I agree with the original sentiment, and I think strongly that keeping such a large max zoom not only decreases immersion and lessens the connection with the beautiful assets Intrepid has made for us, but also affects combat balance. There's one specific point that I haven't seen anyone bring up though. I strongly believe that so long as your computer can keep a stable high framerate and has a stable connection (say, 60FPS), and you've worked in game to make a strong build with powerful gear, you should not be put at a disadvantage because someone else can set the FOV or zoom level higher than you without suffering a framerate penalty. Successful MMOs provide equal experiences to folks with lower-end devices so that you can grow your community without having a financial barrier to entry.
Please cap zoom at a lower level before PvP events smaller scale than sieges become common, and avoid creating a divide between your players just because one of them can't afford the latest powerful rig, especially in the times we live in where getting any graphics card is difficult and expensive.
Grilled cheese always tastes better when you eat it together!
This topic is an attempt at reducing the freedom/options players have. I don't feel any less immersed at max range than I do when my characters head is 10% of the screen (which is ridiculous of course and if you play zoomed all the way in...you just won't live as much as someone who doesn't). You think I want to see these trees close up with the bark cracking off it? Those pretty flowers? No. I want to see the landscapes, how everything merges together. Max zoom is perfect for me and still gives me the advantage of seeing players AND the beauty of the world.
What people also fail to realize, and this has been proven in countless games over the last 20 years, is that players are situationally unaware regardless of zoom range. Just zooming out doesn't mean you have the advantage. You have to have the ability to turn your camera because not every player is going to charge you from the front, you have to visually acquire the target and you have to NOT tunnel vision on what your current task is. How many people I have murdered because they were farming, not paying attention or couldn't see me is staggering. Zoom range isn't going to automatically help players stay alive.
@GrilledCheeseMojito avoid having a divide based on income? Seems like something that should be shouted from the mountaintops IRL about countries being rich while their people are poor. Not in a game. Might as well just make AoC a minecraft mod.
Being close to the character is annoying and makes the game un-fun for some, i believe this is a bad suggestion. Yeah zooming out makes it easier to see things, but not everything needs to be made to be as difficult as possible. Convenience/QoL can be more important at times.
I agree 100%, I discussed this in my video "The Most Important Video I'll Ever Make" and mentioned the same points you did. I really hope they listen to this.
If you feel disconnect then you can zoom in. If you feel cosmetics are the most important aspect of being zoomed in, then you can zoom in.
Watched your video and you make your opinions clear (some I agree with and some I don't), but just my 2 cents on your argumentation. If you frame your opinions such that 'real mmo players' will agree with you, otherwise they're 'COD players,' you're creating an unnecessary division in a space that's already rife with a range of silly to serious tribalisms. Just state your opinion and be ok with your opinion being your opinion.
Sounds like the only person who has a problem with an opinion is you. I listen to every person's opinion and I allow it to connect with me and give it an opportunity to change my heart and mind and grow my perspective as a person. My perspectives have been shaped by the people who have taken the time to debate, discuss and share with me.
Sounds like the only person who has a problem with an opinion is you. I listen to every person's opinion and I allow it to connect with me and give it an opportunity to change my heart and mind and grow my perspective as a person. My perspectives have been shaped by the people who have taken the time to debate, discuss and share with me.
Great! Help me understand where I express that I have 'a problem with an opinion'.
I absolutely refuse to play an MMO I can't zoom out really far in. It literally isn't an MMO if you can't zoom out and see the world you are in. A character in a MMO should be the tool you use to interact with the world. By having the camera shoved into the back of the character it quite literally eliminates 50% of the immersion of the game. When I'm out grinding kills bouncing around and slaughtering massive amounts of mobs I like to be able to move in any direction I want so I can't plan cool combos and choose what to target next as I learn effective movement and stuff. Also...I want to be able to see the entirety of my spells animation. There is nothing more boring then watching like...a mess of garbage that's just stuck right in front of you because you can't see what's happening around you. That's not an MMO at that point. It's far more visually and physically stimulating to be able to see damn near an entire zone as you manipulate what's going on inside of it. The whole argument about players having some disadvantage is ridiculous. It's not a disadvantage if everyone can zoom out...that's literally the whole dang point. We could just pull out the PlayStation and run around on some single player dull ass non immersive single player game if we wanted to be locked into the butt of our characters. Being able to control the camera gives control over how we view the world you've built for us. Please....please...please...please....don't take away max camera distance.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Sounds like you really want to be playing a Hack N Slash, rather than an RPG.
Slaughtering masses of mobs is not the immersion of an RPG.
It is what's expected for a Hack N Slash. Sure.
