Been a while since I contributed to these forums but I thought I'd throw this idea out there just for shits and giggles.
Any thoughts on having different vault animations for the spies based on the speed they are running at?
In chaos theory if you were making your escape and you were running to vault over a railing, you would run into the rail and start to mash space until you went over and that would be that.
I would love to see an animation where the spy does a speed-vault or hurdles over the railing similar to the way the wall flip works. You run toward the obstacle hit the appropriate button at an appropriate distance and you are locked into the animation.
Just a thought. Yours?
If you mean like escape movements in SC:DA, then we already have discussed that here:
http://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/index.php/topic,2201.0.html
and here
http://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/index.php/topic,2203.0.html
no more like escape moves than the wall flip
I'd also like contextual animations based on your speed/position, but that's just fantasizing. Unless, of course, you guys would do that.
The main thing we need in the way of contextual animations is the ability to hang on the other side of a rail when walking slowly towards it.
Quote from: STON3COLDKILLA on June 18, 2010, 12:28:06 PM
The main thing we need in the way of contextual animations is the ability to hang on the other side of a rail when walking slowly towards it.
I agree. I also like the vault idea though when running at full speed. Running towards it, jumping onto the rail and then springing off with one foot to either cover a gap or jump off quickly, maybe even have it where you can time crouch to fall into a roll to avoid fall damage. Small contextual animations like that would be beneficial to both looks and gameplay.
Also, I know this is off topic but speaking of rails, we should be able to ledge grab from the top ledge of something as well as the lower ledge in my opinion; in CT you have to be on the lower level before you can grab :P
I don't exactly understand what you guys mean with vaulting. Can you give some references?
Quote from: comicsserg on June 18, 2010, 01:42:15 PM
I don't exactly understand what you guys mean with vaulting. Can you give some references?
At the moment there will be the option to jump over the rail (no interaction animation, just a simple jump) or the animation where you kinda climb over. A vault over the rail would keep your momentum. Instead of climbing you kinda just hurdle over it (sometimes using your hands for support) or roll over it instead. It looks nicer and makes more sense with the speeds you move at.
Quote from: comicsserg on June 18, 2010, 01:42:15 PM
I don't exactly understand what you guys mean with vaulting. Can you give some references?
A good way of thinking about is how YOU would get over a short rail (about waist height). You would plant your hand on top and jump over.
(https://community.projectstealthgame.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.ning.com%2Ffiles%2FJW1BRnPIwCqLEiFtnsmXXl-vHFT0OFULSjThJLW7Um7LVh1GfuFkJc4NefRrAPnTR8l8xResIUwpWa-oX0HlZK93jE6DsCIr%2Fspeed_vault.jpg&hash=5637204e184028bd0a85130726834f4b8b153e14)
Thx guys, now it's very clear :D
I can make some animation for fun to test it but Lennard and other guys must decide, so it is not for sure if it would be in the game.
already did that animation...its also in CT
BAD EXAMPLE HERES A BETTER ONE :
http://www.5min.com/Video/Parkour---How-to-Vault-3222
This is clearly agent in the above video.
Quote from: goodkebab on June 18, 2010, 11:05:20 PM
already did that animation...its also in CT
Good to know, thanks.
if i remember correctly, it looked like you stopped in front of the rail before jumping. but i'm confident we got better animation blending than ct =)
yes, because you had to hit the wall, and then jump before it would vault. Otherwise it would have to be auto, and you know how everyone hates auto movement with spies.
Quote from: goodkebab on June 19, 2010, 08:43:10 PM
yes, because you had to hit the wall, and then jump before it would vault. Otherwise it would have to be auto, and you know how everyone hates auto movement with spies.
I'm pretty sure not one person dislikes the escape moves from DA, and those are auto movement.
well it's not auto because you still need to press the button at the right time
I agree. Auto movement would be like Assassins Creed.
this thread is going nowhere...
Quote from: Rambo on June 20, 2010, 03:37:04 AM
this thread is going nowhere...
that's what she said
I entered the thread to say that we should let the thread die. But, by doing so, I've unsuccessfully let it die. So now I don't know what I'm doing here.
halp
Quote from: goodkebab on June 19, 2010, 08:43:10 PM
yes, because you had to hit the wall, and then jump before it would vault. Otherwise it would have to be auto, and you know how everyone hates auto movement with spies.
There is a difference between auto-movement and smooth movement.
Take Batman: Arkham Asylum for an example. If you hold down the Spacebar (Interaction/Jump) you will jump over gaps and go into vaults in one solid movement. Rather than having to repeatedly press the Spacebar to do it (which is also possible for your information). Comparable to the behavior in Assassins Creed, it will try to smoothly get its way across an obstacle if you hold down the Spacebar.
So, in our case: In order to smoothly "vault" over a ledge or low obstacle, holding down the Spacebar (or whatever key you specify) could be a solution rather than having to press Spacebar at the right time, which is the currently case for all environmental events. If you've played one or both of the games above, you'll know it gives a certain sensation that you are in control and not the game, as all you have to do is hold down the Spacebar, while focusing on what is important: moving around (rather than the scenario: "OMG! A vault! I have to get into there, now I have to double tab the spacebar otherwise I'll run into the wall instead!").
Fluid movement is the key to success!
I think the way Conviction went about it's movement was a good, fluid way of doing it. You had plenty of control and enough of a "heads up" to achieve whatever movement you desired. I don't know how it would work in a SCCT Versus version but I think it would be something to look in to.
