Add First person shooter

[ominumi]

4 hours ago, Pakaku said:

Not sure what your point is, because this game has all of that as well. If WF’s movement isn’t giving you motion sickness, then I strongly doubt it would in first person.

I actually do get motion sickness from warframe just by moving. It's the micro shuttering that mostly cause it. It'll be worse in first person view. All because it's more noticeable. Using Titania doesn't cause micro shuttering while moving for some unknown reason. Even shooting her Dex Pixia won't jiggle the screen with recoil.

[Zakkhar]

8 hours ago, ominumi said:

I actually do get motion sickness from warframe just by moving. It's the micro shuttering that mostly cause it.

Do you have motion blur and camera shake disabled?

[ominumi]

6 hours ago, Zakkhar said:

Do you have motion blur and camera shake disabled?

Yeah everything that can induce motion sickness is off. I never notice micro shuttering before until my nephew pointed it out. Now I can't unsee it. Ignorance is a blessing.

[HunterDigi]

On 2024-09-17 at 4:01 PM, dwqrf said:

But adding a real FPS option would take such amount of time and ressources for just being a option most people would disable, it woulnd't be profitable.

You can't do it with just slapping the camera on the chest of the Warframe, you also have to remake ALL weapons skins (and hands) and animations (firing, alt firing, switching, reloading) to be compatible with the first person view.

And that's just the range weapons, now you have to do that with all melee stances and combo to find ways to compute the feelings of the moves while keeping the camera logically centered on your character position and cursor view.

And we aren't even talking about jump, double jump, dodge roll, back/side rolls, ballistic jump, wall jump, slams, and so on.

So if you want a real FPS, you can't just press a magic button and make it happen.

Or maybe you just want the same generic FPS view snipers feature, with nothing at all on your screen except your cursor, which is quite limited if you only play it, not even being able to identify which weapon you hold, and losing quite a lot of informations from surroundings. And that's such a bland feature people would ask for more and more, as it would be a broken and buggy message, making a fluid TPS experience actually unreadable as FPS.

So yes, adding a real FPS view would take so much effort that the rest of the developping content would take a big hit. It affects everyone.

TL;DR for below: it doesn't have to take much effort by not showing arms or lower body, therefore it shouldn't affect everyone.

 

I very much doubt these people have the capacity to think that far ahead (not talking about dwqrf here of course, see what they replied to).
One can only see people as toxic if they jump to being rude without providing any reasoning or constructive criticism... because then we'd have a conversation, and they don't want a conversation, they want to impose their will like it's their right.

Now onto what you said, since you actually wrote what the issues are we can have a conversation.

The first thing I'm noticing is that you're thinking with the warframe animations, that's the wrong approach, the frame's animations would have zero bearing on an FP camera.

So all the flips, rolls and whatever frame does are not going to be relevant to the camera. Melee would indeed be an issue to make good, but it doesn't need time spent on it IMO, people would mostly want FP for the shooting part. And if this camera has a hotkey to toggle then people can quickly swap between depending on preference.

Then showing arms and lower body is 99% of the work with how many things this game has, that's the thing this feature does not need in order to function as a FP camera.

That's why I made a topic a while ago to suggest an oldschool FP camera, just a gun glued to your face, you look down you see no body... simple. IIRC Unreal Tournament (the one DE worked on) was exactly like that.

(Some toxic responses there too, some ironically claim the addition of a camera perspective would attract toxic people...)

Motion sickness is indeed an issue and it's exagerrated:
- From personal experience both camera types can induce spatial confusion, the environment, lighting and effects play a bigger role... even how you sit in the real world would affect it, however if seeing the character helps then weapon model should too.
- Millions of people play FP games, and same people likely play other camera perspectives too including WF, it's unfounded to claim anything about player camera preference when there's only one camera available.
- Remember that it's extra option, 3rd person isn't going away so any edge case issues and preferences don't apply to the FP camera.
- Game has a motion HUD that potentially induces motion sickness, it's not that out there to have things that can induce it but can be ignored if it does... however, if they're reading stats on that being off and assume it's motion sickness then they got it wrong, I turn it off too but not because of motion sickness, it's because I prefer to not look around for the info I need on the HUD while I'm being shot at and also I have a 60hz IPS monitor so it can get smeary when it moves.

