Clear team distinction

(Bloodbite) #41

[QUOTE=zenstar;419503]Possibly… we won’t know without trying it… but if we’re stuck with the same models on each side and people don’t want team colours then what other suggestion is there?

I don’t claim to have all the answers… there is quite possibly a graceful answer that I haven’t thought of, but it hasn’t been suggested yet.

Personally I like team colours, especially if they’re adjustable. I know it breaks realism a bit, but imo fun > reality.[/QUOTE]

We can give it a try but I’m confident from how it’s played out in other games, including Brink… it’s not a good thing, not for my tastes anyway.

I think on this occasion a certain degree of traditionalism is called for. W:ET had subdued tones, yet the brown versus gray worked beautifully.

To accommodate a world of custom “whatevers”… for excess visual style, Tribes does a good job of creating classes that are identifiable yet unique per faction. I would have to give Call of Duty some credit for their factional variations too. Still subdued but whatever the “class,” whether it’s a snipe rifle touting ghillie suit dude or an assault looking outfit, they all share a unified and environmentally appropriate look, per faction, that makes it rather simple to distinguish friend from foe.

I am totally against a bright TF2 style to team differentiation. It may suit Rad Soldiers (I can only guess from media samples as I’m not an iWhore), but I think it’d be a bad move on many levels, not just a marketing one, to step away from the blending-with-environment style of camo appropriate combatants in DB.

This could also be a consideration for classes of fashion purchases too. Certain classes may share very similar though slightly unique looking “full” outfits that will suit the engie class, yet applied in the team specific colour/camo… or possibly even variations available to the team. Then there are your little accessories that aren’t faction specific, and some that possibly aren’t class specific.

Let’s say we went black vs white.

[ul]
[li]White team has default variations on all white, snow camo, and urban camo… a custom theme could be a zebra striped white camo
[/li][li]Black team’s default are SWAT black, Police navy blue, NAVY navy/black camo… custom could be a red/black digicam camo
[/li][/ul]

Not that I’m saying it has to be restricted to pure tactical/military, but I am of the opinion that it would be more effective.

THEN, as far as accessories go; Gas Masks… you know they’re going to be our version of senseless TF2 hats. With colour restrictions here, it gets tricky because both could pull off the black/white mix with the schemes I’m suggesting. Whatever restrictions to such accessories I think would be dictated by whatever lore/emblems Splash have in the works that backs up the game’s basic story-based premise.

There is of course a limit on how far we can speculate over this without knowing specifics about the Dirty Bomb story.

(zenstar) #42

Interesting because as far as I know Brink didn’t actually do this. They had a glowing outline around the characters which is not what I said at all.

It’s unlikely we’re getting separate distinct models per side. Look at the founders pack rewards. There are unique characters with names. It’s extremely unlikely that they will be restricted to a single side and it’s also extremely unlikely that a single character is going to have seperate models per side (which would also be confusing as you’d have to learn to recognise 2 models for 1 character).
Separate models would be nice. Not going to happen.

You do realise team colours don’t need to be as bright and cartoonish as TF2 right? W:ET basically had team colours. They were brown and grey.

And try refrain from idiotic comments like “iWhore”. It only shows that you can’t put a cogent argument together and have to rely on emotional arguments and logical fallacies (such as Guilty by Association).

(Bloodbite) #43

[QUOTE=zenstar;419549]…
And try refrain from idiotic comments like “iWhore”. It only shows that you can’t put a cogent argument together and have to rely on emotional arguments and logical fallacies (such as Guilty by Association).[/QUOTE]

I don’t know how this turned into a personal thing, I’m just speculating on ideas. This isn’t me attacking your opinion… and the iWhore thing was a joke. I’d like to give Rad a try but until it gets a port over to android I’m **** out of luck. It looks cool though. If you’re an Apple user, cool… if you’re an Apple zombie… let’s leave it at that. :slight_smile:

And alternate models are very reasonable. ETQW was an extreme example, W:ET, though simple by today’s standards, still had unique models per class per side. This is still the alpha, a lot is going to change. We won’t see the Brink HUD and kill notification icons in the final game… if it’s better for the game, why not consider it. The founder’s packs are also vague about what those mercs are… we’ll find out, they don’t necessarily have to be set in stone.

So what did you mean by the outline thing? I’ve seen the prominent glow, I’ve seen the subtle shimmer… is there another type of outline I’m missing or did you mean that thing that sort of lightens the entire character when your crosshair hits them? I still think any if those types alter the perception mechanic. Not in a good way.

