jtr7 on 19/7/2010 at 23:57
Not being able to get close enough to the loot to see the detail in the correct light, seeing only course detail at a distance (intermittently as the loot glint masks it), and only the bump-mapping in bold blue up close, makes those pictures only valuable for showing us what is never seen in-game, and the potential lost.
darkrahnoehk on 20/7/2010 at 05:13
Quote Posted by jtr7
Not being able to get close enough to the loot to see the detail in the correct light, seeing only course detail at a distance (intermittently as the loot glint masks it), and only the bump-mapping in bold blue up close, makes those pictures only valuable for showing us what is never seen in-game, and the potential lost.
Agreed. Another reason to get rid of the blue highlight and/or use the "kindergarten" colors as someone put it. I see no reason to have to be made to scrutinize objects closely for the sake of "realism".
Koki on 20/7/2010 at 06:02
poorly implemented gamma
Beleg Cúthalion on 20/7/2010 at 11:01
Quote Posted by jtr7
Not being able to get close enough to the loot to see the detail in the correct light, seeing only course detail at a distance (intermittently as the loot glint masks it), and only the bump-mapping in bold blue up close, makes those pictures only valuable for showing us what is never seen in-game, and the potential lost.
That's what I meant with overstretching things just to denigrate them. You
are able to get close to the loot and
are able to see the detail which distinguishes it from junk even with an ugly blue or better copper overlay. And you even are able to see it without the overlay if you don't have it in the centre of your screen. Do you seriously have to twist the facts so much in order to make your point? It's obvious that besides other things the loot implementation in TDS could have been better but your way of forming standards is, aside from biased, anything but constructive to future game design. How can somone learn from the faults of TDS if no one bothered to see it as it is?
Quote Posted by dakrathing
I see no reason to have to be made to scrutinize objects closely for the sake of "realism".
With that kind of argument you could as well include a only-positive-frob feature which avoids frobbing junk at all. Great.
Platinumoxicity on 20/7/2010 at 13:52
Beleg, do you take the opportunity to disagree with anyone regardless of what they stand for? I can't see any reason why anyone could support the object handling- or the frob highlight system in TDS, and I know that you can't either. If someone gets his point across with some obscure means but you still support his idea, you don't need to disingenuously pretend that you didn't understand just so that you can appear to disagree. Or do you just like arguing? Pros vs Pros is not a discussion.
Beleg Cúthalion on 20/7/2010 at 18:24
I cannot argue against someone's
opinion and if you look closely, lately I didn't argue against someone having a balanced view of things and actually seeing pros and cons, but rather an almost artificial looking wave of rants which have long gone from an honest interest in facts. You also might have noticed that I never defended any TDS element 100% but rather the good elements which someone dragged into the dirt for no factual reason.
The thing I fear for (while jtr7 fears for the consolised T4) is that the devs actually want to know how the fans responded to certain things and read about people with an irrational opinion about them, like your latest rant against the TDS maps. Plus, the problem is not someone's TTLG post, it's something like (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132043&p=2003467&viewfull=1#post2003467) this (slightly wrong-headed perception at best IMHO) followed by (again, IMHO) a not greater amount of thought (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132043&p=2003511&viewfull=1#post2003511) here. Honestly I'm waiting for some years now that someone starts complaining about torch bearing guards (how dramatically altering the gameplay!), given that there were already people preferring the old lockpick system or compass (!).
darkrahnoehk on 21/7/2010 at 10:21
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
...You
are able to get close to the loot and
are able to see the detail which distinguishes it from junk even with an ugly blue or better copper overlay. And you even are able to see it without the overlay if you don't have it in the centre of your screen....With that kind of argument you could as well include a only-positive-frob feature which avoids frobbing junk at all. Great.
Actually I do have a hard time distinguishing junk from loot with the blue overlay. This problem is compounded by the fact that it doesn't have to be at the center of my screen to highlight. I have to "look" out the corner of my eye to un-highlight it and see what it is.
Inline Image:
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/1825/51802990.jpg That cup there is almost on the edge of my screen and already gets selected and highlighted. It shouldn't be this difficult.
An only-positive-frob feature would be too far on the "easy" side. TDS's system is on the other end of the scale. Thief 1+2's system, the porridge was just right.
pwyll on 21/7/2010 at 20:00
A thief with a sword? Are you kidding me? Is Garrett going to steal something or to a duel? A dagger is a way more appropriate weapon.
I want a very large City with many streets and houses, pubs, brothels, etc. All buildings accessible and interesting.
Beleg Cúthalion on 21/7/2010 at 21:30
Quote Posted by darkrahnoehk
That cup there is almost on the edge of my screen and already gets selected and highlighted. It shouldn't be this difficult.
Still, you should see the decoration being different from the rest. But what I actually wanted to add: There is a property called FrobBias which indicates how fast the highlight snaps to a certain object. If there is nothing else on that table, the goblet will be highlighted quite quickly.