The main issue with doing this feature are the people's preconceptions about it and especially devs, I've seen the reaction from DE leads on this, they're defaulting to the very polished version of today's FPS games where most of the work goes into the animations for lower body and hands... but none of that is necessary! You can see the frame and all its animation glory in 3rd person if you want to, but sometimes I just want to see the world in front of me... you know, like we normally do as humans :P Also first person would show the weapon more, some have such nice looks and are hidden away in front of you or by depth of field.

I really do hope that if a dev stumbles on my thread they read it through and not jump to conclusions on what I'm asking for and dismiss it based on those :( I don't really blame them if they did, it's how humans work... and I'm guilty of it too, as a programmer I've made mods over the years for various games and I too default to "not doing it" when reading someone's suggestion especially if I'm tired at that particular moment. I have to actively try to read it and imagine the usefulness of it... also people suggest the wildest things at times =)

 

Lastly, the thing I'm suggesting in my topic would only need 1 programmer, no art, no animations, how long they'd take is of course up to what they know about the relevant systems and how complicated their inner processes are, however I imagine it's not as much as adding a new game mode (especially with testing it as FP camera would only need solo testing while a game mode needs multiple players to test sync and etc).

Edited September 19 by HunterDigi
added TLDR

[dwqrf]

Il y a 4 heures, HunterDigi a dit :

TL;DR for below: it doesn't have to take much effort by not showing arms or lower body, therefore it shouldn't affect everyone.

 

I very much doubt these people have the capacity to think that far ahead (not talking about dwqrf here of course, see what they replied to).
One can only see people as toxic if they jump to being rude without providing any reasoning or constructive criticism... because then we'd have a conversation, and they don't want a conversation, they want to impose their will like it's their right.

Now onto what you said, since you actually wrote what the issues are we can have a conversation.

The first thing I'm noticing is that you're thinking with the warframe animations, that's the wrong approach, the frame's animations would have zero bearing on an FP camera.

So all the flips, rolls and whatever frame does are not going to be relevant to the camera. Melee would indeed be an issue to make good, but it doesn't need time spent on it IMO, people would mostly want FP for the shooting part. And if this camera has a hotkey to toggle then people can quickly swap between depending on preference.

Then showing arms and lower body is 99% of the work with how many things this game has, that's the thing this feature does not need in order to function as a FP camera.

That's why I made a topic a while ago to suggest an oldschool FP camera, just a gun glued to your face, you look down you see no body... simple. IIRC Unreal Tournament (the one DE worked on) was exactly like that.

(Some toxic responses there too, some ironically claim the addition of a camera perspective would attract toxic people...)

Motion sickness is indeed an issue and it's exagerrated:
- From personal experience both camera types can induce spatial confusion, the environment, lighting and effects play a bigger role... even how you sit in the real world would affect it, however if seeing the character helps then weapon model should too.
- Millions of people play FP games, and same people likely play other camera perspectives too including WF, it's unfounded to claim anything about player camera preference when there's only one camera available.
- Remember that it's extra option, 3rd person isn't going away so any edge case issues and preferences don't apply to the FP camera.
- Game has a motion HUD that potentially induces motion sickness, it's not that out there to have things that can induce it but can be ignored if it does... however, if they're reading stats on that being off and assume it's motion sickness then they got it wrong, I turn it off too but not because of motion sickness, it's because I prefer to not look around for the info I need on the HUD while I'm being shot at and also I have a 60hz IPS monitor so it can get smeary when it moves.

The main issue with doing this feature are the people's preconceptions about it and especially devs, I've seen the reaction from DE leads on this, they're defaulting to the very polished version of today's FPS games where most of the work goes into the animations for lower body and hands... but none of that is necessary! You can see the frame and all its animation glory in 3rd person if you want to, but sometimes I just want to see the world in front of me... you know, like we normally do as humans :P Also first person would show the weapon more, some have such nice looks and are hidden away in front of you or by depth of field.

I really do hope that if a dev stumbles on my thread they read it through and not jump to conclusions on what I'm asking for and dismiss it based on those :( I don't really blame them if they did, it's how humans work... and I'm guilty of it too, as a programmer I've made mods over the years for various games and I too default to "not doing it" when reading someone's suggestion especially if I'm tired at that particular moment. I have to actively try to read it and imagine the usefulness of it... also people suggest the wildest things at times =)

 

Lastly, the thing I'm suggesting in my topic would only need 1 programmer, no art, no animations, how long they'd take is of course up to what they know about the relevant systems and how complicated their inner processes are, however I imagine it's not as much as adding a new game mode (especially with testing it as FP camera would only need solo testing while a game mode needs multiple players to test sync and etc).

