Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: CT27 on March 21, 2016, 02:17:40 pm
-
Recently in Blue Planet Complete, the BP team released an updated version of the main FS2 campaign called FS2 Blue which had a number of changes.
Hypothetically, if the main FS1 campaign was to be 'redone' in a similar fashion, what would you like to see changed?
-
capships that do something
-
Since people have said the in-game text lies to you about the Avenger vs. Prometheus, I think if there's ever a 're-do' of FS1 like this, Prometheus stats (shield damage, maybe range, etc.) should be buffed so it actually is better than the Avenger.
-
The campaign "What If: Another Great War" is a pretty good reimagining of the FS1 campaign.
-
Railguns. Freaking railguns or some other anti-capital weapons for all races. I hate capship battles in FS1
-
Since people have said the in-game text lies to you about the Avenger vs. Prometheus, I think if there's ever a 're-do' of FS1 like this, Prometheus stats (shield damage, maybe range, etc.) should be buffed so it actually is better than the Avenger.
It's not that it says the Prometheus has better shield damage it's that it says it does more damage in general, both shield and hull, and the banshee claims to do more than the Prometheus.
Frankly, it would be kind of dull if each new weapon was straight up better than the last as the descriptors for each suggest.
Also, Synaptic bomb is near useless.
-
Once upon a time I had a dream of tackling this myself.
If I had to pick just one something, it would be to combine Evangelist and Doomsday into a single mission that captures the full scale of the Battle of Deneb. I actually had a pretty good working first draft of this at one point, but held back on releasing it in order to avoid stealing someone else's thunder. That thunder never materialized, and this all happened a half decade ago, though, so I think it's safe to talk about now. :)
In general, just making the "big" battles feel bigger now that engine limitations are no longer such a constraining factor. And of course all the AI tweak goodness.
-
I would add squadrons, as FS2 uses them and even references some from FS1:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=84282 (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=84282)
-
Polishing FS1 up to an acceptable standard is a topic that comes up a lot and there are tons of good ideas for it but nobody has managed to actually organise a project to do it.
-
Railguns. Freaking railguns or some other anti-capital weapons for all races. I hate capship battles in FS1
I think giant laser cannons would be best, personally. Railguns don't have the right feel for FS1, but if those enormous turrets on the Orion actually fired big flashy WW2-style blasts they'd be a lot more interesting.
-
capships that do something
While it would indeed feel cool, it would actually be counter to the way the universe is in FS1. The fact that capships can't kill each other quickly was actually a major plot point. It was the reason why the Terran - Vasudan war had gone on so long. Neither side was able to actually crush the other side's capships.
-
Karajorma's got a point canon wise. However, it still could be done...if done right. :) Say for example the Terrans were developing railgun technology for ship to ship weapons and they were in the development phase with some performance issues or reliability problems. Take that and run with it :)
Just my two GTA cents worth!
All the best,
Jadehawk
-
I would go with classic blue railguns for terrans and yellow plasma drivers for vasudans and I would not make those weapons very strong. Maybe two times as Terran Huge Turret? The point is to make player aware that dedicated anti-capital ship weapons exist, but is not as efficient as we would like them to be. In practice, capship battles would be only a one quarter faster than retail ones.
Yes - I would make weapons which do almost nothing but looking cool :P. And yes - for canon reasons.
Whatever. Just rid off all those awful blobs away from me!
-
The blob is freespace, the blob is life.
Just make it look good.
Do whatever the hell you want, but make the Capitals have OMPH when they fight. The only ship that has that is the Lucifer, thanks to its beams.
-
capships that do something
While it would indeed feel cool, it would actually be counter to the way the universe is in FS1. The fact that capships can't kill each other quickly was actually a major plot point. It was the reason why the Terran - Vasudan war had gone on so long. Neither side was able to actually crush the other side's capships.
Dose bombers tho...
