Is it Possible for 3PP to NOT be Overpowered?

[Kohlbar 268]

The truth is I always like 1st person in DayZ better. My first few hours were played in it and it's much more of an immersive experience in my opinion. Also, I like shooting in 1st person a lot more than I do in 3rd. However, I really do enjoy 3rd person for the screenshot possibilities, looking at my character run around in all his awesome gear, etc. and I really love the freedom of having the choice to switch 1/3PP. The thing I've been thinking about lately, though, is the wall-peeking that people can do with 3rd person.

The thing I'm wondering is if there's anyway possible to make 3PP more of an aesthetic choice and less of a blatant combat advantage? It's just funny to me because 1st person, being harder already for not allowing peeking, has additional disadvantages built-in! For instance, you can't look over your shoulder if you're wearing a dry bag, mountain bag, or raincoat. 3PP almost feels like an entirely different game because there are all these intentional survival elements you can see in 1st person, but to escape them all you have to do is press Enter. Just kinda bummed out right now because I enjoy using 1PP so much yet getting killed because someone can see me from 75m away while safely behind a wall really annoys me. I appreciate that you can't peek over the taller walls such as in NWAF anymore, it just seems like there is a LONG way to go before 1PP and 3PP can compete on an even playing field.

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

1. Character model fetish belongs in Mary Kate and Ashleys Shopping Spree not DayZ.

2. DayZ is 1PP only.

3. 3PP is easy mode left over from ARMA2 and plays like GearZ of DroneZ cover shooter, especially without large amounts of dangerous infected.

4. The way we play DayZ is about to change so drastically (stamina, weight, infected, scarcity, fucking wolveZ, and balancing to name a few) that I believe most players cannot imagine how different things will be and a lot of arguments will be pointless. Hopefully we'll see more tweaking or "balancing" of 3PP which has been toyed with a few times already.

One of the biggest problems with drone view is how it gives away the position of infected.

^Just this ruins any semblance of immersion.

[sachad 1016]

Eh... IMO, if you're on a server that offers 3PP, you don't get to complain about people using it as a dirty trick to get the upper hand. If you don't want them to use drone-cam to spot you, play on Hardcore (inb4 'there are barely any hardcore servers!')

[Rauchsauger 94]

Not this again... everything that should have been said about this already has been.

That goes double or triple for everything that should not have been said.

[pilgrim* 3513]

Playing on a 3pp server is not a dirty trick because anyone can use 3pp on anyone else.
The way human eyesight really works means that 3pp and 1pp both have weaknesses - they are different weaknesses, but neither is perfect (for sure!)
But if you want more stress in your game every minute, and you need to stay hyper frosty all the time - and if you can face it - play 1pp definitely
You'll burn out faster each session, it's a more difficult game.

Kohlbar - There have been some ideas and internal trials, and a demo or two, and public discussion & ideas of better ways for 3pp.. I don't know if those ideas are ongoing now (check the threads)
One important thing is that most players prefer 3pp (as it stands) given the choice. So no-one will throw them all off the game because a minority want something different.

If there were enough 1pp players to fill just a few servers in every country, then they would have a much better argument for how good it is

All this has been discussed A LOT (with acrimony too) - look around, there have been rants.
But new thoughts and technical ideas and suggestions about how to improve 3pp gameplay are worth mentioning IMO, If they have not been suggested already.

 

Edited April 18, 2016 by pilgrim*
spell correction

[svisketyggeren 662]

31 minutes ago, Rauchsauger said:

Not this again... everything that should have been said about this already has been.

That goes double or triple for everything that should not have been said.

What is it with this stupid complaint...it has been discussed bfore, so the newbies cant discuss it then?

If ur tired of a topic, stay out of it...let the new players discuss it eventhough its been discussed before.

[AmberHelios 2071]

2 hours ago, Rauchsauger said:

Not this again... everything that should have been said about this already has been.

That goes double or triple for everything that should not have been said.

 

1 hour ago, svisketyggeren said:

What is it with this stupid complaint...it has been discussed bfore, so the newbies cant discuss it then?

If ur tired of a topic, stay out of it...let the new players discuss it eventhough its been discussed before.

i will leave this as is for now if this topic becomes anything other then a desscussion it will be closed. add to the disscusion or dont post.

