6
f_error, on August 13 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:
You didnt understand my point. All the games you mentioned HAVE a 3pv. Hawken does not. That is the reason why people ask for it. You always act as if the wish for 3pv was something forbidden and stupid. It is not. And a game that does NOT have 3pv like hawken is obviously the perfect candidate for it. THAT was my whole point.
There is no logic to this. The lack of a feature does not mean that the addition of said feature automatically makes it better.
And this is especially true when something has been purposefully designed to operate without that feature or use said under specific, limited circumstances.
Very good. Thats rather a hint that devs minds can change about a lot of things instead of staying adamant about "never ever ever 3pv" just because someone (you) says they are such blockheads.
You haven't provided any proof like I asked for, for one thing, and aside from that, the introduction of energy weapons is not an equivalent situation as they do not require the splitting of the playerbase or introducing and inherent advantage.
Anyway, you're right in that they don't have to approve everything the first time around, but 3rd person is something they have actively denied in the past. It's one thing when they haven't said a peep, but another entirely when they've mentioned in interviews that they've purposefully built the game in 1st person for a reason.
So_ Thats again a reverse failed argument. We KNOW they dont want it, otherwise it would be there. But thats not based on some "universal laws" or "unfair advantages" its just their creative and subjective decision. And THAT is what i have been saying days ago. 3pv is not a stupid idea and people who ask for it are not complete idiots. The devs dont want it. Thats all and that is fine.
There are unfair advantages inherent in 3rd person perspective.
That is an objective truth, that can be proved using the scientific testing method. Whether you like it or not, that is fact. You can ignore and deny this as much as you want, but that changes nothing.
And keep in mind how much hawken is under development and still changes. Its not like TPV would be the feature to print cash.
The ability to change does not necessitate change. Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.
Keep that straw man to yourself. I never said that 3pv was a necessary change.
Learn what a straw man is, please. Ironic that you accuse me of straw-manning, because it is you who are misrepresenting my position in order to dismiss the argument.
My point still applies, because the change needs not be necessary.to be a bad idea. Like I said before, the lack of a function does not make the addition of said function to automatically be a positive change.
That is what i guessed. No how is there any implication to why the devs should like a 3pv or not or why 3pv would have to be prohibited by general laws of fairness_
Whether you want to admit it or not, 3rd person view provides distinct advantages over 1st person.
That is incorrect. The spectator view includes TPV. Many people are asking for it. It partly exists and is supposed to be the next step from the killcam.
Additionally it raises (or should) a lot more concern about abuse and "unfair advantage" since common spectator views also allow to follow enemies, while TPV does not.
Um... You didn't read what I said. It's obvious because you're denying what I'm saying by saying pretty much exactly what I said.
Actually its you, trying to make "points" where there a none. Of course we all say the same, because we all sum up the same general information. It is just YOU who claims that it proves all your points. It does not prove anything. That is why these "points" seem so complex and contradicting.
Okay. Let's get this straight...
I state that 3rd person view exists only in repair mode, and spectator modes (which includes killcam).
You stated, and I quote, "That is incorrect.", which you immediately follow with, "The spectator view includes TPV.".
I am not the one saying things that contradict themselves. You make the exact same statement of fact that I did, yet you claimed I was wrong. This is why I said you must not have read what I wrote. Because essentially what happened was that I said, "1+1=2", and you said "No, that's wrong. 1+1=2".
You claim things are complex and contradicting, but as far as I can tell, much of that confusion is self induced, if has served as any sort of example.
Delaying that information would make the specator completely useless as a watchmode for tournaments. If you call that "extremely easy" then what do you call a simple "noob light" above the head of a 3pv user_ What do you call the split of player queues for 1pv only and mixed views_ (which hawken, other than MW seemingly cant afford. THAT is a valid point against split queues.)
Completely false. Spectator delay is actually standard practice in tournaments. As for "noob lights" and population splits, those are arbitrary band-aid mechanics. Only neccessary because the advantages of 3rd person can't be naturally accounted for.
We KNOW that the devs are committed towards 1pv. That is why there is no 3pv. I said that days ago. Its their subjective decision for the course of hawken, and that is fine. Stop trying to make all this obvious information into "your points" why 3pv is wrong. You are better than that.
It is not entirely subjective.
