Page 4 of 25
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:55 pm
by Cadillac
Also, with all this talk of physics and special effects for the vehicle models, I was under the impression that the vehicle part of the game would be in the third person.
(I have no idea why, but I just sort of assumed for some reason).
What's the decision on that Rad? Or shall we poll it.
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:11 pm
by Mordechaj
i'm not sure that i like the idea of third person view as main for anything. it's harder to aim and it's generally more console-like.
you can't dogfight from f3, can you?
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:27 pm
by HSharp
Radruin wrote:QUOTE (Radruin @ Nov 13 2007, 10:06 PM) and the shocks would be parented to the wheels (the wheels stay attached to the shocks, but can still spin around).
Fixed
Mordechaj wrote:QUOTE (Mordechaj @ Nov 14 2007, 08:13 PM) can we introduce cockpits into this game? field of view is something that has huge impact on game-play - it gives some realism and feel, and can be used to balance stuff.
tanks would have ridicilously small fov, while infantry would not be hindered at all (or just barely by their helmets). scouts should have biggest fov from all vehicles, tanks the smallest. now we can argue about fighters/mechs/gunships/ints/etc. but i think cockpits should be used, and that they should play a role in ballanicing just as gun mounts are important in current alleg.
You would think in the future Alleg is set in that they would bypass that, im thinking First Person View with lil HUD details just like how most people play Alleg.
Caddi please dont tell me you play Alleg using F11(or is it 10 or 12?) view?? Though that might explain things /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:47 pm
by Cadillac
I'm just saying that this is not dogfighting.
You have limited planar movements as it is.
I personally would find it harder to navigate in the first person when driving and shooting a vehicle.
It also doesn't allow you to fully appreciate any of the vehicle effects that people want to put in such as physics.
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:52 pm
by Mordechaj
well, you can appreciate physics on other people's vehicles /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
i don't like the threesome idea :shrug:
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:47 pm
by radruin
In a lot of games, you can switch between 1st and 3rd person (Mechwarrior /wub.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":iluv:" border="0" alt="wub.gif" />); don't really see why this couldn't also. I'll do it if I can.
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:10 pm
by Cadillac
Please try and do that Rad /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Also, what're we gonna do for aircraft?
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:58 pm
by radruin
Make them fly, of course. Silly.
What do you mean by that?
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:06 am
by Cadillac
I meant model-wise /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:13 am
by radruin
I still don't understand. Do you mean, what aerial vehicles do I think we need?
Troop Transport,
Bomber,
Gunship (sort of like a Blackhawk Helicopter, except more, and smaller, openings for people with machineguns)
Interceptors, Scouts, Fighters,
et cetera.