Chade on 21/9/2009 at 22:45
Ah ... no, I'm not suggesting a new UI. Just let the player try it out and fail! I'm just suggesting hand animation as a way of providing feedback to the user about his climbing attempt.
Anytime the player tries to "climb" something (even mantling), the computer has to figure out what he is climbing on, and figure out whether he can climb on that or not using a range of criteria. This is true regardless of whether you provide any feedback to the user or not. It happened in T1/2/3.
I'm just suggesting that some sort of hand animation (which would have to be quite flexible, and probably powered by some sort of ik algorithm) would be a good way of providing feedback to the user about: 1) what the computer thinks he's trying to climb on, and 2) if the computer decides that the object he's trying to climb is invalid for some reason, you can use the appropriate hand animation to communicate the failed criteria to the player.
Whether or not you need this depends on how complex the players climbing actions are. It might be nice for mantling (who hasn't tried to mantle up same spot using several different angles/placements because you weren't sure exactly why the first attempt failed?), but we also know that mantling works reasonably without that level of feedback.
On the other hand, if you wanted to make the climbing more complex, I think it would quickly become very important to give the player better feedback (somehow).
SubJeff on 22/9/2009 at 00:53
The idea is great, but it's not practical. It would take far too much effort to get working right for the benefit.
Chade on 22/9/2009 at 01:29
You don't actually know that it would be too hard to do an acceptable job. That's just a guess, and a rather uninformed one at that. Of course, I have no evidence to suggest that it would be easy, either ... but the underlying tech is not hard (it's just solving a couple of simple equations). As always, the devil is in the details.
Anyway, the main point is that there are potential applications of ik technology to stealth games. Whether those applications are feasible right at the moment is something I'm not really qualified to talk about.
Bakerman on 22/9/2009 at 02:36
Chade, I really like your ideas. I agree that the user needs feedback, at least in situations more complicated than a mantle.
Quote Posted by Chade
As always, the devil is in the details.
This is the major problem of IK. It's reasonably simple to move the hand to the proper location, but then you need to, for example, figure out what the hand should be doing there.
Quote Posted by I'm Damn Sure It Was Subjective Effect This Time
If you're doing a 3rd and 1st person game don't link the two - allow for the FP view to not inherit the body or animations of 3rd.
I don't think body awareness has anything to do with 3rd person, except that it makes implementing 3rd person easier (you've already got all the animations, etc.). But none of my reasons for implementing it are to do with a 3rd person player view - only the 3rd person views of other characters, which are very important for immersion, and not exactly something you can ignore when making a game.
EDIT: Checked out the Penumbra demo. It's pretty excellent - I'm going to buy the full game when I get the opportunity.
Namdrol on 22/9/2009 at 06:58
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
The idea is great, but it's not practical. It would take far too much effort to get working right for the benefit.
And the world grinds to a shuddering halt due to the apathy of the uninspired.
Vivian on 22/9/2009 at 10:53
and the gears quake in their sockets to the terrible poetry of the indignant
Namdrol on 22/9/2009 at 11:09
William McGonagall eat your heart out.
;)
Ostriig on 22/9/2009 at 12:24
Quote Posted by Bakerman
This is the major problem of IK. It's reasonably simple to move the hand to the proper location, but then you need to, for example, figure out what the hand should be doing there.
Um, not arguing against the greater scope of the statement, but that's not an accurate example. Unless I'm misunderstanding. The animation is always a follow-up to the interaction or control command in a logical class structure. By the point that the hand, as an end-node of the arm hierarchy, has extended to a specific point, an interaction method has already been called. That's to say that before a specific animation, be it recorded or dynamic IK, plays, an interaction has already been identified, tested as possible and requested by the player directly (e.g. choose reach out to a ledge) or indirectly (you move forward and your feet follow suit).
Myagi on 22/9/2009 at 14:32
Quote Posted by Bakerman
I don't think body awareness has anything to do with 3rd person, except that it makes implementing 3rd person easier (you've already got all the animations, etc.).
I'd argue that well done first person BA has animations which probably for the most part won't be top notch in 3rd person (or vice versa). As with many things, it's the whole jack of all trades, master of none thing. You get in trouble when you don't focus on one thing and try to make that as good as possible (see TDS BA).
Jarvis on 22/9/2009 at 15:21
I think mirrors edge is a good example of First Person body awareness. I think that level of body awareness would actually work well in Thief. It promotes the kind of environmental awareness and freedom of movement that is valuable in a stealth game.
However...
The whole point to Mirror's edge was "freedom of movement". It was a parkour game after all. Yet, it was disappointingly linear. Sure I had a couple of days worth of fun leaping over things, but the game decided more or less what I should leap over and when.
One of the strongest qualities of Thief is open level design. It puts the power of choice in the players hands. I really don't care how intricate Garrett's interaction with his environment is. If the world he exists in is constricting by nature, then Thief 4 will fail.
So sure, more body awareness could potentially be neato. But truly, what's the point? Maybe I'm alone in this perspective, but I really don't care one way or the other. What I want is an open environment that I can explore freely. Any new feature that gets in the way of that or makes that more difficult or limited is a BAD feature.
TDS body awareness made exploration more difficult. How much more effort would EM have to put into it to make body awareness work well in Thief 4? Are any of us really qualified to answer that question? Is it really worth any trouble at all in the grand scheme of things?
I feel like focusing too much on this, which is of pretty small benefit all things considered, is missing the point. I hope EM isn't reading this and deciding that this is a major point for us. I hope they focus on good story, free level design, and immersive atmosphere instead.