Stop ignoring that some of "my points" are scientific fact. You are better than that, aren't you_
Immersion is the transformation of your awareness from your physical real world location and situation to the ingame situation. Effects like immersion are very dependent on constraints and cues. Especially when those cues are broken or contradicting, the immersion is low or the system gets a complete breakdown. A classic example are the borders of a monitor/canvas that overlay a 3d-effect in 3d cinema or games. This occlusion depth-cue (monocular) is stronger than the disparity or convergence (both binocular) and can easily destroy a simulation.
For "logical" cues it is mostly the same. If there are contradicting elements then the player will not feel immersed in the scene. The difference is that these cues are based on the persons subjective experience. While some people just blank out that "unlimited ammo" is not possible in the world of hawken, others dont. That is why the point of view is very important for logical immersion, while simple 3d-immersion etc. is mostly depending on cues that are similar between most healthy people. It is exactly BECAUSE immersion != realism, why it depends on the players point of view. If it was about realism, players would have common ground based on reality.
It is subjective up to a point, but not entirely subjective, therefor it is a matter of game mechanics.
And games aren't simply "something else" before they get certain features. There is a design and intended path that they follow.
LOL. (sry)
Do you have understanding of how games are built_ The fact that you laugh at what I said implies you don't really understand the game development process.
An accurate analogy would be like saying, "Mom, could I have icing on the cake_"
"No dear, this particular type of cake isn't meant to have icing on it. By putting icing on it, it unbalances the flavors and makes the cake worse."
See_ "Unbalanced flavor". Its not like your "the cake goes up in flames and destroys the whole town"-argument that "unfair advante" would equal to. NOW its a matter of flavor and therefore taste. I eat my cheesecake with aioli, you probably dont. Some people want their hawken with 3pv. Mom (devs) does not approve, so they dont get it. But that makes it neither a stupid request nor them stupid people.
I'm sorry, I should have said "A more accurate analogy would be like...", because you're right, my analogy does present it as a matter of subjective taste, which is incaccurate.
There are objective issues with 3rd person view, therefor my more accurate analogy still wouldn't be accurate.
For the record, equesting 3rd person doesn't make a person stupid.
However, repeatedly ignoring scientifically proven facts, repeatedly ignoring the concept that the devs have purposefully designed Hawken without 3rd person piloting, repeatedly bringing up the topic as if it's new, only to have the debate restart over and over and over and other such things is...
Well, it's not the most enlightened approach, now is it_
There is no logic to this. The lack of a feature does not mean that the addition of said feature automatically makes it better.
And this is especially true when something has been purposefully designed to operate without that feature or use said under specific, limited circumstances.
Very good. Thats rather a hint that devs minds can change about a lot of things instead of staying adamant about "never ever ever 3pv" just because someone (you) says they are such blockheads.
You haven't provided any proof like I asked for, for one thing, and aside from that, the introduction of energy weapons is not an equivalent situation as they do not require the splitting of the playerbase or introducing and inherent advantage.
Anyway, you're right in that they don't have to approve everything the first time around, but 3rd person is something they have actively denied in the past. It's one thing when they haven't said a peep, but another entirely when they've mentioned in interviews that they've purposefully built the game in 1st person for a reason.
So_ Thats again a reverse failed argument. We KNOW they dont want it, otherwise it would be there. But thats not based on some "universal laws" or "unfair advantages" its just their creative and subjective decision. And THAT is what i have been saying days ago. 3pv is not a stupid idea and people who ask for it are not complete idiots. The devs dont want it. Thats all and that is fine.
There are unfair advantages inherent in 3rd person perspective.
That is an objective truth, that can be proved using the scientific testing method. Whether you like it or not, that is fact. You can ignore and deny this as much as you want, but that changes nothing.
And keep in mind how much hawken is under development and still changes. Its not like TPV would be the feature to print cash.
The ability to change does not necessitate change. Just because it can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.
Keep that straw man to yourself. I never said that 3pv was a necessary change.
Learn what a straw man is, please. Ironic that you accuse me of straw-manning, because it is you who are misrepresenting my position in order to dismiss the argument.
My point still applies, because the change needs not be necessary.to be a bad idea. Like I said before, the lack of a function does not make the addition of said function to automatically be a positive change.
That is what i guessed. No how is there any implication to why the devs should like a 3pv or not or why 3pv would have to be prohibited by general laws of fairness_
Whether you want to admit it or not, 3rd person view provides distinct advantages over 1st person.
That is incorrect. The spectator view includes TPV. Many people are asking for it. It partly exists and is supposed to be the next step from the killcam.
