Feedback on proposed widescreen view change

[Jayfourke]

Hmm... I dunno. Increased FoV is nice, but the planes feel like they're cutting through treacle. Loopy feels like it's travelling at Explodet speed, for example.

[mssv]

Originally Posted by Kuja900

I really want to talk about this point dio made. There are no unavoidable deaths in this game. By keeping track of how many planes the other team has alive and the positioning of your team you should never find yourself in a "messed up situation" as long as you are taking advantage of all the information available to you. You can already also "plan ahead" to quite some degree if you just know where your team is at and have some general idea about the location of the other team and their numbers, the widescreen takes the fun out of this by just showing you where these players are at directly. A widescreen removes all elements of surprise and makes ambushes and more sneaky plays impossible since you are so exposed. There are so many fun things you can do now that you could hardly ever if ever do with a widescreen such as bomb run counters and carrier snipes that really add something to the game.

Kuja do you realise that what you are talking about is the hardest (or latest) thing to master in the learning curve?

That is a barrier to the entrance for newer players, I still can remember my first match, so frustrating from dying to "random" (at that time) spam.

I understand that knowledge give to some players a huge advantage and fun but, isn't better to be able to compete without having to learn 1000 tricks before trying to be competitive?

[Winters Ark]

I have to say, if people are so conceited that they need a game to have widescreen support just to play it then I don't want them around. Not everyone has a widescreen monitor; not everyone likes widescreen monitors. Should there be widescreen support? Yeah, on most games. Altitude wasn't balanced around widescreen. Since Altitude is more of a strategy based shooter changing to widescreen would create a whole different headache of balance issues.

I agree with the idea of making Altitude 2 with widescreen support instead of going forward and rebalancing Altitude for widescreen. Would it possibly divide the community? Yeah. Would people in the current community play both Altitude and Altitude 2? Yeah. It'll be a lot of work if it does come to light, but in the end I think it'll be worth it.

[Greekjr14]

Originally Posted by mssv

Kuja do you realise that what you are talking about is the hardest (or latest) thing to master in the learning curve?

That is a barrier to the entrance for newer players, I still can remember my first match, so frustrating from dying to "random" (at that time) spam.

I understand that knowledge give to some players a huge advantage and fun but, isn't better to be able to compete without having to learn 1000 tricks before trying to be competitive?

so you basically just want newer players to have the easy start and let the older players have no fun at all? I understand you want the new players to have a not-so-hard time with learning the game, but to get good at a game you have to play it over time to get good. This is what I loved about Altitude when I started. I was horrible, but over time got good and set myself apart from the pub players.

[Kuja900]

Originally Posted by mssv

Kuja do you realise that what you are talking about is the hardest (or latest) thing to master in the learning curve?

That is a barrier to the entrance for newer players, I still can remember my first match, so frustrating from dying to "random" (at that time) spam.

I understand that knowledge give to some players a huge advantage and fun but, isn't better to be able to compete without having to learn 1000 tricks before trying to be competitive?

You are absolutely able to compete without such skills. Just because one doesn't posses all the tools does not mean he cannot be competitive with a portion of them. The 1000 tricks that you slowly learn are how you get better. By removing such tricks you decrease the amount of depth this game has to it which is one of the key reasons so many of us from years past still play.

[CCN]

hmmm, my laser aim improved due to the stretch to fit/fill screen option on my old widescreen monitor, wonder what this would do to peoples aim.

[Ribilla]

On the contrary mssv, my experience is that having a larger viewscale allows better players to dominate, simply because they can look ahead. I went 29-1 with laser in 4 minutes (despite the viewscale nerfing it significantly), I can never do this normally.

IMO this is what effect the viewscale would have:

Old: Noobs -------------------------> Decent Players ------------> Pros
New: Noobs ------------------------------------> Decent Players-> Pros

Essentially it means better players can plan ahead and not get caught in noob spam etc, meaning it's very easy to see that DF loopy who is flying in a straightline, holding down primary fire, and then circle to avoid him.

However, as Kuja pointed out a lot of the nuances disappear so decent players are much more evenly matched with pros.

IMHO this would increase the learning curve (in moving from noob to decent player) and lower the skill ceiling. It's like the worst of both worlds!

By giving the decent players more information (which newbs don't know how to interpret yet) I think that you make alti less accessible.