Conviction is not comparable in smoothness to Assassins Creed and Batman, I've had numerous of times I wasn't looking at my "point I want to move to" the way the game liked it and I jumped onto the wrong thing, fell down, or even killed someone while I didn't want it. Judging by that: Making it like Conviction will be as worse as auto-movement.
-- nope, this is not Off-Topic --
Oww cmon.
I don't see anything constructive in this thread, as I suppose you've already discussed it, because the animation has to be prepared differently depending on the approach taken.
Thereore: penis.
ct's animations were quite ok gameplay-wise except for the long ones which you couldn't abort.
Quote from: Rambo on June 21, 2010, 11:44:31 PM
ct's animations were quite ok gameplay-wise except for the long ones which you couldn't abort.
I think this is quite true.
CT's animations, and how they were implemented were fine. The only thing I think needed a little work was...
-When jumping (Vaulting!) over a hand rail, make a way that you can do a quick turn and hold onto it instead of just jumping off. (Perhaps it's the difference between holding Space over a hand rail, and Just tapping)
-CT had some times when it just would NOT register a grab spot on a wall or something similar. To which you just jump at an area for a little bit looking stupid, then move an inch over and figure out it works now. Tightening that up seems like it would be nice.
That's about all I can think of, but other than that... not much else to say.
Quote from: Cronky on June 22, 2010, 12:59:50 AM
-CT had some times when it just would NOT register a grab spot on a wall or something similar. To which you just jump at an area for a little bit looking stupid, then move an inch over and figure out it works now.
I noticed that too. Just try running sideway and grab onto a vents edge with a jump you will fail and just look like some kind of an acrobat who jumps sideways for attention.
The thing i really fear is that the controls would work too "perfectly" and the spy would just stick to anything that can be grabbed.
That's indeed something that would need to be "Tested" (Seems like someone might get a kick out of this word), but as long as it's at least at the level of CT will be acceptable. Just would be NICE to have it be a little better.
In theory: Yes, you can grab anything which has space for the spies hands and climb on anything that has the space for his body.
Though, that can be undesirable at times, therefore, at the mappers discretion, "Block EE"-volumes will be placed. Do mind though, we can't make half the map climbable, but not the other half, otherwise it will result in the same frustration as the ungrabable spots in CT, or the undestroyable buildings in BF:BC2, whereas the rest can be torn to pieces (so fuckin' frustrating!).
A guideline will have to be made like: In all maps, object X and Y are climbable, but under no circumstance, object C will be climbable.
That makes sense, it's much like the psychology of game design.
If you make a certain piece always unclimbable, eventually the player will instinctively know that said object will never be climbable.
Just certain set pieces in CT were set poorly. Deftec is always my example, and that Train Car that had it's side against the Spy Spawn area was just a trouble spot because of it since the whole wall was an instant climb over (Instead of a climb atop) ledge. The box being in the way negated the whole thing.
...but that's just me rambling, trying not to just repeat what you said..
Quote from: LennardF1989 on June 22, 2010, 10:33:53 AM
In theory: Yes, you can grab anything which has space for the spies hands and climb on anything that has the space for his body.
Though, that can be undesirable at times, therefore, at the mappers discretion, "Block EE"-volumes will be placed. Do mind though, we can't make half the map climbable, but not the other half, otherwise it will result in the same frustration as the ungrabable spots in CT, or the undestroyable buildings in BF:BC2, whereas the rest can be torn to pieces (so fuckin' frustrating!).
A guideline will have to be made like: In all maps, object X and Y are climbable, but under no circumstance, object C will be climbable.
You can solve this by requiring the player to hold in the jump key in order to grab a surface... similar to making it so that if a player approaches a rail and holds jump ==> spy hops over and sets up for rail grab. Player approaches rail and taps jump ==> spy just hops over and drops to lower level. Oh, and player drops to floor and holds Q ==> does landing roll. Player just holds movement key ==> no roll.
Autoroll and autograb are annoying as fuck, and anyone who willingly implements those into a game needs to be shot in the testicles.
The game should have as little automation as possible.
What would you guys do without me?
Quote from: Spekkio on June 28, 2010, 03:20:45 AM
Autoroll and autograb are annoying as fuck, and anyone who willingly implements those into a game needs to be shot in the testicles.
The game should have as little automation as possible.
Agree completely.
Quote from: MR.Mic on June 28, 2010, 09:28:09 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on June 28, 2010, 03:20:45 AM
Autoroll and autograb are annoying as fuck, and anyone who willingly implements those into a game needs to be shot in the testicles.
The game should have as little automation as possible.
Agree completely.
Did I say something wrong? I never said anything about adding automation, only holding a specific key to do something in one move (instead of having to tap at the right moment), which you illustrated perfectly in a more concrete way.
Quote from: LennardF1989 on June 28, 2010, 02:52:26 PM
Quote from: MR.Mic on June 28, 2010, 09:28:09 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on June 28, 2010, 03:20:45 AM
Autoroll and autograb are annoying as fuck, and anyone who willingly implements those into a game needs to be shot in the testicles.
The game should have as little automation as possible.
Agree completely.
Did I say something wrong? I never said anything about adding automation, only holding a specific key to do something in one move (instead of having to tap at the right moment), which you illustrated perfectly in a more concrete way.
Ya, I like the way it works in Assassin's Creed / Batman: Arkham Asylum, etc.
Quote from: MR.Mic on June 28, 2010, 09:28:09 AM
Quote from: Spekkio on June 28, 2010, 03:20:45 AM
Autoroll and autograb are annoying as fuck, and anyone who willingly implements those into a game needs to be shot in the testicles.
The game should have as little automation as possible.
Agree completely.