These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

CQ ship view
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shanlara
Weatherlight Industry
#21 - 2011-11-11 16:37:45 UTC
Pyre leFay wrote:

Or only CQ screen should show the ship in static dry dock as it is attached to a gantry of some sort that you cant access to better show scale with little figures of crew going about their business.


I remember seeing a very early version of CQ at fanfest, I believe 06-07 ? don't quote me on the year and there you actually saw a amarr cruiser being docked up to a ledge/dry dock and it looked amazing, just the scale itself was so impressive, also I remember there being another showing of it from the gallente CQ showing the domi back then, if used as a dry dock the frig scale wouldn't be an issue at all, since that seems to be the whole point of the scaling issue atm.
Shanlara
Weatherlight Industry
#22 - 2011-11-11 16:40:18 UTC
Hiram Alexander wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception wrote:
Monocular cues provide depth information when viewing a scene with one eye.

Motion parallax – When an observer moves, the apparent relative motion of several stationary objects against a background gives hints about their relative distance. If information about the direction and velocity of movement is known, motion parallax can provide absolute depth information.[3] This effect can be seen clearly when driving in a car. Nearby things pass quickly, while far off objects appear stationary. Some animals that lack binocular vision due to wide placement of the eyes employ parallax more explicitly than humans for depth cueing (e.g. some types of birds, which bob their heads to achieve motion parallax, and squirrels, which move in lines orthogonal to an object of interest to do the same).

Depth from motion – One form of depth from motion, kinetic depth perception, is determined by dynamically changing object size. As objects in motion become smaller, they appear to recede into the distance or move farther away; objects in motion that appear to be getting larger seem to be coming closer. Using kinetic depth perception enables the brain to calculate time to crash distance (aka time to collision or time to contact - TTC) at a particular velocity. When driving, we are constantly judging the dynamically changing headway (TTC) by kinetic depth perception.


If you haven't learned how to use the above cues to judge distance and scale, then I can only conclude that you have never actually looked at anything other than a computer screen.

You know, instead of making a fascetious comment, verging on personal attack against this guy, you could have written a paragraph or two about why you think those quotes are actually relevant to the discussion.


And the thing is, there is nothing to set the ships in contrast about distance, you can't even look under them or above them to get a sense of distance, unless i'm getting more or less blind, which could be :P
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#23 - 2011-11-11 18:01:20 UTC
Shanlara wrote:
Hiram Alexander wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
If you haven't learned how to use the above cues to judge distance and scale, then I can only conclude that you have never actually looked at anything other than a computer screen.

You know, instead of making a fascetious comment, verging on personal attack against this guy, you could have written a paragraph or two about why you think those quotes are actually relevant to the discussion.


And the thing is, there is nothing to set the ships in contrast about distance, you can't even look under them or above them to get a sense of distance, unless i'm getting more or less blind, which could be :P


From the end of the balcony itself, you're right. However, as I said before, walking along the gangway gives you a very strong sense of scale. That's why those cues are relevant. Looking at a scene on a computer screen is more or less the same as looking at a scene with only one eye. You have to change your perspective (on the screen - bobbing your head around isn't going to help!) to get a sense of depth, distance and size.

Maintenance drones or something buzzing around the ship would help. At the highest interior graphics setting, there are also currently clouds of smoke or steam that hover just beyond the end of the balcony to provide some point of reference.
Shanlara
Weatherlight Industry
#24 - 2011-11-11 18:51:16 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:


From the end of the balcony itself, you're right. However, as I said before, walking along the gangway gives you a very strong sense of scale. That's why those cues are relevant. Looking at a scene on a computer screen is more or less the same as looking at a scene with only one eye. You have to change your perspective (on the screen - bobbing your head around isn't going to help!) to get a sense of depth, distance and size.

Maintenance drones or something buzzing around the ship would help. At the highest interior graphics setting, there are also currently clouds of smoke or steam that hover just beyond the end of the balcony to provide some point of reference.


So to you it makes sense that the futher you walk along the balcony walkway the futher away the ship is pushed from your vision...
Xenial Jesse Taalo
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2011-11-11 18:54:37 UTC
That was pretty arrogant Daedalus. Suggesting a human is less skilled at.. visually perceiving. It's not something we do consciously.

Walking along the gangway doesn't give a strong sense of scale, it gives a broken sense of scale. The perception is that of a behemoth at one end, a school bus at the other. It's nothing to do with your wikipedia quotes teaching a human how to see. The entire hangar and the ship in it does not scale; technical and true. The whole thing could be a 2D wallpaper if it wasn't for the swaying ship.

Since it does not scale, it obviously does not appear to scale either. This only makes sense to a human brain when the object is (literal) astronomically far away and we know that the ship isn't.

We don't need reference points to notice this is wrong and we don't need to know that we are noticing this is wrong, to notice this is wrong. I'm not sure if you were really trying to go with "your eyes and brain are doing it wrong" back there.
Knoppaz
distress signals
#26 - 2011-11-11 19:28:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Knoppaz
The scale is strong in his hangar.. Roll

Anyway, the engine does what it always did.. rendering 3d graphics in the way it gets the data. If the data is wrong by error or on purpose then the 3d graphics look strange no matter where you stand on that darn balcony.
If you stand on the left side a frig look half the size of a battlecruiser and if you walk over to the right side that frig still looks half the size of a battlecruiser simply because CCP wanted it this way when they put in CQ.
Now that we have ship spinning back to look at our ships upclose there really is no need for that nonsense in CQ which leads back to https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=345537#post345537 ...


Edit: here some examples of real scale in the hangar (from ship spinning with camera zoomed far out).. http://eve-files.com/dl/249324

Knoppaz / distressSIGNALS http://distresssignals.tumblr.com

a capsuleer's way to insanity
Previous page12