You can already play this Warframe FPS by playing snipers (Real FPS) or playing invisible Warframes without translucence (player FPS).

Works wonders. 

Now you could just argue to have an option to disable visually your non-invisible frame on screen and tada !

[HunterDigi]

9 hours ago, dwqrf said:

You can already play this Warframe FPS by playing snipers (Real FPS) or playing invisible Warframes without translucence (player FPS).

Works wonders. 

Now you could just argue to have an option to disable visually your non-invisible frame on screen and tada !

I really hope you're joking. The sniper scope is the worst possible camera to use for firstperson, primarily because of the low FOV and lack of gun model that it has high chance to proc motion sickness 😄 Also it's still 3rd person, look straight down and rotate, you'll see that your view is still off to the side.

[dwqrf]

il y a 3 minutes, HunterDigi a dit :

I really hope you're joking. The sniper scope is the worst possible camera to use for firstperson, primarily because of the low FOV and lack of gun model that it has high chance to proc motion sickness 😄 Also it's still 3rd person, look straight down and rotate, you'll see that your view is still off to the side.

That's the best WF can do 🤷‍♂️

[3xt1inct]

On 2024-09-15 at 9:00 PM, ----o---- said:

Add First person shooter.

What you think?

I'dd like to add a parallel to GTA V that introduced first person on ps4 and xbox one, noone used it unless it was forced, because it clashed with the movement system, the lighting was weird in first person and there were a few first person exclusive bugs.

the movement system is the crux of warframe, adding first person would clash heavily with bullet jumping, someone mentioned camera not following the bullet jump, but that would break "the experience" for the people that would like first person view. Secondly it would ruin the satisfaction of the movement system.

first person takes a lot more to implement than most people think, it requires a full rerendering of the gametiles and assets (else you have clashing polygons and stuff will look weird). What is also an important factor is that the Evolution engine (DE's own engine) is optimized for 3rd person.

Introducing first person is the same caliber of update WITW or new war were. Seeing as it would not per se add playable content and thus not count towards player retention, i doubt they would ever find time to build and introduce it, over adding more playable content and quests.

On 2024-09-15 at 9:00 PM, ----o---- said:

Add First person shooter.

What you think?

I'dd like to add a parallel to GTA V that introduced first person on ps4 and xbox one, noone used it unless it was forced, because it clashed with the movement system, the lighting was weird in first person and there were a few first person exclusive bugs.

the movement system is the crux of warframe, adding first person would clash heavily with bullet jumping, someone mentioned camera not following the bullet jump, but that would break "the experience" for the people that would like first person view. Secondly it would ruin the satisfaction of the movement system.

first person takes a lot more to implement than most people think, it requires a full rerendering of the gametiles and assets (else you have clashing polygons and stuff will look weird). What is also an important factor is that the Evolution engine (DE's own engine) is optimized for 3rd person.

Introducing first person is the same caliber of update WITW or new war were. Seeing as it would not per se add playable content and thus not count towards player retention, i doubt they would ever find time to build and introduce it, over adding more playable content and quests.

[Quest]

some of these replies are a little harsh, you can just say no, "leave" is unnecessary

i think this would be cool as an option in settings

[Nexecute]

Always have and always will want a first-person mode. Would be incredible.

[HunterDigi]

On 2024-09-19 at 9:50 PM, dwqrf said:

That's the best WF can do 🤷‍♂️

They made it run 2 camera perspectives at the same time, I'm sure they'll do fine in moving the one camera to be attached to the character pivot instead of swinging around away from them... or who knows, I've seen devs that needlessly complicate things before, but also the fact that I've seen them complicate things they did something great: they replied. Which lead to clarifying the misunderstanding and I think the feature was even implemented, because it was much simpler than what the dev thought the player asked for. But I don't think it's realistic for devs to speak directly in a larger game because people will crucify devs for saying pretty much anything xD I just hope they read everything so they have all the info, but it sucks sending messages into the void and not getting any feedback on what was understood, because often things get declined purely on misunderstandings.

 

On 2024-09-20 at 12:32 AM, 3xt1inct said:

I'dd like to add a parallel to GTA V that introduced first person on ps4 and xbox one, noone used it unless it was forced, because it clashed with the movement system, the lighting was weird in first person and there were a few first person exclusive bugs.

the movement system is the crux of warframe, adding first person would clash heavily with bullet jumping, someone mentioned camera not following the bullet jump, but that would break "the experience" for the people that would like first person view. Secondly it would ruin the satisfaction of the movement system.

