Ostriig on 19/9/2009 at 13:54
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Disadvantages are only going to be visible to those who are aware of the advantages in the first place.
You can piss right off with that attitude. I truly doubt that T1/2 were of such a divine grace over anything else that you can't even begin to describe its control mechanics in words, especially since someone probably already has when they were making the game. If you wanna discuss this subject, by all means, if not, just drop it and move along.
ZylonBane on 19/9/2009 at 14:00
Quote Posted by jtr7
A single, calm, strictly matter-of-fact sentence is treated as ridiculous, countered with non-argument or total falsehood. Dump absurd myths on the doorstep and I will laugh and scream truths couched in absurdities to fight your wimpy fire with roiling fire... and make it hot enough to pop the kernels. Say something new and true. If you have to make crap up, or--god--recycle five-year-old garbage that could never hold water, you have no argument. And unlike poker you can't get away with bluffing.
Holy shit... jtr7 is the time cube guy.
SubJeff on 19/9/2009 at 15:30
Ha ha ha ha.
You are spot on ZylonBane. So on the money. I was struggling to think who he reminded me of. Gene Ray, is that you?
Anecdote: Gene Ray (Timecube man) once offered $1000 to anyone who could prove his 4 day cube earth cycle of truth wrong. For a laugh I sent him an email explaining that its not wrong just another way of looking at things. This was when Timecube was new and still amusing, instead of overlong and just clearly the rantings of a madman.
He sent me back an email starting "I don't have time for your word garbage...". We laughed so much I just knew he'd won.
Ostriig - a very, very simple implementation would have no disadvantages. I'm talking about a non-interactive mesh that allows you to see your feet just for the purposes of careful placement when climbing/exploring. But this could be implemented just as well with a faint round shadow.
If you are talking anything between that and full body awareness (as implemented in TDS) I don't see any other way that doesn't inherently bring with it an overly complex potential interaction with worldy objects, and that is the major disadvantage imho.
Tbh the camera linkage (a la TDS) is not a concern of mine because I don't think many people would be dumb enough to do that again. I just don't see that its worth the effort to implement upper limbs that are always there (arms that use the weapons and tools in 1st person are no issue because they serve only that purpose and don't/shouldn't mess with other world objects).
The lightgem should just stay as it is. I don't want to have to look down to know I'm hidden. In RL you'd know or could just look down with your eyes. I don't want to have to move my mouse to look down and see if I'm completely in shadow; its not practical or realistic.
Bakerman on 19/9/2009 at 15:35
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
You shouldn't have to ask.
Okay, less body I can understand. It's the more awareness I was confused about. jtr cleared it up - more focus on the environment and surroundings.
Quote:
Most sense jtr has made all thread.
Eh. Not saying much :p
Quote:
Someone list me the advantages of having body awareness over not having it please. Not expecting much of list here tbh.
Better immersion. IMO, but that's why I made this thread. Because I have an opinion.
Quote Posted by jtr7
If you would actually look at the games being named as examples, you can plainly see how for every well-developed Thief-like aspect, there are telling under-developed aspects.
That's fair enough, but how much was that due to the well-developed aspects sucking dev time and how much was due to the simple fact that the game was designed like that - and not very well? I'll take Dark Messiah since I've played it most recently. It seems to have been designed as a HL2-style linear slash-'em-up, and consequently the levels were linear and highly scripted. Who's to say that it wouldn't have been possible for them to make larger levels if they'd wanted to? They just didn't want to.
Quote:
Like I said, dishonest. Lying. It has a lot to do with the discussion and you've demonstrated my points.
Okay, I'll go back to your post and try to make sense of how it applies to my arguments.
Quote:
A single, calm, strictly matter-of-fact sentence is treated as ridiculous, countered with non-argument or total falsehood.
I assume that here you're talking about your arguments being treated as ridiculous, but I had trouble finding any calm, matter-of-fact sentences in your earlier posts. It would actually make more sense to read it the other way around - you have treated our point of view as ridiculous, and tried to counter it with rhetoric and verbiage.
Quote:
Say something new and true. If you have to make crap up, or--god--recycle five-year-old garbage that could never hold water, you have no argument.
All along, I believe I have presented my opinion, which I am entitled to and cannot be called false. I'm also not aware of ever making anything up - I'm speaking from my admittedly limited experience of implementing body awareness in my own game, as well as having played TDP/TMA/TDS. What's the five-year-old garbage I've been recycling?
Quote:
Educated and knowledgeable people have no place burying facts so simple they can be taken for granted.
Which facts are these? From my perspective, it is certainly not a fact that 'TDP is God' or 'only the devil is aware of his own body'. Even if these were facts, I am not trying to bury them, merely to suggest that after ten years, maybe we can move on.
