Zalusithix
Member
Horse blinders is the outlaw heavy. Then again, I don't think running is among the specialties of the fat Helghast.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen Pre-Alpha: 'Arena Commander' Dogfighting
- Thread starter MrBig
- Start date
- Status
Horse blinders is the outlaw heavy. Then again, I don't think running is among the specialties of the fat Helghast.
Dictator93
Member
Not currently. Just the helmet geometry.
edit: I wonder what the hud and view set up for the outlaw heavy will be. Will it be like looking through a vr optic? Those separated eye holes must be really interesting given their camera system.
edit 2: mhmmm area lightssss
*Gruff muffled voice with static*
"Not much of a runner. I'm more of a 'make the other guy run'-er."
No, corner UIs deserve to be left in the past. Currently I have a 27" monitor for gaming and it's bad enough to to look at the corners for important information, but it would be much more inappropriate for VR headsets that SC is also designing for.
I am also fond of the helmet obstructing vision - it makes helmet choice consequential.
I see they still completly forget about VR support when designing the game. That hud is yet another thing they will have to have to rework when they finaly remember about VR.
Haven't paid much attention to the whole VR trend and any design requirements it imposes on supporting games. Care to explain?
I'm guessing they are referring to text that's not in the middle of the screen being very difficult to read because of the lens distortion and screen resolution, with VR goggles.
The position of the text won't help, and that size.. not sure a 4k screen in vr would be enough to make it easy to read.
I also wonder what is the FOV on that screenshot, one of the best aspect of VR is the large FOV ( yet still too small :'( still a huge room for improvement ), with their helmet they seem to pretty much kill that aspect ( but given the huge customisation they are going for I guess we should be able to go for far more open helmet ).
Xplatformer
Member
Zalusithix
Member
They shouldn't be focused on VR right now. No real products have shipped yet, and there's not even one standard to focus on. Then there's the fact that the first generation of products are going to be rather inadequate when it comes to displaying HUDs/text in general. Middling resolutions tied with a large FOV don't exactly make a great canvas for fine details like text.
It's a far more efficient use of time to get the monitor aspect right - the monitors that the vast majority of the user base will be using. Once the devices start shipping and the dust begins to settle, they can focus more development time on working within the limitations that they provide.
I say this as somebody interested in VR.
Dictator93
Member
Considering everything is done in 3d space and isn't hacked at all (including first person animations), I am pretty sure they are considering VR BIG TIME.
The detail and fidelity is quite intense.
Yeah, I think the helmet FOV is perfectly fine for VR... it just represents the fact that you are wearing a helmet (because your character actually is, and that geometry there is actually physically accurate relative to the eyes). If you are in VR then, you would proably want to have a more open helmet or no helmet even for your comfort.
All right, you're in.
Seems like a very bad way to make it work really well, either by making it harder to fix later in developement, or even close to impossible leading to half assed integration. Make it work for monitor and VR from the get go, keep that working as developement goes ( and play test with the 2 solution ).
It doesn't mean going for a perfect experience with a DK2, I mean at that point we pretty much know whay to expect for the 2 maybe 3 next year of VR with Vive and oculus resolution, so aim for something at least decent for that. And that only speaking of resolution, there is design decision to be made early when it comes to things like animation ( aka not using those forced head animation when entering a ship ) which could also easily be one of those thing completly destroying the VR experience in SQ42.
It's hard not to take Elite dangerous as an example ( and not even because it's also a space sim ), it's not aiming for a perfect VR experience with the DK2 limitation, nor does it use every new fonctionality of each new SDK as they get released, but it's still designed at it's core in a way where you know it will be ready for the consumer product.
( on the other hands, that's also why I'm not sure the fps integration in ED will be good, with them only really adding it to the game at least a year, probably more, after the game release )
It doesn't mean the different helmet didn't get designed and reworked etc. based on the result it give in game. Except what looked good on a locked 60 fov which made you validate your design choice etc doesn't necessary ( well most likely ) give the same feeling on a 100 fov.