[St. Jimmy 1631]

This is the only way it couldn't be exploited as much. But still if there's a small flaw somewhere in it maybe it could be:

 

Then there would be complains about things popping in and out and how stupid it looks. Also it needs to be applied on a lot of things like vehicles, campfire etc. Not an easy task and could cost performance.

 

Project Zomboid is a survival game where the view is done right. You can't exploit it like in DayZ/Arma. But it's not 3rd person game but it's top view and your line of sight is limited.

 

3rd person view fits only for action packed games that are made around it like Gears Of War. Otherwise it's just an easy mode or the developers are just lazy to do a proper 1st person view. 3rd person in Warthunder exists likely because the actual 1st person view at least with tanks isn't really the best one and they likely want it to be action based game. In many games the 1st person view doesn't feel good because you can't freelook around like in Bohemia games.

Only reason I can forgive that DayZ still has 3rd person view is bug tracking. There's no other reason to have it in a hardcore survival game. At least they've said that official servers will be 1st person only which is good.

[emuthreat 2837]

We could use this thread as an opportunity to try and fill up a 1pp public server on this next patch.  I know I'm in the market for a more populated home server next time around, and 1pp would be great if we could get some bodies on the map.  I would play on DUG much more if they had another server or two, so I didn't have to wait half an hour to get a slot on the server.  I like 1pp play, but I have already spent far too much time playing on empty servers.  If there was a 1pp official server, with apromise from the devs that it will stay up for an entire patch, then I would gladly make it my home. 
 

As things stand now, I'm probably leaning towards playing as a hoarder/mechanic on a full public server like pimpsy's loot mania.  If we can get some people interested in 1pp this go around, I'll stake a claim on a server and hope it has decent traffic for a few months

[BeefBacon 1185]

I'd play 1pp more if the performance was better - providing of course that my mate wanted to play 1pp as well.

1pp from a gameplay perspective is objectively better. Wall peeking is an exploit, and it is an unfair advantage regardless of whether everyone uses it or not. Let's say there was a type of wall that maybe had a funny collision mesh which allowed you to see through it when you stand at a certain angle. Would that be fair because everyone can do it, or would it be an exploit? Let's say there's any easy way to duplicate items, so you give yourself infinite ammo. Would that be fair because everyone can do it, or would that be an exploit? "Well those obviously weren't intended by the developers!" I hear you cry. I have a hard time believing that the devs were sitting around a table discussing how they want players to be able to peek around walls in 3pp. In fact they've made some effort to reduce our capacity to wall peek. Imagine a sniper lying prone on a roof in 3pp. They can see you, but there's no possible way that you can see them.

1pp is centered around risk/reward. You poke your head out and you risk getting spotted, but you are rewarded with information. You wear a big backpack (as the OP mentioned) and you can't look over your shoulder, but you are rewarded with more inventory space. In 3pp you can peek over a wall and see if there are any zombies, completely shitting on a large part of the PvE aspect.

A while back, probably in .57ish I went into a fire station on a 1pp server. I found a flare gun and thought it'd be fun to shoot it into the sky, since it was night time. As I'm leaving the station I get shot at by a PM73 and I panic fire the flare as I'm running back into the fire station. The flare covers up the sound of me positioning myself near the stairs so I can cover the back door with my MP5, but if he tries moving in through the front I'll hear him. The flare dies down but I don't move. He managed to hit me a couple of times - I didn't bleed, but for all he knows I'm dead. Minutes pass, and I consider making a run for it, but I don't know if he's waiting for me. Eventually I see him peek through the back door, and I kill him - but then I wait. Maybe he has friends. After a couple more minutes I bolt, and I survive. By waiting in the station I had a secure position and good cover, and by not moving at all I was able to convince him I was dead, but I sacrificed information. I had no idea if he was alone or in a group, or what he was doing. Did he leg it after he failed to kill me? Is he waiting out front? Is he going round the back? He has no idea if I'm alive. If I am alive, did I go to the top? He didn't see me go up. I can't be waiting this long, I must have logged. He decides to go round the back to see if I'm even there. He takes a risk and he pokes his head out, but I had the better of him. I took advantage of his lack of information, and later took a risk when I ran out because I didn't know if he was alone. Now imagine that exact scenario, but we're both equipped with magical periscopes that allow us to see each other.

