Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
I'm torn.
Angled can be done to avoid the main problem, thrust not agreeing with apparant orientation of the ship. Combined with a nonorthogonal perspective, it gives you a good idea of what the ship looks like. Yes, logically, the 'playing field' should also be tilted, ships getting smaller as they go up, etc.
Perspective is an invention. The egyptians drew battlefields with each figure drawn from the side, but arranged on a field from overhead. Most RPGs (the computer kind) do the 'false perspective', where the figures are seen from the side or 3/4 view, but the area is done as an orthogonal arrangement of tiles.
Personally, I have no problem with the perspective disjoint. I mean, consider... you're not really floating several hundred meters from your ship, watching what's going on. From a game perspective, the playing field is artificial. Therefore, anything IN the playing field is there for information purposes. The ships could just as well be blobs with numbers.
Angled perspective, then, communicates both heading and shape, giving you a good idea of how big the ship is and what kind of ship it is.
All that said, the point of variable rotation is a thoughtprovoking one. I'll have to test it to see if it jars me, but that could easily be an insurmountable issue. I don't know...
Tentatively, angled makes sense to me, only because I maintain the stance that ship graphics are, in game terms, a source of information, and angled view provides more information.
But, fwiw, I understand the opposite view/taste completely.
------------------ When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty. I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong. - Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
Myself, I think I'll wait till I see EV3.
I mean, if it's done well, I'll go for it.
Done poorly, I won't like it.
Wait and see, wait and see.
For the moment, it seems Darkest Hour will be an obsolete plug, seeing as how it's going to have top-view sprites...
ElG7
------------------ KIRK: Very funny, Scotty - now beam down my clothes!
Captain Canardley Ableson's Technical Guide to the EV/O Universe http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/vftp/dl-...=TechFolder.sit
EV3 is another question entirely. This is not about EV3, but about top view versus angled view in the existing EV/O engines.
------------------
(Insert Signature Here)
Quote
Originally posted by Wyvern: **Personally, I find that even worse. Not only does it not fix the original problem, it introduces something else I consider a problem (though I won't argue too much about it, since in this case it really is only a matter of opinion). I do not like ships that appear to change proportion as they spin. If there is a change in proportion, then other ships should be scaled appropriate to there position on screen, which is not possible in EV/O.
Note also that my formula was written assuming an orthographic view, and will not fix the original problem for your perspective view.
**
you must have a REALLY hard time living. lots of stuff in real life changes proportions as you look at it from different angles, or it moves. just quit being a picky bitch and play the game!!!
------------------ DeAdBoY- (url="http://"http://www.grybs.com/harzius")Harzius Productions(/url) (url="http://"http://www.IcedEarth.com")Iced Earth(/url)
Originally posted by DeAdBoY: **you must have a REALLY hard time living. lots of stuff in real life changes proportions as you look at it from different angles, or it moves. just quit being a picky bitch and play the game!!! **
Yes, but that stuff exists in a world that is inherently 3D. EV/O is inherently 2D, and since it doesn't scale ships that are "closer" or "further", imo, the graphics shouldn't scale based on that in the ship spins. So quit your ranting and accept that I have opinions that may not match yours. Just don't foist graphics off onto others that are mathematically incorrect with respect to apparent direction, and I won't complain more than a post worth plus replies to rants.
Originally posted by Wyvern: **Just don't foist graphics off onto others that are mathematically incorrect with respect to apparent direction, and I won't complain more than a post worth plus replies to rants. **
Uh, EV and Override are games, dude. Maybe you're forgetting that.
------------------ (url="http://"http://mailto:skyblade500@yahoo.com")skyblade500@yahoo.com(/url) AIM - Skyblade500 (url="http://"http://www.angelfire.com/ma3/skyblade")Skyblade Software(/url)
Originally posted by Wyvern: **Yes, but that stuff exists in a world that is inherently 3D. EV/O is inherently 2D, and since it doesn't scale ships that are "closer" or "further", imo, the graphics shouldn't scale based on that in the ship spins. So quit your ranting and accept that I have opinions that may not match yours. Just don't foist graphics off onto others that are mathematically incorrect with respect to apparent direction, and I won't complain more than a post worth plus replies to rants.
Actually, most angled viewed vessels are mathmatically correct, just different in how that math is setup.
------------------ "Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Star Trek Escape Velocity http://homepage.mac.com/startrekev/
EV/EVO are just games, sure. But if the ship pointed at 45 degrees when it would thrust straight up, would you be annoyed?
And, hey! It's different math! Vector = 45 degrees + apparant heading. Yay!
Wyvern has a point, dudes.
