31 replies to this topic

[Generations (Chaos Warp)]

So this topic is about Sonic's turning in 3d. Which game you think did it best, how it can be improved, how you would do it personally, etc etc. Myself, I think Generations gets it best overall, but there's still room for improvement. Make it so he controls like he did in SA1 at low speeds (and while you're at it, reduce his level of accel to Adventure 1's, add sloping level design to make up for slower accel, yadda yadda), and gradually increase the turning arc, not have it jump into, "turning-impossible", mode at a certain speed like Generations.

Thoughts? Discuss!

[The Cheese]

I've played a few fangames out there, and to be perfectly honest I feel Sonic's turning in 3D is best by far when it's completely merged with camera functionality - which is to say, Sonic always faces where the camera is pointed rather than the direction Sonic was last moving. This helps a lot in areas where running in a perfectly straight line is required, but it also removes nearly all the ambiguity in Sonic's turning cycles because you can damn well count on Sonic going exactly where the camera is pointed at some point, even if the turning cycle isn't built to work as fast as the camera itself can turn. I can't really see Sonic Team doing that, sadly, because too many people will think it's wierd for a platformer to control like an FPS (even if we have SRB2 to thank for doing it first).

[JezMM]

^ I have to admit, the fluidity of mouse-control does suit Sonic to a tee, as you can precisely turn however sharply or smoothly you want to.

But I hate that fan-games tend to have to sacrifice all sense of spectacle and cinematicness to do this, which I do think is an important part of 3D Sonic.

[Scar]

I don't like the notion of infinite directional precision. Sonic should turn in an arc dependant on his speed. It can't be as bipolar as Unleashed or Generations, but it needs to be fluid enough so that at speed, staying in a reasonably straight line or moving in an arc isn't impossible without jittering around the screen.

[TimberWolf]

I've played a few fangames out there, and to be perfectly honest I feel Sonic's turning in 3D is best by far when it's completely merged with camera functionality - which is to say, Sonic always faces where the camera is pointed rather than the direction Sonic was last moving. This helps a lot in areas where running in a perfectly straight line is required, but it also removes nearly all the ambiguity in Sonic's turning cycles because you can damn well count on Sonic going exactly where the camera is pointed at some point, even if the turning cycle isn't built to work as fast as the camera itself can turn. I can't really see Sonic Team doing that, sadly, because too many people will think it's wierd for a platformer to control like an FPS (even if we have SRB2 to thank for doing it first).

Except SRB2 is a complete shitstain, and I would prefer that SEGA and Sonic Team not take cues from shitty fangames. Plus, that whole "move where the camera is pointed AT ALL TIMES" makes actually GOING FAST a goddamned nightmare.

Edited by TimberWolf, 08 May 2012 - 11:47 PM.

[Diogenes]

But I hate that fan-games tend to have to sacrifice all sense of spectacle and cinematicness to do this, which I do think is an important part of 3D Sonic.

An important part of why it sucks. A bunch of stuff that looks flashy but barely involves any actual interaction and breaks the gameplay up into ugly chunks...

FPS-esque controls seem like a possible solution, but I'm not sure it's entirely viable. Like, for a console game, requiring the right stick for something as integral as turning means essentially giving up all face buttons. That leaves you only the four shoulder buttons for any other actions...and I'm not sure I trust any of the 360 controller's buttons for jumping in a Sonic game, anyway.

[The Cheese]

^ I have to admit, the fluidity of mouse-control does suit Sonic to a tee, as you can precisely turn however sharply or smoothly you want to.

But I hate that fan-games tend to have to sacrifice all sense of spectacle and cinematicness to do this, which I do think is an important part of 3D Sonic.

I can definently see where you're coming from there, but after working with the guys at A:DR I wouldn't say it's impossible to throw in some spectacle where camera control isn't needed - IE: most loops, long-distance spring launches, maybe the occasional HA chain or chase sequence as long as there's no platforming involved. It's something that'd have to be decided on a by-level basis for the most part though, because naturally it has the potential to kill you if cinematic angles interfere at the wrong place and the wrong time. Personally I'm of the opinion these games don't really need any such spectacle because of its interference with playability, but I understand perfectly if people still believe there's a place for it.

Except SRB2 is a complete shitstain, and I would prefer that SEGA and Sonic Team not take cues from shitty fangames.

Despite what your personal views may be on fangames. there are lessons that can be learnt from them, even if only because the better ones attempt the kind of stuff that Sonic Team wouldn't be caught dead trying to pull off. I can't claim to know what your problem with SRB2 is based on such a vauge putdown, but I'd be lying if I said I was basing my views off that alone. It's hardly the only fangame out there with a functioning FPS-esque control scheme.