So at best 3pp detracts from gameplay. At worst it's an exploit. What pros does 3pp confer? It doesn't increase FoV, but it does increase awareness of your immediate vicinity, including behind your own head. DayZ is a game that focuses on our characters, and it's nice to be able to see what we look like in the environment - when I play on 3pp servers (which is most of the time since 1pp is underpopulated and there are some really good 3pp private servers) I like to travel in 3pp because I like to look at my character. For some, 1pp can cause nausea caused by head bob (which can be disabled) and the horrible frame rate, which is set to improve. So the pros don't exactly weigh out the cons. I've never heard an argument in favour of 3pp, from a realism or authenticity standpoint, that made me go "that's a good point." People like 3pp because they like being able to peek over walls, they like to see their character and, in fairness, 3pp is easier on the head brain when you're lucky to scrape 30fps. Barring the frame rate issue, there doesn't seem to be a viable argument for 3pp to exist besides "I like it."

As @St. Jimmy said, this seems to be a good solution. Maybe not this exact script since it doesn't seem very precise, but something like it would be perfect. It would remove many of the inherent issues of 3pp while not getting rid of 3pp. I'm not in favour of removing 3pp. If the devs suddenly decided to remove it, I'd get used to it pretty quickly, but I don't think I'd actually support its removal. A compromise as shown in the video above sounds ideal. Everybody wins and threads like this can disappear forever.

[QUAZIMOFO 275]

Go play on a 1pp server and shut the hell up about this crap already.

[Kohlbar 268]

22 hours ago, sachad said:

Eh... IMO, if you're on a server that offers 3PP, you don't get to complain about people using it as a dirty trick to get the upper hand. If you don't want them to use drone-cam to spot you, play on Hardcore (inb4 'there are barely any hardcore servers!')

You see, that's not my point. Point is I LOVE 3PP, but only use it for cinematic photo ops and vanity. This is more of a QUESTION than a complaint. I'm just wondering if there's any way the playing field could be a bit more level. IDK Just a thought.

I also admit that 3PP has its disadvantages in very specific situations (sometimes 1PP will offer a more realistic and open view from closed spaces) 

Truth be told, I was really impressed when they adjusted 3PP to not be compatible with the taller walls such as NWAF. It made me all giddy having seen countless videos where people were tracking down others at NWAF using the safety of the wall.

[pilgrim* 3513]

Let's NOT do the 1pp v 3pp argument - that has been done ten times and it always gets out of order. 1pp and 3pp both have weaknesses. They are like two different games. People violently take one side or the other and get crazy and then the thread is shut down  . so no one mention 1pp. OK?     On this thread we can Pretend there is a 3pp game called 3pp DayZ and we are talking about that  and not anything else. A lot of folk play this game 3pp DayZ  and already enjoy it, and maybe like Kohlbar they want it to be better. So :

                                                                      This thread is ONLY about 3pp and ways to make 3pp a better game.

I have some ideas  (a bit technical) - about how camera movement can be modified in 3pp - not taken away, just modified .. I'll tell ya later.

So far people have only mentioned "peeking over walls" and "peeking round corners" as being negative - is there anything else in 3pp that causes a lot of grief in a 3pp Game ?    Anyone got any to add ?

xxP

Edited April 19, 2016 by pilgrim*

[behemoth_dog 4]

[bad idea]

Edited April 19, 2016 by behemoth_dog
My idea was bad and I feel bad

[BeefBacon 1185]

1 hour ago, pilgrim* said:

So far people have only mentioned "peeking over walls" and "peeking round corners" as being negative - is there anything else in 3pp that causes a lot of grief in a 3pp Game ?

No...

On 18/04/2016 at 1:59 AM, Kohlbar said:

you can't look over your shoulder if you're wearing a dry bag, mountain bag, or raincoat. 3PP almost feels like an entirely different game because there are all these intentional survival elements you can see in 1st person, but to escape them all you have to do is press Enter

 

19 hours ago, BeefBacon said:

You wear a big backpack (as the OP mentioned) and you can't look over your shoulder

Now that might not cause grief, as such, but it does remove some nuance from the game. Other issues are largely subjective. Immersion, for example - some say 1pp is more immersive, others say 3pp is more immersive. 3pp may well be perpetuating the hip fire crosshair that is currently in-game, and that has no business existing in a hardcore survival game. DayZ seems to be a game that is being designed for 1pp, but has 3pp slapped on top of it, the sole reason being that the mod had it.