Seriously, FS1 as a setting doesn't really make much sense. Bolting a couple of dozen Apollos to the side of an Orion would vastly improve the destroyers effectiveness, but they don't do it, for game balance reasons obviously.
I would say range is a factor. Increase the range if FS1 anti cap blobs so they can engage at three or four thousand metres, giving them something to do before the fighters and bombers come I to play. That and more use of fusion mortars and similar.
Of course doing that would mean fundamentally changing the ships, their turrets, capabilities etc., so it's a bit more involved than simple, light touch rebalancing.
-
Polishing FS1 up to an acceptable standard is a topic that comes up a lot and there are tons of good ideas for it but nobody has managed to actually organise a project to do it.
dude did you even see what I wrote above (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=91743.msg1816497#msg1816497)
-
Sure, but that has no relevance to what I'm talking about, which is all the conversations I've seen in the last couple of years about improvements people would like to make to FS1.
-
FS1 capship battles are fine, they need some visular polish (adding trails to the THT, VHT and SMT does it) but otherwise not much to change there on the table side ... sprincle in some cruiser support (Fusion Mortar FTW) and it looks good
Now bombers on the other hand need a little love in a reimagining of FS, away from the dive bomber style to something more akin torpedo boats or somthing (all FS1 era-bombers, exception for the Athena and the Zeus) are already patterned with a "flying fortress"-design in mind, esspeically the Osiris and Amun
But what I would want most off all: MAKE USE OF THE SD DEMON! and not just as a big target, the Demon can be made to look awesome (see ST:R)
-
FS1 capship battles are not "fine". An Orion is incapable of destroying anything at all except by ramming. Capships in FS1 have absolutely no gameplay presence except as big setpieces to get blown up by bombs or the Lucifer.
-
The campaign "What If: Another Great War" is a pretty good reimagining of the FS1 campaign.
^ this
You could do another reimagining of FS1, but you'd have to bring something to the table that AGW doesn't. Does everyone in this thread has even played it?
-
FS1 capship battles are not "fine". An Orion is incapable of destroying anything at all except by ramming. Capships in FS1 have absolutely no gameplay presence except as big setpieces to get blown up by bombs or the Lucifer.
Play this (http://www.freespacemods.net/e107_plugins/download/download.php?action=view&id=21). Remove the Stilletos from the Athenas in the last mission, cheat away the Nephilim wings as well as the Fenrirs and then watch the Galatea broadside away at the Demon. (note: the SD Demon is doing some sub-optimal maneuvering if the bombers are out of the picture). Polish will be added in a new release
(yes it will take a while but it looks well enough, and it has presence)
-
I can't find anything about this "Another Great War" people have mentioned on the FS Wiki. Where can I download it and what is different about it than FS1?
-
I can't find anything about this "Another Great War" people have mentioned on the FS Wiki. Where can I download it and what is different about it than FS1?
SF_Junky made it a while back but the links are all dead ends now... I think I have a beta/release without patches on my backup drive - PM me if you like (but I am not responsible if it doesn't work)
It is more in the style of FS2 and was supposed to plant some seeds for SF_Junky's post-Capella campaigns (Stormfornt)
-
The fact that you can't even download it any more is, I think, a good case for a new remaster of FS1.
-
Railguns. Freaking railguns or some other anti-capital weapons for all races. I hate capship battles in FS1
I think giant laser cannons would be best, personally. Railguns don't have the right feel for FS1, but if those enormous turrets on the Orion actually fired big flashy WW2-style blasts they'd be a lot more interesting.
(http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7_Iowa_pic.jpg) (https://www.google.com/search?q=battleship+broadside+hd)
Videos, there's some really cool clips buried in there, just have to skim through and find them (unless you don't mind the wait):
-
The fact that you can't even download it any more is, I think, a good case for a new remaster of FS1.