As for colours, I thought I covered that pretty solidly.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of black vs white… or something contrasty like that. It might suit the high contrast nature of the actual maps. Only problem I can see though is for night maps, they could give a dark team an edge.

(zenstar) #44

[QUOTE=Bloodbite;419570]I don’t know how this turned into a personal thing, I’m just speculating on ideas. This isn’t me attacking your opinion… and the iWhore thing was a joke. I’d like to give Rad a try but until it gets a port over to android I’m **** out of luck. It looks cool though. If you’re an Apple user, cool… if you’re an Apple zombie… let’s leave it at that. :slight_smile:

And alternate models are very reasonable. ETQW was an extreme example, W:ET, though simple by today’s standards, still had unique models per class per side. This is still the alpha, a lot is going to change. We won’t see the Brink HUD and kill notification icons in the final game… if it’s better for the game, why not consider it. The founder’s packs are also vague about what those mercs are… we’ll find out, they don’t necessarily have to be set in stone.

So what did you mean by the outline thing? I’ve seen the prominent glow, I’ve seen the subtle shimmer… is there another type of outline I’m missing or did you mean that thing that sort of lightens the entire character when your crosshair hits them? I still think any if those types alter the perception mechanic. Not in a good way.

As for colours, I thought I covered that pretty solidly.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of black vs white… or something contrasty like that. It might suit the high contrast nature of the actual maps. Only problem I can see though is for night maps, they could give a dark team an edge.[/QUOTE]

Yeah… I think I was a bit more terse than I meant to be. I was rushing at work. And I don’t like the whole fanboy division between android and apple and windows… it’s such a silly thing that I do get a little annoyed when people say things like that :stuck_out_tongue: No offence meant.

I agree with you on the different models. It is the best way of doing things, but I don’t think that’s the way they’re going to do things. I don’t think that (for example) the sniper Vasilli is going to have a separate model for each side. Maybe (and this is a stretch) they’ll add things like gas masks to one side (similar to your suggestion) but keep the base model the same, but I don’t think it’ll happen.

Let me just clarify my views on outlining: The Brink method was… ok, but not particularly good. That kinda misty halo around the characters.

Then there’s the class outline… the silhouette. This is just the shape of the models. Soldiers should keep a similar silhouette, all with big backpacks and covops should always have a hood up. This is just class recognition.

Then there’s the luminosity changes… it’s not a glow exactly. It’s certainly not a halo around the character. The background is simply darkened a bit and the player models are simply lightened a bit. Imagine taking a picture of the background and dimming it down. Then taking a picture of the enemy and cutting that out and making it a bit brighter and then sticking it onto the background… It’s not exactly a glow. There’s no halo or any outlining. The enemy is just a little brighter than the background. Makes things easy to spot with a little less blending into the background.
Now if you mix in a tint of a team colour then it makes it a little more separate. And when I say a tint I mean a tint… like 10% or 20% red or blue (or whatever) which should just subtly alter the model’s skin a tiny bit making it slightly different. Maybe more or less tint… I’m not an artist =P

As for team colours / skins: your snow / urban cam skins vs swat / police navy blues is not a bad one… but that’s really just team colours too. It’s a little more advanced: it’s team palettes, but at he end of the day you’re simply making team colours be grey vs navy blue and making the area cover most of the model (yeah… a bit generalised, but basically).
I’m happy with team skins if they’re done right but they add a bit of a limitation to what can be sold - if SD were planning on selling skins they’d need to pack them in 2s now. But maybe that is the best option if we can’t get separate models?

(Bloodbite) #45

Yeah, I know what you mean, I’ve seen that too. Maybe I’m becoming a stubborn old man but I still don’t like the subtle way something like that could distract those of us that are committed to seeing this live up to the intense, high skill matches we remember so fondly from the other ET games.

[QUOTE=zenstar;419617]As for team colours / skins: your snow / urban cam skins vs swat / police navy blues is not a bad one… but that’s really just team colours too. It’s a little more advanced: it’s team palettes, but at he end of the day you’re simply making team colours be grey vs navy blue and making the area cover most of the model (yeah… a bit generalised, but basically).
I’m happy with team skins if they’re done right but they add a bit of a limitation to what can be sold - if SD were planning on selling skins they’d need to pack them in 2s now. But maybe that is the best option if we can’t get separate models?[/QUOTE]

Yeah but… it still makes me think, why not have the whole cake? If we’re going to see a marketplace of custom stuff including full models like the merc units, then we’re going to see plenty of variation anyway, within reason. And Splash isn’t beholden to a publisher with DB, their only limitation on doing justice to their ideas and skills would be what they impose on themselves.

