<!--quoteo(post=1759498:date=Mar 15 2010, 09:36 PM:name=BigText)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigText @ Mar 15 2010, 09:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759498"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As a sidenote: Why did widescreen ever happen, anyway? Why not just make an overall bigger screen?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cheaper at the time.
Also, visually more pleasing to the eye. So it was win:win.
<!--quoteo(post=1759519:date=Mar 16 2010, 12:16 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Mar 16 2010, 12:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759519"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->you take that to the extreme of everything being "bright and cheery for 'teh skillz'" and assume it's because I will sacrifice anything to gain an advantage. The truth is I don't like games that have poor lighting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, what you DID say (and these are quotes) are:
"A well lit environment is critical to gameplay" which is more than very debatable. and then you said "I hope every possible command to adjust video settings is inside the game through menus in order to avoid more advanced players from editing .cfg or .ini files to gain an advantage. " Considering you're one of these advanced players, what you are implying (and not so subtly) is that your objective IS to gain an advantage.
Now I'm not saying you're wrong to want a bright game. I'm saying you're wrong in assuming that it is necessary to tune brightness sufficiently high to have a good gaming experience. And I, for one, hope that NS2 will have a claustrophobic and dark atmosphere that is characteristic of its space sci-fi background.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Could you elaborate on the first one? I heard it mentioned numerous times, but I can never make out the idea. Also the latter is a common misconception.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Given a certain diagonal, the largest area obtainable (with rectangular shapes) would be the square: such a square with a diagonal of D, will have an area of D²/2.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, we'll flatten the diagonal down, until you have a veeeeery long rectangle with dimensions nearing D on the long side, and 0 on the short side. The diagonal will still be D; however the area will near 0.
Given the same diagonal, the "squarer" the rectangle is, the larger the area.
Also, the latter is not a common misconception. Try it out yourself with a flyer or magazine and see whether it is more comfortable when you hold it vertically or horizontally (holding it at the same distance both times). Effect mostly visible when the object is very close and nearly encompassing your whole vision.
Lighting in terms of competitive gaming has no choice but to be binary: either you see something or you don't. Every shade of grey in between is nullified as gameplay element simply by the fact that people can and do have different gamma settings, and to that extent can only exist in cosmetic sense.
If you want darkness as an atmospheric element, there are plenty of ways to do that without making the game actually dark (see: Left 4 Dead), if you want hiding in the shadows to be an actual tactic, render the shadows as absolute pitch black. NS2 quite clearly goes for the first route, with possible incorporation of the second somewhere in the later unknown.
<!--quoteo(post=1759525:date=Mar 16 2010, 02:52 AM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Mar 16 2010, 02:52 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759525"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, visually more pleasing to the eye.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ew.
Why all the hate for widescreen? For gaming, it's usually more pleasing (apart from those nostalgic types). For work, it allows you to pull documents side by side. Non widescreen-compliant web pages are getting rare (not fast enough, sadly). And for multimedia it's obviously a match, movies being already widescreen.
I've always had trouble to manage my window layout with 4:3. Now it all seems much more natural as I find it's much easier to split the screen without having them completely off proportion-wise.
<!--quoteo(post=1759528:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759528"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Given a certain diagonal, the largest area obtainable (with rectangular shapes) would be the square: such a square with a diagonal of D, will have an area of D²/2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ah, yes, that is true, thanks for the intuitive explanation. Was never good with anything relating to math...
<!--quoteo(post=1759528:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759528"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, the latter is not a common misconception. Try it out yourself with a flyer or magazine and see whether it is more comfortable when you hold it vertically or horizontally (holding it at the same distance both times). Effect mostly visible when the object is very close and nearly encompassing your whole vision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I was about to mention the same thing.
The misconception stems from the fact that it's easier for our eyes to move on the horizontal plane than the vertical one (or maybe because they're located on the horizontal plane in general). This has no effect on actual field of view, however, minding the simple fact that human eye is - shockingly - round, and thus the gain in horizontal estate is exactly equal to the width of one's nose. For anything other than painfully intimate distances, this is completely negligible.
<!--quoteo(post=1759530:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:15 AM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 16 2010, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759530"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why all the hate for widescreen?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> For some it's the switch costs, for others it's aesthetically displeasing (I would trade my display for a 4:3 in a heartbeat), and you're apparently one of the lucky guys who has no problem with it.
To the best of my knowledge there are no known objective differences between screen widths at all.
Mr. EpicJoin Date: 2003-08-01Member: 18660Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1759530:date=Mar 15 2010, 07:15 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 15 2010, 07:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759530"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why all the hate for widescreen? For gaming, it's usually more pleasing (apart from those nostalgic types). For work, it allows you to pull documents side by side. Non widescreen-compliant web pages are getting rare (not fast enough, sadly). And for multimedia it's obviously a match, movies being already widescreen.
I've always had trouble to manage my window layout with 4:3. Now it all seems much more natural as I find it's much easier to split the screen without having them completely off proportion-wise.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No hate for them, I have hate for people who do a lousy job and needlessly give us a hard time. If you have a wide screen, you should get more horizontal area at the cost of vertical area. If you have a 4:3 you should get more vertical area at the cost of some width coverage.
I'm pretty sure there are many more than just a "few lucky guys" who don't have a problem with widescreen. Personally, I prefer widescreen principally for the same reasons Cereal mentioned, and because I'm a laptop user. Widescreen format gives more room for full sized keyboards and less space goes wasted around the touchpad. Imo it's also more convenient during transportation.
Some people also say the Golden ratio has something to do with all this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1759528:date=Mar 15 2010, 08:08 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 15 2010, 08:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759528"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, what you DID say (and these are quotes) are:
"A well lit environment is critical to gameplay" which is more than very debatable. and then you said "I hope every possible command to adjust video settings is inside the game through menus in order to avoid more advanced players from editing .cfg or .ini files to gain an advantage. " Considering you're one of these advanced players, what you are implying (and not so subtly) is that your objective IS to gain an advantage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well lit doesn't even have to mean bright and even if it did a bright game isn't by default "cheery". Well lit means I'm not seeing dark ass shadows down every other hallway, like the first time I saw when I watched that video. On the second fly through the level seemed much more playable, so I'm thinking my LCD was angled in a way that made it appear darker. (I have a big screen, so this is sometimes an issue if I'm slouching).
