These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Would this work in EVE?

Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#21 - 2012-04-24 02:50:11 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
What then stops you from double-clicking into space every second?
The fact that it would be horribly imprecise and indirect, to the point where it wouldn't be connected to how you move the joystick.

Quote:
So why would this stop a client from doing the same when all the client needs to do is to translate a joystick position into a direction and pass it onto the server every second?
The same reason: the translation would be broken, disconnected, jerky, and completely devoid of any precision of feedback — iow, it would lack every last thing that would make joystick control useful.
Patient 2428190
DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School
#22 - 2012-04-24 02:51:44 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Sure, and it is a hell lot better than walking around in stations.

Somehow does CCP think we would rather like to play with puppets than flying with joystick and cockpit. Will they ever get this?!


Walking in stations stays because it makes another game for them as they get tired of their terrible legacy product.
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-04-24 02:55:12 UTC
Patient 2428190 wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Sure, and it is a hell lot better than walking around in stations.

Somehow does CCP think we would rather like to play with puppets than flying with joystick and cockpit. Will they ever get this?!


Walking in stations stays because it makes another game for them as they get tired of their terrible legacy product.


WiS stays cause if they took it out all the WiS nerds would quit and theyve had enough of that this summer

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes

Marcus Ichiro
IchiCorp
#24 - 2012-04-24 02:58:44 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
It is perfectly doable! You just would not get a super high precision out of it, but why would you expect this? You are already not getting a high precision out of the game. Seems to me that some here are only denying the possibility, because they either lack the imagination or they imagine it would have to be super precise for it to be fun. Roll


I'd rather them actually spend time working on things to improve the game, rather than spending sizable resources in implementing a crappy novelty feature that nobody would use for more than 5 minutes.
Ai Shun
#25 - 2012-04-24 03:06:45 UTC
Kengutsi Akira wrote:
WiS stays cause if they took it out all the WiS nerds would quit and theyve had enough of that this summer


Or ... WiS stays because it is one of the logical evolutions in building a comprehensive science fiction universe that caters for a variety of different play-styles in the same sandbox. (Must be a separate game though ... )
Whitehound
#26 - 2012-04-24 03:15:53 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
Kengutsi Akira wrote:
WiS stays cause if they took it out all the WiS nerds would quit and theyve had enough of that this summer


Or ... WiS stays because it is one of the logical evolutions in building a comprehensive science fiction universe that caters for a variety of different play-styles in the same sandbox. (Must be a separate game though ... )

Nonsense. It is a PvP game. I bet you could exchange all ship models for horses and half the players would not notice it as long as these horses make pew-pew sounds. You want to tell me EVE players suddenly value immersion like it was Elder Scrolls? Never! Ganker start hugging and kissing miners before this will happen. If players cannot use a game mechanic to violate others then it is a dead mechanic. There is however a possibility that I am totally wrong about EVE.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#27 - 2012-04-24 03:27:56 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
You want to tell me EVE players suddenly value immersion like it was Elder Scrolls?

For some, it is a big deal. The idea of commanding a spaceship is what drew me into the game in the first place. Then I fell in love with its [more or less] open-ended environment, rules, and "wild west" atmosphere... and the official lore plays pretty well into those things without getting too specific (which has spawned a whole host of fanfiction and role playing communities).

Whitehound wrote:
If players cannot use a game mechanic to violate others then it is a dead mechanic.

This I can more or less agree with. There should always be a door open to player-oriented destruction in some form or another! Twisted
Ai Shun
#28 - 2012-04-24 03:31:24 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Ai Shun wrote:
Kengutsi Akira wrote:
WiS stays cause if they took it out all the WiS nerds would quit and theyve had enough of that this summer


Or ... WiS stays because it is one of the logical evolutions in building a comprehensive science fiction universe that caters for a variety of different play-styles in the same sandbox. (Must be a separate game though ... )

Nonsense. It is a PvP game. I bet you could exchange all ship models for horses and half the players would not notice it as long as these horses make pew-pew sounds. You want to tell me EVE players suddenly value immersion like it was Elder Scrolls? Never! Ganker start hugging and kissing miners before this will happen. If players cannot use a game mechanic to violate others then it is a dead mechanic. There is however a possibility that I am totally wrong about EVE.


Nice rant. It could even be epic.

Now where in that post did it say WiS would be risk free and devoid of competition and would not embrace the concept of PvP everywhere as in EVE?

Oh right. Nowhere but your imagination? Now **** off.
Mya ElleTerego
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2012-04-24 03:45:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Mya ElleTerego
For the record, I Agree with the OP I Cant see how it could strain the servers, if you left the controls still at the mercy of transveral speeds. I mean you dont need milliseconds, you need a tenth at most. And thats one simple command. Same as you can do now with double click. IT would be pretty sweet. Also I think all ships could do this, I mean a BS wouldnt require much to move with a joystick lol.

