Tarbel

Member
  • Content count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tarbel

  • Rank
    Wannabee
  • Birthday 12/26/1994

Contact Methods

  • Steam ID
    Mirror Gundam

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    U.S.

Profile Fields

  • Platform
    PC gamer
  1. Behavior modification based on weapon

    imo 1. How should the enemy's primary weapon affect their behavior? A good degree. They should try to keep in mind the best use of the weapon considering maneuverability, controllability, range, accuracy, and clip size. Should machine gunners be more prone to lay down suppressive fire? Sure, if the situation calls for it. Should submachine gunners have smaller "buckets" to fill before they decide to storm indoors or into a room? Sounds reasonable. Heck, a machine gun wielder may even decide to switch to secondary due to space constraints and maneuverability. Should snipers be given a higher tendency to prioritize a path that leads to higher ground, displace after taking a shot, and holding back or even retreating in a close-ranged firefight? Etc etc. I think so, although this may be more suited for more difficult AI levels (if there are going to be AI levels). 2. When to tactical reload, when to speed reload, when to switch to secondary, when to switch back to primary? Tactical decision algorithms? When not under duress and should conserve ammo; when under duress and/or would be better off with a full clip; when under serious duress with empty primary and/or in need of maneuverability; when not under immediate duress and with full ammo. As much as possible, for better AI gameplay. 3. Appropriate use of the different types of grenades available Um.. definitely of course. Actually, I would even suggest several possible modes for an AI to undergo which depend on the variables/situation at hand. Inspection, heard something like gun shots or some noise with gun ready or not ready depending on the potential threat level Search, scoping out an area a player may be in from sight or noise with caution Assault, tactically attacking a specific area or position a player was definitely in Protect/guard, staying in an area to defend Recover/recoup, leaving an area to recuperate after being attacked Ambush, hiding and waiting in an area for player to enter (camping basically) with assault or exterminate mode coming after Exterminate, active pursuit to mow down players and maybe more.
  2. Movement-momentum suggestion: Right now I can't think of any FPS or first person anything that has very realistic walking/running/turning mechanics. And I understand that because it's probably extremely hard/complicated to implement realistically and adds a ton of factors to it and may make the whole game feel clunky and bad if not done well, or even if it's done well. But I'm going to suggest this realistic movement anyway. Most FPS movement mechanics have your character you control respond quite instantly and move at a ~set velocity as soon as you press [WASD] and stop quite instantly when you let go, or change direction, or turn, etc. What happens with this is walking or running and instant stopping which creates an unrealistic animation that goes from walking/running to a standing position unnaturally quickly in a, pretty much, physics defying way. With this, you can also just spam press [WASD] causing the character to probably vibrate as they go from movement animation to standing to movement to standing and so on. Even with a very fluid transition. This kind of problem results from, imo, a flawed conception of how humanoid locomotion works. We think legs drive the movement, which is true. But we focus on it too much. Walking and movement of a human body in general is the combined movement of, essentially, your whole body. That means your legs will move, but your upper body will also undergo a certain movement, as will your arms, head etc (to a lesser degree). The main thing is that people see the upper body as just stationary mass that will move along with the method of transportation, your legs. As if legs are simply wheels and the upper mass is simply the chassis or load that it is carrying along with it.What actually happens is more of a controlled falling of your whole mass while being pushed. For a clearer example, a person sprints by dropping/shifting their center of mass (most of their upper body) in front of them and then using their legs to keep the body up and moving forward (and using their body, too of course). For walking, this happens to a lesser, sometimes much lesser, degree, but is still apparent and the basis of how humans walk. We don't leave our upper body still and use our legs to just drag/pull it forward, and most FPS games do do this correctly with proper representations of the character when walking (mostly just from the side effect of a character's movement moving the whole character in a fixed manner, and not just parts of the character). But what isn't usually done correctly is the stopping portion of this movement. When a character finishes their movement (stops pressing movement keys), the animation for movement will stop and transition to standing animation.An actual person doesn't just lose all momentum and shift to a standing position when they stop moving. They have to implement a movement to stop their momentum. The most noticeable thing would be a stopping foot/leg, or pretty much a leg you place in front of your body to generate an opposing force to slow your momentum