I want those options available in ingame menus to <i>prevent</i> people from gaining an unfair advantage. People should be able to choose how they want their own game to look on their computer within reason (cue Temphage saying something about replacing skulks with red boxes). If a player wants to be super competitive and decides to increase brightness then every other player should have that option and shouldn't have to go searching through config files or .ini files to figure out how they did it. If a player wants to enjoy a more atmospheric and moody game, they should have that option as well.
If someone wants a dark and shadow filled game but still rages every time they die (Temphage) then they need to play on more casual servers or not take the game so seriously. You can't force players to play at the settings you want but you should make all of those settings freely available through ingame menus and easily adjustable. Assuming NS2 has a healthy playerbase, I would assume most players wouldn't even touch the brightness settings and they would be able to choose more casual or newcomer servers if server admins are able to self label and players can filter via these labels.
<!--quoteo(post=1759538:date=Mar 16 2010, 01:09 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Mar 16 2010, 01:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759538"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If a player wants to enjoy a more atmospheric and moody game... ...then they need to play on more casual servers or not take the game so seriously... ...I would assume most players wouldn't even touch the brightness settings and they would be able to choose more casual or newcomer servers...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if people don't want to play with blackwalls, they should stick to the noob servers where they belong? I assume this also goes for everyone who doesn't want to delete half their sound directory, or replace all their footstep sounds and the like with louder and clearer ones. This also probably goes for weapon models... despite the fact that BiteCams blocking your view is entirely intentional and to turn it off, again, nets you an advantage.
The words you use say that you just want to play a happy friendly game between going to church and volunteering at the homeless shelter, and all you want is the innocent ability to adjust minor things to your preference and everyone wins, all the time, always and forever. Your intonation as well as past history says exactly what I've been saying, where in the spirit of every clan-tag-wearing ***hole that's ever played a game, you want to squeeze every trivial advantage out of the game. Don't be offended, this is exactly how NS1 competition worked. It's how all video game competition works - well, competition in an unmonitored environment. People freely deleted sounds, had replacements for less echoy weapon sounds, invisible skulk jaws, louder footsteps, removed fog sprites, and used a collection of in-game and external settings to make the game brighter than the surface of the moon. Some 'pr0's aren't even above using outright hacks if they know they can get away with it.
The only assumption I made is that everyone knew this already. Maybe *you* yourself don't outright want to do this for the advantage, but a lot of other people do. You already said once you want it just for the advantage (and admirably backpedaled). The entire point that you force everyone to play at settings set to get the best advantage seems to be lost on you - or you consider that a perfectly acceptable consequence.
'You should be able to play how the developers intend the game to look. But you should be severely punished for it.'
Why don't you just come out and say that the competitive scene wants to be able to change settings to get an advantage, and that they consider the ability to do this to be integral for proper gameplay? The only surprise here is that you'll stop lying and d***ing us around in some misguided attempt to drum up support for the 'competitive experience'. If these forums are any indication (a poor one, sure, but the only metric we have) most people agree that doing what you want to do is worse for the game than any benefits it provides.
Also, Widescreen is better for gaming (assuming it gives you a +horizontal screen space) because horizontal space is used a lot less often.
EDIT: Since I already screwed up and triple-posted, I might as well use this space for something.
You said yourself that you should have the ability to customize your game <u>within reason</u>. Would you consider that any option that the devs have not intentionally implemented your ability to freely change is like that for a reason?
NS1 had no option to turn off weapon models. The 'pr0' players, despite the intentional lack of a toggle for weapon models and the locking of r_drawviewmodels, both completely indicative of deliberate intent for ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY WITH WEAPONS SHOWING, circumvented both of these by simply making empty models to replace all their guns with.
I doubt you fully understand what this actually means. I consider it pretty concrete proof that the developers are more than willing to put a proper-looking game as well as balance ahead of the demands of a handful of players who actually do not like having weapons visible. And that the 'pr0' players are more than willing to cheat around any system to do what they want, because they know better than the devs do.
If they do not have an option to turn ambient sounds off, that indicates and deliberate attempt to keep the playing field even by not having some players' hearing impeded by the steam turbine next to them, that other players are oblivious to and can hear footsteps due to the lack of it. What you're saying via your .cfg and .ini hunting as well as simply modifying game files is that how you want to play the game is more important than balance and fairness, and thusly you are more than willing to resort to cheating to get what you want.
If the game doesn't have an option to turn every wall texture to a single matte color, you'll rage that you DESERVE the advantage it confers, and its the DEVELOPERS' faults that they didn't make it an option for everyone. If the game doesn't have an option to amplify footsteps and remove all non-essential soudns, you'll rage that you DESERVE the advantage it confers, and its the DEVELOPERS' faults that they didn't make it an option for everyone.
It's like listening to the stupid excuses people give to justify crime.
And, for what it's worth, it's healthier for competition to have everyone playing at settings as close to each other as possible. You can do this via a method that alienates half the playerbase and divides them into 'haves' and 'have nots', or you can do it in a method that keeps everyone fair, only you lose a marginal handful of people who rage that they'll refuse to buy the game (though I doubt that's true) if they can't join the elite group of 'haves' specifically to enjoy an advantage over the 'have nots'.
I wouldn't draw any big conclusions on a map that is apparently engine test (including lighting) and not necessarily an indication of gameplay direction. Still, as for the general flammable topic:
I think what people want here is exactly the opposite of this skill monopoly. What quite a lot of people are asking for is clear lines where you can go and the modifiable parts avaible for everyone. Consistency (which blocks nearly all model modifications and is used on every competetive event I know) is a good example of that: It draws a clear line on which details are designed purely cosmetic and modifiable and which aren't. It's easy to point out if someone crosses the line there.