Well, this one is still there ... I am just not certain if the version I have is safe to release to the general population without SF_Junky's consent - it might turn out to be an inferior version or something similiar that would reflect badly on the original creator; to me it is a matter of respect to have it signed off by the person that actually did all the work
-
I haven't played it - I can't play Freespace without beam weapons involved any more - and haven't tested to see if it works but the download at the bottom seems to work
http://sectorgame.com/fsfiles/?dir=uploads/Projects%20-%20Campaigns%20-%20TCs/Campaigns/SCP%20Campaigns
You may need the Storm Front files as well judging by the original thread.
-
If you see Freespace 1 from the view of FreeSpace 2... Shivans in FreeSpace 1 needs Beam Weaponary and Flaks, next to different locations for its missions, because of all the Node-, and Date Inconsistencies.
AFAIK AGW does not feature this completely like it was mentioned during FreeSpace 2's "The Great Hunt". I remember that a "Clash of the Titan"-Mission with a beamed weaponized Tantalus was only in a downloadable single mission.
Also it should take much more missions to have even a shield system. And the first weapons, like the Avenger, should be much weaker.
But if you see FreeSpace 2 from the view of FreeSpace 1, like you usually do, because FreeSpace 1 was the first one. FreeSpace 2 makes much more mistakes and is the real game that have all the errors and inconsistencies, that were never fixed ;)
-
Yes, well... Freeespace 2 was well-written, Freespace 1 really wasn't. Therefore more people will base their headcannon on the better written one.
-
If you see Freespace 1 from the view of FreeSpace 2... Shivans in FreeSpace 1 needs Beam Weaponary and Flaks, next to different locations for its missions, because of all the Node-, and Date Inconsistencies.
No you don't; play BP.
-
Yes, well... Freeespace 2 was well-written, Freespace 1 really wasn't. Therefore more people will base their headcannon on the better written one.
FS1 was written... good but not great, I give it a 7/10, FS2 I would give a 9.5/10. I would actually like to change the story to FS1 more than anything else, it should introduce plot points drawn on in later games:
-Give the GTI a part in the story, and give hints of a possible future rebellion
-Show or give hints to the existence of the Sathanas and the larger shivan fleet
-Possible reference to Knossos portals
-
I can't find anything about this "Another Great War" people have mentioned on the FS Wiki. Where can I download it and what is different about it than FS1?
Off the top of my head I remember The Big Bang got turned into a pretty lengthy mission, and the Taranis got upgraded to a Lilith and had a mission or two prior to dealing with it where it just came in and wrecked everything. Shivans had beams and allies had flak. But the Lilith was the most memorable, it made chipping away at the boulder much more satisfying the way it was built up to and more of a challenge with a Lilith instead of a mere Cain. There was certainly plenty more. Missions varied from mildly tweaked to greatly reworked and even the occasional original one. Shivan capital ships having beams and allies not but having flak worked surprisingly well. Iirc the missions on average were more lengthy than their FS1 counterparts.
-
-Show or give hints to the existence of the Sathanas and the larger shivan fleet
-Possible reference to Knossos portals
Neither of these would make sense in the context of the FS1 timeframe.
-
-Show or give hints to the existence of the Sathanas and the larger shivan fleet
-Possible reference to Knossos portals
Neither of these would make sense in the context of the FS1 timeframe.
Why? :confused:
-
-Show or give hints to the existence of the Sathanas and the larger shivan fleet
-Possible reference to Knossos portals
Neither of these would make sense in the context of the FS1 timeframe.
Why? :confused:
How, exactly, would you make reference to either of those things while still having them be unknown when FS2 rolled around?
-
-Show or give hints to the existence of the Sathanas and the larger shivan fleet
-Possible reference to Knossos portals
Neither of these would make sense in the context of the FS1 timeframe.
Why? :confused:
How, exactly, would you make reference to either of those things while still having them be unknown when FS2 rolled around?
Personally, for the Sathanas, I would add some subtle hints in the ancient monologues of ships far larger than the lucifer, (or ones that can destroy stars).
