulling you into a close fight is a tactical decision involving risk. If you really want to sniper, you want to choose a location where you can't be attacked anyway. It is also intuitive: Think of the close teammate as willfully blocking your view. We should absolutely *not* implement a way to get around it.
Uh, actually, to me that sounds as much fun as having a big black "YOU CANT SEE NOW" over your screen while you tumble - it would also be add some new tactical decisions to the game. But I really doubt it will make the game more fun.I don't want the game to be more "deep" by messing up the camera of any player in the game and claiming that is good for the playstyle.
Sigh. Could you please stop your "That sounds like" arguments and start discussing what I actually propose? Oh well, I guess the idea is doomed anyway, given by the level of reservations towards it.
> "That sounds like" arguments
Noticed that, too.
Anyway, nobody tried to implement an intelligent camera in the game, yet. And thus, we/you can only conjecture about how this will actually affect the gameplay. Since your basic idea can be completely implemented in C4Script, you could quickly build a prototype in Tests.c4f to check out how it feels like.
The distance-mouse-cursor-clonk zoom can also be implemented in C4Script if you fiddle around with the controls (or only zoom when item is used).
>"That sounds like" arguments and start discussing what I actually propose?
What Newton said: I don't have an implementation in front of me, so I am actually only able to talk about how I think it will turn out. Not how it is.
And at the moment I have a system in front of me that enables me to have the perfect zoom in 100% of the cases - now you suggest a system that automatically sets decent zoom in the general case (maybe 80% of the cases?). I did not test any implementation. But I am under the impression that it would be worse. But because I really did not test it, I can only talk about how it appears or sounds to me when thinking about the proposal.
PS: So actually leaving the "I think" or "it sounds to me" out and replacing it with "the feeling will be so much better/worse" is a flat lie imo - since I really don't know about how the feeling will turn out to be.
PPS: And when I actually say something where I am sure, I make sure to leave the "It sounds to me" out of course ;)
What about the problem, how to detect a "near" clonk? Is a clonk just some pixels away, but separated from you by a wall near? Or how big has a hole in the wall to be that the clonk on the other side is considered "near"? When you could by chance shoot an arrow through, or when the clonk can go through? You don't always have an open area, where the "nearness" of an enemy is easy to determine.
I think Peter's suggestion was something like: Adjust the zoom so that you can see the nearest enemy more or less at the border of your screen (with some maximum/minimum of course)
No, that would mean that the zoom changes consistently. That's bad, for automatic changes you want to go as subtle as possible or the player might get distracted. Maybe start zooming in when distance falls under 25% screen height and start zooming out when it goes over 35%. Values would have to be tweaked obviously.
Hm, I actually really like this as a general rule of thumb. Let's consider some kind of RPG scenario in 3D: You are in town, can't look farther than the next wall. You go outside the city walls, suddenly you can see for miles. They implicitly have very fine-grained vision control.
In the equivalent Clonk scenario, we should try to simulate that by zooming out when leaving the city. When you encounter a monster, the camera should move in again - and if only to alert you to the danger. Maybe we could make a system out of it like with the FoW: Make enemies, merchants, monsters etc "zoom magnets" that cause the camera to go closer when they are near.
In the equivalent Clonk scenario, we should try to simulate that by zooming out when leaving the city. When you encounter a monster, the camera should move in again - and if only to alert you to the danger. Maybe we could make a system out of it like with the FoW: Make enemies, merchants, monsters etc "zoom magnets" that cause the camera to go closer when they are near.
Could turn out well. And if you dig through the earth and are surrounded by earth & rock, the camera zooms in extremely close. When you put a lamp there, you see a bit more.I'm not sure though if this makes sense for the general case but for some RPG scenarios or even settlement/exploration scenarios, the idea sounds nice.
>I'm not sure though if this makes sense for the general case but for some RPG scenarios or even settlement/exploration scenarios, the idea sounds nice.
True, could really be nice for some RPG or exploration scenarios - combined with a finer FoW it could actually be pretty cool :)
Actually, you might not even need the FoW any more in this case, if you disable manual zoom and scrolling.
If the zoom is limited to the "maximum" view range you would have with FoW enabled it adds to the feeling.If the game zooms in without FoW I can imagine the player to be like "what, I _could_ see more and now you force me to zoom in?"
For the FoW as it originally worked, yes. For the more fine-grained "line of sight" things, I would feel that zooming is too blunt an instrument. For tunnels we would have to zoom in far too much in order to emulate the effect. That would surely feel very limiting.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