[mssv]

Originally Posted by Greekjr14

so you basically just want newer players to have the easy start and let the older players have no fun at all? I understand you want the new players to have a not-so-hard time with learning the game, but to get good at a game you have to play it over time to get good. This is what I loved about Altitude when I started. I was horrible, but over time got good and set myself apart from the pub players.

Well, I only have 370 hours and 60k kills with reco, I know there's ppl playing for more than one year with insanely higher numbers. Yet I have the feeling that the 10 alti pros are always the same guys and that is not going to change, I hope am wrong. I would love to see a bunch of guys popping out of the blue fighting for the throne of Alti. As well as 30 top clans in a APL instead of 2.

[Ribilla]

Originally Posted by mssv

Well, I only have 370 hours and 60k kills with reco, I know there's ppl playing for more than one year with insanely higher numbers. Yet I have the feeling that the 10 alti pros are always the same guys and that is not going to change, I hope am wrong. I would love to see a bunch of guys popping out of the blue fighting for the throne of Alti. As well as 30 top clans in a APL instead of 2.

I have less hours than you, I did hit number 2 in ladder the other day (for about 1 hour, lol). I don't think I am considered a 'pro', by alti's 'old guard' because I can basically only play one playstyle in one plane, but I don't think that you can say that newer players don't do well. If you compare the top of ladder now with the end of season 1, you still see some significant differences.

Just ignore the elitist troll crowd that is kuja/elix/sinstar, even if they once were, they are no longer the best players in alti. I would say most of the to 10 players in ladder are more than willling to give tips and are actively helpful, they certainly have been to me.

Also, the current APL (according to others) is apparently very close, compared to other years. Whilst fLb are the favourites there is no guaranteeing that they will beat PR (or indeed IL) especially after bong's beat them in the regular season. In a tourney where there are only ~10 clans, that 4 could well win it is pretty good. I challenge you to find any other competition where 40% of the participants could well be winners.

[Kuja900]

Originally Posted by Ribilla

I have less hours than you, I did hit number 2 in ladder the other day (for about 1 hour, lol). I don't think I am considered a 'pro', by alti's 'old guard' because I can basically only play one playstyle in one plane, but I don't think that you can say that newer players don't do well. If you compare the top of ladder now with the end of season 1, you still see some significant differences.

Just ignore the elitist troll crowd that is kuja/elix/sinstar, even if they once were, they are no longer the best players in alti. I would say most of the to 10 players in ladder are more than willling to give tips and are actively helpful, they certainly have been to me.

Also, the current APL (according to others) is apparently very close, compared to other years. Whilst fLb are the favourites there is no guaranteeing that they will beat PR (or indeed IL) especially after bong's beat them in the regular season. In a tourney where there are only ~10 clans, that 4 could well win it is pretty good. I challenge you to find any other competition where 40% of the participants could well be winners.

Hi, first off you severely underestimate me. Also I can guarantee you we'll win, bongs did not play us at nearly our best and they know it well.

Now that that is out of the away why are you saying "ignore the elitist troll crowd." None of us are trolling anybody or trying to be "elitists" we are just trying to not see parts of this game we love go away and I do not see why you need to make such comments.

[Ribilla]

Originally Posted by Kuja900

Hi, first off you severely underestimate me. Also I can guarantee you we'll win, bongs did not play us at nearly our best and they know it well.

I don't doubt that fLb are rightly the top seeds, but the fact remains that you face some stiff competition. If IL and PR can assemble their top teams then the matches will make excellent watching. I don't think you can absolutely guarantee anything.

Originally Posted by Kuja900

Now that that is out of the away why are you saying "ignore the elitist troll crowd." None of us are trolling anybody or trying to be "elitists" we are just trying to not see parts of this game we love go away and I do not see why you need to make such comments.

I don't mean this thread, if you read my posts, then I wholeheartedly agree with your points. This is just the general impression I get from you in game. Maybe this is wrong or I just bring out the worst in people but, to my knowledge, you are the only person who has ever had to mute me and I get the impression I am not unique in this.

Now, let's stop derailing, or Karlam will strike us down with dev-anger.

[wolf'j'max]

1 opinion:
keep the old size, i think making the screen bigger makes the game unbalanced.