to a crawl, with the rest of that momentum being absorbed by the rest of your body as it would also be slowing it down through the stopping foot/leg. You basically plant yourself and change your body's positioning to that of a ~right triangle in the direction of movement (pushing your center of mass opposite of your momentum): Of course, not all movement halts are that drastic and not every movement can simply be halted with a single foot in front of you. Small or finely controlled movements can have virtually no change in center mass while stopping(or rather stays mostly in your center as you move/stop), and very fast movement will force you to either do a very drastic stop where you leave most of your mass back and with a hard stopping foot (bottom right of the image) or with multiple stopping foots/steps.Implementing something like that into the game would mean no set velocities while pressing [WASD] but rather increasing velocities as you hold them. In a way, the stopping foots which halt your momentum are also used to push your momentum; moving forward would mean you move your center mass forward and push forward with your legs (which is kind of like the reverse of the "right triangle position" with the stick figure facing the other way). At the same time, how would this solve those unrealistic instant stops and turns, etc? Well here is where I'm kind of excited about this suggestion. Movement isn't just moving your legs which moves your body, but moving your upper body which allows your legs to move rather (proper/realistic movement that is). In that case, when you press the [WASD] keys, you would, instead of moving your whole character, just your upper body would move first. This would simulate the movement of your center mass forward which then allows you to efficiently generate a forward (or whatever direction) force with your legs. And in that case, quick tapping of [WASD] keys would do minor movements of your upper body rather than your whole character, kind of similar to the fluid stance (leaning/peaking stance). Holding the [WASD] keys would make your upper body move in so-and-so direction until you are at an angle that will allow your legs to efficiently generate a force in the direction you want to go. To better explain... The concept explained at walking pace: A controlled, tactical walk is pretty much the basic walking, [WASD] movement, in Ground Branch. For this, you wouldn't actually move your upper body much because it's not necessary for getting the speed you would be moving at, and you want to be steady for aiming.Quick [WASD] taps or presses will yield some upper body movement (nowhere near as significant as fluid leaning/peaking). They yield very little movement in general because you can't actually move very far in such short amounts of time in real life (and you wouldn't be trying to with this type of locomotion). With enough [WASD] taps/presses, your body will need to take a step, and that will be a fixed small step, which is pretty much the smallest step you would reasonably take in real life. This would pretty much be shifting your legs into a wider stance. Meanwhile, if you kept tapping left, your upper body would shift a little left, and when it reaches the limit, with a longer press, you would actually use your right foot to step with your feet closer together and then take a step with your left, for a longer step. Note: Which foot you take the first step with would depend on your leg positioning, where your upper body is, and which direction you are going. Basically, where your upper body is will determine where you step as you always move your upper body first. With a proper [WASD] press (let's say half a second or so), your upper body moves in a direction enough and you would also take a step, which is the stopping step (very similar to tapping [WASD] until you have to take step). How big of a step you take depends on how long the [WASD] was held. Your upper body then sort of predetermines how much you will step, because you shift your upper body first and then your legs have to account for the best position for a proper stance. With longer [WASD] presses, you move your upper body more, and the longer you hold, the faster you move it. For a normal walk, the speed would reach a limit with a long enough hold. When you let go of [WASD] after holding/moving for a while at that maximum walking speed, you will have some residual momentum which you then stop with your stopping step. This takes a bit of time, but with a controlled, tactical walk, it'll be almost negligible. It will be pretty much a rather quick stop when the stopping step happens and any residual upper body momentum will also slow down slowly but in a short amount of time; you get a quick loss in speed with the step, taking most of the momentum away, and then a small amount of residual velocity is stabilized more slowly (signifying the body's stiffness and reactionary force taking the rest away). For crouching walking, this is pretty much the same except the maximum speed is slower, and everything that would happen while at that slower speed would be close to the same for standing walking. Shifting/jogging pace:With the walking method explained, this faster movement will be faster upper body movement, larger stopping steps to account for the increased momentum, and the overall rate at which you pick speed/momentum will be faster. The same "formula" as explained in the walking pace before will apply here, except with