As for the darkness, it's <b>extremely</b> difficult to create a level playing field out of it. Hardware and software affect it so much that someone is always going to have the upper hand, even if nobody wanted to have one. There isn't any clear guideline on how you should be able to set your gamma options because they vary on each system.
People who want to have less dark gameplay will most likely get their lighting anyway, just as happened on NS1. It seems fair that NS2 doesn't force people to play on low gammas, because it just creates another step of know-how modification instead of easy options sliders. Dark maps are still avaible for anyone just as before, but I highly doubt they can be forced in any reasonable amount of work.
<!--quoteo(post=1759554:date=Mar 15 2010, 09:45 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 15 2010, 09:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759554"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->bunch of text<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Last I checked r_viewmodels was required under mp_consistancy, and thus it is illegal under tournament play to disable view models. Changing out models is definitely illegal under tournament play..... These are exactly the kinds of things the random screen shot plug ins are built to combat... so what are you arguing about?
Exactly what pro players are you talking about? If they play in a league, none of the stuff you talk about is a valid concern... If they don't play in a league chances are they are just terrible posers.
I honestly think your just being really paranoid, none of the stuff your talking about even confers a huge advantage, at most it would move a 50-50 match up to a 50.001-49.999 match up. All the ui tweaks, background sound removal, costume cross hairs, transparent maps, gamma hacks, in the world don't make bad players good, hell in NS even an AIM bot won't make a bad player good in a tournament setting. Stop worrying about all the things your opponent could possibly do to have an "unfair" advantage over you, and focus on playing the game, playing it well and improving your skills.
<!--quoteo(post=1759564:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:04 AM:name=Katana-)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Katana- @ Mar 16 2010, 03:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759564"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Last I checked r_viewmodels was required under mp_consistancy, and thus it is illegal under tournament play to disable view models. Changing out models is definitely illegal under tournament play..... Exactly what pro players are you talking about? If they play in a league, none of the stuff you talk about is a valid concern... If they don't play in a league chances are they are just terrible posers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>To Temphage:</b> And then there's the pro tournaments in LAN parties where everybody plays with identical computers (though you can bring your own mouse and keyboard) and tournament supervisors constantly looking behind your shoulders that you don't cheat. These are the tournaments where the real money is, so why would a pro player choose to build his skills on top of some model cheating, only to notice that he can't never compete in these tournaments?
I never normaly comment on rants and arguments at all but Temphage is 100% correct.
<i>Gamma is bad, Macros are bad, Editing Content is bad. Injection Manipulations is so wrong it cant be put into context.</i>
At the end of the day they all ruin every single game and <!--coloro:#9ACD32--><span style="color:#9ACD32"><!--/coloro-->word of mouth experience from <u>NEW players</u><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> or <u>lesser skill players who need those dark corners</u> that played with <!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->people who have moded the game for an advantage have one over the "NEW players", They have one over the NEW players, They.. have.. one.. over.. the.. NEW.. PLAYERS..!.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> <!--coloro:#F4A460--><span style="color:#F4A460"><!--/coloro-->They tell their <u>mates what a bad experience it is</u><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> and how crap the game is cause there is loads of people who can see a skulk hiding in a dark corner for example as well as other things, <!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->This KILLS SALES!<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> NS1 I have played for a long time, it has been F'd over big time, I cant even get back into the game now not uless I and my mates use macros because someone else is.
I am all for MD5 hash checking of all files even if that means my game takes an extra 30 secons to load. There should be no gamma options. I agree that huds should bleach out to punish them for trying to light up corners without a <u>flashlight..</u>
At the end of the day your game 2 months down the line should be no different from the fresh install of a NEW player. <!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->It's unfair for them and It's unfair for the Dev's whos salse are getting hurt.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Once it took me an extra 60 or so seconds to red the eye bleeding text of Sgt. Barlow he's correct. Although there is nothing that can be done to stop manual over rides of lighting such as monitor over brightening and third party programs doing so. So the argument is pretty pointless.
<!--quoteo(post=1759538:date=Mar 16 2010, 02:09 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Mar 16 2010, 02:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759538"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well lit doesn't even have to mean bright and even if it did a bright game isn't by default "cheery". Well lit means I'm not seeing dark ass shadows down every other hallway, like the first time I saw when I watched that video. On the second fly through the level seemed much more playable, so I'm thinking my LCD was angled in a way that made it appear darker. (I have a big screen, so this is sometimes an issue if I'm slouching).
I want those options available in ingame menus to <i>prevent</i> people from gaining an unfair advantage. People should be able to choose how they want their own game to look on their computer within reason (cue Temphage saying something about replacing skulks with red boxes). If a player wants to be super competitive and decides to increase brightness then every other player should have that option and shouldn't have to go searching through config files or .ini files to figure out how they did it. If a player wants to enjoy a more atmospheric and moody game, they should have that option as well.
If someone wants a dark and shadow filled game but still rages every time they die (Temphage) then they need to play on more casual servers or not take the game so seriously. You can't force players to play at the settings you want but you should make all of those settings freely available through ingame menus and easily adjustable. Assuming NS2 has a healthy playerbase, I would assume most players wouldn't even touch the brightness settings and they would be able to choose more casual or newcomer servers if server admins are able to self label and players can filter via these labels.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Alright then, I did mean well lit actually. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but what you want (and this is based on the NS1 gamer base) is that a marine should be able to make out nearly instantly a skulk, wherever his placement. What you believe the more casual players want is Doom 3 lighting. There is a sweet middle; where some conditions are favorable to the marine, and others favor the alien. There is a reason for the flashlight and advanced hive sight to exist. And this is NOT (as quoted from somebody else in another thread) "dumbing down for pubbers".
It's insulting to insinuate that people who like to keep their game atmospheric are casual or newcomers. I am more than able to defend myself in NS1 despite the fact that it's plagued with people who apparently don't do anything else. I am NOT expecting to end up on the next ABLE/BAD. I am expecting a lot from the other players that I play both with and against. But these include accurate aim and strategy (among others) and definitely not seeing me where I'm supposed to be well hidden. In the end anyway, I know that people will be able to end up blanding up the game, however I'd appreciate it if they were at a very competitive level, while leaving us (advanced casual?) relatively safe. Basically the state NS1 was before it became a 3 server per continent game.