I don’t think the default models need to be radically different in this setting mind you. A few different pouches here and there perhaps. And like W:ET the units on a single side had more in common with each other than the opposing side’s like-class unit… with the exception of field ops and covies, having the prominent backpack and beanie respectively. So a tac vest unique to one side could have variant set of ‘other’ accessories on the model for say medic versus field ops.

Perhaps an alternative, or additional touch could be weapon recognition. You could identify german versus allied weaponary pretty easily in W:ET. While that’s no longer justifiable in this setting, especially with mercenaries, perhaps there could be a restriction on camo styles applied to weaponary per side? And any custom skins sold could very easily come in twin packs, or multi one-team packs.

Which also leads me to ask the question… is it better or worse if we had our distinguished teams restricted/representative of their role in the field. ie. Offence is always “this” team with “these” models or whatever variations, on every map. This could go a long way towards the psychological conditioning we all develop after playing a game for awhile online. This could work well towards hammering the goal oriented mechanics of the game into the more casual, sometimes thicker skulled, new comers.

AND… maybe there could be a $$$ --> Clanning element. Clans that want to define their team colours can do so for clan specific battles. Perhaps a minor adjustment (or something like an armband) that is visible in pub matches that doesn’t conflict with the per-team schemes, but also full access to modifying colours for team sets. It could be like defining Space Marine, or Eldar (etc) chapters in Dawn of War. I could see this frivolous side of the game actually encourage clan activity. It would make machinima playbacks of matches posted on YouTube really stand out in the world of competitive FPS’ing.

Of course this may all be redundant. Brink was a fine example of how much creative skill Splash have in this area. They may be able to pull .

(tokamak) #46

Yeah but… it still makes me think, why not have the whole cake? If we’re going to see a marketplace of custom stuff including full models like the merc units, then we’re going to see plenty of variation anyway, within reason. And Splash isn’t beholden to a publisher with DB, their only limitation on doing justice to their ideas and skills would be what they impose on themselves

The more choice you leave to the player the more diffuse the team recognition will become. There’s a lot more for players to progress. That’s why the team recognition can’t come from models or skins.

(zenstar) #47

If we were going to have some visible distinction between teams then I’d think it’s be best to always have the assault looking the same. That way no matter where or when you join a game you’ll know which team is attacking and which is defending at a glance. Then you just need to know what team you’ve been assigned to.

Attackers should always be “red” (or whatever the team distinction ends up being - “gas masks” or “skins” or whatever. Doesn’t need to be a colour).

If we’re going for pure wishlist then yeah: I’d much rather have different models to distinguish sides. I played a couple of rounds again last night and kept shooting at teammates that would run past me and suddenly come into my screen from the side. It still takes me a second too long to see if someone is an enemy waiting for the info to fade in. It’s just better to shoot at anything you come across, unless it’s throwing health packs at you, at the moment.

EDIT:

I disagree… you can still use skins and models to identify teams but it means that the customizable pieces need to come in both varieties when you buy them. So a new character will come with both team skins and buying a new skin for him/her will have to come in both team palettes (for example).
It does make things a lot trickier though. I do agree with you there.

(tokamak) #48

It either limits the selection of what a player can have or it limits the visual cues for recognition, there’s a field of tension between these two. The whole diffuse thing still stands.

That’s why I say the team recognition should come from indicators. Preferably really ostentatious cues on your team-mates and no cues on your enemy. I don’t really mind if the enemy blends in the background. Although that flaky bloom stuff is a separate issue. It’s the moment of hesitation to make sure you’re not shooting at your team that is the real issue.

(zenstar) #49

[QUOTE=tokamak;419726]It either limits the selection of what a player can have or it limits the visual cues for recognition, there’s a field of tension between these two. The whole diffuse thing still stands.

That’s why I say the team recognition should come from indicators. Preferably really ostentatious cues on your team-mates and no cues on your enemy. I don’t really mind if the enemy blends in the background. Although that flaky bloom stuff is a separate issue. It’s the moment of hesitation to make sure you’re not shooting at your team that is the real issue.[/QUOTE]

I mostly agree with this +1.