Plus, that whole "move where the camera is pointed AT ALL TIMES" makes actually GOING FAST a goddamned nightmare.

What? No it doesn't. The exact opposite in fact. If "forward" relative to the player character is always forward relative to the camera, you're always facing exactly where you tell the game you want to be going, which generally gives you the most optimum view for moving forward at any given time. Add in the ability to strafe and you have a pretty much perfect model of manuverability that renders context-exclusive moves like the quick step completely redundant.

Really, any fault of the camera is literally the fault of the player at that stage, so it begs the question of whether you're just crap at FPS movement. =V

EDIT:

FPS-esque controls seem like a possible solution, but I'm not sure it's entirely viable. Like, for a console game, requiring the right stick for something as integral as turning means essentially giving up all face buttons. That leaves you only the four shoulder buttons for any other actions...and I'm not sure I trust any of the 360 controller's buttons for jumping in a Sonic game, anyway.

Considering a modern Sonic game could be played with only two buttons anyway once you cut all the redundant bullshit out of it (lightdash, quickstep, drifting etc), I'd say it's entirely feasible to get a Sonic game playable with just the L and R triggers and the two control sticks. Well I mean sure, it's bound to feel wierd at first in comparison to every other game thus far, but if it's really that important not to take your hand off the stick for the fraction of a second it takes to reach from the A button and back (and honestly, knowing some of the twitch gameplay we've already had, that wouldn't surprise me), at the very least it works to some degree.

Edited by The Cheese, 09 May 2012 - 12:34 AM.

[Phos]

Really, any fault of the camera is literally the fault of the player at that stage, so it begs the question of whether you're just crap at FPS movement. =V

A lot of people are. Some first person views just flat out nauseate people, like me. Minecraft, for example, I can't play it.

I also thought about putting jumping on the shoulder buttons, but let's be honest, A is jump. I don't really want to to stray too far off the topic lest this turn into another post your Sonic control scheme topic, so I'll just say that I think the camera should mostly take care of itself, the only real camera input I'd want to expect the player to have to do during ordinary gameplay would be a recentering function mapped to a trigger.

Now turning, that's tricky. You need to turn slow enough to maintain control but you need to turn quickly enough to make sure the player can make relevant course corrections. I could go on about how this hasn't really been done in previous games, but really what needs to happen is a turning radius that depends on speed in a functional (in the mathematical sense) way.

[Scar]

A lot of people are. Some first person views just flat out nauseate people, like me. Minecraft, for example, I can't play it.

I also thought about putting jumping on the shoulder buttons, but let's be honest, A is jump. I don't really want to to stray too far off the topic lest this turn into another post your Sonic control scheme topic, so I'll just say that I think the camera should mostly take care of itself, the only real camera input I'd want to expect the player to have to do during ordinary gameplay would be a recentering function mapped to a trigger.

Camera should be computer controlled mostly, i.e. it automatically positions itself for optimum view of the stage. However if you don't like the way the computer has positioned the camera, you should be able to freely change the camera angle, using the right stick. Sometimes its better to have a side-on veiwpoint and having the camera essentially work like a Third Person shooter (always over the shoulder) would get frustrating sometimes. Generations suffered from this, in that it had a fixed camera that couldn't be user-manipulated, but it made up for it by having a dynamic camera which usually automatically positioned itself at the optimum position. So having the same dynamic camera, but giving the user the option to change the camera angle to what suits them would make it better.
Other than that, I agree about having a function to re-centre the camera, be that a shoulder-button or trigger, or pushing in the right stick (effectively R3). As long as the ability to instantly focus the camera behind Sonic exists, a freely moving camera is the best solution.

Now turning, that's tricky. You need to turn slow enough to maintain control but you need to turn quickly enough to make sure the player can make relevant course corrections. I could go on about how this hasn't really been done in previous games, but really what needs to happen is a turning radius that depends on speed in a functional (in the mathematical sense) way.

I support this fully.

Spoiler

To make things clear:

{ 'r' is turning radius and 'v' is velocity}

r=f(v) [radius is a function of velocity]

Or more specifically:

r ∝ v [radius is proportional to velocity]

Which means:

r = kv {where k is a positive constant}

The constant should be determined by developers by playing around with the game and feeling for what handles the best.
Simple but elegant solution.