In WF you can do all these all over the place without rotating the camera, why would that need to change for FP?
Bullet jumping, double jumping and rolling should indeed not affect the camera, and I very much doubt it'll affect the experience when the whole experience is being in that first person perspective, and the speed changes will be noticeable.

Also they don't have to make sink so much time into it anyway, it can be an experimental feature with only a proper FP camera.

 

On 2024-09-20 at 12:32 AM, 3xt1inct said:

first person takes a lot more to implement than most people think, it requires a full rerendering of the gametiles and assets (else you have clashing polygons and stuff will look weird). What is also an important factor is that the Evolution engine (DE's own engine) is optimized for 3rd person.

Introducing first person is the same caliber of update WITW or new war were. Seeing as it would not per se add playable content and thus not count towards player retention, i doubt they would ever find time to build and introduce it, over adding more playable content and quests.

That first paragraph I have no idea what you're talking about and I think a lot of people would agree that you're pulling things out of thin air there...

Engine doesn't matter, they can place the camera wherever they want as shown by the decoration camera, the camera gear item and all the in-world cinematics.

The engine is more relevant if it's optimized to not see much of the world like in a top-down camera. Or if you want VR or picture-in-picture, then the engine is a roadblock, but in this case from similar perspectives it's really not a concern, the engine is optimized to see everything so 3rd, 1st and even 2nd camera perspectives can work (not that anyone would want that, maybe as a mechanic in a creepy quest where you see from an enemy perspective following you while you have normal control of your character).

And while yes it would take an insane amount of animation work to make proper firstperson hands and body animations, that's like 5% of the experience. it's utterly unnecessary to do any of that when the core experience is the camera itself which only requires one programmer, and also why spend needless time on a feature you're not sure how many will use anyway, the "quick and dirty" version should contain the essentials:
- configurable FOV, so many FPS games have insanely low FOV that is motion-sick-inducing|
- ignore the frame, hide it and don't attach anything to it! a proper FPS camera is its own thing, it has to only be offset from the character pivot (which is likely at their feet, or at their waist), then crouching and sliding would lower camera relative to that just to know you're doing the thing.
- attach the weapon only (no hands) to the camera, maybe make it bob around a bit but it really does not matter either way.
And you got yourself a classic FPS game like ones from around the year 2000... if only WF had an update themed around that era :P

This will also serve to see all the edge cases it needs, like needing to do something about being ragdolled, that for example would switch temporarily switch to 3rd person. But not for knockdown, it'll be too frequent and become more annoying than it is.

[Toritte]

On 2024-09-20 at 7:53 AM, Quest said:

i think this would be cool as an option in settings

I agree, they are overreacting it too much, if they could add it when they have a free time, it would be really nice.

[3xt1inct]

16 hours ago, HunterDigi said:

In WF you can do all these all over the place without rotating the camera, why would that need to change for FP?
Bullet jumping, double jumping and rolling should indeed not affect the camera, and I very much doubt it'll affect the experience when the whole experience is being in that first person perspective, and the speed changes will be noticeable.

Also they don't have to make sink so much time into it anyway, it can be an experimental feature with only a proper FP camera.

Well let's have a look shall we, first of all, a first person camera that doesn't follow head movement is not a first person camera, but a hybrid first person camera. People asking for FP likely would like to increase the immersion of the game and some may dislike the camera not moving on bullet jump, some may get severly motion sick due to the camera moving, also a toggle? The answer to your first question was already in the paragraph you responded to by the way.

Not moving camera on movement breaks the immersion for most FP advocates, plus it adds an extra layer of needed coding, to detect actions, decouple camera etc.

Problem with time is that introducing FP even as an experimental feature would take a lot of time, i'll explain why by replying to your second paragraph, but for example, GTA V was in development for 5 years and had the FPS feature in mind from about 4 years before the release of the game in 2013, it then took another year for Rockstar to release the First Person mode in 2014, yes it takes that long to develop a game where people can switch between FP and 3P.

16 hours ago, HunterDigi said:

On 2024-09-19 at 11:32 PM, 3xt1inct said:

first person takes a lot more to implement than most people think, it requires a full rerendering of the gametiles and assets (else you have clashing polygons and stuff will look weird). What is also an important factor is that the Evolution engine (DE's own engine) is optimized for 3rd person.

Introducing first person is the same caliber of update WITW or new war were. Seeing as it would not per se add playable content and thus not count towards player retention, i doubt they would ever find time to build and introduce it, over adding more playable content and quests.