And when I thought only competitive players can act stupidly.
I'll give you a tip. There's no objective way to determine what kind of level customization is part of the game, so stop being arrogant about it. On either side of the debate. For example I think removing weapon view models, changing models/skins or weapon sounds (as annoying as they are) should not be allowed. However I want HUD's to be fully customizable aswell as ambient sounds toggleable.
Gamma tools, give you a clear advantage against non-max-level cloak or skuks hiding in dark corners. There's no going around it. The reality is however is that you cannot really monitor that. Even if you wanted to set it to some fixed value (which is btw bad because people have different monitors), and blocked every program there is, you cannot change the fact people can use ther monitor settings to increase gamma. That's something you cannot block and makes your argument moot.
Besides, I think aliens should not use darkness as gameplay element. In the end, its just like a cloak. You cannot see it, you need a hard counter for it. Cloak is annoying. :(
And lack of darkness has never stopped killing marines from corners they didn't look at.
You know what kills sales. The fact this ain't MMORPG. But I don't regret that.
<!--quoteo(post=1759587:date=Mar 16 2010, 12:44 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Mar 16 2010, 12:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759587"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Once it took me an extra 60 or so seconds to red the eye bleeding text of Sgt. Barlow he's correct. Although there is nothing that can be done to stop manual over rides of lighting such as monitor over brightening and third party programs doing so. So the argument is pretty pointless.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The valid point he's making is that newbies getting pwned too much might reduce sales. Otherwise it seems to stray off into completely imaginary worlds in more than a few ways. I, an average at max marine, can nearly roll over public servers with absolutely terrible connection and fresh NS install with a few preferrences changed from the game options menu. So much for newbies getting scared away by customization/macro caused advantages. The learning curve is what we need to work there.
I can agree that too much customization is bad, but the customization simply happens in computer games, no matter what. The design objective should be to minimize the necessity of customization and make the necessary customization accessible. Asking for proper gamma slider is asking for an accessible customization.
Edit: Jiriki just nailed the most of it, I think. Including the reason why gamma slider needs to be accessible.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
Go play hidden source to see how painful it has been to try to 'fix' the atmosphere of the game as a game mechanic. I think people should have the option of playing in darkness but the ability to brighten the game needs to be accessible, because otherwise people who have technical ability to change it via 3d settings, monitor or external gamma tuner will gain a gameplay advantage.
People might say.. well you might apply that logic to an aimbot too, and yes, one could argue that point but the significant difference is that aimbot is binary and definite. You want it off. With gamma tuning, you have to provide some level of support for it otherwise some people can't play on their monitor.. and when you open that as a feature then you need to open it all the way. This difference is very significant in the debate.
I agree with jiriki and would like ambient sounds and HUD need to be customisable and I would like to see an equivalent of sv_consistency that is tiered
Bad Company 2 seems to have nailed the problem of brightness, I reckon by accident though probably. They have Brightness & Contrast Sliders that behave much differently from ramping any gamma setting, There is an inconsistancy in the lighting as you would expect between levels but also during gameplay with exposure changes. What I get if I try to ramp up the brightiness and contrast for a dark level is lit areas are way too bright and then you get to a desert level where you cant see nothing but brilliant light. You also get a brief annoying dazzle too unless your settings are balanced. It deffo forces you to stick with a balanced setting on any screen type.
<!--coloro:#808080--><span style="color:#808080"><!--/coloro--><i>Someone mentioned that bloom being unsettable to off was an attempt but its not, Its still too bright with it off. Side note: Infact there are a few settings in that .ini not in the game because they had to cram everything important into one Menu for the moment, I dont think they could get their menu effects to work for the PC that they have on the PS3 (Same Setup as Flashpoint Dragon Rising).</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Yeah good idea by puzl, the sv_consistency should have different levels for different types of servers. Also I'd suggest an enhancment for that, namely making it a binary-coded variable, where 1st bit would toggle models, 2nd bit muzzle flash etc.
Barlow, it doesn't matter because you can change the gamma settings between levels with proper tools. You don't really need gamma boost in veil either.
I know nothing about programming, game designing, or anything, but I totally understand the concept of draw distance and object drawing! And by "totally" I mean in a very immature, incomplete, and simply fashion haha. Either way, this video was really cool, informative, and good to hear how flexible this system is.
It seems like it will allow modders to get really creative with both indoor and outdoor environments
I fail to understand why the game should have built-in handicaps for people with obsolete, broken, faulty hardware from 1992. If your screen is broke and makes things too damn dark, you get a new screen.
People might still be able to adjust it externally but that's an annoying hurdle they'll have to handle on their own. A 'feature', similar to SgtBarlow's note with BFBC2's HDR, would work well. In marine spawn, you'd be blinded by bright light, by gunfire, or maybe your HUD elements will be all whited out too (like the ammo counter on the backs of guns - make it nice and bright by default, so pumping up your gamma to overbrighten the scene would make it unreadable).
<!--quoteo(post=1759566:date=Mar 16 2010, 07:13 AM:name=Garo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garo @ Mar 16 2010, 07:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759566"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>To Temphage:</b> And then there's the pro tournaments in LAN parties where everybody plays with identical computers (though you can bring your own mouse and keyboard) and tournament supervisors constantly looking behind your shoulders that you don't cheat. These are the tournaments where the real money is, so why would a pro player choose to build his skills on top of some model cheating, only to notice that he can't never compete in these tournaments?
- Garo<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was there even a 'pro' ladder for NS?
The number of *real* pro players borders on the 'mathematically insignificant' area (to the extent that I pay absolutely zero attention to them and their "sport"). Nobody will ever take NS2 competition super-seriously anymore than they did NS1 (the best it managed was CAL? Until it collapsed up its own ass because it was so full of drama and teams being caught cheating). Or any more than any of the dozens of multiplayer games with amateur ladders and thousands of clan-tag-wearing-d-bags.