To me it all come down to the difference between making the game VR compatible and making it a really good VR experience.
kutthoat5150
Member
I remember seeing area lights as a feature when the tech video for crysis 3 came out. Did that not get put in?
Dictator93
Member
Put in and then subsequently relegated to the side (turned off for a bit) in the post-PBR transition phase of Cryengine.
Zalusithix
Member
The only truly great VR experiences are going to be the games developed from the ground up around it and designed to accentuate its strengths and minimize its weaknesses. Star Citizen isn't that game. You're going to have to settle for the "compatible" level here. It should end up decent enough due to the totally first person based system, but the game design is going to focus on what works on monitors first and foremost. The VR experience comes secondary to that. Fully catering to the VR experience would necessitate compromises to monitor play. Compromising the experience of 90% of players for the 10% that'll have a VR headset doesn't make sense. (Percentages pulled out of my ass, but they'll probably end up being rather generous to the VR segment.)
That being the case, the minor details about HUD design and placement is best dealt with when you have real hardware in place. The Rift dev kits are fine and dandy for implementing the basic underlying mechanisms that you can't see in a screenshot, but they wont give an accurate picture as to what exactly things like the HUD will look like in the final version. Questions such as "Will this be legible at X size or a blurry mess?" or "Does this color work well with the sub-pixel matrix used on this screen?" can't be answered without real consumer grade hardware. These kits are going to be primitive enough that optimizing for them is going to hearken back to the day when you had to make every pixel count. To do that you need to know exactly how that pixel is going to render.
Sure, waiting for final hardware will delay things a bit, but it'll be less man hours wasted in the end. Seeing as how the game isn't a dedicated VR experience, and very few people will have VR headsets when the game launches, this is an acceptable trade off.
As for ED, its VR is basically a glorified TrackIR. There's nothing spectacular about its implementation. The HUD is the same as with monitors, and by all accounts very hard to read the text when using the Rift. If this is your idea of well designed, then I don't think you have anything to worry about with SC.
The fact that the hud is the same with a monitor is exactly why the implementation is so good. They immediately went for a hud which work well for the two solution, and where the expected resolution and fill rate jump with the consumer product will do the rest of the job when it comes to further improve the VR experience.
As I said the design is what count, the hud being optimised for head movement ( accessing the left and right panel ), is pretty much perfect for VR, same with the hud customisable color wise ( even if it's still limited, being able to choose the color of each element would be better ), the text being put on holo screen with some back color definitly help with the readability, and since they are fixed on the ship, you can actually center you view on it or even get closer to it if needed ( SC ? ).
Other than not being able to aim with your head with gimbaled weapon, and pretty bad galaxy map camera, yeah I'd call that pretty well designed, since what they have is already usable with the inferior dev kit, and will scale really well with the hardware update CV will bring ( that's what matter, it's not about making the ultimate DK2 experience, same with my comment about SC ).
On the other hand with have SC where we have some design decision which goes pretty much against what VR bring ( by limiting the FOV ), every hud element pretty much sure to be needing an entire revamp for the VR use ( except if we wait for 8k screen to get into VR ), and example of animation which are doing exacly the opposite of what you should do with a VR game ( forced head movement ).
I mean at that point I wouldn't be surprised if SQ42 made you do some rolling mirror's edge style, for ultimate pucking experience with VR.
Every single one of those thing can be patched, rebalanced etc.. sure... ( will still have a hard time convincing me that it's not more work to redo so many things already developed and integrated, because they were made in a way which doesn't work well with VR ) if they are not, well yeah, one game will have good VR ( even if it's not a vr game in it's core, only made for it etc.. ), the other will be compatible with vr headsets, still better than using VorpX I.
That's only speaking about the VR integration, when it comes to the game itself, for the most part I really prefere the direction SC is taking over what Elite went for ( like it's very limited player interaction ).
Zalusithix
Member
To say the HUD has a customizable color is pushing it. Having to edit an entry in a file manually which then has side effects on other colors doesn't really strike me as a feature so much as hack. Doesn't change the fact that the default color isn't ideal for the Rift's subpixel layout. Also, assuming that the final versions will solve everything is just that - an assumption. They had no idea what the specs for the final version were going to be, so it was all a guess on whether or not the final resolution would make the panels clearly legible.