But I will grant you the knossos portal could be left out
Fs1 and fs2's stories were more disconnected than I would have liked; it seemed to me :v: was making things up as they went along, rather than having a story planned out in advance. Hence why we see no sign of the Sathanas in FS1, and no sign of the lucifer in FS2
-
Personally, for the Sathanas, I would add some subtle hints in the ancient monologues of ships far larger than the lucifer, (or ones that can destroy stars).
But I will grant you the knossos portal could be left out
Would the Ancients have seen the Sathanas? I always believed that they were developed after the Ancients were destroyed (the Lucifer could have been an early test prototype).
Fs1 and fs2's stories were more disconnected than I would have liked; it seemed to me :v: was making things up as they went along, rather than having a story planned out in advance. Hence why we see no sign of the Sathanas in FS1, and no sign of the lucifer in FS2
Like many "first" games, FS1 was a complete storyline that could have stood alone. Therefore, to continue the storyline, you would have to add something that wasn't there before. Also, FS1 did end with Alpha 1 saying that the Shivans would be back.
-
It's strongly implied that the nebula in FS2 was an Ancient system that met with the same fate as Capella.
-
It's strongly implied that the nebula in FS2 was an Ancient system that met with the same fate as Capella.
By the fans.
In terms of the actual game there's no time or space to connect the two events because it kind of ends.
-
You're right, it's not explicitly stated in the text. You have to actually think to see all the clues.
-
You're right, it's not explicitly stated in the text.
So then why are you calling it strong? It's not. Indeed, thinking on the clues, they're all also strong only in the sense they're strongly ambiguous. It would tie the story together thematically very well if your ideas were true, but they really don't have to be true. The ambiguity means that both interpretations are equally valid. Welcome to criticism.
Or I suppose we could go for the idea the Shivan Comm Nodes were actually really important since they centerpieced one of the more fondly remembered missions involving the game so obviously they must have special significance, but that's not provable either.
-
We don't know that the Shivans used the Sathanas class to cause the nebula supernova, or for that matter that the Ancients whose messages were left behind in Altair would have any knowledge of what happened to the system in the first place.
-
So then why are you calling it strong? It's not. Indeed, thinking on the clues, they're all also strong only in the sense they're strongly ambiguous. It would tie the story together thematically very well if your ideas were true, but they really don't have to be true. The ambiguity means that both interpretations are equally valid. Welcome to criticism.
if you go back and read the actual context you'll note that i was replying to someone asking for textual evidence that the ancients would have met a sathanas
-
It's strongly implied that the nebula in FS2 was an Ancient system that met with the same fate as Capella.
By the fans.
In terms of the actual game there's no time or space to connect the two events because it kind of ends.
It's implied simply because you're told the nebula was created via supernova, and it happens to contain an ancient subspace gate as well.
2 + 2 /= 5
Freespace 2 is like Dark Souls in that you have to put the pieces together, because there isn't terribly a lot of time due to how bad the situation is.
-
The game screams at you that the nebula was created by the Shivans.
At 1540 hours, the GTD Aquitaine entered the subspace portal in Gamma Draconis and jumped to our current position. We have entered a nebula, a vast and dense ionized field, and possibly the remnant of a supernova. We have travelled farther than any Terrans in the history of subspace travel.
First briefing you get when you're through the portal. It's a supernova remnant, the game climaxes in a supernova, the text is yelling.
-
To weigh in on the cap ship debate, I think leaving things as is in the game is fine. There's nothing to be said that the music, special effects, and IMPACT of capital ship lasers couldn't be upgraded.
There are only two capship fights in FS1 anyway between an Orion and a Shivan vessel. It's not a big deal.
-
Since people have said the in-game text lies to you about the Avenger vs. Prometheus, I think if there's ever a 're-do' of FS1 like this, Prometheus stats (shield damage, maybe range, etc.) should be buffed so it actually is better than the Avenger.
It's not that it says the Prometheus has better shield damage it's that it says it does more damage in general, both shield and hull, and the banshee claims to do more than the Prometheus.