a higher maximum velocity, more prominent steps and residual momentum, and the different animations to represent it. Same concept as the crouch walking pace for crouch shifting pace.If anything, the thing to take note of is that here, the stopping step can more often be used as leverage for changing directions quickly. When you have a leg out, it's easier to generate force in the opposite direction in which your leg is facing, propelling/accelerating your body in that opposite direction faster than from a simple standing position. Thus, it would be possible to do continuously stepping side-to-side or moving back-and-forth a bit quicker than just moving forward and stopping and moving forward and stopping. More time is focused on halting your momentum when you stop, but you have quicker acceleration due to better leverage with your stopping leg in the proper position for generating force for your next movement. The sprinting pace: When sprinting, you would bring most of your upper body in the direction you want to go, and quickly. Thus, when initiating a sprint, there's a fast startup, but a much longer cooldown for the action if you decide to stop midway. If you try to sprint forward, you bring your upper body forward, and your legs would also act to put you in the position for running, but if you stop, you'll need to stop the momentum already generated by your upper body. You'll need time to take one good stopping step which takes away most of your momentum rather quickly (which would happen for sprint initiated and stopped fairly quickly, not having generated your full momentum), and probably multiple stopping steps for a full on sprint. These upper body movements will be quite prominent for your field of view, causing it to quickly move forward and drop a little lower as is what happens to your head. As I said about the back-and-forth/sidestepping movements for the jogging pace, the same should apply for a sprinting pace. In the 0.9.6 tech preview, you can't actually utilize your left and right movement keys when sprinting, they just put you at the jogging pace in that direction. This does make sense as you can't go full speed properly while moving diagonally. But I think sprinting left and right should be utilized as a full speed side step movement. From a standing position, you should be able to hold the sprint key and press left, causing you to do an explosive movement (realistically explosive) to your left, which is basically a quick upper body movement, as you would do for a forward sprint, before initiating the jogging left speed. The startup time for moving side to side is decreased when sprinting just left and just right when compared to the startup time for jogging left or right from a standing position. Also, pressing left and right while doing a full sprint should not immediately eliminate your forward momentum generated from sprinting, but somewhat gradually decrease until you reach normal diagonal jogging speed, if holding left/right and forward. In fact, another intriguing feature would be being able to increase your sprinting speed by pressing left and right continuously at the right pace, simulating a left step and right step with more momentum by using your upper body. That'd be pretty damn cool. Finally, turning: Turning should, as I've sort of mentioned in earlier suggestions, be upper body movement first, and then leg movement; your FOV movement (your head) which then goes all the way down from your body and then to your legs. Your legs are there to support your mass, which most of it is towards your core, and you don't usually only move your legs to change where you point your gun, but your upper body.Knowing that, we have upper body rotating left and right, and once the upper body rotates too much left/right, the legs will respond to account for the movement by either stepping back with the right leg for turning right or left leg when turning left. This means you may have some actual movement of the character itself, but that is actually realistic as a regular person doesn't stay perfectly on some axis when turning around.And like real life, how much you turn your character will dictate how far you will take step. Your FOV will change first, essentially your upper body, and then your legs will change to account for it. This enforces a limit to how fast you can turn, so no 360 no scopes allowed, unless you initiate the jump first and then do the turning, which then dictates how much you spun during the jump. How the movement mechanics and turning mechanics fit together: Your leg positioning should be determined by where your upper body is. So when turning, your legs will adjust in response and when moving, they will, too. When doing both, because your turning tends to be upper body first, the general motion of your character shouldn't be too affected if the turning isn't significant with just the upper body rotating. However, for large turns while moving, this becomes more of a problem, just like in real life. At lower movement speeds, like walking, turning your body a lot would require you to pivot on whatever foot you are currently on. At jogging pace, this is somewhat the same, except you may actually need to take an extra step in the opposite direction of where you are turning first in order to pull off the turn, so turning is slightly delayed and a little harder. For sprinting, this is even harder, and the current mechanic of slowing down the turning illustrates to a degree. When