Kharaas' eyes
Petzi
Join Date: 2010-04-04 Member: 71171Members
Join Date: 2010-04-04 Member: 71171Members
Hi, I'm new to Natural Selection 2. When I saw screenshots/videos of the 1st person camera when playing a kharaa, I immediatly noticed that the view was from inside the mouth. I thought "Oh, I guess this particular creature has its eyes inside it's mouth. That's biologically so total bull######, because that would mean it's blind when its' mouth is closed". But I realized that on that in fact they did NOT have eyes inside their mouths. So, why are the kharaa's cameras down their throats? There doesn't seem to be any logical reason within the game world, just the fanciness of it.
Comments
How else would you want to see yourself biting your enemies to death? Looking at the top of your nose isn't all that great.
welcome to ns2 ;)
well you got it one - its fancy
but for the biting aliens, it makes it easier to know if you are biting and hitting a target
2. its the same reason that third person melee is complete ass to control, totally unresponsive
3. a bunch more gameplay reasons that make it awesome
When you think about it there's no logical reason for there to be any aliens in the game world at all, but it definitely makes the game much fancier than the "patrol deep space" simulation that it would be without aliens.
Honestly something being fun or cool is a good enough reason to stick it in a video game about space marines fighting aliens. It's not like we're going for realism here.
LOL just shows how LITTLE U ACTUALLY NO.
First of all, if you would have read all 54 pages of the NS1 manual and the supplementary 132 pages of NS universe fiction, you WOULD HAVE learned that the Kharaa (we like to capitalize the first letter of an entire species on the forum, out of a thing called respec, u no? aparently not. you dont no.) that the kharaa have a double vision to guide the smaller organisms in their mouths. These organisms are more like a smaller miini game (like a flash game on shackwave.com you may be familiar with it?) and you have to use them to break down the food in your mouth inbetween bites. This was remvoed in NS1 (but not the manual) because the HL1 engine could not support it. So you'll want the kharaa double vision once you have to do a mass effect 2 (I had intercourse with Miranda) like mini game in order to seal the deal (aka the kill).
I'm dumbfounded by this topic. IT'S JUST A VIDEO GAME.... Jesus people, take it lightly.
If they want to put their eyes in their asses, they could SO do it!
yeah but then the controls would be reversed and that would just be annoying....
Where did that come from? :/
I'm dumbfounded by this topic<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Welcome to the forums.
Honestly something being fun or cool is a good enough reason to stick it in a video game about space marines fighting aliens. It's not like we're going for realism here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You do realize the 'lol aliens' argument whenever realism is involved is total horse###### right?
It makes you sound like a complete tosser whenever you use that, and I've heard that crap spewed on here like four times this week alone. It's called a suspension of ###### disbelief.
You might as well say a shooter that has a single gun that's not real has suddenly lost complete credibility and they have complete free-reign to do what the hell they want. Doesn't hyper-realistic Red Orchestra let you kill people in one slash with your bayonet? Doesn't Battlefield 2 let you jump out of an aircraft in mid-flight and freefall back into the cockpit?
It's called <b>science</b> fiction. If it weren't supposed to have an element of plausible reality it'd be ###### <b>fantasy</b>.
Now I don't care about the bitecam. There's a balance aspect to it and everything but I will say this - I'm a huge proponent of making aliens as different from marines as possible, and that means changing how they see and sense the world. If there is any reason we should lose mouthcam it should be to take advantage of expanded FOV for aliens due to the fact that marines (humans) have binocular vision and the aliens have their eyes on the sides of their heads. It makes infinitely more sense to give aliens an advantage in terms of overall scope of vision to enhance their situational awareness. I can't think of how to pull this off with the bitecam, at least not with a mouth setup as screen-hungry as the Gorge.
I think the technical term is verisimilitude, although "internal consistency" is probably more comprehensible. It applies to <i>all</i> forms of fiction.
Simply put, being a fictional setting does not mean there are no rules; merely that the rules it abides by are not necessarily the same ones that govern reality.
Wow, I thought no one else would ever use that word. I feel smarter and less weird for knowing what that means!
Anyway, I think the bite cam is probably the feature new users will "Huh?" at the most. It was a decision made by the developers a long time ago that the game's community is almost entirely in favor of, but someone new who plays 'rines first and then tries aliens is going to be a tad confused.
I don't think it'll end up all that bad, though.
Anyway, I think the bite cam is probably the feature new users will "Huh?" at the most. It was a decision made by the developers a long time ago that the game's community is almost entirely in favor of, but someone new who plays 'rines first and then tries aliens is going to be a tad confused.
I don't think it'll end up all that bad, though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My first reaction to Bite Cam when I started playing a few months ago was "###### yeah, bite cam".
Uh, yeah, I would say that for Battlefield 2 (but not for Red Orchestra, because it makes perfect sense for someone to die from one stab). BF2 has all sorts of ridiculous stuff. People spawn out of midair on their squad leader, they heal gunshot wounds with a defibrillator, they use a wrench to magically fix vehicles in the field, the UAV has a magic radar that reveals everyone in a radius around it, ammo bags refill the guns of anyone standing near them, etc. They could add a laser gun and all anyone would be able to say is "that doesn't fit with the theme of only using actual equipment." Nobody would ever think of criticizing an addition to BF2 because it's not realistic, because BF2 doesn't even try for realism. Natural Selection 2, which has SPACE ALIENS in SPACE in the FUTURE, falls into a similar category, and while we could argue that laser guns or robot dogs wouldn't fit into the aesthetic or that they wouldn't be fun to play with or something like that, we can't really argue that they wouldn't be realistic (except in the context of the NS universe) because there are SPACE ALIENS in SPACE.