Frankly, it would be kind of dull if each new weapon was straight up better than the last as the descriptors for each suggest.
People in this forum though have said the Avenger is actually better than the Prometheus and there's virtually no reason to take the Prometheus. Shouldn't the Prometheus have at least one advantage over the Avenger?
-
If you fire only a single shot, the Prometheus is better. There's almost no situation in FS where that would be helpful though.
-
Against shields the difference is laughable. A single Prometheus shot will do 0.4 extra damage compared to a single Avenger shot so it doesn't even make for a good alpha weapon against highly shielded Shivans. And even then it's not strictly better as it still has less range and slower shots that are easier to dodge.
-
But the avenger has a ****ty weapon sound
-
Hands down, make the Avenger sound a little more iconic.
I sadly remember it for sounding more like a silenced weed whacker than a gun.
Other things? Hard to say, as FS1 is in a vastly different era than FS2. Though I'd like to see a slightly higher RoF from the capships, in the FS1, nearly everything sucked in one way or another 'cept the Herc, a pile of Interceptors, and our ever so smart AI wingmen to die to a misplaced missile XP
-
What should be changed about the Prometheus to make it better?
-
Make it work like the Prom S.
-
You want to change-up cap-ship weapons? Make some salvo-fire variants of the traditional weapons.
-
You want to change-up cap-ship weapons? Make some salvo-fire variants of the traditional weapons.
That would own.
-
Yeah, I think the best thing for FS1 capship weapons is just to have bigger, harder-hitting laser bolts firing from all those massive turrets.
-
Honestly: FS1 probably needs the ST:R treatment. New voice acting, primarily, but also lots and lots of gameplay and mission changes.
On the topic of the Avenger/Prometheus: the Avenger is a projectile weapon, right? Probably a railgun (it makes more sense, since it drains energy, and it would be easier to fit into a fighter because you don't need to carry propellant). The existing effects feel all wrong for that to me -- they're just small blob rounds with a weak sound. I'd take the kinetic weapon idea and run with it -- give the thing an ammo count, and very little shield damage, but a medium amount of shield-piercing damage. For effects, I'd go with cylindrical glowing bolts, rounded on the ends. (A lot like Prom-S bolts, but a bit narrower and with parallel edges instead of being oblong.) Then, a brief, tense metallic effect for the sound -- something a bit similar to the blob turret firing sound, actually. Maybe even make it fire in bursts?
The idea is that this is an early, hacked-together anti-Shivan weapon that's fairly crap, but gives you something to fight them with, and it's immediately replaced with the more reliable, easier-to-use Prom when that rolls around. Although admittedly, that's a bit at odds with the Avenger's backstory as a weapon developed for the V-T War and modified for anti-shield work at the last minute.
-
If you're gonna make the Avenger look more like a projectile weapon, how about having tracer rounds included in the stream? I believe there's a flag for that.
-
Isn't the stream already 100% tracer?
-
What exactly does "stream" mean? The stream of bolts?
-
I mean, have it act like modern machine guns, where every 3rd or whatever round is a tracer. Therefore, in the game, you'd see small projectiles for the Avenger's fire, with some bright tracer shots mixed in.
-
Hmmm. Interesting idea.
If you really wanted to run with it you could even do smoke trails. It makes slightly less sense in space than an atmosphere, I think, especially if it's a railgun, but...yeah, no, it still works, because the burning tracers would create gas.
-
Give the Prometheus a slight buff so there's a real reason to pick it over the Avenger.
-
Since people have said the in-game text lies to you about the Avenger vs. Prometheus, I think if there's ever a 're-do' of FS1 like this, Prometheus stats (shield damage, maybe range, etc.) should be buffed so it actually is better than the Avenger.
It's not that it says the Prometheus has better shield damage it's that it says it does more damage in general, both shield and hull, and the banshee claims to do more than the Prometheus.
Frankly, it would be kind of dull if each new weapon was straight up better than the last as the descriptors for each suggest.