That first paragraph I have no idea what you're talking about and I think a lot of people would agree that you're pulling things out of thin air there...

Engine doesn't matter, they can place the camera wherever they want as shown by the decoration camera, the camera gear item and all the in-world cinematics.

The engine is more relevant if it's optimized to not see much of the world like in a top-down camera. Or if you want VR or picture-in-picture, then the engine is a roadblock, but in this case from similar perspectives it's really not a concern, the engine is optimized to see everything so 3rd, 1st and even 2nd camera perspectives can work (not that anyone would want that, maybe as a mechanic in a creepy quest where you see from an enemy perspective following you while you have normal control of your character).

 

Ironically if you had any idea of the scope of what you propose to happen, you would know what I mean by polygons and renderings. Brief summary, Polygons are subtextures that every graphical 3d model is made up of (platforms, warframes, weapons,...), the more polygons, the more detailed the model, the harder the game is to render, the more demanding the game is towards the graphics card. Right now all those polygons are made in such a way that they look good for 3rd person view. Look I get that sometimes you do not immediately understand something, but that is no reason to start accusing people of making things up, google "polygons computer graphics", before starting to type, that way you prevent looking bad and projecting that on other people that you took word for. Computer graphics are a practical example of Linear Algebra, so I suggest you brush up on that if you want to discuss technical details further.

If you want to introduce a FP, all those polygons and textures need to be adapted (rerendered) to that first person view, else you will get very weird angles, mangled textures, lots and lots of visual bugs, the list goes on. DE's own engine (the evolution engine) is optimized for 3rd person view in terms of lighting and texture/model rendering. No offense, but Decoration mode and Captura already have weird lighting issues and visual clashes, plus a free moving camera indeed is not that hard to build. The problem comes when that camera has to be fixed to a point on a model, when every model is different and was not designed with first person in mind. To give some examples of possible problems: if they use a mock model inside the warframe to fix the camera to, they would have to make the "face" of the frame invisible, which would be an exception due to it needing to be rendered for 3P users but not for FP users, if they use a fixed point on the model of the warframe itself it would look different for every warframe, both aforementioned solutions would be affected by interference of equiped cosmetics, like ephemeras etc, how are they gonna deal with that.... all things that have to be solved in an engine that does not have the tools to do it, due to being developped for non first person camera angles. So first they would need to append the engine with the features to do it and then build it, that is where the engine aspect is important. FP and 3P views are much different, simply because FP is much 

Not to mention they would need to make a first person view of every single weapon in the game, as well as make them look decent while aim gliding (aim gliding with a glaive would basically make you blind in FP), jumping, running, etc. I presume you want to have a FP system akin to CS, where you do have crosshairs but no reticle, else there is more to add, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Well in modern times, quite frankly any computer can make the calculations needed to linearly transform an image to another POV, but warframe runs p2p and has crossplay between consoles and pc's. This means the host is providing the data and graphics for the map displayed on the clients side, if a client is running FP while host runs 3P, what machine will be responsible for handling the linear transformation calculations (which are quite huge matrices considering every single polygon has to be transformed)? What machine calculates the lighting for the different gamestate? and many more important decisions like these would need to be made. This is where a lot of technical difficulties arise and a lot of testing is needed, which takes heaps of time, before everything would work smoothly.

The main limitation for a FP is the Peer to peer system and its inability to be flexible in this regard, because it has to take into account that it's weakest member also has to be able to provide sufficient data for clients to run on and asking a host machine to calculate and render the map, enemies, weapons and pickups 2x is a lot of strain put on that host's electronics and frankly impossible for any console, the host would lose game experience due to lowered performance of their own machine, something that was already observed when Plains of Eidolon was released (and this was pc-only matchmaking).

Unfortunately DE chose to run a peer to peer system and crossplay, meaning FP is not a technical possibility due to not everyone owning a pc that is capable of workload needed to be host to two data rendered maps. If you can find me a game with a peer 2 peer system, with both first person and 3P view on multiplayer at the same time and more than 20 moving 3d models active, i'll concede possibility, but it would still take a long time.

If the game relied on a centralized (per region) server to host its game instances, I would agree to FP for warframe being a possibility, but that would take a lot of time to develop/test and introduce properly, but this is simply not the case.

[HunterDigi]

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

Well let's have a look shall we, first of all, a first person camera that doesn't follow head movement is not a first person camera, but a hybrid first person camera. People asking for FP likely would like to increase the immersion of the game and some may dislike the camera not moving on bullet jump, some may get severly motion sick due to the camera moving, also a toggle? The answer to your first question was already in the paragraph you responded to by the way.