That being said. Steven likes his camera zoomed out significantly, so...
Watch videos of his gameplay and see if that suits you.
3rd person corner peaking in Planetside 1 was a bit broken, but that's a very different game to use as a comparison. I think you should have a fair amount of zooming out but really don't overdo it. They may need to test a few things out, but don't forget there's a reason why in some games characters have abilities to give the equivalent of zoomed out vision and that's because vision is information and information gives advantages. I just don't want 3rd person to be a few meters back. As for how far you can zoom in I want to be able to check out my characters gear and maybe even zoom up to their face when I get cool helmet gear.
SussurroMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You used to be able to get the camera really far out in WoW and play it sort've like a rts with click-to-move. They recently adjusted the fov down from where it had temporarily been adjusted up before according to some rather upset forum posts. If you are indeed playing competitively or at a very high skill level, then max zoom is too powerful to ignore. Evaluate what you want from the game and determine what compromises, if any, you will need to make for gameplay.
“Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.” - Terry Prachett, Reaper Man
The only thing it adds is the amount of additional mouse movement that I'll need to do in order to see the things I wanna see. Doesn't sound like a good addition to me.
The only thing it adds is the amount of additional mouse movement that I'll need to do in order to see the things I wanna see. Doesn't sound like a good addition to me.
Right so youve just said the answer and not made it there yourself. It makes many things viable specifically because you can't zoom out as if you have a drone following you. It adds to the gameplay.
Right so youve just said the answer and not made it there yourself. It makes many things viable specifically because you can't zoom out as if you have a drone following you. It adds to the gameplay.
Could you give any example of those "viable things"? Cause again, I see no benefit in me having limited vision.
Right so youve just said the answer and not made it there yourself. It makes many things viable specifically because you can't zoom out as if you have a drone following you. It adds to the gameplay.
Could you give any example of those "viable things"? Cause again, I see no benefit in me having limited vision.
In a game with even limited action controls, you have to choose between accuracy and time on target versus awareness. To me having a wide camera zoom doesn't fit a risk vs reward model in games with even soft tab. You are getting awareness, accuracy and time on target for 'free'.
You say it makes you swivel your camera more? That's the point. But you don't see why it costs something at first glance because you come from a heavy tab target game where this mattered less and was not a cost just an annoyance.
I agree with you that a full tab game should have a wide camera. Ashes on the other hand will have a lot of reasons why accuracy cannot be assumed with tab due to it's action and template laying options. I would therefore argue that among many other reasons this is a core argument for why a narrower camera view is better design for a game like Ashes.
You can definitely make arguments for why this trade off hinders certain play styles, but it's probably better you make those arguments rather than trying to convince people with an action combat background that a wide camera is strictly about comfortable play.
You can definitely make arguments for why this trade off hinders certain play styles, but it's probably better you make those arguments rather than trying to convince people with an action combat background that a wide camera is strictly about comfortable play.
I'd say that it limits design variety. If you camera is narrow even in tab mode, the devs can't create pve encounters that would require you to constantly monitor your surroundings while also engaging in a fight.
A super quick look through a GW2 guide video shows that they have a fairly distant camera coupled with a somewhat close action one, so this has been done before and, from what I know, worked just fine, because people tend to say that GW2 has the best hybrid combat.
So I really don't see why Intrepid couldn't either allow for both or have a smooth transition from a far zoom to a closer one when you switch between modes. And it's gonna be on the player to adjust to such a system.
It's a little bit wonky in Alpha One.
There are times when I end up zoomed out way more than I want... but it's so trivial I don't even remember what causes that.
It's easy enough to zoom in and it stays like that most of the time.
A minor tweak to camera zoom would be nice. But, it's far from a deal breaker.
Proper in game settings can easily control zoom and other things. Here's what SWTOR has and you can lock how far you're able to zoom if you want.
I think the zoom should lean towards the closer side. In a game like this where people will be ambushing caravans etc. you should have to be aware of your surroundings by having players on watch or scouting etc. Having a view of your character from essentially the top of a small mountain really negates any of this.
You won't really be ambushing caravans when you need to get close to it first to get within it's specified area, then opt-in to participate in the caravan to begin with, and then choose to play the attacker role. By that point they know you're there.
Caravans aren't free PvP zones you can just gank as they run by - they're moving opt-in open world battlegrounds. You have to join in first.
You can definitely make arguments for why this trade off hinders certain play styles, but it's probably better you make those arguments rather than trying to convince people with an action combat background that a wide camera is strictly about comfortable play.
I'd say that it limits design variety. If you camera is narrow even in tab mode, the devs can't create pve encounters that would require you to constantly monitor your surroundings while also engaging in a fight.