At the moment, Generations seems to have two "gears". There is "platforming gear", which operates and a range of low velocities, where r ∝ v applies. However, when you reach a certain point, it suddenly shifts to "boost gear", which randomly ramps things up to r ∝ v² or something, where your turning radius suddenly becomes HUGE and it becomes hard to steer.
I can understand why they did it, to point out to players when it is and isn't OK to boost given how the gameplay is broken strictly into two halves. From here on (if there is no boost), then it can't be bipolar like this; with a "platforming mode" and "boost/speed mode", it should be consistant throughout Sonic's range of reasonably attainable velocities.

Edited by Scar, 09 May 2012 - 08:33 PM.

[Azookara]

Giving a constant behind-the-back camera like SRB2, SonicGDK (at it's base), and anything else based off of an FPS is a bad idea.

You'd think that it would add to the gameplay's immersion to see behind Sonic as you go all the way around these loops, but in reality with it like that, you actually see less and the spectacle is somewhat lost in the process (and sometimes the constant jerking around on the slopes and loops makes it almost headache inducing).

Also,

An important part of why it sucks. A bunch of stuff that looks flashy but barely involves any actual interaction and breaks the gameplay up into ugly chunks...

You can give cinematic camera stuff while also still implementing tons of control. Just because Sega did it without giving you control doesn't mean that's the only way it could be done. Give the player the ability to still control their direction, speed, or action throughout said loop or section and it could be appealing to both play and look at.

Edited by Azukara, 09 May 2012 - 08:53 PM.

[TimberWolf]

Want to know what my main problem with SRB2 is?

The devs, and there insistance on not fixing the fucking gameplay so Sonic isn't broken in every single goddamn mode. This also extends to my main gripe with the gameplay, that being that unless you're PERFECTLY FUCKING PRECISE with your jumps, it is impossible to go fast in most of the stages, due to both the shitty camera and hugely oversensitive momentum-based gameplay. It's the main reason I always play as Tails the times I actually try playing the game, because his flight I can actually somewhat control and his slower speed gives me a much larger margin for error, although for the longest time he was too damn slow.

The hilarious part is, the devs (or at least Mystic) hate the modern games primarily because of the camera, yet I've never had a camera issue in the modern games while their camera is near impossible to manually control. When it's fixed behind your character, it's not as bad, but turning quickly (especially at any speed past snail) is still a massive problem. And yes, before you ask, I have tinkered with the camera sensitivity settings, and it still didn't help except in first-person mode, but with that the main problem is less "the camera is shit" and more "I CAN'T FUCKING HIT THE SONIC PLAYERS BECAUSE OF THE FUCKING THOK".

'course, if you mention me at all on the forums or IRC you'll be told I'm a flamer (used to be, I'll admit, but I've grown out of that), complainer, and moron who can't play the game properly, because clearly it isn't the responsibility of the devs to actually make a good game that isn't broken up the ass.

And to think, when I first got into SRB2, I actually liked it and even downloaded Mystic's level pack. Ah, the silliness (read: stupidity) of youth...

But, back on topic, I like turning just the way it is, thank you very much.

Edited by TimberWolf, 10 May 2012 - 12:10 AM.

[Diogenes]

You'd think that it would add to the gameplay's immersion to see behind Sonic as you go all the way around these loops, but in reality with it like that, you actually see less and the spectacle is somewhat lost in the process

Loops lost their spectacle years ago. Frankly I don't think loops work all that well in 3D, since you're forced to choose between a cramped over-the-shoulder view and keep your control or go for a more cinematic angle and make it largely or entirely automated. But, I think if the games actually start acting like Sonic games, and take advantage of the crazy ways Sonic can move (outside of restrictive automated sequences), we won't need a loop in every level to meet our spectacle quota.

(and sometimes the constant jerking around on the slopes and loops makes it almost headache inducing).

I'm sure there are ways you can smooth the motion of the camera so it's not jerking around with every bump.

You can give cinematic camera stuff while also still implementing tons of control. Just because Sega did it without giving you control doesn't mean that's the only way it could be done. Give the player the ability to still control their direction, speed, or action throughout said loop or section and it could be appealing to both play and look at.

How do you keep the player in control when the camera's switching around on its own?

[Kaze_Senshi]

I loved Sonic Colors, I have no problems with the camera and the controls are fine in the 2D and 3D style, also Generations is great too.

[Scar]

How do you keep the player in control when the camera's switching around on its own?

The camera isn't exactly going to be doing backflips now is it.
The way the camera worked in Generations, you're in control most of the time, even when the camera is moving. The movements don't need to be sharp or anything, just shifting and panning smoothly can add to the spectacle, as long as they do so properly with visual cues to support it.

A perfectly static camera could be good, but it would be a little boring to look at. That is what a dynamic camera system exists for.