The wall peeking thing is the main issue. If wall peeking was somehow fixed, but any other issues related to 3pp remained, I don't think many people would complain too much. If everyone was honest and swore some solemn oath to never wall peek, there wouldn't be a problem. Peoples' issue isn't with 3pp itself, I certainly don't mind being able to pan around in third person, the issue is that it can be exploited. The best solution I've seen is the occlusion thing - if you can't see it in 1pp you can't see it in 3pp.

[pilgrim* 3513]

20 minutes ago, BeefBacon said:

." you can't look over your shoulder if you're wearing a dry bag [;in 1pp] //  some say 1pp is more immersive, others say 3pp is more immersive [1pp v 3pp] // DayZ seems to be a game that is being designed for 1pp, but has 3pp slapped on top of it/ [1pp v 3pp ]

/The wall peeking thing is the main issue

3pp may well be perpetuating the hip fire crosshair that is currently in-game
 

no one is talking about 1pp, that is not the topic. Please don't. The OP wants to talk about the 3pp DayZ that 95+% of DayZ gamers play as the normal DayZ game.

So what 3pp elements do you find cause problems in 3pp Gameplay  BeefBacon ? Things in 3pp DayZ that might make 3pp DayZ more interesting?

OK -  you say "3pp may well be perpetuating the hip fire crosshair that is currently in-game, and that has no business existing in a hardcore survival game"

1 ) So the crosshair could be taken out ?

2 ) The wall peeking thing is the main issue (that is my opinion too)

Wall peeking has been modified but it still exists (anyone think it's better now?)
Corner peeking is still the way it was. And what about rooftop peeking ? -  when you lie flat on a roof and watch players down underneath you - that's like corner peeking except vertical.

Now we have:
- "peeking over walls"
- "peeking round corners"
- "hip firing with a crosshair"
- "being able to switch views to first person in the 3pp game"  (comment from OP)

Anything else ? 

[BeefBacon 1185]

1 minute ago, pilgrim* said:

no one is talking about 1pp, that is not the topic. Please don't. The OP wants to talk about the 3pp DayZ that 95+% of DayZ gamers play as the normal DayZ game.

 

I quoted the OP.

I appreciate your attempts to view this topic objectively, but it's very difficult to talk about 3pp without mentioning, even implicitly, 1pp. Remember that it has been stated by the devs (or a dev, this was a while ago) that 1pp is how DayZ is meant to be played. That is an important aspect of the discussion as that view directly impacts the way DayZ is being designed. It creates a dissonance where the game is being designed one way, but people are playing it another. The result is that either a compromise sometimes has to be met when it comes to design decisions to make them affect two distinct styles of play, or certain elements of the game (backpacks obscuring vision, for example) are ignored entirely depending on whether you're playing in 1pp or 3pp.

However, I will make some effort to try and avoid the topic of 1pp, especially given we seem to agree on what the actual problem is. 'Peeking' or 'wall peeking' are terms I use to refer to all kinds of 3pp peeking. You'll notice I used the example of a sniper on a roof in my mini essay. Having a different word for different kinds of peeking seems unconstructive - what about walls that are broken at the bottom? That's broken-bottom-of-wall peeking of course. I also tried to cover points made in favour of 3pp, but concluded that it provides no actual benefit to gameplay outside of aesthetic (being able to see your character) and lessening the impact of poor performance. 

I've seen a few people mention the crosshair in the past. I don't necessarily think that it's a direct result of 3pp, but I think that it exists in the way that it does in order to facilitate hip fire in 3pp. I would remove it completely, but keep a dot in the center of the screen. The dot doesn't represent where we're aiming, but it provides a point of reference when we're trying to pick things up.

I would very much like to know if the devs are aware of this occlusion thing. If they are, what do they think of it? Is it feasible? Do they have a better idea? Is peeking something they even intend to address outside of minor changes to camera angles?

