Jump to content

BFS Banner


Member Since 26 Feb 2007
Offline Last Active Private

Topics I've Started

World explained

04 August 2016 - 09:35 AM

Posted Image


03 August 2016 - 06:08 PM

I think it would be good to have a main thread where people can propose their preferred control schemes, no matter whether movement or weapons, so that maybe Kris can compare them and find a middle ground for how controls can be customized, without being stuck in a single mindset that will always not work for some group (the way weapon controls do not work well for me right now).

Basically I think controls should be moved out of a hardcoded system of certain mind set, but instead work like bricks, that can be laid on top of eachother, which I think is easy, but defining the grout would be the challenge (how things interact, what comes first and after, etc). So each stance, weapon position and movement are separate things and you could define how to switch to them (toggle key, hold key, double tap, scroll up/down), but part of it would be how it also behaves after the action was done. As with my weapon controls suggestion, I'd like to set how I want to toggle between what weapon postures and if I hold key to aim, what would happen if I release it.

BTH mentioned groups to me, so that he can put stuff into, say, two groups that he toggles between with a preferred key, and set how to toggle between the things inside the group. He should elaborate further on his idea himself, but I think the group system is the more plausible system to be able to customize different control schemes:

Group 1: low-ready [1]*, high-ready [2]*, carry [3]*
Group 2: ready [1]
Group 3: aim [1]
Group 4: primary sight [1], secondary sight [2], third sight [3]
Group 5: carry [3]

*[1] is higher priority, within the group it is the default. [2] is secondary, etc

Key 1 (toggle) = toggles through Group 1 ([1], [2], [3])
Key 2 (hold) = Group 1 item [1] is default by default, the on hold function can only be [2]. Important is to set what happens on release, because you can have it so it goes to [3] on release. Another tap of that key resets the group to [1]
Key 3 (toggle) = toggles between Group 1 and Group 2
Key 4 (hold) + Key 5 (toggle) / or wheel* or what you will = toggles Group 4, releasing Key 4 remembers the setting

*Wheel can be either up, down, click, or actual scrolling, so scrolling can let you toggle back and forth the group

I can imagine that you have the groups as horizontal fields and you drag and drop functions there, define which keys and properties affect them. A fully customizable system like this would take any possible customization into account while being a single neutral base for it, without any hardcoded limitations.

This would basically allow you to do something very simple, like having only two keys; first key for toggling between two groups and second key for toggling through both the groups (the one currently active, so one at a time of course), or something more complicated, like the way I'd like it, where you toggle with a key between two groups and switch to a third group on hold (plus defining to what group you return on release) and having the scroll wheel go through each group (which is currently active, so different sights if I hold aim, or different weapon stances if not aiming).

Sounds feasible? Thoughts and suggestions welcome, of course.

Ideas for vs. AI

21 July 2016 - 05:06 PM

I see that some people (kind of including myself) would like to see defensive AI, akin to R6. On the other hand it is more realistic to have a larger force not be intimidated by a single enemy, and thus would have less reason to play defensive and instead would engage the single enemy, as they do now in GB.

I thought about what could be the odds to break the confidence of larger force? I think it would be "deception".

So what if you play the solo tango hunt and there'd be gun shots coming from the forest, making the AI believe being under attack and investigating/countering it and more often holding their position and not be overly exposed, nor overly mobile. This would give you opportunity to sneak by and attack. Once AI realizes they're being actually shot at, they'd focus on the imminent danger, but the deception would limit their capabilities still, so they don't feel confident enough to freely move around and flank you all they want, like they own the area. In some interior areas charges would go off, making them believe there is an enemy team, so they go inside to counter, giving you the chance to pick them up inside.
That way you would not have the enemy team bunching up on you all the time, but be busy dealing with the deception, while interacting with you if you present yourself. I think this could lead to some dynamic tango hunt.

Furthermore, if you take out the majority of the AI, the rest of them would begin to think they're outnumbered and rush inside to hide inside buildings, where you can have your defensive AI gameplay. They will not dare coming out and only hold their position, even if you combat their friends, because they'll be in survival camp mode and will expect the enemy "team" coming after them.