[Ribilla]

Originally Posted by wolf'j'max

1 opinion:
keep the old size, i think making the screen bigger makes the game unbalanced.

I think part of Lam's post is that he acknowledges the unbalancing of the game and would make various nerfs/buffs to realign the plane balance. One of my worries is that balancing a game like alti, with multiple game modes, is a very tricky business, especially when it's so difficult to get impartial views, and that these balances patches would take so long to fine-tune, it might leave the (competitive) game broken for a substantial amount of time.

[Mortva]

Have I written yet that on my -- admittedly old -- 4:3 monitor the planes look *really* small in 120?

[mssv]

Originally Posted by elxir

It's difficult to show just a video - being on a team with voice communication and where each person knows exactly what they are supposed to do and when to do it...

A very basic example would be player 1,2,3 are supposed to immediately kill turrets x,y, and players 4,5 are supposed to get center map control.

I don't think widescreen would really improve upon this sort of thing, as it is all about communication...

Something widescreen would likely improve is an increase in plays of this nature: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQbbw...ailpage#t=463s

However, that sort of play is largely intuitive: you know you are clearing the ball from your own zone, so naturally (hopefully) one of your lights is respawning and cutting across the middle for a pass.

Being able to see more of the map could free up the ball game to a degree, and create more passing - and get heavier planes more involved in passing, since they are theoretically supposed to be the best at it.

The gameplay of ball seems like it would be improved by having greater visibility...until you realize the planes have guns.

I know it will make the game change in one sense though...one of the best strategies a miranda has in goal defense is to hover just outside the SIGHT RANGE of enemies approaching the goal - they will more often than not shoot the ball if they think they are alone - and the miranda can double warp, snatch the ball, and save the day. This strategy seems impractical now since the enemy can like, see you and realize they shouldn't shoot.

Just some impressions.

edit: another example of team strategy is in knowing who to kill. For example, when the enemy is pushing on your base, the lighter planes should flank - quickly, and a) try to take out the runner, b) get smoking planes, and c) deal as much damage as possible while the remaining planes prevent a lob onto the base.

While this may seem like "individual skill," in reality it is each player knowing what their role is - the heavies are large, they keep the base from getting lobbed. The lights are fast and do massive DPS - they focus down the runner and any trailers...it may seem basic, but a lot of runs success and failure depends on whether teams are capable of executing together...

ETA (again): listen to tyr and cloud talk about sammiches strategy...http://www.youtube.com/user/tyraltit.../1/vCzuKxHN-pA

Your strategies are due to lack of vision, you guys are talking about communications as a teamwork factor but it's only a way to point enemys in the map due to the lack of vision, and that, imho, it's not a real strategy; but just a way to adapt to limitations.

Before electronics, when humans had to hunt in groups they could only utilise gestures and sounds, they were limited to eye contact and sound radius. their strategies were very simple due to those factors.

Electronics came, so they could skip eye contact and sound radius limitations by using walkie-talkies and develop more complex and bigger terrain-wise strategies.

Then cameras and planes/helicopters allowed a group-leader with a lot of info in his hands, including a bird perspective of the action, to lead his group in real-time through a real and complex strategy.

So, I'm not saying before electronics guys hadn't a strategy, in fact they had some cool ones to kill bigger animals, and indeed they had to have a good teamplay, but, most of their teamwork was focused in to avoid limitations, which is what you guys are calling here teamwork.

[Ribilla]

Originally Posted by mssv

Your strategies are due to lack of vision, you guys are talking about communications as a teamwork factor but it's only a way to point enemys in the map due to the lack of vision, and that, imho, it's not a real strategy; but just a way to adapt to limitations.

Before electronics, when humans had to hunt in groups they could only utilise gestures and sounds, they were limited to eye contact and sound radius. their strategies were very simple due to those factors.

Electronics came, so they could skip eye contact and sound radius limitations by using walkie-talkies and develop more complex and bigger terrain-wise strategies.

Then cameras and planes/helicopters allowed a group-leader with a lot of info in his hands, including a bird perspective of the action, to lead his group in real-time through a real and complex strategy.

So, I'm not saying before electronics guys hadn't a strategy, in fact they had some cool ones to kill bigger animals, and indeed they had to have a good teamplay, but, most of their teamwork was focused in to avoid limitations, which is what you guys are calling here teamwork.

