PDA

View Full Version : Spec-Cam a great addition or realism breaker?



Charles Caldwell
01-02-2018, 03:18 PM
War of Rights pushes the following message:


"War of Rights is a multiplayer game set during the perilous days of the American Civil War, in the Maryland Campaign of September, 1862. Campfire Games is devoted to presenting the gruesome and glorious elements of the period, while maintaining the highest level of historical accuracy and realism as is possible "

...but can you have the above whilst allowing a select few a top down view of the dynamic battlefield? Its more 21st Century, rather than 19th Century!

We are told its a standard addition in FPS but WoRs isn't any other FPS (or so I thought)...


*At the very least give us tools to lock this exploitable feature down!

TrustyJam
01-02-2018, 03:34 PM
I think it's a great addition (surprise). It's a feature much looked forward to by lots of community members. :)

I don't follow your argument as it feels like cherry picking specific things and compare them to the 19th century. I could also state that we ought to get rid of all options (like rebindable keys or graphics options) as that certainly is more 21st century than 19th century.

Sometimes standard things are standard for a reason.

That being said, we've never said "this is it, the first and final version of the wor cam!". Naturally this feature will evolve as any other throughout the development of the game.

- Trusty

Redleader
01-02-2018, 03:50 PM
Well a solution for the 'stalemate' would be servers with the feature and servers without it.
But that might just counter the Original purpose of the 'Wor-Cam' ?

Gamble
01-02-2018, 03:52 PM
I love it, it's a standard in competitive fps for years over years now and why shouldn't a beauty like WoR have it? I would support a disable option for private servers, though.

MadWolf
01-02-2018, 04:13 PM
I love it, it's a standard in competitive fps for years over years now and why shouldn't a beauty like WoR have it? I would support a disable option for private servers, though.

+1.

Charles Caldwell
01-02-2018, 07:27 PM
I don't follow your argument as it feels like cherry picking specific things and compare them to the 19th century. I could also state that we ought to get rid of all options (like rebindable keys or graphics options) as that certainly is more 21st century than 19th century.

- Trusty

Well bindable keys and graphic options contribute and aid gameplay, spectator cams in no way contribute to gameplay.... as for comparing 21st Century with 19th. You decide which nods towards realism. ;)

21st Century!
https://www.itechast.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/SURVEILLANCE.jpg

19th Century....
https://acwm.org/sites/default/files/styles/blog_listing_images/public/0985.13.378.jpg?itok=QWfLLH_9



Sometimes standard things are standard for a reason.

Standard being the accepted norm or level of quality. Standard can often mean AVERAGE!

What quality do you prefer, standard or superior?

.... I'm glad however you mention you are looking into this, as sometimes the average (standard) isn't enough.

TrustyJam
01-02-2018, 07:40 PM
What about names over character heads then? or the chatbox? Surely they didn't have instant messaging in the 19th century. :)

Let's just agree to disagree on the matter (I doubt any of us will be able to convince the other).

Our wor cam is already quite advanced as far as spectating cameras go (it is built for capturing cinematic moments more so than just straight up spectating).

- Trusty

Dutchconfederate
01-02-2018, 07:48 PM
I like it. And you can add options for the private servers later on.

sal_tuskin
01-02-2018, 08:02 PM
ah the private servers the golden goose awaits always the answer private servers
not to be an ass but that is just used to much what happens if we never get private servers then what

Bravescot
01-02-2018, 11:07 PM
ah the private servers the golden goose awaits always the answer private servers
not to be an ass but that is just used to much what happens if we never get private servers then what
Then to be brutally honest; the game flounders and likely putters out. Private servers are key to helping nurcher a community like this.

People, like yourself Caldwell, need to stop complain and accept this is a feature that has LONG been spoken by the devs and something they made clear that they wished to add soon. They have also mentioned, though I'd be really have to dig deep to find the thread which had this on, a desire to have it for spectators only so people can see who is viewing the battlefield. This is clearly just a test phase for this feture which will likely get refined and limited in the future to prevent ghosting. There is also clearly a growing majority in favour of this cam.