sprinting, you still have a bit of control of your upper body, so turning a little bit left or right shouldn't be very hard. But with a large turn, you'd need to stop your momentum, and that'll require a big stopping step: So sprinting forward and turning right 50 degrees will require the character to actually stop their momentum with a step (which will take a bit of time, but your upper body and FOV can still turn properly), and then use that stopping leg's leverage to start running in that direction you turned. This is somewhat implemented already by stopping the sprint during an aggressive turn, but I think the upper body, and thus FOV, should move rather significantly to better represent the maneuver, like with an abrupt FOV tilting, etc. Overall, yeah this was a long suggestion, but I feel it's very important for realism. Not sure if any games have this level of realistic depth to their movement mechanics so I feel this being implemented would be quite the big deal.Reiteration: upper body of character dictates leg movement/position/stance character movement starts with upper body first and then leg movement as ~response (a fluid predictive response) character movement starts out slow and increases in speed due to realistic velocity build up faster movements increase movement acceleration (decreasing startup time) but also increases time required to halt character movement halting character movement is somewhat abrupt but not instant, leaving residual momentum alternating opposite direction movements is somewhat faster due to mechanics of how legs work and proper leverage for force generation sprint button and left or right keys used for quick sidestepping akin to a dodge before the normal jogging pace left/ right action (differentiating it from mere jogging left/right) sprint speed can be increased slightly by alternating left and right keys during (simulating controlling upper body movement and alternating leg movement, increasing movement efficiency) turning rotates upper body before legs turning adjusts character position slightly in realistic manner turning speed is delayed for larger turns (that trigger leg movement/adjustment) while moving due to legs requiring repositioning FOV movements that should represent all of these upper body adjustments/changes Reasoning: More/most? realistic movement/turning mechanics.
  3. I can only say that that's awesome and good to hear. Edit: And by the way, I mean the fact that a fluid stance is available in the game, even if it's in an edition I don't have access, too. *sniffle*
  4. What's 1011? I'm not that knowledgeable about....I'm not that knowledgeable.
  5. Peak/lean suggestion: So as of tech preview 0.9.6, the peak/lean feature is a simple button press for lean left and lean right: [Q] to lean left, [E] to go back to normal; [E] to lean right, [Q] to go back to normal. What I suggest is a higher control for the peak/lean feature, to be able to control how far you lean, rather than just a fixed lean amount for either side. To do this, I suggest that the buttons for leaning can be held (pressed and held down): if you want to lean left, you can press and hold [Q] What happens after you hold [Q] is that you then enter a leaning mode. This is somewhat similar to the freeview mode. While holding [Q], you can move your mouse left and right, which would adjust the amount of lean you have. This would allow you to lean further out or lean just a little bit, giving more control over the leaning feature. With this feature, you can hide behind cover and do quick glances out of cover and back in without exposing yourself for long periods of time, control the amount of exposure, and control the speed of exposure (how fast you look out and get back cover). Essentially, this allows you to peak with finer control and more safety. And then to get out of this leaning mode, you would stop holding [Q]. This would leave you in the last lean position you adjusted yourself at: if you held [Q] and leaned all the way left, then let go of [Q], you would stay leaning all the way left. At this point you can either leave yourself leaning as is, press [E] to go back into normal posture, or hold [Q] again to readjust your lean. In fact, a feature like this can just require one button for leaning either all the way left or all the way right by moving your mouse to those positions. But one thing to take note of is that during leaning mode, you will lose control of your gun aim, just like in freeview mode. Therefore, I also suggest that the default [Q] and default [E] button presses put you into a certain/fixed leaning position. These positions can be set positions which let the player look out of cover and get back in while maintaining the aim you have with your gun, so you can still quickly pop out of cover and fire off shots and get back in. Another feature would be allowing the player to adjust how far that fixed lean is so they can adapt their own playing style. Finally, there should always be realistic timing/speeds at which you implement these leans/peaks which depend on the distance you lean and how fast a real person can do these maneuvers. Reiterated: pressing and holding [Q]/[E] to allow adjustment how far you lean this disallows control of your gun's aim (like free mode) pressing and releasing [Q]/[E] will still allow you to lean a set distance being able to set how far you lean with the fixed leans (press and release [Q]/[E]) Reasoning: Higher functionality of the peak/lean feature.