[AmberHelios 2071]

On 18/04/2016 at 8:14 PM, emuthreat said:

We could use this thread as an opportunity to try and fill up a 1pp public server on this next patch.  I know I'm in the market for a more populated home server next time around, and 1pp would be great if we could get some bodies on the map.  I would play on DUG much more if they had another server or two, so I didn't have to wait half an hour to get a slot on the server.  I like 1pp play, but I have already spent far too much time playing on empty servers.  If there was a 1pp official server, with apromise from the devs that it will stay up for an entire patch, then I would gladly make it my home. 
 

As things stand now, I'm probably leaning towards playing as a hoarder/mechanic on a full public server like pimpsy's loot mania.  If we can get some people interested in 1pp this go around, I'll stake a claim on a server and hope it has decent traffic for a few months

no you can't.

16 hours ago, QUAZIMOFO said:

Go play on a 1pp server and shut the hell up about this crap already.

dont play if you cant play nice

5 hours ago, pilgrim* said:

Let's NOT do the 1pp v 3pp argument - that has been done ten times and it always gets out of order. 1pp and 3pp both have weaknesses. They are like two different games. People violently take one side or the other and get crazy and then the thread is shut down  . so no one mention 1pp. OK?     On this thread we can Pretend there is a 3pp game called 3pp DayZ and we are talking about that  and not anything else. A lot of folk play this game 3pp DayZ  and already enjoy it, and maybe like Kohlbar they want it to be better. So :

                                                                      This thread is ONLY about 3pp and ways to make 3pp a better game.

I have some ideas  (a bit technical) - about how camera movement can be modified in 3pp - not taken away, just modified .. I'll tell ya later.

So far people have only mentioned "peeking over walls" and "peeking round corners" as being negative - is there anything else in 3pp that causes a lot of grief in a 3pp Game ?    Anyone got any to add ?

xxP

yes please.

 

Stay on topic.

[emuthreat 2837]

The only way I have imagined, that would make the 3pp fair, would be to render the floating camera behind and above players.

I understand that occluding players and AI based on LOS is an option, but I think it is a pretty poor option.  We would have people complaining in droves about players disappearing in front of their eyes; players' legs getting occluded when they ran past short cover, strobing in-and-out of existence as they flee through the woods; and I can't even imagine the graphical mess that it would cause when vehicles are involved.

Sorry @Kohlbar, but I think that tightening the camera to the player is the only realistic solution for wall/roof peeking, and that has already happened to some degree.  It's a classic dilemma, hence the divestment into two different games; one, a claustrophobic survival simulator, and the other, a post apocalyptic RTS shooter.

Thanks for trying.

[pilgrim* 3513]

On 20/04/2016 at 5:43 AM, emuthreat said:

The only way I have imagined, that would make the 3pp fair, would be to render the floating camera behind and above players.

Thanks for trying.

Camera movement is a whole subject in itself, in every game - there is a lot of clever stuff and different solutions are used. Mainly, players don't notice because it "looks" natural to them, but the way the camera alters view-direction and tracks in a game is very important. Eg In a flying game like 'Tame your Dragon' if you are racing between obstacles, swerving, the 3p camera must never look at an obstacle when you are on the other side of it, because then you would not know how to steer (not good in an obstacle race). But the change in camera position and direction of view is done so it seems natural and players don't notice how cunning it is. They just play.

( I mention that one game because I had to explain the discussions between two different language groups involved in it, camera was a difficult problem, and because the result was really good - the testers spent a long time trying to find movements that would trick the camera into being in the wrong place or wrong distance at the wrong time, but they couldn't.)

So don't give up hope. If it works really well you won't be aware it is in the game.
That's the sad tragic life of a programmer - you spend all those hours and days to do something that is SO GOOD that the player's don't even notice it.

 

[edit]

Possible Example - if you are on a surface designated as  "flat roof"  then the 3pp camera is not allowed to rise more than a few inches above your head-level unless you are crouching or standing. So if you are lying flat you can't peek down in 3p at players on the ground beneath you. When you want to look downwards towards the lower ground you have to either crouch or stand. OK - this is only one idea, and only about roofs, not windows or other possible situations.. but it could deal with one common misuse of 3p camera - it is more realistic, and makes it much more likely that if you can see down from the roof, the player you are looking at can look up and see you.
[And hey - this could work when you were lying down anywhere, close to the edge of rocks or on the ground on a hill, or anywhere - if the 3p camera cant hardly move upwards you cant use it to look downwards much (that is realistic) but you can still move the camera enough to see stuff on the ground in front of your face, or to look around horizontally everywhere in front of you.