A. P. Hill
01-02-2018, 11:09 PM
To just kinda clarify this ...

Saturday, December 30th, 2017, I was on with quite a few other players. I had to play as union due to the balance thing when I logged on, but during the course of several skirmishes, I keep seeing the chat box pop up and one player in particular was always stating movements of the union players. I located his name and checked him on the player list via the TAB key, and he listed as a member of a confederate unit, (his player name,) but he was, as was I, on the union list of players.

Trust me, If I could have found him I would have team killed him. That of course wouldn't have stopped his antics, but it probably would have made me feel a bit better. ;)

So no really I don't see as how this camera is any different than the bullshit that goes on currently with players being players.

Charles Caldwell
01-02-2018, 11:39 PM
So no really I don't see as how this camera is any different than the bullshit that goes on currently with players being players.

Well congrats we've given this idiot the tools to do what he does easier and more efficiently... I look forward to the posts and complaints about battle nights ruined by 'eye in the sky' scouts.

Clearly I and a few others are in the minority when it comes to 'Standard FPS' spectator cams, lets see what the future holds... but as a backer I have every right to voice my concerns and will not 'shut up and accept' things that I feel will destroy a game with promise. If the devs want and encourage 'Yes men' then they will be disappointed in me. ;)

Poorlaggedman
01-03-2018, 12:14 AM
Badly-worded poll. Every game should have spectate. It's just a tad bit alarming the way it was implemented as a throw-away feature.

If it's not a big deal.. okay? How about third person or inspection mode as in training servers? As I pointed out, this turns a "Oh that can happen in any game (spying) to " "Press f9 to turn into a literal drone that can see and hear everything while still being a member of your team." What.

The poll should have been about the concern about the abuse being a major problem more than in most games that needs to be dealt with front and center before anything else since a large part of the immersion experience is intelligence collecting.

Charles Caldwell
01-03-2018, 12:25 PM
Badly-worded poll. Every game should have spectate. It's just a tad bit alarming the way it was implemented as a throw-away feature.



I'd hope that people would read the OP but point taken...

Kane Kaizer
01-03-2018, 03:40 PM
It's really cool to use the cam just to observe the battle from a different perspective, all on my own, without any kind of interaction with the players. However, it really needs some more restrictions from what it currently has. Chat needs to be disabled while using it and the player should be removed from their team list for sure so they aren't wasting a player slot. Yes, yes, a ****ing billion times yes we know that players have been and will continue to use Teamspeak and Steam chat to relay tactical information to players on their "preferred" team while thinking that they're cleverly outsmarting the game, but the game itself shouldn't actively allow it by keeping the in-game chat enabled. There also should only be a few WoR-Cam "slots" available, as well.

It sucks that it's next to impossible to catch the enemy by surprise with any kind of clever flanking attacks with this feature around (some of the strategies used in Cody's earlier videos certainly wouldn't have been possible with this tech, and I'd like to see Stonewall Jackson pulling off his moves at Chancellorsville like this), heavily benefiting the defending team unless by sheer chance nobody on their side is using it, but anything that minimizes its exploitation even a little bit would be appreciated. It's certainly very strange how we champion "realism" when it comes to things such as not providing any feedback for when you shoot someone, but players are currently allowed to use UAVs to gather intelligence on the enemy formation and report back in real-time.

Shiloh
01-03-2018, 04:07 PM
Idiots will be idiots. After the match I get to go back to my life regardless of whether a cheater cost my team the match and at the end of the day that person is still an idiot. That's their problem if they don't live their life with some integrity and trust me, it's costing them big somewhere else in their lives. I feel bad for them really.

To wrap up my thoughts I'm not going to spend my time worrying about people who cheat. When I played sports for most of my childhood and much of my adult life I ran across many cheaters. I used to get a kick out of beating them anyhow. I'm still beating them by always playing with integrity in business and in life. That's a win. Focus on having a good time and getting to employ some tactics with your buddies and be social. That's what this game is about.