  6. @Psychomorph Oh, yes. I forgot about eye orientation. And I agree it is important. However, it's possible that we could consider the parts of the FOV that we, ourselves looking at the monitor, focus on could be considered the eye movement, or what the character is pointing their eyes at.That doesn't actually portray realistic animation though because it would just be a person moving only their head to look around with stagnant eyes.In that way, maybe it would be more realistic for the character to first only use their eyes to look at something, then their head to turn, then the body to turn to it. Although, head and eye movement are probably going to go together in most cases.Overall, this may just be an animation that just hasn't or isn't close to being implemented yet. I don't think the head even turns at all at this point in the 0.9.6 tech preview. Let alone any turning animation in general. It deserves a suggestion format though. Eye movement animation suggestion (and head movement and turning and overall FOV adjustment): When looking around in both normal mode and free view mode, eye movement (and subsequently head movement) animation should be added to show somewhat more precisely what you are looking at, to simulate reality. Particularly, any small FOV adjustment should be mostly eye movement and some head movement for slightly larger adjustments. Then for the larger adjustments it would apply the full body turn, probably top first and then leg shifting to position, although a combination of torso and leg may be more realistic (so you don't contort your upper body weirdly with respect to your lower half). Another thing can be a different animation for FOV adjustment when your weapon up and ready to engage vs down and vs not engaged. With your weapon up and engaged, you are actively aiming and would want to keep consistent eye and head movement in line with your gun. With your weapon down and engaged, you are somewhat actively aiming and eye+head movement will be mostly in line with some give (when you turn to look in this mode, your animation will show your eyes and head moving slightly in that direction first before your weapon). With your weapon not engaged, whether up or down, you would probably be more lax and can use eye+head movement more freely before your body turns to what you're looking at.Then free view will probably be the most eye movement and head movement and the only movement pretty much.Reasoning: More realistic animation.-Credit to PsychomorphAnd now, another suggestion! Gun and wall/other obstacle collision and collision avoidance suggestion: The 0.9.6 tech preview automated gun collision avoidance system seems to be: a part of the volume encased by the gun touches a wall/obstruction and the character immediately points the gun down so it isn't touching it. What I suggest is a preemptive gun collision avoidance. Rather than waiting for your gun to pretty much touch the obstacle to get it out of the way, your character would begin to lower the gun/avoid collision as soon as it starts to get too close -- while the gun is being actively moved towards/closer to it. So if you are running towards a wall, as soon as your gun gets close enough, like a foot or so away, you'll begin to lower your gun to avoid collision. That way, if you continue at that speed, you'll have your gun pretty much out of the way once you get to the wall, rather than the gun touching and a following weirdly fast retraction. This would generate fluid and human-like movement resulting in a smoother and more realistic animation. The same thing would apply to moving your gun side to side and bumping into a wall or sandbag, etc. However, if you are shooting though, this would not be the case. While shooting, you would not preemptively avoid collision, and keep your gun where it is in the optimal shooting position. But then what happens when you are moving and shooting and hit the wall you ask? In this case, I say you get a collision, and a slight repercussion of your movement being halted prematurely, and maybe even a misfire if you do it hard enough. Let's say you are running towards a wall. You fire your weapon while running to the wall. Your gun muzzle hits the wall. You would then lose forward momentum, get a slight forward screen jerk, and stop moving prematurely --basically, what would happen in a real life situation. But there's more. This case would be for when your gun is pointing approximately directly at the wall you are running at, in a relatively orthogonal alignment between the gun and the wall. Instead, if you run at the wall