Beyond that, I see the head turning based panels as a byproduct of them not being able to cram all that information legibly into the forward facing FOV. They already have HUD elements in all corners and the bottom of the typical viewing angle. It's an interesting design choice, but functionally they could have simply rendered those panels over the normal panels like they do with the system services panel while docked with the press of a button. It's not like you can easily see what's going on in front when you're looking at one of the panels anyhow. You can sort of push it a bit and straddle the edge of where it'll show up to get some forward visibility, but you run the risk of the panel blinking out.
Getting closer to a panel is just another aspect of them being physically tied to the ship. You could theoretically do the same thing with the Aurora's panels. (Unlike ED, SC has variety in ship HUDs.) A helmet based HUD, however, you'll never be able to lean closer to by principle and thus would require being designed to work right without relying on such a crutch.
And speaking of head turning for panels, SC could implement the same thing with the Mobiglass outside of the ship. Look down to your left/right and your character brings up their Mobiglass interface.
Frankly, I don't see VR working great for FPS games in general - at least for ones not designed from the ground up with it in mind. VR works well enough for something where you're sitting by default as there isn't as much of a conflict in what you see your avatar do and what you are doing yourself. This changes with an FPS where you'll be running, ducking, leaning, etc. It's going to lend itself to a rather out of body experience to have your body and hands moving all over the place while you remain still as a log.
The thing is, all we're going by is screenshots. However, the parts that take the most time with VR aren't going to be visible in screenshots. All you can see in screenshots are game assets, and there's not much point in showing off placeholder VR assets (assuming there are any).
It's far from perfect, I definitly agree on that. Again I'm speaking of a middle ground between a complete VR experience, and a barebone VR compatibility ( even if I was still able to have some fun with the VorpX borderland compatibility ).
Do we know if they separated aiming from head movement ?
Dictator93
Member
it was one of the things they first showed off
Nice! That was a good read. Don't trust the AI D:
the Artemis has never been seen again, right?
Yeah... I have the strongest feeling that VR will be an afterthought for this game.
At least in Elite, the UI made sense for VR especially in the ship with the UI having "layers" and the windows popping up when you looked at them.
That helmet visor would be horrible in VR. It's way too up-close. Constantly switching your focus on the UI and what's in front of you... Already giving me a headache...
If they want VR to work for this game, they should already be thinking about this right now.
I think that the discovery of the fate of Artemis will an player driven event in the PU.
That should at least ensure a decent experience ( for trackIR user too ), it's a good start.
Cabbagehead
Member
Yes, Yes and yes
https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/5090659/#Comment_5090659Some details would be nice, but thanks nonetheless.
They'll review IT policies, then carry on like nothing ever happened
Dictator93
Member
Some details would be nice, but thanks nonetheless.
They said they know, it wont affect dev, they are reviewing their policy, they are removing any content from their board about it to protect people from SQ42 spoilers. That was it really... not a big deal apparently.
That 85X snub fighter is larger than my 315p. Why didn't I buy a 890 Jump, why oh why
Not to worry. By the time SC is released, you'll probably be a millionaire in RL.
Zalusithix
Member
That 85X snub fighter is larger than my 315p. Why didn't I buy a 890 Jump, why oh why
The 85X wasn't supposed to be a snub fighter. It was intended to be a two seater multi-function craft, and as such you should have expected it to be larger than the single person 300 series. Heck, they even had images of it in the concept sale.
That said, you didn't buy one because it's the quintessential yacht of the game with a price to match. Spend real money on something that has utilitarian purpose to make money in game. When you're rich in game, then you spend your money on the yacht. Heck, by then they might even have the next model year out.
Xplatformer
Member
So this game (Star Citizen) won't run well at 1080p if the graphics card is a GTX 970? I mean, the card only has 3.5GB VRAM.
I see Nvidia putting out a 12GB Titan, a 6GB 980ti.