Quote:
I'm here to shift the weights in the pans because you are THAT ridiculous and don't know it.
Of course, it is entirely posible that I've gone insane without realising, am spouting utter nonsense, and your posts make perfect sense.
Quote:
"Less body, more awareness" has been stated several ways in this thread alone, in detail, by diverse members, and you act like it's new and ask for meaning.
The way you stated it, I was unsure of what you were saying - now you've clarified it, I can recognise it as the same point that your side have been making all along. But frankly, I wouldn't have been surprised to find out that it meant something entirely different and unrelated.
Quote:
You also contradicted yourself by not continuing the discussion, either.
It's a little difficult to do so in this situation.
Quote:
Here's how mind-blowingly insane these conversations seem to me.
...
I completely agree.
Quote:
so it will even be possible to have a discussion
I don't want to get into a personal argument with you. I want to discuss the merits of having a visible character body. That was the attitude I brought to this thread, and have tried to maintain throughout it. You have ridiculed my attitude and opinion without providing any coherent arguments (until recently), and then suggest that I am trying to obstruct discussion.
It's a good thing I enjoy arguing or I would have given up long ago.
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Disadvantages are only going to be visible to those who are aware of the advantages in the first place.
Fine, I played T1/T2. I don't believe my enjoyment of those games would have been hindered in the slightest by being able to see my own feet.
Jarvis on 19/9/2009 at 16:01
I'm throwing in with the "less body" crowd. One of the things I appreciated about the originals was the ability to balance on small beams and confidently work around high ledges. In TDS, it forced your body to swing around awkwardly to match up with the direction you are looking in. Sometimes, there was simply nothing you could do about it. The body was going to swing around regardless, and you had to turn around to do whatever it was you wanted to do. In other words, "body awareness" caused you to fall, but not because *you* messed anything up.
I never even thought about a body in the originals. I think once I stared at the round shadow and noted that no one cast round shadows like that. But it was a moments consideration and I was back on my way. TDS "body awareness" drew me out of the game plenty. Pretty much every time I had to turn around. Or lean.
I normally do a lot of turning around and leaning in Thief.
SubJeff on 19/9/2009 at 16:03
Quote Posted by Bakerman
mistake
Don't attribute a quote posted by someone else to me. Ever.
Ostriig on 19/9/2009 at 16:13
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Ostriig - a very, very simple implementation would have no disadvantages. I'm talking about a non-interactive mesh that allows you to see your feet just for the purposes of careful placement when climbing/exploring. But this could be implemented just as well with a faint round shadow.
That's pretty much what I'm rooting for here. A visible animated mesh, and an integrated IK system to lift the feet according to height variation on the terrain. Preset joint positions might also work for the most part, given the scope. And sure, a round shadow could functionally suffice just as easily, but that goes back to my reply earlier in the thread about using single polygons for walls - why not take advantage of this reasonably available feature for the sake of visual immersion, now that tech allows it.
Quote:
The lightgem should just stay as it is. I don't want to have to look down to know I'm hidden. In RL you'd know or could just look down with your eyes. I don't want to have to move my mouse to look down and see if I'm completely in shadow; its not practical or realistic.
No, that's something I agree with, I wasn't suggesting taking out the lightgem. All I'm saying is that if I were given another visual cue to the degree I'm in the shadow, and an option to toggle the lightgem off, I'd probably give it a shot. I'm a big fan of minimal UI.
Bakerman on 19/9/2009 at 16:24
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Don't attribute a quote posted by someone else to me. Ever.
Sorry about that. I guess that's what happens when I try to attribute quotes to people instead of just plain [ quote][ /quote].
Jarvis - that's a good example of poorly implemented body awareness. I think most of the advocates here agree that it was shoddy and counterproductive, and want something that you don't have to fight.
Ostriig on 19/9/2009 at 16:41
Quote Posted by Bakerman
Sorry about that. I guess that's what happens when I try to attribute quotes to people instead of just plain [ quote][ /quote].
If you wanna quote several posts in a row, you can click the Multi button on each one, then hit Post Reply. Or Multi each one aside from the last you want, and hit Quote on that one. The names and post link still get associated automatically that way.
SubJeff on 19/9/2009 at 16:43
Quote Posted by Ostriig
why not take advantage of this reasonably available feature for the sake of visual immersion, now that tech allows it.
I think it would actually be incredibly difficult to implement well actually. There are so many situations you'd have to code for - stairs, slopes, uneven ground, carpet, grass, small objects on the ground, standing on the edge of something and shuffling a little or turning around, climbing up ladders, sliding down ladders forwards or backwards.
It's be a mess or doing it right would cost too much time.
I'm also a fan of minimal HUDs but the lightgem is one thing I like to have. Have you seen the TDM HUD? That's nice and minimal.