There's clan-based competition in every game and that's where 90% of the problems stem from. I use 'pr0' and 'TEH SKILLZ' mockingly because that's all either of those are in my eyes: a big joke.
Make the skulk chameleon like and take on the colour of the background if he sits still. There. Not relying on darkness alone. Eyes teeth and claws being the only things that don't change. Gamma boost = fixed. Really should have been one of the first things to be given to the skulk given the nature of the class.
Nonsense aside, remember folks, this engine can do MUCH better lighting. The whole model in the halflife engine was evenly lit. Not necessarily so with this engine. Changing brightness, etc, are not going to be as effective because suddenly, the shadows are going to have shape. Part of the skulk will be all black and part won't. Skulks could be lost among the sheer amount of extra detail present in maps. The whole argument is null and void until we can see the game in motion.
I'd agree with the sv_consistency idea. Like the sv_pure settings for TF2. The server settings override the custom settings depending on the server rules. However, it does it without deleting the custom content. It's just that the default models show instead. Furthermore, there should be certain types of "materials" that cannot be edited. TF2 had to have certain locks since ppl were utilizing semi-transparent textures and whatnot to see through walls, etc.
<!--quoteo(post=1759613:date=Mar 16 2010, 04:52 PM:name=BigD)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigD @ Mar 16 2010, 04:52 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759613"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nonsense aside, remember folks, this engine can do MUCH better lighting.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't know how you come to that conclusion. There is no bounce solution right now, everything emanates from a point spherically based on radius or from a point in a cone.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
edited March 2010
<!--quoteo(post=1759612:date=Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759612"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I fail to understand why the game should have built-in handicaps for people with obsolete, broken, faulty hardware from 1992. If your screen is broke and makes things too damn dark, you get a new screen.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Monitor attributes can vary on a continuum. The purpose of gamma adjustments is to allow people with different hardware to see the same game. Gamma is not realistically something you can lock.
<!--quoteo(post=1759612:date=Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759612"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->(the best it managed was CAL? Until it collapsed up its own ass because it was so full of drama and teams being caught cheating)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're making things up. CAL-NS was closed because of low activity.
<!--quoteo(post=1759554:date=Mar 16 2010, 01:45 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 16 2010, 01:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759554"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS1 had no option to turn off weapon models. The 'pr0' players, despite the intentional lack of a toggle for weapon models and the locking of r_drawviewmodels, both completely indicative of deliberate intent for ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY WITH WEAPONS SHOWING, circumvented both of these by simply making empty models to replace all their guns with.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> More fiction. View models are covered by mp_consistency.
IMO, they made a horrible mistake when they changed how cloak worked. If cloaked aliens were 100% invisible, the argument of "if you won't want to be seen, then use cloak." can be used here.
At any rate... isn't it possible to query the settings of the monitor? If so, adjusting in-game brightness (not adjustable by players) could be done based on the contrast and gamma of the monitor which would help keep things "fair"...
Comments
Cheaper at the time.
Also, visually more pleasing to the eye. So it was win:win.
Well, what you DID say (and these are quotes) are:
"A well lit environment is critical to gameplay" which is more than very debatable.
and then you said
"I hope every possible command to adjust video settings is inside the game through menus in order to avoid more advanced players from editing .cfg or .ini files to gain an advantage. "
Considering you're one of these advanced players, what you are implying (and not so subtly) is that your objective IS to gain an advantage.
Now I'm not saying you're wrong to want a bright game. I'm saying you're wrong in assuming that it is necessary to tune brightness sufficiently high to have a good gaming experience. And I, for one, hope that NS2 will have a claustrophobic and dark atmosphere that is characteristic of its space sci-fi background.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Could you elaborate on the first one? I heard it mentioned numerous times, but I can never make out the idea. Also the latter is a common misconception.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Given a certain diagonal, the largest area obtainable (with rectangular shapes) would be the square: such a square with a diagonal of D, will have an area of D²/2.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, we'll flatten the diagonal down, until you have a veeeeery long rectangle with dimensions nearing D on the long side, and 0 on the short side. The diagonal will still be D; however the area will near 0.
Given the same diagonal, the "squarer" the rectangle is, the larger the area.
Also, the latter is not a common misconception. Try it out yourself with a flyer or magazine and see whether it is more comfortable when you hold it vertically or horizontally (holding it at the same distance both times). Effect mostly visible when the object is very close and nearly encompassing your whole vision.
If you want darkness as an atmospheric element, there are plenty of ways to do that without making the game actually dark (see: Left 4 Dead), if you want hiding in the shadows to be an actual tactic, render the shadows as absolute pitch black. NS2 quite clearly goes for the first route, with possible incorporation of the second somewhere in the later unknown.
<!--quoteo(post=1759525:date=Mar 16 2010, 02:52 AM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Mar 16 2010, 02:52 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759525"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, visually more pleasing to the eye.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ew.
I've always had trouble to manage my window layout with 4:3. Now it all seems much more natural as I find it's much easier to split the screen without having them completely off proportion-wise.
Ah, yes, that is true, thanks for the intuitive explanation. Was never good with anything relating to math...
<!--quoteo(post=1759528:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 16 2010, 03:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759528"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, the latter is not a common misconception. Try it out yourself with a flyer or magazine and see whether it is more comfortable when you hold it vertically or horizontally (holding it at the same distance both times). Effect mostly visible when the object is very close and nearly encompassing your whole vision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was about to mention the same thing.
The misconception stems from the fact that it's easier for our eyes to move on the horizontal plane than the vertical one (or maybe because they're located on the horizontal plane in general). This has no effect on actual field of view, however, minding the simple fact that human eye is - shockingly - round, and thus the gain in horizontal estate is exactly equal to the width of one's nose. For anything other than painfully intimate distances, this is completely negligible.
<!--quoteo(post=1759530:date=Mar 16 2010, 03:15 AM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 16 2010, 03:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759530"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why all the hate for widescreen?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For some it's the switch costs, for others it's aesthetically displeasing (I would trade my display for a 4:3 in a heartbeat), and you're apparently one of the lucky guys who has no problem with it.