BTW im not a fan of this changing the way combat works.
You should still have to target and rely on gun tracking, and all the other stuff that is normal, just give us a cockpit view and allow control of space flight.
Whitehound
#30 - 2012-04-24 03:53:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Ai Shun wrote:
Nice rant. It could even be epic.

Now where in that post did it say WiS would be risk free and devoid of competition and would not embrace the concept of PvP everywhere as in EVE?

Oh right. Nowhere but your imagination? Now **** off.

Who said WiS is risk free? I was under the impression that it left quite a dent in CCP's business plans after Incarna. Or do you think Elder Scrolls is somehow risk free? I am not getting your anger... Shocked

I am also not imagining WiS as a replacement to mining. I would not dream off walking around somewhere and then drill a hole into a wall or an asteroid with some hand mining laser. I hope not! This would be the hell of EVE.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#31 - 2012-04-24 04:28:34 UTC
Mya ElleTerego wrote:
For the record, I Agree with the OP I Cant see how it could strain the servers, if you left the controls still at the mercy of transveral speeds. I mean you dont need milliseconds, you need a tenth at most.
…and in doing so, you've increased the amount of traffic required to go to and from the server by a factor of 10, at the very least, but in reality it will be much higher since people don't actually constantly double-click in space once a second. If they do it on average once every 30 seconds, you've increased the traffic by a factor of 300.

Now multiply that with everyone that needs to be informed about these changes. Suddenly, it's 300¹⁰⁰× more data to handle for a medium-sized fight.

The reason it works in other games is because there are very few people that need to be updated with every change. The only game that I've seen come close to doing it was Planetside, and that's because it was almost all client-side, with everyone else extrapolating from very few data points that were actually sent to the server, causing all kinds of issues as far as looks and hit detection (and cheating) was concerned. Oh, and polling a joystick once every 0.1s is still very very imprecise if it needs to be sent to the server for processing and then returned. If you've ever tried precise mouse manipulation when the cursor moves at 3fps, you'll have a good idea at what you can expect.



Really, the fundamental problem is that movement in EVE is about discrete vectors, not about smooth motion through the manipulation of yaw rates, and it's really the latter that a joystick lets you manipulate precisely.
Jackal Datapaw
Doomheim
#32 - 2012-04-24 05:22:08 UTC
It actually rather simple to understand, one can click into open space as fast as they want, but regardless, there only one data input, so that means you are changing the packet by only a little bit, once that packet is changed, the server then does the calculations, then sends the data back to your client showing you the results of that calculations.

However you put in a joystick, thats where things get fun, as a joysticks will have hundreds of thousands of inputs, basically each one of these inputs tells the client, and then the server what direction the joystick is in. Now with these hundreds of thousands of inputs added to the equation, you are now adding to packet size, and packet load.

Now thing, with 50,000 players of average all loaded with joysticks with lets say 100,000 inputs, you just down do basic math

50,000 x 100,000

the server now has to do an extra 5,000,000,000 input calculations.... Jeeze, that is a lot of calculations for every tick

lets say one tick is every second, and the average person can do at the MOST 10 clicks a second

that means, at the most, the server is calculating 500,000 inputs every second.

So with all these people under one server, while it a lovely idea to put in a joystick, is technically possible? Not really.
Culmen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#33 - 2012-04-24 06:03:38 UTC
Jackal Datapaw wrote:
It actually rather simple to understand, one can click into open space as fast as they want, but regardless, there only one data input, so that means you are changing the packet by only a little bit, once that packet is changed, the server then does the calculations, then sends the data back to your client showing you the results of that calculations.

However you put in a joystick, thats where things get fun, as a joysticks will have hundreds of thousands of inputs, basically each one of these inputs tells the client, and then the server what direction the joystick is in. Now with these hundreds of thousands of inputs added to the equation, you are now adding to packet size, and packet load.

Now thing, with 50,000 players of average all loaded with joysticks with lets say 100,000 inputs, you just down do basic math

50,000 x 100,000

the server now has to do an extra 5,000,000,000 input calculations.... Jeeze, that is a lot of calculations for every tick

lets say one tick is every second, and the average person can do at the MOST 10 clicks a second

that means, at the most, the server is calculating 500,000 inputs every second.

So with all these people under one server, while it a lovely idea to put in a joystick, is technically possible? Not really.



Lets continue with the math.

Suppose there are 200 people in a fleet fight.
Each additional bit has to be relayed to every other person in the fight.

So we fire up the calculator and find that each additional bit per client results in an increase of (n * (n+1)) /2
So in a 200 person fleet fight adding in joystick support results in sending 20,100 bits for each bit of additional information.

Theres a good reason why most games don't do joystick control once the player count starts being measured in the hundreds

There is a fine line between a post and a signature.