A super quick look through a GW2 guide video shows that they have a fairly distant camera coupled with a somewhat close action one, so this has been done before and, from what I know, worked just fine, because people tend to say that GW2 has the best hybrid combat.
So I really don't see why Intrepid couldn't either allow for both or have a smooth transition from a far zoom to a closer one when you switch between modes. And it's gonna be on the player to adjust to such a system.
How does it limit design variety in PvE? I don't see how this is at all relevant to PvE. If you are in PvE that requires that level of vigilance you require a party. If you have a party, communication resolves this. What it does do is make PvX a more tactical thing that requires vigilance. The constantly monitoring your surrounding at the cost of a little time on target or accuracy is a feature not a bug.
The difference between where this camera starts at t=67 and where it ends is the difference I am talking about. The place where it starts I feel would work fairly well in Ashes. The distance where it ends is where I imagine most people who play tab target are 'comfortable'.
GW2 is a fairly PvP oriented game although it's recently gotten some good PvE additions. So you are correct in using it as an example of it being fine for PvP. GW2 lacks the level of PvX and the transition between PvE and PvX that Ashes will have. Ashes is a lot MORE about controlling a specific area and being able to be tactically routed or ambushed.
This fluid transition between PvE and PvP is why I don't think it's reasonable to go 'just make it optional or make action combats camera smaller.' That will just lead people to people flickering between targeting modes which I'd argue is way more of a user experience discomfort than swiveling your camera occasionally. I think consistency in camera angle is vital to keeping the two modes balanced.
Steven already said: MAX ZOOM!!!! ain't got time for no casuals trying to dictate how I should play my MMORPGs....
If you want to play it zoomed in just do it, leave the rest of us that care for competitive pvp and pve play how we want: with max zoom.
It's not even just about being competitive, though. It's about what's comfortable. Zoom being in too close is just frankly irritating and unfun. It drives me nuts to look at a screen when everything is so close.
Also as a healer I'm used to being able to see more of the battlefield/more of the fight, what all my teammates are doing, etc. I'm sure tanks feel the same need and when you're zoomed in too close you feel like you can't do your job properly as a healer/tank.
This fluid transition between PvE and PvP is why I don't think it's reasonable to go 'just make it optional or make action combats camera smaller.' That will just lead people to people flickering between targeting modes which I'd argue is way more of a user experience discomfort than swiveling your camera occasionally. I think consistency in camera angle is vital to keeping the two modes balanced.
Imo options are always better. You want close camera - you got it. You want far camera - you got it. You want to switch between the 2 and is fine with the resulting whiplash - you got it.
And we have no real idea how exactly AoC's combat will be designed, cause we've barely seen any finalized combat and we sure as hell know nothing about the classes design. And even if Intrepid do go down a very particular design path, making the camera zoom optional now would just give them a wider spectrum of "where do we want all players to have their camera" later on, if they need it.
This fluid transition between PvE and PvP is why I don't think it's reasonable to go 'just make it optional or make action combats camera smaller.' That will just lead people to people flickering between targeting modes which I'd argue is way more of a user experience discomfort than swiveling your camera occasionally. I think consistency in camera angle is vital to keeping the two modes balanced.
Imo options are always better. You want close camera - you got it. You want far camera - you got it. You want to switch between the 2 and is fine with the resulting whiplash - you got it.
And we have no real idea how exactly AoC's combat will be designed, cause we've barely seen any finalized combat and we sure as hell know nothing about the classes design. And even if Intrepid do go down a very particular design path, making the camera zoom optional now would just give them a wider spectrum of "where do we want all players to have their camera" later on, if they need it.
But it's not about options. Options will be always present. It's about 'what's the maximum allowed advantage in our combat design'.
And ok if that's your stance 'we don't know enough about this to make judgements' that is both factual and correct, but it's also where the conversation basically ends so good chatting with you I guess.
'Here are these principles relative to the big picture combat and this is why I think one mode would be theoretically better.'
'We don't know what all the parameters are for your theory to be validated as correct or not so let's not discuss it from that perspective.'
'Ok Nikr you right. Have a good day.'
This fluid transition between PvE and PvP is why I don't think it's reasonable to go 'just make it optional or make action combats camera smaller.' That will just lead people to people flickering between targeting modes which I'd argue is way more of a user experience discomfort than swiveling your camera occasionally. I think consistency in camera angle is vital to keeping the two modes balanced.
Imo options are always better. You want close camera - you got it. You want far camera - you got it. You want to switch between the 2 and is fine with the resulting whiplash - you got it.
