• Welcome to the Vanguard Community

    These forums date back to the game's origins as the Crysis mod Traction Wars. Over the years the game and internet habits have evolved and discord.gg/vanguardww2 is now the principle home of the community.

    The team continue to read and reply to posts here, but we can be contacted more quickly on Discord.

Dev Blog #33: Player Identification

Status
Not open for further replies.

Alex

Member
If you are referring to me with this random response, i mostly play Project Reality and Escape From Tarkov, no floating gibberish on head.

Flare addressed it nicely but if I had it my way, I'd keep the HUD completely minimal and almost nonexistent. I can say from my own experience that Tarkov does it pretty well.
 

DerJoachim

Member
I don't want to offend you but arm bands as player ID is just a silly suggestion.

Nah, it just sucks less compared to an UFO on top of your head.

But yes, Tarkov is the best at it but it have less players in a raid so it is less chaotic compared to a WW2 game, the Project Reality is a good compromise i can agree on that, at least you dont have to endure those UFO's the whole time.
 

Flare

Member
Vanguard Backer
The "UFOs" as you call them at least do not undermine the authenticity of the game as arm bands do.

I am not advocating for the indicators as they are shown in the gifs. I would strongly prefer if they only showed up if you had line of sight on the soldier and only if you were looking at them (in the middle area of your screen.)

I'm done arguing this point.
 

FlyingR

Member
PR style = best style

You aim at the person and its name shows up. Depending on the range, the player's name takes faster (the closer) or longer (the farther) to show up.
i.e. If the person is 500 meters it could take maybe 5 seconds for his name to show up, but if he is 1 meter away from you it could be instant.

Also you don't necessarily have to aim with the gun, as long as your mouse is aiming at the person, be it with knife, fists, binoculars, etc., his name will show.

Maybe at first it should not be so that the enemy can hear you, this would make things simpler and easier for everyone. I think that there's still shouldn't be a "Squad" chat, but just "Local" so that everyone near you can hear you.
 

Alex

Member
Maybe at first it should not be so that the enemy can hear you, this would make things simpler and easier for everyone. I think that there's still shouldn't be a "Squad" chat, but just "Local" so that everyone near you can hear you.
Resistance and Liberation handled voice chat the best imo
 

FlyingR

Member
Resistance and Liberation handled voice chat the best imo

They did, but sadly the people that play R&L may not be the same that will play TW (but I do hope so). I can just imagine retards ruining everything and noobs not knowing how to use it and also ruining everything. Maybe once the retard/noob playerbase dies and only the dedicated players remain it could be implemented, but at first I think the devs should play it safe and not having it so that the enemy can hear you.
 

Mars

Pathfinder Games
It's just a placeholder proof of concept, we're 100% taking on board your feedback as we agree with a lot of what you guys are saying.
 

Zainab

Member
They did, but sadly the people that play R&L may not be the same that will play TW (but I do hope so). I can just imagine retards ruining everything and noobs not knowing how to use it and also ruining everything. Maybe once the retard/noob playerbase dies and only the dedicated players remain it could be implemented, but at first I think the devs should play it safe and not having it so that the enemy can hear you.

Same here thinks, and
also no flashing and ruining in-game play .... maybe game should start with tutorial levels then to war levels so more peoples can learn the tactics.
Also they can add penalty or warning for not following commander's orders? or something like that.
 

DerJoachim

Member
It's just a placeholder proof of concept, we're 100% taking on board your feedback as we agree with a lot of what you guys are saying.

Good to know but there is a consensus that the PR style identification is the best compromise.
 
PR style = best style

You aim at the person and its name shows up. Depending on the range, the player's name takes faster (the closer) or longer (the farther) to show up.
i.e. If the person is 500 meters it could take maybe 5 seconds for his name to show up, but if he is 1 meter away from you it could be instant.

Also you don't necessarily have to aim with the gun, as long as your mouse is aiming at the person, be it with knife, fists, binoculars, etc., his name will show.

Maybe at first it should not be so that the enemy can hear you, this would make things simpler and easier for everyone. I think that there's still shouldn't be a "Squad" chat, but just "Local" so that everyone near you can hear you.

This sounds acceptable :).
 

stonecomet

New Member
Hello all,

I rarely comment but feel compelled to do so here. I am all fine with not being able to pick up an enemy kit. Weapon sounds are then a great indicator friend or foe activity. You will certainly have arguments for both sides so you will have to make a game play decision not necessarily a democratic one in this case. The HUD indicators are a great addition and I'm in the find out what you are shooting at before you fire camp. They would be unnecessary for my style of play but I still see the need for overall improved play.

If you are really concerned about immersion then I would NOT put class type icons as they will be more intrusive. Keep them simple as you have them above. Seeing them if players are not in line of sight is a bit immersion breaking so requiring that a player has line of sight to have them show would be a great change if that is possible/feasible.

Good Luck!
 
Maybe player identification tags, on the screen, could be a layer that is optional. So the more realistic setting has no player identification (layer).
Of course, that option could apply to a lot of on-screen information.
 

Dante009

Member
I think your solution to the problem is the one to go because of the point you bring here:
Human senses can be difficult to convey in games, and we hope this will prove to be a useful addition without being too intrusive.
But IMO it should be optional, after all people will eventually get used to it if they play some time without it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top