And the point you demonstrate very well in your analogy is that the early hunters required more skill. Furthermore, hunting with old methods rather than new methods is probably much more fun.

Your argument doesn't hold at all because in your analogy the hunting is for survival, however alti is just for fun. Moreover, in your example only one side of the fight (the humans, as opposed to the animals) are getting better technology, whereas, in alti, both teams are effected equally, so this doesn't constitute an overall enhancement.

[mssv]

Rib, you are not getting my point, not going to explain it further, sorry, I can't help you.

[elxir]

I just breed deer in my barn and shoot them in the face when I'm hungry. The point of games like this is TO have limitations. Obviously they could expand the screen to full-map view - would it benefit the game in any way? Game, in this context, has two meanings. One is the "fun-casual" aspect...people who play football, play the pubs, etc. This is akin to the people who show up in jean shorts to play basketball. The other "fun" is the serious-fun...the people who are good at the game and want to keep getting better while playing the best competition. These people don't want the game dumbed down. There would be no point in playing if there were nothing else to learn. These people are the ones who show up looking for a 5v5 full court game, who want to try to guard the other teams best player, who want to try to run the court all day.



p.s., change ball normal 4 to thsi viewmode so we can get some ball testing?

[elxir]

After playing a little more, I do have one gripe. It is just plain hard to see the finer details. Like, it is absolutely critical to be able to see the angle your plane is facing in some situations, and it is really hard to focus on such a smaller object quickly.

It might just be that I am not used to it, but it just seems like a little small.

[Zed556]

In the words of my ex-girlfriend:

I don't like it, it's too small.

[mssv]

Since nobody have experience with a wider pov, how can you maintain that a wider pov caps instead of opening a wider range of tricks and strategies to learn? You don't have that experience, so it's impossible you argue that. Nobody can talk from their knowledge or experience since we are talking about a new feature.


"E pur si muove"

[porpus]

Originally Posted by mssv

Since nobody have experience with a wider pov, how can you maintain that a wider pov caps instead of opening a wider range of tricks and strategies to learn? You don't have that experience, so it's impossible you argue that. Nobody can talk from their knowledge or experience since we are talking about a new feature.


"E pur si muove"

Actually the old altitude had a wider pov (relative to plane size). Dio, myself, and a few others played quite a bit with that perspective and this is the experience we're drawing on.

I for one welcome the change with open arms. It was a bit shocking at first, but, like dio, I felt the game had less frustrating moments and I had two good games of tbd. I understand that while it may take away some of the nuances that Kuja is concerned about, it will open up a range of different strategies. Specifically, I had a lot more options on how to react when a new player flew into a fight guns blazing.

That said, I don't have the perspective of someone new to the game, or to the pov, which makes up the majority of the player base. So if a change like this makes 70% of the players angry, it's not worth it to me.

[lamster]

After collecting feedback we will not be proceeding with a change to the field of view. The risk of fracturing the community during the adjustment period (which would involve significant balance changes) and losing players who prefer the faster pace dictated by the current view scale is too great. As always, users are free to set up their own servers with custom camera view scales.

[Considered]

I understand the decision.

I do hope that one day Altitude does go widescreen.

Black bars, yuk.

[Echo Mirage]

Originally Posted by lamster

Edit:
After collecting feedback we will not be proceeding with a change to the field of view. The risk of fracturing the community during the adjustment period (which would involve significant balance changes) and losing players who prefer the faster pace dictated by the current view scale is too great. As always, users are free to set up their own servers with custom camera view scales.

I applaud this. Practically no other software dev does this, and it's noted.

Devs that listen to their player/user base? Unpossible!

This is truly good form.

[Mortva]

Originally Posted by Echo Mirage

I applaud this. Practically no other software dev does this, and it's noted.

Devs that listen to their player/user base? Unpossible!

This is truly good form.

1+ Awesome devs, three of my two thumbs up!

[phong]

This was already in debate a long time ago:
http://altitudegame.com/forums/showt...tions&p=111101

In 1v1 situations or someone zerging pub maps, yes some ships will be op. In league/team play the ships would remain balanced (if you play to win not pad stats).

[Boko]

I love playing on the New England servers scale better then the normal scale and so has everyone I ever asked. Balance was practically still the same. Just sayin'