The game mode, where they bunch up on you would make good sense in a lone wolf extraction scenario, where you have to move through the area to the extraction zone and they're be obviously onto you. The idea of this would be that you're hunted, but if you want to be the hunter, than you gotta have some sort of support to not make them actually hunt you.

Make sense?

Peripheral/sight blur & aim transition

21 April 2016 - 09:12 PM

Peripheral/sight blur

I gave the outside of scope blur one more thought, as it was presented in the latest news with this WIP screenshot.

I looked down a tube, as if aiming a scope, and I generally see what the idea is. The scope covers up the focus area, while the focus point has a magnified perspective. Both create that rift between the focus area and peripheral area, which is usually not too apparent. A blur effect might not be a bad idea to convey that feel, but there have to be a good compromise.

The picture below is an example. The peripheral effect is there through a vignette around the edges, but does not feel like an artificial overlay that covers the entire outside of the scope. You retain the ability to scan the area at the front outside the scope. The left arm that is stretched out and the weapon parts are at different distances from your eyes, so the weapon blur should look natural, while you can look down on your arm.

I like the idea of it, because I would like to see sights to be implemented in a way that makes them realistic to use, but not too comfortable to look and move around. If you need to keep your scope at a certain point, ready to shoot, but need to keep the area around it in check, you do it, because you can, but if you want to observe the entire area, it would be more comfortable to drop aim, as in real life you'd not force your face to a scope.

With non magnified sights and iron sights, I'd keep that vignette effect, but to a minimum, because the said rift between the optic and outside is less apparent, especially with iron sights, but the idea that observing the area without aiming sights is best should be there, at least to an extent.


Aim transition

This has been a dream of mine since forever.

Usually in games with 3D sights the weapon moves smoothly to/off the centre if you aim/unaim. With sprite sights (Americas Army 2) the sight snaps into/off the view. I actually like that, because if you aim a sight by closing one eye, the sight indeed kind of snaps into view. If a game wants to make it right, than they will have an initial "3D weapon moving to centre" animation, which isn't completed, because by then the shooter closes the other eye and has the sight snapping into view.

That "snapping into view" is an effect I'd like to see with 3D sights. This is how I suggest it:

Let's say there are two camera positions, one for non-aim and one for aim (located slight more to the lower right). Since the character brings the gun higher when you aim, the "aimed camera position" would be located where the sight will be, not where it currently is, of course.

The idea is that if you switch to aim, the "non aim camera" begins to move to the "aim camera", while the character animation will begin to move the weapon straight up. Only both, the weapon and the camera will not move toward each other until they overlap and you aim the weapon, but the moving "non aim camera" will fade out and the "aim camera" will fade in (like morphing two pictures). The effect will make it look as if like you close the left eye and suddenly the sights blend in, that are already in front of your right eye.

The extent of this effect would vary depending on the sight type. Traditional iron sights and scopes would have most of this. Holo sights, that can be aimed with both eyes open, would have less of it, not to look like you really close your left eye. Pistols would also have less of it, due to them being held further stretched out.

I doubt I could do anything like this in an INS mod, but perhaps you guys could experiment with something like this?

Cooperative Training mode

07 April 2016 - 05:56 PM

Is there a chance to add randomly placed targets in the current maps?

We have been playing with BTH a bit and 1v1 kind of didn't do it, so we started to tactically move around imagining there could be enemies, so it would be nice to have sort of like cooperative training mode, where the opposing team are just said randomly placed targets and we'd be able to play all the maps that way. Practicing movement, entry tactics and also testing mechanics together while at that, without that PvP pressure where you run for yer lives. Good marketing material could come together that way, too.

Regarding the targets. I think getting those metal targets might be not good idea, so I suggest a wooden stand with a wooden board hanging on it with a paper target. Shooting the board would make it just fall to the ground after a randomized amount of hits (so no one shot kill, but need to hit it till it drops).

Would be sweet.