People in this forum though have said the Avenger is actually better than the Prometheus and there's virtually no reason to take the Prometheus. Shouldn't the Prometheus have at least one advantage over the Avenger?
I didn't say the Prometheus shouldn't have some advantage over the Avenger, I am just arguing that it would pretty uninteresting if it were just straight up better.
I'd rather see a change where one of them is better, or at least good enough in most situations, but the other weapons excel in specific situations, that make them more worth taking if you are expecting it.
Much like the fighters, none of them are strictly better than the others, it's situational, weapons should be somewhat situational rather than just a clear, linear progression where the newest gun is the best.
-
Like in FreeSpace 2 Blue!
-
Somewhat random thought, anyone else think the Lucifer should be 'bigger'?
-
Bigger as in physically larger, or bigger as in more guns ?
-
Well, it's supposed to be a Super Destroyer. Canonically, it's 2,777m in length (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Lucifer#Statistics), compared with the largest (now decommissioned) seagoing vessel (that I could Google), the Seawise Giant, clocking in at 458m (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawise_Giant) (also known as Happy Giant; Jahre Viking; Knock Nevis, post-name "Mont").
I don't think the Lucifer's massive size (or any capship in FS/FS2, for that matter) seems accurately represented. Just look at these, then imagine something more than 5 times larger:
For (http://www.oldsaltblog.com/2014/03/visualizing-big-ships-queen-mary-2-maersk-mc-kinney-moller-seawise-giant/) scale (https://worldct.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/the-biggest-ships-afloat/):
(https://worldct.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/800px-en_mary_titanic-svg.png)
(http://www.oldsaltblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/USS-Enterprise-size-comparisons-640.jpg)
(https://worldct.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/2000px-bateaux_comparaison2-svg.png)
(http://www.oldsaltblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/shipcompinfographic.jpg)
(http://img02.deviantart.net/f7b7/i/2009/028/0/2/star_ship_comparison_by_yomerome.jpg)
-
The Lucifer is long but quite skinny, so its internal volume is actually lower than the Demon. Scaling it up to 4-5km in length would make it more threatening
-
I'll just raise my hand for keeping the Lucifer the way it is. It inspired dread in me so it did its job.
-
Freespace sizes are accurately represented, it's just that by default your FOV is rather huge. You can lower it through the -fov flag which will make big ships look properly big at the cost of combat awareness.
-
Need a way to toggle FOV on the fly, bindable to a key.
-
Moar Carthage :D
-
Obligatory Freespace ship size post
(http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu320/FabianW/carrier_comp_4.jpg)
-
Freespace sizes are accurately represented, it's just that by default your FOV is rather huge. You can lower it through the -fov flag which will make big ships look properly big at the cost of combat awareness.
For most (proper PC) first person shooters, I'd say that 75 degrees is pretty small. For me, 75 degrees is like borderline motion sickness inducing for a FPS. 90 degrees or bust. Thankfully Freespace doesn't really do the motion sickness thing, being in space and all that.
But yeah, lowering FoV in FS2 definitely has a direct relation to perception of scale. Take these two screenshots for example, the first one taken with a FoV of 75 and the second with 55. From exactly the same distance:
(http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s490/kingspoon/WoD/fov75_zpsiu2c0bgs.jpg~original)
(http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s490/kingspoon/WoD/fov55_zpsxxjmvpm3.jpg~original)
(Yes, I know that's WoD and not FS2. I had WoD open in FRED as I was making this post so it was more convenient for me)
There's of course also the fact that sense of scale is hard to really get right in space, due to the lack of objects to compare with. No landscape with tree's and humans and such. Put an Orion in say, a level of Half life 2 and suddenly you can get an actual sense of how bloody massive the thing actually is.
Also, according to the wiki, there is supposedly some perspective distortion happening at the default 75 FoV at the edges.