at an angle while shooting, your momentum wouldn't be lost as abruptly, as the gun would actually slip and glance off to the side instead. So if you run in shooting at the wall, gun parallel to the ground, and 60 degrees with respect to the wall: Your gun would hit the wall, your momentum would decrease, you jerk forward a little, and the gun would either: 1) glance off to your left, leaving its normal straight forward aim for a bit, and then be lowered to avoid colliding with the wall if you are still facing in the same direction 2) hit the wall pretty much the same way as a direct running and shooting collision with the wall, and decrease most or all your momentum. This reaction would be pretty much the same for a gun pointing straight at a wall except pointed high or low, except the gun would glance high or low depending on its position. Then, any combination of the two can happen for a gun pointing high left or down left, etc. (Hmm..smacking a guns barrel-first into objects makes me think about bayonets..) As of now, I've only explained muzzle tip collision. There's also cases of the side of the gun hitting into a wall or other obstruction. For this, it is somewhat similar. But perhaps I need to explain the types of collision available. There's collision by direct movement, and collision by rotational movement. Direct movement is translational walking movement, etc. Collision by rotational movement is you moving your mouse and your gun hitting something. Direct movement collision is a little less likely to happen, and would mostly be done by players fooling around, running and shooting at a wall.Rotational movement collision is situational but a lot more likely to happen. Mostly, for longer weapons being used in tight spaces or peak shooting behind cover. Again, there would be a preemptive attempt at avoiding collision which would be based on how fast you are moving your mouse, and thus your gun towards the obstacle.The faster you move, the more preemptively you would begin avoiding collision. However, for mouse movement you can have a lot quicker turns, higher accelerations, and varieties of speeds. Direct movement collision is mostly a set speed of either walk, run, etc. With rotational movement, you can turn faster and more sporadically. And with this part of my suggestion, the repercussions are more prominent. It'll make using long barreled weapons in tight spaces clunkier and harder just like in real life.The current collision avoidance suggestion is preemptive avoidance based on speed and distance between gun and obstacle. However, as said, rotational movement can be quite sporadic and quickly changing. Preemptive avoidance based on speed and distance would mean, if you turn your gun extremely fast into an obstacle, the preemptive avoidance would avoid it, bringing your gun down instantly. That's not realistic. If you move a gun and point to another direction really quickly, you wouldn't have time to notice an obstruction and avoid it ~instantly. Instead, you would probably smack your gun into it. And that is what would happen in these cases. The preemptive collision avoidance would be in place for rotational movement, or turning, that happens slow enough to allow for your gun to move out of the way in time. Otherwise, your gun would smack against an obstacle, slow down your turning movement, and then gets positioned in a way that avoids the obstruction. With this type of possible collision in place, long guns in narrow spaces get a realistic nerf in how fast you can turn around, and the usual peak out and fire gets a nerf in how fast you can rotate your gun in and out of cover, just as in real life. Shorter/smaller weapons would not have this drawback, making them more ideal like they would be in reality. Reiteration time: preemptive movement of gun while avoiding approaching obstructions realistic gun collision when using it and hitting muzzle-first into a wall through direct translational movement preemptive collision avoidance having a certain amount of time to take effect, as in moving the gun out of obstruction's way takes a certain amount of time moving too quickly before the gun has enough time to avoid an obstruction in it's path while moving and/or turning into it will cause a collision which slows down your direct and rotational movement Reasoning: I guess putting a reasoning part is kind of pointless. These suggestions are mostly to improve realism and gameplay. I guess I can just keep it short and say realism for the reasoning. Related: This looks really good. PepperBelly already showed this, too. But yeah.