And we have no real idea how exactly AoC's combat will be designed, cause we've barely seen any finalized combat and we sure as hell know nothing about the classes design. And even if Intrepid do go down a very particular design path, making the camera zoom optional now would just give them a wider spectrum of "where do we want all players to have their camera" later on, if they need it.
But it's not about options. Options will be always present. It's about 'what's the maximum allowed advantage in our combat design'.
And ok if that's your stance 'we don't know enough about this to make judgements' that is both factual and correct, but it's also where the conversation basically ends so good chatting with you I guess.
'Here are these principles relative to the big picture combat and this is why I think one mode would be theoretically better.'
'We don't know what all the parameters are for your theory to be validated as correct or not so let's not discuss it from that perspective.'
'Ok Nikr you right. Have a good day.'
I disagree I think type of combat is entirely irrelevant. TERA and Black Desert have arguably the two best action combat systems of any MMO out there (both at launch also were popular for their PvP ) - TERA for more traditional trinity gameplay, and Black Desert for that more combo/fighting style. Both allow very maxed out cameras with reticules placed high above the character's head, centrally located on screen (and IIRC both games allowed you to adjust it's location, or at least TERA did). It worked really well in both of those games. Just because a game has action combat elements, that doesn't mean it needs a terrible zoomed in (and often also low to the ground) camera. That just limits what you can see and makes aiming unnecessarily harder. It doesn't add anything positive to the experience.
Now if you want to try to make the argument that ESO, New World, Crowfall, etc. have better PvP and/or overall better action combat and gameplay experiences because the camera view is different, I'd love to see anyone attempt that argument. Because I can't think of any MMO's with good combat that has a more zoomed in camera view.
Honestly this topic is more important than people give it credit for. Devs have to make a decision here. Do devs want to put competitive players into more metas? then longer max zoom out is the way to go for more awareness.
I would dare to say that majority of players thinks it feels better and more "immersive" being zoomed in closer to the character. The argument why having limited zoom out would be OK is that everyone will on equal footing as not anyone can zoom out way more than others and it would make the game more of a welcome challenge imo despite shotcalling etc will be harder, some see it as annoyance, some higher skillceiling.
Comments
Please cap zoom at a lower level before PvP events smaller scale than sieges become common, and avoid creating a divide between your players just because one of them can't afford the latest powerful rig, especially in the times we live in where getting any graphics card is difficult and expensive.
What people also fail to realize, and this has been proven in countless games over the last 20 years, is that players are situationally unaware regardless of zoom range. Just zooming out doesn't mean you have the advantage. You have to have the ability to turn your camera because not every player is going to charge you from the front, you have to visually acquire the target and you have to NOT tunnel vision on what your current task is. How many people I have murdered because they were farming, not paying attention or couldn't see me is staggering. Zoom range isn't going to automatically help players stay alive.
@GrilledCheeseMojito avoid having a divide based on income? Seems like something that should be shouted from the mountaintops IRL about countries being rich while their people are poor. Not in a game. Might as well just make AoC a minecraft mod.
Sounds like the only person who has a problem with an opinion is you. I listen to every person's opinion and I allow it to connect with me and give it an opportunity to change my heart and mind and grow my perspective as a person. My perspectives have been shaped by the people who have taken the time to debate, discuss and share with me.
Great! Help me understand where I express that I have 'a problem with an opinion'.
Slaughtering masses of mobs is not the immersion of an RPG.
It is what's expected for a Hack N Slash. Sure.
That being said. Steven likes his camera zoomed out significantly, so...
Watch videos of his gameplay and see if that suits you.
Steven already said: MAX ZOOM!!!! ain't got time for no casuals trying to dictate how I should play my MMORPGs....
If you want to play it zoomed in just do it, leave the rest of us that care for competitive pvp and pve play how we want: with max zoom.
What does caring about pvp or being casual have to do with camera zoom? Having the zoom out restricted adds to pvp.
x2
Right so youve just said the answer and not made it there yourself. It makes many things viable specifically because you can't zoom out as if you have a drone following you. It adds to the gameplay.
K?
In a game with even limited action controls, you have to choose between accuracy and time on target versus awareness. To me having a wide camera zoom doesn't fit a risk vs reward model in games with even soft tab. You are getting awareness, accuracy and time on target for 'free'.
You say it makes you swivel your camera more? That's the point. But you don't see why it costs something at first glance because you come from a heavy tab target game where this mattered less and was not a cost just an annoyance.
I agree with you that a full tab game should have a wide camera. Ashes on the other hand will have a lot of reasons why accuracy cannot be assumed with tab due to it's action and template laying options. I would therefore argue that among many other reasons this is a core argument for why a narrower camera view is better design for a game like Ashes.