-
That's because -fov 0.75 in Freespace isn't the same as setting FOV to 75 in other games. Most games have a direct correlation between their FOV settting and the actual Field of View in degrees. In Freespace the default 0.75 FOV is actually something else. It's the vertical angle of view, in radians, multiplied by 1.39626348. for some reason.
First, you'd have to convert 0.75 radians to degrees which would be ~43 degrees.
Next you multiply that by 1.39626348 to get ~60 AoV. How this converts to FoV depends on your monitor's aspect ratio, but let's assume you're using a 16:9 widescreen one. Multiply 60 by (16/9) and you get 106.666...
The default Freespace FOV for a 16:9 monitor is actually ~107 degrees, which is quite high and this is why it causes "fisheye" distortions and makes big ships less impressive.
For a 16:9 monitor you need to divide whatever FOV you actually want by 142.2222 to get the number you need to use with the -fov flag. So if you want a 90 degree FOV you need to use -fov 0.6328.
On an old school 4:3 monitor the default FoV would be only 80, something that's much more natural.
Also you couldn't fit a full sized Orion into HL2, it's too big for the Hammer editor. The largest hammer can do is ~0.8km in height, width, and lenght while the Orion is 2030m long. You could obviously fit the model in but you couldn't make it big enough to illustrate the difference between the player , a tree, and that thing.
-
If ships would scatter scale accurate corpses everywhere then we'd have great size referents!!!
-
That's because -fov 0.75 in Freespace isn't the same as setting FOV to 75 in other games. Most games have a direct correlation between their FOV settting and the actual Field of View in degrees. In Freespace the default 0.75 FOV is actually something else. It's the vertical angle of view, in radians, multiplied by 1.39626348. for some reason.
First, you'd have to convert 0.75 radians to degrees which would be ~43 degrees.
Next you multiply that by 1.39626348 to get ~60 AoV. How this converts to FoV depends on your monitor's aspect ratio, but let's assume you're using a 16:9 widescreen one. Multiply 60 by (16/9) and you get 106.666...
The default Freespace FOV for a 16:9 monitor is actually ~107 degrees, which is quite high and this is why it causes "fisheye" distortions and makes big ships less impressive.
For a 16:9 monitor you need to divide whatever FOV you actually want by 142.2222 to get the number you need to use with the -fov flag. So if you want a 90 degree FOV you need to use -fov 0.6328.
On an old school 4:3 monitor the default FoV would be only 80, something that's much more natural.
Yeah, it's really weird. Another reminder we're dealing with an engine written in 1999 I guess :p
I'm just thinking on how to get this information more widespread known to all the players. The fisheye effect is there, but its so much harder to notice in a space game with no good points of visual reference. So a lot of players are going to end up playing on a too wide of a FoV by default and then feel the scales for the ships are off. (incidently, I've been using default FoV for a long time myself, but my screens are 16:10). I feel ideally the scp should make the default to say 0.65 (so 85 fov on 16:10 and 94 fov on 16:9) or have it listed as a note on the launchers that FoV should probably be adjusted for a better experience. Or something.
Also you couldn't fit a full sized Orion into HL2, it's too big for the Hammer editor. The largest hammer can do is ~0.8km in height, width, and lenght while the Orion is 2030m long. You could obviously fit the model in but you couldn't make it big enough to illustrate the difference between the player , a tree, and that thing.
Haha, didn't know that (I don't actually know **** about the HL2 engine and editor), my example is now ruined.
-
Also this is totally offtopic and I apolgize for hijacking the thread with dumb FoV poopoo.
I'll make a new thread about that in the SCP forums.
-
This is something of a problem for just about all video games (well, I guess it doesn't apply to things like isometric games or RTSs, but other than that...). Things always seem smaller than they are, because we're dealing with a monitor that doesn't take up our whole field of vision. I feel like there must be a solution (other than VR), but I don't know what it is.
I really want to see a better Lucifer model, myself. Maybe using the HTL Cain/Lilith design language, for the arms? It's times like this I wish I wasn't terrible at modeling.