To the best of my knowledge there are no known objective differences between screen widths at all.
I've always had trouble to manage my window layout with 4:3. Now it all seems much more natural as I find it's much easier to split the screen without having them completely off proportion-wise.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No hate for them, I have hate for people who do a lousy job and needlessly give us a hard time. If you have a wide screen, you should get more horizontal area at the cost of vertical area. If you have a 4:3 you should get more vertical area at the cost of some width coverage.
Some people also say the Golden ratio has something to do with all this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio</a>
"A well lit environment is critical to gameplay" which is more than very debatable.
and then you said
"I hope every possible command to adjust video settings is inside the game through menus in order to avoid more advanced players from editing .cfg or .ini files to gain an advantage. "
Considering you're one of these advanced players, what you are implying (and not so subtly) is that your objective IS to gain an advantage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well lit doesn't even have to mean bright and even if it did a bright game isn't by default "cheery". Well lit means I'm not seeing dark ass shadows down every other hallway, like the first time I saw when I watched that video. On the second fly through the level seemed much more playable, so I'm thinking my LCD was angled in a way that made it appear darker. (I have a big screen, so this is sometimes an issue if I'm slouching).
I want those options available in ingame menus to <i>prevent</i> people from gaining an unfair advantage. People should be able to choose how they want their own game to look on their computer within reason (cue Temphage saying something about replacing skulks with red boxes). If a player wants to be super competitive and decides to increase brightness then every other player should have that option and shouldn't have to go searching through config files or .ini files to figure out how they did it. If a player wants to enjoy a more atmospheric and moody game, they should have that option as well.
If someone wants a dark and shadow filled game but still rages every time they die (Temphage) then they need to play on more casual servers or not take the game so seriously. You can't force players to play at the settings you want but you should make all of those settings freely available through ingame menus and easily adjustable. Assuming NS2 has a healthy playerbase, I would assume most players wouldn't even touch the brightness settings and they would be able to choose more casual or newcomer servers if server admins are able to self label and players can filter via these labels.
So if people don't want to play with blackwalls, they should stick to the noob servers where they belong? I assume this also goes for everyone who doesn't want to delete half their sound directory, or replace all their footstep sounds and the like with louder and clearer ones. This also probably goes for weapon models... despite the fact that BiteCams blocking your view is entirely intentional and to turn it off, again, nets you an advantage.
The words you use say that you just want to play a happy friendly game between going to church and volunteering at the homeless shelter, and all you want is the innocent ability to adjust minor things to your preference and everyone wins, all the time, always and forever. Your intonation as well as past history says exactly what I've been saying, where in the spirit of every clan-tag-wearing ***hole that's ever played a game, you want to squeeze every trivial advantage out of the game. Don't be offended, this is exactly how NS1 competition worked. It's how all video game competition works - well, competition in an unmonitored environment. People freely deleted sounds, had replacements for less echoy weapon sounds, invisible skulk jaws, louder footsteps, removed fog sprites, and used a collection of in-game and external settings to make the game brighter than the surface of the moon. Some 'pr0's aren't even above using outright hacks if they know they can get away with it.
The only assumption I made is that everyone knew this already. Maybe *you* yourself don't outright want to do this for the advantage, but a lot of other people do. You already said once you want it just for the advantage (and admirably backpedaled). The entire point that you force everyone to play at settings set to get the best advantage seems to be lost on you - or you consider that a perfectly acceptable consequence.
'You should be able to play how the developers intend the game to look. But you should be severely punished for it.'
Why don't you just come out and say that the competitive scene wants to be able to change settings to get an advantage, and that they consider the ability to do this to be integral for proper gameplay? The only surprise here is that you'll stop lying and d***ing us around in some misguided attempt to drum up support for the 'competitive experience'. If these forums are any indication (a poor one, sure, but the only metric we have) most people agree that doing what you want to do is worse for the game than any benefits it provides.
Also, Widescreen is better for gaming (assuming it gives you a +horizontal screen space) because horizontal space is used a lot less often.
<a href="http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/9034/dedust20007jx2.jpg" target="_blank">http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/9034/dedust20007jx2.jpg</a>
Remember that time the pistol got a hard fire rate limit on it? It wasn't because of people with really fast trigger fingers.
EDIT: Since I already screwed up and triple-posted, I might as well use this space for something.
You said yourself that you should have the ability to customize your game <u>within reason</u>. Would you consider that any option that the devs have not intentionally implemented your ability to freely change is like that for a reason?
NS1 had no option to turn off weapon models. The 'pr0' players, despite the intentional lack of a toggle for weapon models and the locking of r_drawviewmodels, both completely indicative of deliberate intent for ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY WITH WEAPONS SHOWING, circumvented both of these by simply making empty models to replace all their guns with.
I doubt you fully understand what this actually means. I consider it pretty concrete proof that the developers are more than willing to put a proper-looking game as well as balance ahead of the demands of a handful of players who actually do not like having weapons visible. And that the 'pr0' players are more than willing to cheat around any system to do what they want, because they know better than the devs do.
If they do not have an option to turn ambient sounds off, that indicates and deliberate attempt to keep the playing field even by not having some players' hearing impeded by the steam turbine next to them, that other players are oblivious to and can hear footsteps due to the lack of it. What you're saying via your .cfg and .ini hunting as well as simply modifying game files is that how you want to play the game is more important than balance and fairness, and thusly you are more than willing to resort to cheating to get what you want.
If the game doesn't have an option to turn every wall texture to a single matte color, you'll rage that you DESERVE the advantage it confers, and its the DEVELOPERS' faults that they didn't make it an option for everyone. If the game doesn't have an option to amplify footsteps and remove all non-essential soudns, you'll rage that you DESERVE the advantage it confers, and its the DEVELOPERS' faults that they didn't make it an option for everyone.
It's like listening to the stupid excuses people give to justify crime.