This just goes to show you how desperately we need NS2 to be out. I can't believe we're even discussing this, but we have nothing better to do...
Cheers,
Cody
We need more orifice cameras.
Marines should get them too.
Nosecam, earcam etc, and they can show in the corners of the screen to improve your peripheral vision.
Aliens should be able to grow more orifices to get 360 vision.
And if you really think that's all there is to it I'd have more luck pushing a dictionary through a concrete wall than explaining the point you're missing here. Even in RO, even in ArmA2, you still just push 'R' and you eject a magazine, reach down, grab a new one, put it in, slap it, and maybe pull the charging handle as needed.
Suffices to say, nice black-and-white view of the world there.
Suffices to say, nice black-and-white view of the world there.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are either the internet's greatest troll or the world's dumbest person.
Every game (<b>every game</b>) that isn't being outright outlandish (Halo) and is trying to achieve some level of 'realism' (this goes from BF1942 to Killzone 2) is no different from ArmA or RO. They *ALL* have elements of arcadiness in them to automate the more mundane or gameplay-toxic features. In ArmA, you still just go up to a wounded guy, push a button, your dude waves his hands around and like magic, he's healed. You could use this hilarious wizardry bull**** as rationale in Celchuuu's fashion to thusly justify any kind of idiocy like dual-wielding pistols. We all know it's BS but you just sort of ignore it and press on with the game. Until they make us play a combat trauma minigame where we have to clamp arteries and apply combat gauze inside gushing wounds, you'll still have to do this.
There is no 'realistic' shooter. They all have elements of arcadey BS fudging or outright fictional components. Using the presence of aliens to somehow invalidate any argument founded on a concept with a basis in reality is stupid to this end, because games are not just 'arcadey' or 'realistic'. They're shades of gray. You do what fits the game <i>within its own rules</i>, not because it's realistic (or maybe on the other hand, it's NOT realistic so you rule it out). It's almost as trite and tired as the fallacy of "gameplay > realism".
I can't believe I had to spell this out to you. Un-****ing-believable.
while I normally agree with that opinion, in this case he actually has a point, internal consistency and all the difficult words quoted earlier in the thread are actually a very important aspect of game design (or design in general).
BF2 has its own rules and its own "realism", and contrary to what might seem expected, any new addition going against this "realism" will feel very disruptive of game-play. Dropping out of an airplane and getting back into it is entirely consistent with the method of going into a plane in the first place
The point is, gravity and all those nice things we think of as real, aren't that real anyway, at least the rules we all know about are just simplifications we made to live with it, the same in games.
Once there is a set of rules that in most areas make sense and is consistent across the board, this set is just as "realistic" as gravity in that it's a set of rules that we invented to explain events and enable us to anticipate and solve problems. (yes, gravity is not "Real")
Look through any proper work of fiction and even fantasy, they create a world with rules, which they adhere to throughout the universe of their works of fiction.
So the point is, while ALIENS are not real in the sense most people believe to (except maybe some nutters), in the world of NS, they are part of a world with rules, which should still remain consistent throughout this world. Saying something can happen because it's fiction, is true, but any good work of fiction introduces a set of rules and sticks to it, bitecams in this case can be part of this set of rules, but one should always be consistent.
might I suggest a 20 min walk? D:
The reason people immediately jump to the conclusion you're a dumb forum troll and are therefore prejudiced against anything you so violently describe, is because you sound like a dumb forum troll (insofar anyone can sound like anything in writing)
That is the main reason you had to spell that out.
Maybe I have such a corrosive attitude because I give forum posters way too much credit and yet they never fail to disappoint me.
I mean, seriously, we have a guy saying "This game has aliens. Aliens are unrealistic. Therefore anything realistic is BANNED!!!". What kind of god damn neurosurgeon does one have to be to see the problem with that argument? I'd like to think a 20-something year old wouldn't need me to hold his hand through this argument.
Maybe I have such a corrosive attitude because I give forum posters way too much credit and yet they never fail to disappoint me.
I mean, seriously, we have a guy saying "This game has aliens. Aliens are unrealistic. Therefore anything realistic is BANNED!!!". What kind of god damn neurosurgeon does one have to be to see the problem with that argument?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Before taking the intellectual high ground, realize that you're arguing over relative realism in a video game with space marines and space marines.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"This game has aliens. Aliens are unrealistic. Therefore anything realistic is BANNED!!!"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Classic Temphage. Non-stop extremes. A reasonable person would say "This game has aliens, aliens are unrealistic, therefor let's not really get carried away with the biological reason as to why there is a bitecam."
<!--quoteo(post=1762720:date=Apr 5 2010, 12:46 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Temphage @ Apr 5 2010, 12:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762720"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Now I don't care about the bitecam.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What are you doing? You've gone off on a tangent that is unrelated to this thread, you're derailing this thread, and you're flipping out over something that is subjective at best. Relax. Save some of that rage from when I'm spawn camping you.
you really need to learn to read before you post, aliens are not unrealistic, nor do they not adhere to rules (in a context such as NS2)
(and yes, temphage is a raging troll, but doesn't mean everything he says is bull######, even though it's formulated like it)
Seriously? You missed my point which is hard because I spelled it out. I'll try it again:
Temphage takes things to extremes, as he did in my quoted text where he mocked people by saying "BAN ALL REALISM!" I pointed out that a reasonable person would realize we're playing a video game and as such wouldn't let how biologically realistic a bitecam is bother them, relative to the NS universe or not. Temphage agrees with me, as he said in first post he doesn't care about the bitecam. Maybe make another thread so you two can discuss relative realism in NS?