Additionally it raises (or should) a lot more concern about abuse and "unfair advantage" since common spectator views also allow to follow enemies, while TPV does not.
Um... You didn't read what I said. It's obvious because you're denying what I'm saying by saying pretty much exactly what I said.
Actually its you, trying to make "points" where there a none. Of course we all say the same, because we all sum up the same general information. It is just YOU who claims that it proves all your points. It does not prove anything. That is why these "points" seem so complex and contradicting.
Okay. Let's get this straight...
I state that 3rd person view exists only in repair mode, and spectator modes (which includes killcam).
You stated, and I quote, "That is incorrect.", which you immediately follow with, "The spectator view includes TPV.".
I am not the one saying things that contradict themselves. You make the exact same statement of fact that I did, yet you claimed I was wrong. This is why I said you must not have read what I wrote. Because essentially what happened was that I said, "1+1=2", and you said "No, that's wrong. 1+1=2".
You claim things are complex and contradicting, but as far as I can tell, much of that confusion is self induced, if has served as any sort of example.
Delaying that information would make the specator completely useless as a watchmode for tournaments. If you call that "extremely easy" then what do you call a simple "noob light" above the head of a 3pv user_ What do you call the split of player queues for 1pv only and mixed views_ (which hawken, other than MW seemingly cant afford. THAT is a valid point against split queues.)
Completely false. Spectator delay is actually standard practice in tournaments. As for "noob lights" and population splits, those are arbitrary band-aid mechanics. Only neccessary because the advantages of 3rd person can't be naturally accounted for.
We KNOW that the devs are committed towards 1pv. That is why there is no 3pv. I said that days ago. Its their subjective decision for the course of hawken, and that is fine. Stop trying to make all this obvious information into "your points" why 3pv is wrong. You are better than that.
It is not entirely subjective.
Stop ignoring that some of "my points" are scientific fact. You are better than that, aren't you_
Immersion is the transformation of your awareness from your physical real world location and situation to the ingame situation. Effects like immersion are very dependent on constraints and cues. Especially when those cues are broken or contradicting, the immersion is low or the system gets a complete breakdown. A classic example are the borders of a monitor/canvas that overlay a 3d-effect in 3d cinema or games. This occlusion depth-cue (monocular) is stronger than the disparity or convergence (both binocular) and can easily destroy a simulation.
For "logical" cues it is mostly the same. If there are contradicting elements then the player will not feel immersed in the scene. The difference is that these cues are based on the persons subjective experience. While some people just blank out that "unlimited ammo" is not possible in the world of hawken, others dont. That is why the point of view is very important for logical immersion, while simple 3d-immersion etc. is mostly depending on cues that are similar between most healthy people. It is exactly BECAUSE immersion != realism, why it depends on the players point of view. If it was about realism, players would have common ground based on reality.
It is subjective up to a point, but not entirely subjective, therefor it is a matter of game mechanics.
And games aren't simply "something else" before they get certain features. There is a design and intended path that they follow.
LOL. (sry)
Do you have understanding of how games are built_ The fact that you laugh at what I said implies you don't really understand the game development process.
An accurate analogy would be like saying, "Mom, could I have icing on the cake_"
"No dear, this particular type of cake isn't meant to have icing on it. By putting icing on it, it unbalances the flavors and makes the cake worse."
See_ "Unbalanced flavor". Its not like your "the cake goes up in flames and destroys the whole town"-argument that "unfair advante" would equal to. NOW its a matter of flavor and therefore taste. I eat my cheesecake with aioli, you probably dont. Some people want their hawken with 3pv. Mom (devs) does not approve, so they dont get it. But that makes it neither a stupid request nor them stupid people.
I'm sorry, I should have said "A more accurate analogy would be like...", because you're right, my analogy does present it as a matter of subjective taste, which is incaccurate.
There are objective issues with 3rd person view, therefor my more accurate analogy still wouldn't be accurate.
For the record, equesting 3rd person doesn't make a person stupid.
However, repeatedly ignoring scientifically proven facts, repeatedly ignoring the concept that the devs have purposefully designed Hawken without 3rd person piloting, repeatedly bringing up the topic as if it's new, only to have the debate restart over and over and over and other such things is...
Well, it's not the most enlightened approach, now is it_
. Who killed me_ OH Yeah! That's the 3rd person view of who killed me repairing. 