(Bloodbite) #50

Let’s say it does work, and I’m not trying to be a doomsayer here, but it’s an extra piece of code that could be a game breaker if indeed it does happen to break due to whatever reason (mystery holes in ATI/AMD drivers come to mind). Model/skin based recognition would eliminate that possibility. That’s one concern I have with it. Most of the games I’ve played that had tags tended to have some sort of moment where certain tags refused to display for whatever reason. I think the tags if used should be an aid rather than a primary reliance for distinction, which they kinda seem to be at the moment.

If Splash affords us the luxury of trying both… mock models that are distinct during one patch as well as the allied-only-tags in another. We could come up with the beginnings of some hard, practical impressions… or perhaps a test like that may be better left until the next, larger group alpha phase? That way they can quantify the majority that play better. I think in the end that’s what it should be based on, which option produces the better player performance all round, and not what is more easily adaptable to new comers/casuals.

Though even those of us that lean away from the tags, it seems a necessity for the sake of comp spectating.

As for too many models/skins diffusing the experience. I think Brink was a brilliant example of the artistic skill Splash can churn out, with Brink being a somewhat extreme example of uniqueness at every turn. Within the confines of the DB settings and DB’s goals, I have no doubt they can pull it off without polluting the experience…

(Dormamu) #51

Personally i find this “same model for both teams” as a game breaker, period. You had your different teams in W:ET, ET:QW, Brink. I don’t think you should start with DB and i still think you are working on distinct teams in DB. Teams that are easy to spot and are different. Outlining, arrows are from my point of view… meh! You need something new, something fresh, other colors than red vs blue. You need to stand out from the FPS crowd.
You could import the characters from Brink and give them a personal bright color, some tweaks, and we are ready to go. The actual sniper model is boring, “The Anger” Sniper is something else :smiley:
Also, different models for teams will mean different story’s for the factions, let’s think on the long run, BongoBoy needs to write the Best Videogame Story Ever! :smiley:

(stealth6) #52

I’ll just add that it would be best to have multiple forms of identifying friend from foe, but SD have done a great job so far, so I don’t see why DB would be any different.

I think the current lack of models is because it’s closed alpha. I wasn’t even expecting the game to look this good tbh.

(tokamak) #53

Yeah I agree that real models are more foolproof. And generally most information should be derived from the environment rather than the hud.

But I’m really fearing for artistic freedom and number of cosmetic possibilities, which in the end, is going to be a big source of revenue for this game.

(murka) #54

Hmm the new IFF looks good and is easy to notice so i’m already used to only looking at them for team distinction. The problem is tho that very close you can’t tell if it’s friend or foe so i usually pop 2-3 shots before noticing.

(mortis) #55

I will have to apologize in advance for all my future teamkills…

(DeTh) #56

I think after playing with the new setup with teammates and opposition i can still say we need more distinction even if they wore other colors. Because while the new bars are very helpful it can still be confusing who is on whose side especially when you have people one behind another and when you have people right up next to you.

(H0RSE) #57

The new indicators help, but if you plan on keeping them, then they should only show for either friendlies or enemies, not both.

(iwound) #58

if the frontlines blur i still get confused between friend and foe.
in close quarters im still looking at the model first. i just shoot at everyone.
i was shooting at the pedestrian sign the other day when it came into line of sight.:rolleyes:

its not natural to search for the colour of their indicator before i shoot. i should be able to
distinguish an enemy immediately.

just use the TMNT models.

(tokamak) #59

Yeah I’m still not happy with this. Though the new iteration is slightly better. Right now I merely felt slightly more confident shooting at people and not constantly second guessing. Still it often felt a lot like guessing.

The thing is, you just can’t rely on what’s floating over someone’s head. That’s not what you’re looking at, and if frequently gets obscured or is up too close to see anyway.

The indication needs to be ON the models. Some Orange/cyan patches would already work wonders.

I still prefer only cyan patches on your team-mates and nothing on the enemy but SD seems to hold health bars and arrows dear to their philosophy so I won’t go on about it.

(Mustang) #60

I have come to the conclusion that completely different skins is the only way to go.

IFF arrows are just not enough, in-fact they are very slow to pop-in half the time, don’t work at all for close range combat and I’d rather see them removed from enemies completely (and rely on differing skins only).