Jackal Datapaw
Doomheim
#34 - 2012-04-24 06:08:44 UTC
Culmen wrote:
Jackal Datapaw wrote:
It actually rather simple to understand, one can click into open space as fast as they want, but regardless, there only one data input, so that means you are changing the packet by only a little bit, once that packet is changed, the server then does the calculations, then sends the data back to your client showing you the results of that calculations.

However you put in a joystick, thats where things get fun, as a joysticks will have hundreds of thousands of inputs, basically each one of these inputs tells the client, and then the server what direction the joystick is in. Now with these hundreds of thousands of inputs added to the equation, you are now adding to packet size, and packet load.

Now thing, with 50,000 players of average all loaded with joysticks with lets say 100,000 inputs, you just down do basic math

50,000 x 100,000

the server now has to do an extra 5,000,000,000 input calculations.... Jeeze, that is a lot of calculations for every tick

lets say one tick is every second, and the average person can do at the MOST 10 clicks a second

that means, at the most, the server is calculating 500,000 inputs every second.

So with all these people under one server, while it a lovely idea to put in a joystick, is technically possible? Not really.



Lets continue with the math.

Suppose there are 200 people in a fleet fight.
Each additional bit has to be relayed to every other person in the fight.

So we fire up the calculator and find that each additional bit per client results in an increase of (n * (n+1)) /2
So in a 200 person fleet fight adding in joystick support results in sending 20,100 bits for each bit of additional information.

Theres a good reason why most games don't do joystick control once the player count starts being measured in the hundreds



Yelp, and remember, thats for every tick. The lag, would be extreme
Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#35 - 2012-04-24 08:11:04 UTC
D3F4ULT wrote:
Would a cockpit view and joystick configuration (frigates only) work in a game like EVE Online?

I'm not sure on how practical this could be, but I'm sure it would be fun as hell with frigates.



no, you are in a pod.

I would consider it for bombers/fighters though. Like remote control of drones by guys in texas flying aroudn in afghanistan.

"take controls of fighter/bomber of corpmate"

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]

Di Mulle
#36 - 2012-04-24 08:47:18 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
It is PLAUSIBLE that joystick controls could be added... but CCP would have to make the server "tick" faster ...

Irrelevant. People do not want technical details, they want a joystick in front of them and the impression that they are steering their ship. One can already fly a ship manually. It only needs for the client to accept joystick movements as input for course changes and you will have joystick control.

Why would you even want to send positional information with millisecond precision over the Internet, when you already know it is not going to do? You then work around it and make it possible with what you have got.


I love that kind of thinking.

FYI, I want magical flying carpet, which also makes coffee and delivers girls. Right now. Impossible, very expensive, you say ? Irrelevant. You just lack imagination. I want it now - and for free, of course. Now go on and deliver.

Of course, it is probably pretty feasible to fit a joystick control to an existing system. It will need some work, but the outcome may appear to be negative, for two reasons.

With server still ticking at 1 second cycle, and with people accustomed to almost instant joystick response (it is what, in a range of tens of miliseconds usually ?), the perceived reception of lag will be huge. People who "do not want technical details" , i.e with I-want-it-now-you-just-suck attitude will flood forums and every gaming press with whine. Way more than now.

The second reason is rather hidden. With people accustomed to current mechanics they do not give inputs very often, there is not much reason for that and double-clicking is tiresome. With a joystick a number of inputs will increase significantly - simply because I can, or my hands are shaking. Of course, you can filter excessive input right at the client, thus reducing bandwith and server load. But then we come back to the first question - what it was for at first. You now are holding joystick instead of mouse, but nothing has really changed. Was it worth it ?
<<Insert some waste of screen space here>>
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#37 - 2012-04-24 08:48:19 UTC
Ah this topic again. Once about every three months it rears its ugly head. Simply put; joystick mode is not EVE.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#38 - 2012-04-24 09:00:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Misanth
I guess it was about that time to get this topic again, been a while since the last.

Edit;

Marlona Sky wrote:
Ah this topic again. Once about every three months it rears its ugly head. Simply put; joystick mode is not EVE.


I should stop playing World of Tanks while posting, makes for some stupid ass replies twelve minutes late. P

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Norian Lonark
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2012-04-24 09:24:34 UTC
I would say there are already enough twitch games around and more coming in the pipeline I prefer being in my pod controlling the ship via mind control rather than joystick.

Also I think the way WIS could be progressing is very interesting.

I really like the exploration ideas they were talking about at Fanfest and I would much rather be able to disembark and go exploring or having some public places in stations than be able to control my Rifter with a joystick.

Start wide, expand further, and never look back

Aedron
Aedron Holding.
#40 - 2012-04-24 09:42:24 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Do a forum search. Technical limitations etc.

You do a search. The keywords you can use are "imagination" and "lack".


Hello Troll.

Technical limitations are a hard limit. Nothing to do with imagination.
Now, please go back to your troll-cave.