I don't know what FPS games you've played but vast majority of them are a rigid stick with some screen wobbling, what the character model seen by others does (specifically their head) has no corelation to the first person camera. And no that doesn't answer my question, and I really believe the movement can stay as it is except for a few specific cases that can be tailored afterwards.

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

Not moving camera on movement breaks the immersion for most FP advocates, plus it adds an extra layer of needed coding, to detect actions, decouple camera etc.

Problem with time is that introducing FP even as an experimental feature would take a lot of time, i'll explain why by replying to your second paragraph, but for example, GTA V was in development for 5 years and had the FPS feature in mind from about 4 years before the release of the game in 2013, it then took another year for Rockstar to release the First Person mode in 2014, yes it takes that long to develop a game where people can switch between FP and 3P.

Changing its height from crouch and slide is all it needs for now. If they feel like polishing it some more it can get view bobbing for various contexts.

Not pitching or rolling the view with the special moves is not really going to break any immersion, I don't care for it and neither did the plethora of games where their character rolls from various moves... do YOU want those? Say so and they'll probably add it but as an option because it's gonna be something too frequent, compared to Mirror's Edge for example.

You don't know what GTA5 devs worked on during that time, so you can't allocate all the time they spent on it being for the firstperson feature. It's all about priorities, it can take literal years for someone to do a single line change, simply because nobody was assigned to do it.
Also they did it properly wtith full body first person animations, which again not something I'm asking for.

 

---

 

For the rendering... I think you're trying to say that the models and textures are low quality therefore being able to look at them closer would show how low quality they are, yes?

 That's to be expected for being closer, which you can do with aiming or scoping, so I don't really see the issue... or why that gigantic workload is even relevant to a request for a simple camera that, as I said, is do-able by a single programmer...

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

Decoration mode and Captura already have weird lighting issues and visual clashes

I'd like to see these issues in screenshot or ideally video form so I can understand what you're talking about.

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

The problem comes when that camera has to be fixed to a point on a model, when every model is different and was not designed with first person in mind. To give some examples of possible problems: if they use a mock model inside the warframe to fix the camera to, they would have to make the "face" of the frame invisible, which would be an exception due to it needing to be rendered for 3P users but not for FP users, if they use a fixed point on the model of the warframe itself it would look different for every warframe, both aforementioned solutions would be affected by interference of equiped cosmetics, like ephemeras etc, how are they gonna deal with that...

No FPS game does this, the model you see on the outside has no impact on the first person camera, that's pointless complexity to have to deal with animations being smooth enough to not jerk the camera when you can just make the camera independent of animations.

And again the (war)frame model would not be visible, including any cosmetics... did you even read my post?

Differences in rendering 3rd vs 1st are not relevant to multiplayer if that's what you're getting at, your frame can be invisible for you and other people still see you normally.

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

Not to mention they would need to make a first person view of every single weapon in the game...

It doesn't.

All weapons would have a bone/empty/data-thing that specifies where the weapon connects to the character's hand, so you have an offset to the right and down from the camera and you spawn the weapon at that position, this will work for vast majority of guns, and ones that need tweaking, well, it'll be an offset for that specific gun, nothing crazy.

For melee it's similar, and could get a rotate per click just to see it doing something, but really that's a side-quest.

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

...as well as make them look decent while aim gliding (aim gliding with a glaive would basically make you blind in FP), jumping, running, etc. I presume you want to have a FP system akin to CS, where you do have crosshairs but no reticle, else there is more to add, but correct me if I'm wrong.

How is aim gliding is relevant? I'm not expecting aim-down-sights if that's what you mean, nor do I see how jumping and runnig are relevant...
If by crosshair vs reticle you mean the way the targetting graphic looks, that's also not relevant, especially when it's easier in FPS games.
In 3rd person games is where the crosshair/reticle is complicated if you want to shoot from the character's position... in WF however you're shooting from the camera but it's projected forward to where the frame is, it's a good workaround to not be annoyed by your rounds hitting stuff, because still with 3rd person cameras we're used to things working like in first person :)

 

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

plus a free moving camera indeed is not that hard to build.

And same for parenting it to the character (or heck even hackingly move it to follow character every frame, anything that works), then rotating it locally with look up/down inputs, lower the offset on crouch and a bit more for slide, detach weapon entity and parent it to the camera with an offset... and voilla, the thing I'm asking for (and FOV is important to be able to reach high values, I don't remember what the options menu offers but I think up to 100 which is fine for now).