  7. Thanks for the everyone's inputs. So I understand the necessity of the snap back to where you're running, but I feel you could just manually reset your position by looking back to where you are running. The point of free look is to be able to get a quick look at your surroundings without affecting your body's position/movement, and this doesn't change that, but provides more control of your FOV as well (imo). And I definitely recommend that real life delay should always be involved when turning your body. I think the preview already halts a sprint if you do a wide turn or something if I'm not mistaken, so I don't think sudden changes in direction would be as prominent. But I can be wrong. Another thing to point out with the current free view system is: let's say you free view all the way right, then you stop free view, your head snaps back to where your body is looking; now let's see mouse-wise: activate free view, move mouse to the right, end free view, now your screen is back to where your body is, but your mouse is now to the right of your mousepad when you are looking ~center. You have to readjust your mouse position after because of this. With an end free view approach, you would instead look right and look back to close to center before ending the free view, and have a fluid body reset that doesn't change your mouse position. Of course, a tracking headset would just negate this, but I consider that more of an accessory to the game. Finally, I definitely agree with having more customization options to the game, so there can certainly just be a toggle or an extra button to activate this feature. Since we're already kind of on the free view.. Free view neck range suggestion: So the free view now is you press [Tab], look as much as you can left, as much as you can right, etc. But while you are on free view mode, you aren't able to be as consciously aware of what orientation your body is facing at the moment with respect to your head. The only cues are pretty much what you last saw before you entered free view, and what parts of your body you can see on your screen. What I suggest is giving a little bit of resistance when turning your head away from your normal orientation (facing away from your body's orientation). You have a normal range of motion for your head which you use often enough that it seems relatively comfortable. Let's say that's 45 degrees in all directions as an example (excuse the drawing skills): In that 45 degree (or so) range, you can free view with no resistance. Going beyond that range while free viewing, say 60 degrees right will offer increasing resistance to show that you are beginning to extend your neck beyond normal/comfortable viewing range. Then when you decide to move/look back towards your center, it'll be resistanceless. This way, you can intuitively feel and have an idea of your general FOV and head orientation with respect to your body orientation. Perhaps, you can even hyper extend your free view range a little bit beyond normal, which would simulate a slight turn in your body's orientation to allow that sight. To explain: let's say your max free view range is 80 degrees. With hyper extended view, you can view up to, perhaps 95 degrees, albeit with extra resistance AND an automated retraction when you are no longer moving your mouse in that direction. You can sort of think of it as recoil: you'll need to continuously pull your gun point to the correct position while firing; in this case, you would need to continuously push your mouse in the direction of the hyper extension in order to see at that 95 or so degree range as your body would automatically try to stay in that suitable range of head motion. Finally, there may be a developing retraction the longer you hold a head position in free view mode. That is, let's say you want to look up at the sky for a long period of time (70-80 degree head motion). Your neck may get tired after a while and your body will want to move it back into comfortable position. To simulate this, after about 10 seconds or so of looking at that uncomfortable range level, there can be a slight attraction that pulls your FOV back to the center for your head that increases over time. So to keep looking in that way, you'll have to start fighting that attraction, just like with the hyper extended free view I mentioned before this. Reiterated: free view resistance with range to highlight head orientation with respect to body orientation slight hyper extended free view range to realistically increase range tired neck simulation from forcing it into uncomfortable viewing positions for too long Reasoning: Seems like a fun and realistic mechanic to have that increases the functionality and handling of your character.