Second Poss: When you move your 3p view slightly, as in peeking (not using the look-left look-right buttons) the effect is like turning your head OK? Really you turn your body slightly, but the effect is to be able to see a different area of the screen. Players can misuse that movement to turn the 3p viewpoint so you can peek - eg round a tree or round a corner - OK?
SO:  When you are inside 2 meters distance of an object "in front" of you (I mean a hit box located say inside a 30° angle in front of you and less than a meter or so distant) then when you move your mouse too far change your view angle left or right, you ALSO lean left or right.. This would help the peeking problem.. you would have to stand further off the wall (or tree or whatever) to be safe peeking without leaning out.. and also if you were lying flat and tried to peek, if you moved the camera too far you would do a roll in that direction (so you'd want to be really careful trying to peek too much, right?). But if you turned away from the objct, say at 90° from it, or turned your back on it, then you would not lean.. so if you tried to peek round a tree or corner you would lean if you were close enough to that object, but if you turned to see something in some other direction, you wouldnt lean because the object wouldn't be "in front" of you...You need a short delay on the camer action for this, so if you turn your body to peek, and stay like that for half a second (or less) you lean, but if you just turn away from the corner to look in some other direction, the "lean" effect doesn't kick in, so for instance you can turn around and run off, or run down the length of the wall as long as you are not facing it, without that automatic leaning..  
These things would make players a lot more cautious about peeking, and decrease the advantage of it.. because you'd have to stand definitely further back from the wall corner, or the truck or whatever object, to peek "safely" without risk of being seen leaning out.; and having to be further away from the wall to try "peeking" would put you in a more exposed position from all directions.

I've got a Third Poss (goes with the second)  .. "variable 3p camera distance" depending on your facing distance from an object (hit box).  So if you have your nose against a tree, the 3p camera is real close just behind/above your head, but if you are out facing a "normal" open space, the camera moves back to "normal" 3p view.. it has to move between these two limits fluidly and "quite" slowly, so you don't see camera jump.. If you run up to a wall til you are face in the wall, the camera will "slowly" close in.. meaning in a short second but not instantly.. And if you run through a forest there is enough delay so the camera will  will not jump around all the time. Only if you stop for a moment it will have time to start adjust distance smoothly.
Combine this "variable camera distance" with the "when you peek you lean" idea -  something good might come of it. It would make corner-peekers think twice, and worry more.. IMO

As I said above - these are suggestions, not any perfect solution, and maybe I got my ideas wrong and missed something really important (that might easily be true)...   I'm suggesting, this is not expert advice, ok?
 

xxP

Edited April 21, 2016 by pilgrim*
edited to make explanations a little clearer - I hope

[BeefBacon 1185]

11 hours ago, emuthreat said:

 

I understand that occluding players and AI based on LOS is an option, but I think it is a pretty poor option.  We would have people complaining in droves about players disappearing in front of their eyes; players' legs getting occluded when they ran past short cover, strobing in-and-out of existence as they flee through the woods; and I can't even imagine the graphical mess that it would cause when vehicles are involved.

 

That's not a good argument. You're basing that assertion off of a script that some guy probably made in an afternoon. I imagine a large team of dedicated developers with considerably more resources and access to the core of the game and its engine would be able to do a better job. 

Tightening the camera can only do so much. I suppose it's possible that the camera could intelligently detect scenarios so that it restricts itself dynamically, though. I wish the devs would do this sort of thing in experimental. Experimental just seems to be a platform on which people can stress test and find bugs for stable - there's nothing very experimental about it.

[emuthreat 2837]

1 hour ago, BeefBacon said:

That's not a good argument. You're basing that assertion off of a script that some guy probably made in an afternoon. I imagine a large team of dedicated developers with considerably more resources and access to the core of the game and its engine would be able to do a better job. 

Tightening the camera can only do so much. I suppose it's possible that the camera could intelligently detect scenarios so that it restricts itself dynamically, though. I wish the devs would do this sort of thing in experimental. Experimental just seems to be a platform on which people can stress test and find bugs for stable - there's nothing very experimental about it.