And, for what it's worth, it's healthier for competition to have everyone playing at settings as close to each other as possible. You can do this via a method that alienates half the playerbase and divides them into 'haves' and 'have nots', or you can do it in a method that keeps everyone fair, only you lose a marginal handful of people who rage that they'll refuse to buy the game (though I doubt that's true) if they can't join the elite group of 'haves' specifically to enjoy an advantage over the 'have nots'.
I think what people want here is exactly the opposite of this skill monopoly. What quite a lot of people are asking for is clear lines where you can go and the modifiable parts avaible for everyone. Consistency (which blocks nearly all model modifications and is used on every competetive event I know) is a good example of that: It draws a clear line on which details are designed purely cosmetic and modifiable and which aren't. It's easy to point out if someone crosses the line there.
As for the darkness, it's <b>extremely</b> difficult to create a level playing field out of it. Hardware and software affect it so much that someone is always going to have the upper hand, even if nobody wanted to have one. There isn't any clear guideline on how you should be able to set your gamma options because they vary on each system.
People who want to have less dark gameplay will most likely get their lighting anyway, just as happened on NS1. It seems fair that NS2 doesn't force people to play on low gammas, because it just creates another step of know-how modification instead of easy options sliders. Dark maps are still avaible for anyone just as before, but I highly doubt they can be forced in any reasonable amount of work.
Last I checked r_viewmodels was required under mp_consistancy, and thus it is illegal under tournament play to disable view models. Changing out models is definitely illegal under tournament play..... These are exactly the kinds of things the random screen shot plug ins are built to combat... so what are you arguing about?
Exactly what pro players are you talking about? If they play in a league, none of the stuff you talk about is a valid concern... If they don't play in a league chances are they are just terrible posers.
I honestly think your just being really paranoid, none of the stuff your talking about even confers a huge advantage, at most it would move a 50-50 match up to a 50.001-49.999 match up. All the ui tweaks, background sound removal, costume cross hairs, transparent maps, gamma hacks, in the world don't make bad players good, hell in NS even an AIM bot won't make a bad player good in a tournament setting. Stop worrying about all the things your opponent could possibly do to have an "unfair" advantage over you, and focus on playing the game, playing it well and improving your skills.
Case closed?
<b>To Temphage:</b>
And then there's the pro tournaments in LAN parties where everybody plays with identical computers (though you can bring your own mouse and keyboard) and tournament supervisors constantly looking behind your shoulders that you don't cheat. These are the tournaments where the real money is, so why would a pro player choose to build his skills on top of some model cheating, only to notice that he can't never compete in these tournaments?
- Garo
<i>Gamma is bad, Macros are bad, Editing Content is bad. Injection Manipulations is so wrong it cant be put into context.</i>
At the end of the day they all ruin every single game and <!--coloro:#9ACD32--><span style="color:#9ACD32"><!--/coloro-->word of mouth experience from <u>NEW players</u><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> or <u>lesser skill players who need those dark corners</u> that played with <!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->people who have moded the game for an advantage have one over the "NEW players", They have one over the NEW players, They.. have.. one.. over.. the.. NEW.. PLAYERS..!.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> <!--coloro:#F4A460--><span style="color:#F4A460"><!--/coloro-->They tell their <u>mates what a bad experience it is</u><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> and how crap the game is cause there is loads of people who can see a skulk hiding in a dark corner for example as well as other things, <!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->This KILLS SALES!<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
NS1 I have played for a long time, it has been F'd over big time, I cant even get back into the game now not uless I and my mates use macros because someone else is.
I am all for MD5 hash checking of all files even if that means my game takes an extra 30 secons to load.
There should be no gamma options.
I agree that huds should bleach out to punish them for trying to light up corners without a <u>flashlight..</u>
At the end of the day your game 2 months down the line should be no different from the fresh install of a NEW player.
<!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->It's unfair for them and It's unfair for the Dev's whos salse are getting hurt.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
I want those options available in ingame menus to <i>prevent</i> people from gaining an unfair advantage. People should be able to choose how they want their own game to look on their computer within reason (cue Temphage saying something about replacing skulks with red boxes). If a player wants to be super competitive and decides to increase brightness then every other player should have that option and shouldn't have to go searching through config files or .ini files to figure out how they did it. If a player wants to enjoy a more atmospheric and moody game, they should have that option as well.
If someone wants a dark and shadow filled game but still rages every time they die (Temphage) then they need to play on more casual servers or not take the game so seriously. You can't force players to play at the settings you want but you should make all of those settings freely available through ingame menus and easily adjustable. Assuming NS2 has a healthy playerbase, I would assume most players wouldn't even touch the brightness settings and they would be able to choose more casual or newcomer servers if server admins are able to self label and players can filter via these labels.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Alright then, I did mean well lit actually. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but what you want (and this is based on the NS1 gamer base) is that a marine should be able to make out nearly instantly a skulk, wherever his placement. What you believe the more casual players want is Doom 3 lighting. There is a sweet middle; where some conditions are favorable to the marine, and others favor the alien. There is a reason for the flashlight and advanced hive sight to exist. And this is NOT (as quoted from somebody else in another thread) "dumbing down for pubbers".
It's insulting to insinuate that people who like to keep their game atmospheric are casual or newcomers. I am more than able to defend myself in NS1 despite the fact that it's plagued with people who apparently don't do anything else. I am NOT expecting to end up on the next ABLE/BAD. I am expecting a lot from the other players that I play both with and against. But these include accurate aim and strategy (among others) and definitely not seeing me where I'm supposed to be well hidden. In the end anyway, I know that people will be able to end up blanding up the game, however I'd appreciate it if they were at a very competitive level, while leaving us (advanced casual?) relatively safe. Basically the state NS1 was before it became a 3 server per continent game.
I'll give you a tip. There's no objective way to determine what kind of level customization is part of the game, so stop being arrogant about it. On either side of the debate. For example I think removing weapon view models, changing models/skins or weapon sounds (as annoying as they are) should not be allowed. However I want HUD's to be fully customizable aswell as ambient sounds toggleable.