How much is enough vram for this game? It seems to me that targeting gamers with more than 3GB video ram isn't the best choice. Sure, let users that have more vram use more ram. I'm all for that.
I just want to make sure I can run my game at 30-60 fps with a $350 graphic card.
I see Nvidia putting out a 12GB Titan, a 6GB 980ti.
How much is enough vram for this game? It seems to me that targeting gamers with more than 3GB video ram isn't the best choice. Sure, let users that have more vram use more ram. I'm all for that.
I just want to make sure I can run my game at 30-60 fps with a $350 graphic card.
Dictator93
Member
Put down the texture settings and/or the graphics to high or medium. The game is targeting GPUs that really don't even exist at this point in time, so it has really high requirements.
Xplatformer
Member
What you're really saying is this.
Since this game is the #1 reason I sold my PS4 (which I originally bought specifically to play Destiny) I should wait until AMD/NVidia release middle of the road cards with 6GB VRam before I purchase a video card for the system I'm building.
Seriously, this is going to be my Star Citizen/Xcom/NBA 2k/the Division box and nothing else.
Waiting until 2016 to get a graphic card won't kill me unless Squadron 42 comes out this year.
Iced_Eagle
Member
That card will be fine. VRAM is the least of your concerns honestly. Just turn down the texture settings, and boom, you're back in business. Once the game fits in VRAM, then it's all about the raw power of the card to get that high framerate.
If you have a good CPU, 1080p on medium @ 30fps seems doable with a 970. Of course, this may change, but optimization is still ahead as well.
Well, it depends... Are you unhappy with your current card? Buy a graphics card when you need it. There will always be something better on the horizon.
Squadron 42 episode 1 is still scheduled to release at the end of the year though. If I were in your position, unless you NEED that card right now, just wait until the end of the year and see how your current one fares in Sq42. Then upgrade next year if you want.
Dictator93
Member
That doesn't actually sound like a terrible idea especially since the game is a ways off (well.. maybe not SQ42... but who knows).
BTW, it is not as if the game starts looking terrible at medium or high settings. It is still amazing looking at medium even, and in due time, it will run better and better as fidelity either stays the same (or as its very high settings become more expensive).
Waiting never killed anyone!
Regarding the idea to give up on Destiny: that mirrors my own thoughts on the game. Destiny seems rather unambitious in comparison to even the dog fighting module.
mercenar1e
Member
they did say the FPS module would be released in April but look how that turned out lol i think its safe to say Squadron 42 will not make it this year.
the aim box disappears after re spawning in AC.. am i the only one experiencing this? how do i turn it back on?
Not officially. They give no dates and hardly any vague estimates anymore after they've blown so many in the past.
Originally, the Social Planetside Module was supposed to come out around May 2014 and the FPS Boarding Module was planned for about August 2014. When fall 2013 rolled around and Chris Roberts realized he hadn't worked on the Dogfighting Module at all but it needed tons of work, Social and FPS got pushed into fall 2014. As the summer of 2014 wore on and work on Dogfighting post-launch didn't go as speedily as planned, Social and FPS were pushed to early 2015 — later clarified as late March. Then early March hit and Chris Roberts realized FPS was in a shambles (probably) and the Austin team couldn't get players to network properly with each other in Social, so they got pushed back again... this time by a few weeks at a time, it seems.
At this point, FPS will come out once it's "finished" (i.e. not playing like dogshit, I presume) and Social will come out like a month afterward. Who knows when that will be.
except people on transplant lists
No, there hasn't been an official estimate since then. I'm convinced that our esteemed Mr. Roberts was high as shit when he announced those dates.
Dictator93
Member
oh man, lol
staticneuron
Member
Roberts didn't give a month per say. He mentioned spring as a target. Given the date of the massive FPS update, that would have shifted the expectation of FPS to summer. There is no telling where they are at, only that it is the next major release. I expect the social module to be implemented fairly fast followed by weeks of the server going down due to unexplained bugs, like most of the multiplayer alphas with new features recently. lol.
- Status