If I somehow missed a large chunk of understanding how such a dynamic player/AI occluder would work, please explain it to me.  As it stands, there will have to be a point at which a player becomes invisible; once the conditions for occlusion are met.

There is no way to combat wall/roof peeking by occlusion, without having a visible player abruptly become invisible, or otherwise.  It is intrinsic to the 3pp camera mode, that the camera will "see" more than the player's LOS will allow; this will invariably create zones that the camera looks at, which the player cannot see.  These areas will have boundaries, and it is on those boundaries that players will have to come into visual existence to the camera.  How can this "event horizon" be made less abrupt?  By quickly scaling the opacity of the player as they move into view?  By abruptly popping into view from thin air?  Will a bright flash of light herald their coming into view?

You can say that it is a bad argument, and that a professional team should be able to make a smooth transition into view, but without any assertion as to how it can be done, the idea is still just as bad.  Pilgrim's idea based on scaling the camera distance dynamically, based on terrain, would work, but it would require tagging every walkable surface in a somewhat complex manner.  Think of a rock or a parked car; the ground around it would have to be tagged to draw-in the camera closer to the player, but only if one is looking in the direction of the obstruction; roofs would be easier.  This method might work, without having an "event horizon," but I don't know how expensive it would be to implement.

[BeefBacon 1185]

51 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

IThere is no way to combat wall/roof peeking by occlusion, without having a visible player abruptly become invisible, or otherwise.

The visible part of an object can be rendered while the invisible part isn't rendered. If you can see their leg, then only their leg renders rather than either rendering their entire body or rendering nothing at all. If that isn't possible then a threshold can be set so that objects are rendered just before they become visible, rather than at the exact moment they become visible. While this second option could still be exploited, it'd be considerably harder - and any wall peeking would be limited to a tiny angle that would be unlikely to confer a significant advantage.

It wouldn't be that exact script, or even necessarily something similar. The video showcases a concept - you can only see stuff in 3pp that you would be able to see in 1pp. It's the concept that is broadly being discussed, not the actual script and how it functions.

[pilgrim* 3513]

I admit I don't like the occlusion idea at all.. it's like a mod fix to a problem that leaves the problem still in the game - As it stands the 3p camera can move in certain ways- so players will move it however they can. With occlusion either the "hidden" player is invisible - or "what you are not supposed to see" is invisible; If you blank out areas you "should not see" then moving the camera will sometimes show black areas (pretty often, right!!) .. I think this will be difficult for players to understand, and will interfere with their game, and it is really strongly visible on screen and it will look like your graphics card is burning out.
But (occlusion- the other method)  if only the "invisible player" is not seen, then you will think there is REALLY no one there because you SEE there is no one there. This will drive standard players (most players) crazy. They will not put up with it.
Your brain tells you there is NO ONE behind that car, then the guy steps out from 3 feet away and sprays you - that's worse than hackers. A lot of players will go nuts. They want 3p but it has to seem "natural" to them., not immersion breaking.

SO: A 100% better solution is to make the 3p camera move in a better way.. You must know that 3p camera movement in different games can be really quite complicated, but without the player much noticing at all.
In DayZ - in 3p view - the camera movement is not very sophisticated in a number of ways. (no insult intended Devs)

One obvious example: In 3p camera you can stand your character in front of a tree, and all the 3p camera shows is the back of the tree - you can't see your own character at all, just the damned tree. OK - you must admit that compared to many other games, that is truly NOT advanced high-tech immersive camera work. No one is winning prizes for that 3p camera ATM. I know it is acceptable and has some good moves programmed in as it stands - but there is room for a real and definite improvement (admit it).

 

A LOT of games (nearly ALL games) manage to avoid that kind  "wrong side of a tree"  stuff by some thoughtful programming of 3p camera position,(its location as a mobile object)  and direction of view,and camera distance (from the player) .. All these three parameters can be varied dynamically (all the time, or at any special time, singly or together, and with regulated speed and acceleration)) according to different circumstances, and all of us have seen it happen in dozens of games. When it happens naturally and smoothly you don't notice it much. It does not break immersion at all when it is done well.

