[MUD-Dev] Graphical mud perspectives

Koster Koster
Fri Jan 23 12:20:02 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998


On Friday, January 23, 1998 3:43 AM, Mike 
Sellers[SMTP:mike at online-alchemy.com] wrote:
> At 07:58 AM 1/23/98 PST8PDT, Koster, Raph wrote:

> OTOH, with overhead views using "text over the head" people complain 
that
> you can't have a conversation with more than a few people on the 
screen,
> and they have to stand far apart so their words do not overlap. 
 Also,
> without a separate text window, there is no history of the 
conversation --
> which may be good or bad, depending how you look at it.

Very true. I didn't go into much depth on drawbacks of isometric, etc. 
Of course, a text window can be done with isometric (a la Furcadia) 
too, of course. The UO choice of in-graphic-window text is not a 
perfect solution either as it suffers from the flaws you mention. My 
ideal solution would be to offer the text window as an option too, so 
that it's up to the user as to preference.

> I've seen people ignoring the graphics only when in an intense
> conversation; the other problem like this that occurs is detachment, 
where
> people move around disconnected from the conversation they're 
having.  But
> neither of these is a major issue, and I don't think I've seen the 
30-foot
> spacing you're talking about; I've actually been rather pleased with 
the
> cocktail party spacing of conversations first-person can give you. 

Maybe it's a personal thing; I found that getting one person close 
enough to see faces meant that nobody else could participate. And 
groups tended to just scatter around the room and ignore the graphical 
perspective. "Turning to face someone" lost its relevancy...

> >There is also the issue of player psychological expectation. Many
> >argue that a 1st person view conditions the player into an "action 
> >game mentality" purely because of the history of so many other 1st 
> >person games that are combat-oriented. Then there's the large
> >contingent that feels it is more immersive.

> I think the "more immersive" crowd is going to win out as time goes 
on.

I don't actually know, so I reserve judgement. One thing which I have 
never understood is why exactly all the 3d muds are using traditional 
shape view windows, when they only use part of the screen and could 
choose to add the peripheral vision. I always feel like I am wearing a 
helmet when playing Quake, for example. And the "over the shoulder" 
view has certainly got a lot of adherents. Then again, Ultima IX is 
going to offer these choices, and diehard fans are screaming because 
they want isometric, because they find THAT more immersive.

> I'd even be willing to bet that later incarnations of UO have a
> first-person or variable camera (includin FP) aspect.

Choice, choice, choice. :) That's my watchword. Also, apparently, Brad 
McQuaid's (EverQuest).

> On that note, have
> any of you played San Francisco Rush?  It's a great arcade driving 
game,
> but it seems much more difficult to play in "first person" mode than 
in
> "over the shoulder" or guardian angel mode.  So FP isn't a global 
solution
> by any means.

I have never seen a driving game that wasn't easier to play in chase 
cam than in first person.

-Raph






More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list