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

So first they would need to append the engine with the features to do it and then build it, that is where the engine aspect is important. FP and 3P views are much different, simply because FP is much 

That's implementation detail and entirely up to the devs that know how the engine works, you don't need to concern yourself, you only need to see that the engine supports all features the firstperson camera requires, like parenting entities to other entities, moving the camera freely, hiding entities/models... basic stuff that pretty much any 3D engine supports, and this one does too because they're doing all that and more.

Also they're doing code changes to the game pretty much every major version (when they need to recertify on consoles), that's not really a roadblock to this simple thing, they're doing much more complex stuff, like getting data back from the renderer to know which entities have been rendered even a pixel of, that's the kind of thing you need to mess with the engine if it didn't have support for... moving the camera is a basic feature.

 

 

The rest are really outlandish things, I don't even...

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

Well in modern times, quite frankly any computer can make the calculations needed to linearly transform an image to another POV, but warframe runs p2p and has crossplay between consoles and pc's. This means the host is providing the data and graphics for the map displayed on the clients side...

Graphics as in, what exactly? I hope you don't mean any polygons or textures...

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

...if a client is running FP while host runs 3P, what machine will be responsible for handling the linear transformation calculations (which are quite huge matrices considering every single polygon has to be transformed)? What machine calculates the lighting for the different gamestate?

The local machine... as it does in literally every game.

 

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

...and many more important decisions like these would need to be made. This is where a lot of technical difficulties arise and a lot of testing is needed, which takes heaps of time, before everything would work smoothly.

The host decides gameplay-relevant physics, AI decisions and game state like mission progress, etc... There's no difficulties, you're making them up.

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

If you want to introduce a FP, all those polygons and textures need to be adapted (rerendered) to that first person view, else you will get very weird angles, mangled textures, lots and lots of visual bugs,

 

They don't, weird angles and mangled texture would happen regardless of camera, you can bring 3rd person camera close to things too... so please show me these mangled textures via captura camera that don't also show mangled with 3rd person (because the renderer is accurate, if it's mangled then the UV maps are mangled).

No polygons need to be touched in any way, leave the polygons be!

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

DE's own engine (the evolution engine) is optimized for 3rd person view in terms of lighting and texture/model rendering.

It's one thing to talk about an eye-in-the-sky optimized engine that would have performance issues and draw distance limits when brought to ground level... but 1st person and 3rd person are basically the same thing in terms of what the engine cares about, it's a rendering engine like any other that can render from any angle and almost any distance (near and far culling).

 

On 2024-09-29 at 4:17 AM, 3xt1inct said:

The main limitation for a FP is the Peer to peer system and its inability to be flexible in this regard, because it has to take into account that it's weakest member also has to be able to provide sufficient data for clients to run on and asking a host machine to calculate and render the map, enemies, weapons and pickups 2x is a lot of strain put on that host's electronics and frankly impossible for any console, the host would lose game experience due to lowered performance of their own machine, something that was already observed when Plains of Eidolon was released (and this was pc-only matchmaking).

Unfortunately DE chose to run a peer to peer system and crossplay, meaning FP is not a technical possibility due to not everyone owning a pc that is capable of workload needed to be host to two data rendered maps. If you can find me a game with a peer 2 peer system, with both first person and 3P view on multiplayer at the same time and more than 20 moving 3d models active, i'll concede possibility, but it would still take a long time.

If the game relied on a centralized (per region) server to host its game instances, I would agree to FP for warframe being a possibility, but that would take a lot of time to develop/test and introduce properly, but this is simply not the case.

 

Maybe I should seek help myself with spending all this time reading this xD

I leave you something to ponder for these statements, how much data would it be to send all those polygons from the host to the clients? Remember, they need to be transformed every. single. frame, at least that we agree on :P

[3xt1inct]

12 hours ago, HunterDigi said:

 

I don't know what FPS games you've played but vast majority of them are a rigid stick with some screen wobbling, what the character model seen by others does (specifically their head) has no corelation to the first person camera. And no that doesn't answer my question, and I really believe the movement can stay as it is except for a few specific cases that can be tailored afterwards.

 

Changing its height from crouch and slide is all it needs for now. If they feel like polishing it some more it can get view bobbing for various contexts.

Not pitching or rolling the view with the special moves is not really going to break any immersion, I don't care for it and neither did the plethora of games where their character rolls from various moves... do YOU want those? Say so and they'll probably add it but as an option because it's gonna be something too frequent, compared to Mirror's Edge for example.