Seeing (occlusion) players jump up on your screen when you move, or guys pop into existence from nothing, shoot you and vanish again - ..exist/not exist/exist/not exist/..having to understand why that suddenly happened, specially if there are several players around - will make you crazy even if you only want a nice simple bang-bang game of PvP - that has got to break immersion and be "confusing" (to be polite).

I can't think of one game that has used this solution.

I'd much rather go for ways to get the 3p camera to move and react better, so players can still use it but not get such obvious unfair advantages from it..That will be more fun for them;

ps - you speak of "tagging the ground" EmuThreat - but you don't need to. Every in-game object already has a hit box so it is already tagged - if you are facing towards an object and you are close enough , then the camera acts differently than when you are at a greater distance from that object, even if you are still facing it.  Read what I suggested above, about running up to a wall from a distance, until you have your character's face right up against the wall..(or the car, or the tree). A programmed 3p camera action can deal with this to make peeking much more difficult.

Hey - I agree with BeefBacon on development (and also with some of EmuThreat on occlusion)- I never said it would be easy.   I'm SURE there are problems that will come up I haven't thought of.  And situations when people will use the different new camera movements to gain advantages. I haven't worked out those, maybe I'm on a total looser.
But the experimental servers are there to do EXACTLY that kind of stuff, and IF the Devs are interested and put time into it, I BELIEVE some interesting better 3p camera movements could be tried out. So 3p gameplay could definitely get better for everyone - and stay as immersive or more immersive (best of both worlds).  AND if it was good, even the hardcore 3pp PvP players would like it..

So it comes down to how far are the Devs prepared or able to go in this. I think camera movement is the key (but not just one simple change. a rework). I THINK that can be done without rebuilding the game or rewriting the map, using the existing properties and modifying how the camera reacts to them.

I'm only thinking of getting rid of the one or two obvious things that are bad about 3p camera.. some work has already been done and folk seem pleased about it.. Any software work requires time - but I think a lot of players would be really happy to mess with any experiments that turned up on experimental.  So it depends where the devs want to take it.

 

Edited April 21, 2016 by pilgrim*

[emuthreat 2837]

I won't pretend to know how it can be most efficiently made that the camera follow distance is to be made directly proportional to the player's distance from an object, but I do think this is the better (only) option to improve 3pp function.  The occlusion thing, to me, is a non-start.  Picture a situation in which one is crouching behind a dumpster in an open lot.  Directly centered in the occluded LOS shadow created by the dumpster is a player, laying down in the open.  The observing player stands up, and has a very wide view of the area in question, yet the dumpster still casts a LOS shadow onto the area containing the player.  The player goes from prone to crouch; does only the upper half of him render, leaving a man with no waist visible to the player, partially occluded by the LOS shadow?  The observing player returns to a crouch, while the observed player pops out of existence because the dumpster is now casting a 'taller' shadow over the area.  The observed player stands up.  The observing player slowly moves back from the dumpster, until the head of the observed player is no longer within the shrinking LOS shadow cast out by the dumpster.   Shall the observer see only the head of the player, or will the whole body be rendered?  Did we just defeat the purpose of LOS occlusion?

The very nature of having the camera separate from the player creates these gray zones that can be seen by the camera, but are not within the direct LOS of the player.  So there will inevitably be many cases where the player is using the camera to observe an area outside the direct LOS, but the game will not render anyone until camera and LOS are redundant on that zone.  There will be a certain point where something within the observed field of the camera, will no longer be "in the shadows" and the game will have to render it as if it appeared out of nothing.  I don't see any way to avoid this problem, and this is why this kind of solution hasn't already been used.

I like the idea of having contextual camera setbacks, but I don't know how this would best be achieved.  My immensely labor intensive ides, would be to paint concentric rings around every structure in the game, determining three different distances for camera setback, dependent on which band of proximity to objects the player is standing within.  Aside from the labor involved in hand-designating these zones around every object on the map, I imagine another layer of the map would have some effect on the resources used.

If everything on the map already has a hitbox that can be used to designate areas where camera needs to draw-in tighter to the player, then it may just be a matter of giving the camera a simple means of deciding how far the player is from an object.  I know that the same thing already happens whenever I drive a car through a bush; the chase-cam jumps right into the back seat.  This might actually be a very easy to implement improvement if the camera already has this capability.  But then we start getting to that claustrophobia that people were trying to avoid by using 3pp in the first place.