(This message has been edited by wtimmins (edited 10-10-2000).)
so what? its meant to give the illusion of 3D... the game is still 2D... and who cares about the math? if your so intrested in the math, why dont you get a ton of books on math, and read those instead of bugging the people here that want to play a game... jeez!
Originally posted by DeAdBoY: **so what? its meant to give the illusion of 3D... the game is still 2D... and who cares about the math? if your so intrested in the math, why dont you get a ton of books on math, and read those instead of bugging the people here that want to play a game... jeez! **
I want to play the game too. I just don't want to play it if it's noticeably wrong.
Originally posted by Wyvern: **I want to play the game too. I just don't want to play it if it's noticeably wrong.
So your saying that if EV:Nova uses the same implementation of sprites that STEVO uses you would quit playing EV:Nova? Or is EV:Nova's implementation (judging from screenshots) is just fine? STEVO and Nova use the same system (albeit different programs) to achieve the same results. Is STEVO noticeably wrong? and is EV:Nova's implementation noticeably wrong as well?
I don't know why it double posts. Must have to clear the cache or something...
(This message has been edited by Metzen (edited 10-10-2000).)
I just gotta say, that when I play EV/O, I really don't pay that much attention to they graphic of my ship. I mainly just glance at it ocasionally to get a general idea of my heading, not the exact direction I am pointing. Paying to much attention to to your ship's graphic, flawed or not, will get you killed.
Oh, BTW, point your ship directly upward, and thrust. Notice something odd about your heading?
-Andrew out.
------------------ "Question boldly even the very existance of a God, for if there is one he must surely apreciate the homage of Reason rather than a blindfolded fear." -Thomas Jefferson
Originally posted by Metzen: **So your saying that if EV:Nova uses the same implementation of sprites that STEVO uses you would quit playing EV:Nova? Or is EV:Nova's implementation (judging from screenshots) is just fine? STEVO and Nova use the same system (albeit different programs) to achieve the same results. Is STEVO noticeably wrong? and is EV:Nova's implementation noticeably wrong as well? **
Not necessarily. I did play FH. Plot does make up to some extent for other annoyances. And I fully expect Nova's implementation to be correct, because all of the problems with angled view in EV/O could easily be fixed by someone who had access to the game engine.
Originally posted by Servack: **I just gotta say, that when I play EV/O, I really don't pay that much attention to they graphic of my ship. I mainly just glance at it ocasionally to get a general idea of my heading, not the exact direction I am pointing. Paying to much attention to to your ship's graphic, flawed or not, will get you killed.
-Andrew out. **
That is just fine for most things, but if you are circling a target and trying to make every shot count (because you only have a limited amount of ammunition), being able to see an accurate heading is very important.
And, as you would know if you had bothered to actually read any of this, straight up is one of the four (4) directions that are correct regardless of viewing angle.
So. It is obvious that I must explain again , since nobody seems to be interested in reading what I have said before.
Consider a circle with lines radiating from the center in even ten degree increments. Now, rotate it into the screen. This has the visual effect of scaling it down vertically. Notice that the lines are no longer in even increments. Thus, when the ship is pointing at, say, 45°, the image (which has been scaled down vertically since it has essentially been rotated into the screen) points at about 30°. Do you see the problem now?
Nice to know you played FH, Wyvern.
I should point out that the FH ships are not angled because of point of view but because they are banking.
Fast ships bank much more severely than heavy ships, which is why the Bulk Freighter hardly banks at all while the Tachyonic fighter goes completely on its side.
I realise that this is completely unrealistic, but no more unrealistic than the idea that all of the ships would be moving in one plane and with the same orientation.
I kind of liked the look of it more, and stuck with it. I know that a lot of people liked it, and a lot of other people hated it. It's actually not on my list of changes to make, although most other things are.
------------------ M A R T I N • T U R N E R
Originally posted by Wyvern: **Not necessarily. I did play FH. Plot does make up to some extent for other annoyances. And I fully expect Nova's implementation to be correct, because all of the problems with angled view in EV/O could easily be fixed by someone who had access to the game engine.
So your referring to the banking system than? I don't think EV:N is going to be top down... http://www.AmbrosiaS...s/manticore.mov
(Continued) **Consider a circle with lines radiating from the center in even ten degree increments. Now, rotate it into the screen. This has the visual effect of scaling it down vertically. Notice that the lines are no longer in even increments. Thus, when the ship is pointing at, say, 45°, the image (which has been scaled down vertically since it has essentially been rotated into the screen) points at about 30°. Do you see the problem now?
The problem is posted in my previous example. What Wyvern is trying to say is that the circle becomes an oval. See my previous post for a pict.
Star Trek Escape Velocity (url="http://"http://homepage.mac.com/startrekev/")http://homepage.mac.com/startrekev/(/url)
(This message has been edited by Metzen (edited 10-12-2000).)