Poorlaggedman
01-04-2018, 02:19 AM
Good thing sports leagues don't have that attitude or many multi-billion dollar businesses wouldn't exist. I always get confounded when people say 'it's just a game.' Should people half-ass everything in their lives or just video games? I don't get it.

I'm not a fan of 'limited' slots for spectate. Maybe by server choice. It should be transparent. Just as the team player lists should be expanded so as not to cut off halfway down the list, there aught to be a separate one for spectators.

Maximus Decimus Meridius
01-04-2018, 11:11 AM
Just an idea:

I think the majority has spoken (including devs and they have the last word) that the cam is a great feature.

A minority want to remove it due to problems that everybody see.

No we come to the mindfuck idea:

Why not arrange with the new feature and stop complaining about the same point over and over again. I think you point is clear and everybody can see it even the devs. So stop complaining, test the feature and wait what the devs will do to fix it.

It's unnecessary to discuss this because Trusty got your point and he stated out that they will patch it. Thats what happen during an alpha. Add features and and make them work.

They will make it fine ;)

Kane Kaizer
01-04-2018, 01:30 PM
A minority want to remove it due to problems that everybody see.

I think you need to read a little more carefully. Very few have actually said "remove it". Big difference between "remove it" and "make changes to it". Even in the OP he didn't ask for its removal, but everyone's treating it as though he did.

Maximus Decimus Meridius
01-04-2018, 01:54 PM
I think you need to read a little more carefully. Very few have actually said "remove it". Big difference between "remove it" and "make changes to it". Even in the OP he didn't ask for its removal, but everyone's treating it as though he did.

Look at the Poll and read the thread carefully. Everyone or most of us see that it can used for ghosting but just a minority want to remove it even if it's reworked.

We don't need a discussion about rework because we all see and think it and the devs made it clear that there will be a rework.

In the end we have more or less the same opinion but want different solutions (rework or remove). Remove is not a thing due to devs opinion and most of the guys who voted so it will stay but not in the actual version because it will be patched and reworked so in the end it's just unnecessary to complain because the points are clear what the problem is and it's clear what will happen.

To remove a feature which isn't developt to its final version doesn't bring the game forward because that's development. Bring a feature in, see how it's work, fix it, see how it's work and so on.

Also the thing of ghosting isn't a big thing. In a more or less organised battle it won't happen because you invite other companies to fight you and you will lose your reputation if you need to use such a noob "tactic" to win.

But it's a very nice feature to record nice videos and use it as advertisement for the game and your company. It's a fact that cryengine and this game looks beautiful and I love some of the already published cinematic videos.

Kane Kaizer
01-04-2018, 02:05 PM
Look at the Poll and read the thread carefully. Everyone or most of us see that it can used for ghosting but just a minority want to remove it even if it's reworked.

We don't need a discussion about rework because we all see and think it and the devs made it clear that there will be a rework.

In the end we have more or less the same opinion but want different solutions (rework or remove). Remove is not a thing due to devs opinion and most of the guys who voted so it will stay but not in the actual version because it will be patched and reworked so in the end it's just unnecessary to complain because the points are clear what the problem is and it's clear what will happen.

To remove a feature which isn't developt to its final version doesn't bring the game forward because that's development. Bring a feature in, see how it's work, fix it, see how it's work and so on.

Also the thing of ghosting isn't a big thing. In a more or less organised battle it won't happen because you invite other companies to fight you and you will lose your reputation if you need to use such a noob "tactic" to win.

But it's a very nice feature to record nice videos and use it as advertisement for the game and your company. It's a fact that cryengine and this game looks beautiful and I love some of the already published cinematic videos.

Still, really no one is saying "I hate it, get it out of the game", even if you want to assume that they think that way, and most posts come with suggestions for how to make it less exploitable. This forum section is called "Alpha Suggestions & Ideas" and some of us are more than happy to give those suggestions and ideas. Considering it's not even a new feature in the game (only to us players), it was a little surprising that they didn't at least think to disable the chat while using it before they allowed regular players to use it, which is concerning to some of us. Suggestions will obviously often come with "complaints", especially when someone is salty off of a recent match in which it was exploited, but that's only to be expected.