Gamma tools, give you a clear advantage against non-max-level cloak or skuks hiding in dark corners. There's no going around it. The reality is however is that you cannot really monitor that. Even if you wanted to set it to some fixed value (which is btw bad because people have different monitors), and blocked every program there is, you cannot change the fact people can use ther monitor settings to increase gamma. That's something you cannot block and makes your argument moot.
Besides, I think aliens should not use darkness as gameplay element. In the end, its just like a cloak. You cannot see it, you need a hard counter for it. Cloak is annoying. :(
And lack of darkness has never stopped killing marines from corners they didn't look at.
You know what kills sales. The fact this ain't MMORPG. But I don't regret that.
The valid point he's making is that newbies getting pwned too much might reduce sales. Otherwise it seems to stray off into completely imaginary worlds in more than a few ways. I, an average at max marine, can nearly roll over public servers with absolutely terrible connection and fresh NS install with a few preferrences changed from the game options menu. So much for newbies getting scared away by customization/macro caused advantages. The learning curve is what we need to work there.
I can agree that too much customization is bad, but the customization simply happens in computer games, no matter what. The design objective should be to minimize the necessity of customization and make the necessary customization accessible. Asking for proper gamma slider is asking for an accessible customization.
Edit: Jiriki just nailed the most of it, I think. Including the reason why gamma slider needs to be accessible.
People might say.. well you might apply that logic to an aimbot too, and yes, one could argue that point but the significant difference is that aimbot is binary and definite. You want it off. With gamma tuning, you have to provide some level of support for it otherwise some people can't play on their monitor.. and when you open that as a feature then you need to open it all the way. This difference is very significant in the debate.
I agree with jiriki and would like ambient sounds and HUD need to be customisable and I would like to see an equivalent of sv_consistency that is tiered
sv_consistency 1 = view model, muzzle flash
sv_consistency 2 = 1 + player models locked
sv_consistency 3 = 2 + structures locked
They have Brightness & Contrast Sliders that behave much differently from ramping any gamma setting, There is an inconsistancy in the lighting as you would expect between levels but also during gameplay with exposure changes. What I get if I try to ramp up the brightiness and contrast for a dark level is lit areas are way too bright and then you get to a desert level where you cant see nothing but brilliant light. You also get a brief annoying dazzle too unless your settings are balanced.
It deffo forces you to stick with a balanced setting on any screen type.
<!--coloro:#808080--><span style="color:#808080"><!--/coloro--><i>Someone mentioned that bloom being unsettable to off was an attempt but its not, Its still too bright with it off.
Side note: Infact there are a few settings in that .ini not in the game because they had to cram everything important into one Menu for the moment, I dont think they could get their menu effects to work for the PC that they have on the PS3 (Same Setup as Flashpoint Dragon Rising).</i><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Barlow, it doesn't matter because you can change the gamma settings between levels with proper tools. You don't really need gamma boost in veil either.
It seems like it will allow modders to get really creative with both indoor and outdoor environments
People might still be able to adjust it externally but that's an annoying hurdle they'll have to handle on their own. A 'feature', similar to SgtBarlow's note with BFBC2's HDR, would work well. In marine spawn, you'd be blinded by bright light, by gunfire, or maybe your HUD elements will be all whited out too (like the ammo counter on the backs of guns - make it nice and bright by default, so pumping up your gamma to overbrighten the scene would make it unreadable).
<!--quoteo(post=1759566:date=Mar 16 2010, 07:13 AM:name=Garo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garo @ Mar 16 2010, 07:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759566"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>To Temphage:</b>
And then there's the pro tournaments in LAN parties where everybody plays with identical computers (though you can bring your own mouse and keyboard) and tournament supervisors constantly looking behind your shoulders that you don't cheat. These are the tournaments where the real money is, so why would a pro player choose to build his skills on top of some model cheating, only to notice that he can't never compete in these tournaments?
- Garo<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was there even a 'pro' ladder for NS?
The number of *real* pro players borders on the 'mathematically insignificant' area (to the extent that I pay absolutely zero attention to them and their "sport"). Nobody will ever take NS2 competition super-seriously anymore than they did NS1 (the best it managed was CAL? Until it collapsed up its own ass because it was so full of drama and teams being caught cheating). Or any more than any of the dozens of multiplayer games with amateur ladders and thousands of clan-tag-wearing-d-bags.
There's clan-based competition in every game and that's where 90% of the problems stem from. I use 'pr0' and 'TEH SKILLZ' mockingly because that's all either of those are in my eyes: a big joke.
Nonsense aside, remember folks, this engine can do MUCH better lighting. The whole model in the halflife engine was evenly lit. Not necessarily so with this engine. Changing brightness, etc, are not going to be as effective because suddenly, the shadows are going to have shape. Part of the skulk will be all black and part won't. Skulks could be lost among the sheer amount of extra detail present in maps. The whole argument is null and void until we can see the game in motion.
I don't know how you come to that conclusion. There is no bounce solution right now, everything emanates from a point spherically based on radius or from a point in a cone.
Monitor attributes can vary on a continuum. The purpose of gamma adjustments is to allow people with different hardware to see the same game. Gamma is not realistically something you can lock.
<!--quoteo(post=1759612:date=Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 16 2010, 12:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759612"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->(the best it managed was CAL? Until it collapsed up its own ass because it was so full of drama and teams being caught cheating)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're making things up. CAL-NS was closed because of low activity.
<!--quoteo(post=1759554:date=Mar 16 2010, 01:45 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Mar 16 2010, 01:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759554"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS1 had no option to turn off weapon models. The 'pr0' players, despite the intentional lack of a toggle for weapon models and the locking of r_drawviewmodels, both completely indicative of deliberate intent for ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY WITH WEAPONS SHOWING, circumvented both of these by simply making empty models to replace all their guns with.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
More fiction. View models are covered by mp_consistency.
If cloaked aliens were 100% invisible, the argument of "if you won't want to be seen, then use cloak." can be used here.
At any rate... isn't it possible to query the settings of the monitor? If so, adjusting in-game brightness (not adjustable by players) could be done based on the contrast and gamma of the monitor which would help keep things "fair"...