  8. So this is just a thread for me to post any suggestions/feedback I may have with the gameplay of GB. I feel like I may or may not have a lot of suggestions later on so just organizing it into a single thread that gets a bump when I come up with something from time to time would be more useful than multiple threads. Of course, feel free to provide your own opinions/feedback, and thanks for reading. Free view suggestion: I feel like the free view system should turn your body to the direction you are looking after you get out. I feel it may be more intuitive and less abrupt than the current system it has now. So, as of this technical preview 0.9.6, the free view system is, press and hold [Tab], look around with your mouse, let go of [Tab], and your mouse immediately points back to the initial position in which you started the free view. I suggest that, instead, when you let go of [Tab], your body turns to face whatever direction you ended your free view on. Reasoning: To put it simply, the immediate return to initial view just feels janky and not intuitive. It feels like it would just be a lot easier to look around while running and then continue running towards what you are looking at with full control of your FOV, rather than an automatic reset. Also, for instance, say you spot something/someone while free viewing and want to be ready to engage, you would stop free view, let your FOV reset, and then turn your body toward the target. With the body turning to your FOV, you would instead be able to end free view, and then immediately engage, without resetting your FOV first, and basically turning away for no reason.
  9. Ground Branch suggestion thread

    Hey, thanks all for the welcome and advice XD.
  10. First, I have to say I'm really pumped for this game and I think all those realistic details will make the difference for it to be undisputed, the most realistic tactical shooter. Just to say, from the few videos of it's details and your team's dedication, I certainly would buy it even just to try it out if its not too pricey (I understand the financial burden but nudge). Now, I didn't see particularly any GB suggestion threads, so maybe you're not accepting suggestions ...but I'd still like to make them. And to those reading with ideas I encourage you to make your suggestions on this thread if you'd like. So in this thread, I just want to put out my thoughts and ideas on some features the game should have, no doubt some of which are already planned but not implemented yet, but some which I hope may improve the game in ways not thought of. I might put more ideas later on or expand on old ones I come up with them if they are especially intriguing. Well on with it(ideas and short summary on meaning): Blinking- something I find most shooters lack, and can really be a gameplay changer as it does in real life. Especially with smoke, flashbangs, gunshots, richochets, and explosions, just to name a few. Walking, jogging, running, sprinting- these are all different ways to traverse distances and greatly affect the player and is of course available options in real life. Sometimes you are taking fire and need to do a dying sprint for cover, but stuck with the same lightly stressing run at the same pace. On the other hand you can walk and shoot but rarely can you jog or run in a game and hip fire. It could be wildly inaccurate but taking fire is and should be a very intimidating event regardless. Goggles- debris, smoke, blinking, should be self explanatory. Sunglasses- if you so choose in a sunny sandy map Close quarters combat- I believe it's a very effective option when you are stuck holding a big gun in the tight areas. I mean sure it is almost never as effective as using your sidearm, but it certainly can be a faster alternative if you bump into an enemy holding a long rifle. Also, as in CQC, you have a choice between using your fist or the butt of your gun, or even your foot, and of course the knife. Tackling bumping physics- it's only sensical that if you sprint directly into a body or headfirst at a wall that you get hurt or get stunned for a bit. Dead body physics- I think it would be very interesting and realistic to be able to use meat shields, but of course a person can sometimes trip over one or bump heads when crawling at one. Helmets- they sometimes work, but are best at stopping normal physical blows, but even then not too effectively. Immense gun customizability- for instance a slide fire buttstock. Startup time and slow down time- it's not normal for someone to be able to run one second stop one second run one second stop one second smoothly and at the same pace each time. A person always needs a bit of time to let inertia pass. Holophonics or binaural sounds- this makes a sound particularly realistic because it simulates the human head and how it hears sound depending on the distance and direction of it. You could actually be able to pin point reliably what direction a shot was fired. Of course these suggestions do not take into account the amount of work needed to implement and may undermine the great work already put into the project, and of course I do not wish for it if felt that way. I'm just glad to have found such a game and studio so dedicated to realism. Thanks for all the work you've put into the game and good luck!