You can definitely make arguments for why this trade off hinders certain play styles, but it's probably better you make those arguments rather than trying to convince people with an action combat background that a wide camera is strictly about comfortable play.
A super quick look through a GW2 guide video shows that they have a fairly distant camera coupled with a somewhat close action one, so this has been done before and, from what I know, worked just fine, because people tend to say that GW2 has the best hybrid combat.
So I really don't see why Intrepid couldn't either allow for both or have a smooth transition from a far zoom to a closer one when you switch between modes. And it's gonna be on the player to adjust to such a system.
Proper in game settings can easily control zoom and other things. Here's what SWTOR has and you can lock how far you're able to zoom if you want.
You won't really be ambushing caravans when you need to get close to it first to get within it's specified area, then opt-in to participate in the caravan to begin with, and then choose to play the attacker role. By that point they know you're there.
Caravans aren't free PvP zones you can just gank as they run by - they're moving opt-in open world battlegrounds. You have to join in first.
How does it limit design variety in PvE? I don't see how this is at all relevant to PvE. If you are in PvE that requires that level of vigilance you require a party. If you have a party, communication resolves this. What it does do is make PvX a more tactical thing that requires vigilance. The constantly monitoring your surrounding at the cost of a little time on target or accuracy is a feature not a bug.
Here is a link for GW2 camera distance variation for those who don't want to look it up themselves and are unfamiliar.
The difference between where this camera starts at t=67 and where it ends is the difference I am talking about. The place where it starts I feel would work fairly well in Ashes. The distance where it ends is where I imagine most people who play tab target are 'comfortable'.
GW2 is a fairly PvP oriented game although it's recently gotten some good PvE additions. So you are correct in using it as an example of it being fine for PvP. GW2 lacks the level of PvX and the transition between PvE and PvX that Ashes will have. Ashes is a lot MORE about controlling a specific area and being able to be tactically routed or ambushed.
This fluid transition between PvE and PvP is why I don't think it's reasonable to go 'just make it optional or make action combats camera smaller.' That will just lead people to people flickering between targeting modes which I'd argue is way more of a user experience discomfort than swiveling your camera occasionally. I think consistency in camera angle is vital to keeping the two modes balanced.
It's not even just about being competitive, though. It's about what's comfortable. Zoom being in too close is just frankly irritating and unfun. It drives me nuts to look at a screen when everything is so close.
Also as a healer I'm used to being able to see more of the battlefield/more of the fight, what all my teammates are doing, etc. I'm sure tanks feel the same need and when you're zoomed in too close you feel like you can't do your job properly as a healer/tank.
And we have no real idea how exactly AoC's combat will be designed, cause we've barely seen any finalized combat and we sure as hell know nothing about the classes design. And even if Intrepid do go down a very particular design path, making the camera zoom optional now would just give them a wider spectrum of "where do we want all players to have their camera" later on, if they need it.
But it's not about options. Options will be always present. It's about 'what's the maximum allowed advantage in our combat design'.
And ok if that's your stance 'we don't know enough about this to make judgements' that is both factual and correct, but it's also where the conversation basically ends so good chatting with you I guess.
'Here are these principles relative to the big picture combat and this is why I think one mode would be theoretically better.'
'We don't know what all the parameters are for your theory to be validated as correct or not so let's not discuss it from that perspective.'
'Ok Nikr you right. Have a good day.'
I disagree I think type of combat is entirely irrelevant. TERA and Black Desert have arguably the two best action combat systems of any MMO out there (both at launch also were popular for their PvP ) - TERA for more traditional trinity gameplay, and Black Desert for that more combo/fighting style. Both allow very maxed out cameras with reticules placed high above the character's head, centrally located on screen (and IIRC both games allowed you to adjust it's location, or at least TERA did). It worked really well in both of those games. Just because a game has action combat elements, that doesn't mean it needs a terrible zoomed in (and often also low to the ground) camera. That just limits what you can see and makes aiming unnecessarily harder. It doesn't add anything positive to the experience.
Now if you want to try to make the argument that ESO, New World, Crowfall, etc. have better PvP and/or overall better action combat and gameplay experiences because the camera view is different, I'd love to see anyone attempt that argument. Because I can't think of any MMO's with good combat that has a more zoomed in camera view.
I would dare to say that majority of players thinks it feels better and more "immersive" being zoomed in closer to the character. The argument why having limited zoom out would be OK is that everyone will on equal footing as not anyone can zoom out way more than others and it would make the game more of a welcome challenge imo despite shotcalling etc will be harder, some see it as annoyance, some higher skillceiling.