You don't know what GTA5 devs worked on during that time, so you can't allocate all the time they spent on it being for the firstperson feature. It's all about priorities, it can take literal years for someone to do a single line change, simply because nobody was assigned to do it.
Also they did it properly wtith full body first person animations, which again not something I'm asking for.

 

---

 

For the rendering... I think you're trying to say that the models and textures are low quality therefore being able to look at them closer would show how low quality they are, yes?

 That's to be expected for being closer, which you can do with aiming or scoping, so I don't really see the issue... or why that gigantic workload is even relevant to a request for a simple camera that, as I said, is do-able by a single programmer...

 

I'd like to see these issues in screenshot or ideally video form so I can understand what you're talking about.

 

No FPS game does this, the model you see on the outside has no impact on the first person camera, that's pointless complexity to have to deal with animations being smooth enough to not jerk the camera when you can just make the camera independent of animations.

And again the (war)frame model would not be visible, including any cosmetics... did you even read my post?

Differences in rendering 3rd vs 1st are not relevant to multiplayer if that's what you're getting at, your frame can be invisible for you and other people still see you normally.

 

It doesn't.

All weapons would have a bone/empty/data-thing that specifies where the weapon connects to the character's hand, so you have an offset to the right and down from the camera and you spawn the weapon at that position, this will work for vast majority of guns, and ones that need tweaking, well, it'll be an offset for that specific gun, nothing crazy.

For melee it's similar, and could get a rotate per click just to see it doing something, but really that's a side-quest.

 

How is aim gliding is relevant? I'm not expecting aim-down-sights if that's what you mean, nor do I see how jumping and runnig are relevant...
If by crosshair vs reticle you mean the way the targetting graphic looks, that's also not relevant, especially when it's easier in FPS games.
In 3rd person games is where the crosshair/reticle is complicated if you want to shoot from the character's position... in WF however you're shooting from the camera but it's projected forward to where the frame is, it's a good workaround to not be annoyed by your rounds hitting stuff, because still with 3rd person cameras we're used to things working like in first person :)

 

 

And same for parenting it to the character (or heck even hackingly move it to follow character every frame, anything that works), then rotating it locally with look up/down inputs, lower the offset on crouch and a bit more for slide, detach weapon entity and parent it to the camera with an offset... and voilla, the thing I'm asking for (and FOV is important to be able to reach high values, I don't remember what the options menu offers but I think up to 100 which is fine for now).

 

That's implementation detail and entirely up to the devs that know how the engine works, you don't need to concern yourself, you only need to see that the engine supports all features the firstperson camera requires, like parenting entities to other entities, moving the camera freely, hiding entities/models... basic stuff that pretty much any 3D engine supports, and this one does too because they're doing all that and more.

Also they're doing code changes to the game pretty much every major version (when they need to recertify on consoles), that's not really a roadblock to this simple thing, they're doing much more complex stuff, like getting data back from the renderer to know which entities have been rendered even a pixel of, that's the kind of thing you need to mess with the engine if it didn't have support for... moving the camera is a basic feature.

 

 

The rest are really outlandish things, I don't even...

 

Graphics as in, what exactly? I hope you don't mean any polygons or textures...

 

The local machine... as it does in literally every game.

 

 

The host decides gameplay-relevant physics, AI decisions and game state like mission progress, etc... There's no difficulties, you're making them up.

 

 

They don't, weird angles and mangled texture would happen regardless of camera, you can bring 3rd person camera close to things too... so please show me these mangled textures via captura camera that don't also show mangled with 3rd person (because the renderer is accurate, if it's mangled then the UV maps are mangled).

No polygons need to be touched in any way, leave the polygons be!

 

It's one thing to talk about an eye-in-the-sky optimized engine that would have performance issues and draw distance limits when brought to ground level... but 1st person and 3rd person are basically the same thing in terms of what the engine cares about, it's a rendering engine like any other that can render from any angle and almost any distance (near and far culling).

 

 

Maybe I should seek help myself with spending all this time reading this xD

I leave you something to ponder for these statements, how much data would it be to send all those polygons from the host to the clients? Remember, they need to be transformed every. single. frame, at least that we agree on :P

Just going to summarize it for you, you talk as if you are a senior software dev that deals with this kind of issue on the regular, yet you did not even know what polygons are? Yeah right sounds very credible.

Secondly, I know a few game devs that did the development for GTA V's first person mode, among other things.

Thirdly I cba to comment on you again, enjoy delusion.