[Azookara]

Scar answered that last part the best, so I leave it to him for that one.

Loops lost their spectacle years ago. Frankly I don't think loops work all that well in 3D, since you're forced to choose between a cramped over-the-shoulder view and keep your control or go for a more cinematic angle and make it largely or entirely automated. But, I think if the games actually start acting like Sonic games, and take advantage of the crazy ways Sonic can move (outside of restrictive automated sequences), we won't need a loop in every level to meet our spectacle quota.

Well, like it or not, loops are a part of the standard in Sonic level design. You could make them three ways: restricted movement with cinematic visuals (like most 3D Sonics), full control with static behind-the-back visuals (most fanmade 3D Sonics), or a mixture of both cinematics and control in order to improve the gameplay experience. Which one sounds the most attractive to the average Sonic player?

I'm sure there are ways you can smooth the motion of the camera so it's not jerking around with every bump.

It'll still look remarkably boring, though. Really, after all the times I've had to look at it, Sonic locked in a front and forward position in the loop with the world tilting around him isn't nearly as exciting as it sounds. As Scar said, this is why a dynamic camera system exists.

Edited by Azukara, 11 May 2012 - 03:00 PM.

[Diogenes]

The camera isn't exactly going to be doing backflips now is it.

Is it? The camera typically does some pretty jarring shifts in 3D Sonic games.

The way the camera worked in Generations, you're in control most of the time, even when the camera is moving.

Yeah and Generations can get away with this because of how restrictive and automated it is. Your control basically amounts to "boost or don't", and "boost" is always the correct answer.

Well, like it or not, loops are a part of the standard in Sonic level design.

I'm not suggesting they get rid of them entirely, just that they don't need to bust them out constantly.

You could make them three ways: restricted movement with cinematic visuals (like most 3D Sonics), full control with static behind-the-back visuals (most fanmade 3D Sonics), or a mixture of both cinematics and control in order to improve the gameplay experience. Which one sounds the most attractive to the average Sonic player?

I'm still not entirely sure what the third option actually involves. Like, where exactly is the camera going, and how much control does the player have?

It'll still look remarkably boring, though. Really, after all the times I've had to look at it, Sonic locked in a front and forward position in the loop with the world tilting around him isn't nearly as exciting as it sounds. As Scar said, this is why a dynamic camera system exists.

And after all the 3D Sonic games I've played, having the camera zoom out as I go through some (fully or partially) automated sequence is boring as balls. I've stopped being wowed by the game doing something flashy; I'd much rather be in control, even if it means not having some crazy camera angle.

[Scar]

Is it? The camera typically does some pretty jarring shifts in 3D Sonic games.

Nothing that jarring to be honest. 3D to 2D at most, but I'm not really talking about that.

Yeah and Generations can get away with this because of how restrictive and automated it is. Your control basically amounts to "boost or don't", and "boost" is always the correct answer.

I know its not relevant, but Generations doesn't really have that much automation.

Anyway, what about the way the camera moves in that 3D park section of City Escape? That is a wide open 3D space, with lots of curvy geometry. The camera moves dynamically while you wander around that area pretty effectively without the motion being too jarring or upsetting your control over Sonic in any significant way.

And after all the 3D Sonic games I've played, having the camera zoom out as I go through some (fully or partially) automated sequence is boring as balls. I've stopped being wowed by the game doing something flashy; I'd much rather be in control, even if it means not having some crazy camera angle.

I get what you're saying, but a totally static camera would be equally boring to look at and often an dynamic camera system can offer a better view of the area you are in than if it just constantly follows Sonic at a set height and distance. That is precisely why dynamic camera systems were created.
I'm not talking crazy shit like in automated sequences, I just mean a camera that moves with the environment not with Sonic, and is also fully user-adjustible should the player feel the need to change the camera position a tad and a recenter function.
In order to add some flashiness, all you need to do is make the landscape visually interesting, or make a set-piece happen at a specific point in the level, which the camera focuses on as you approach it, so you can see what's going on effectively and play the game accordingly.

[Azookara]

I'm not suggesting they get rid of them entirely, just that they don't need to bust them out constantly.

I can get behind that.

I'm still not entirely sure what the third option actually involves. Like, where exactly is the camera going, and how much control does the player have?

When I say "have the camera work cinematically", I'm not asking the camera to jerk all over the place and do insane positions. Would any of the loops in SA1's Emerald Coast be playable if they kept at those angles? Of course not. I'm moreso talking about how loops could do something with a bit more.. flair.

Actually what I'm talking about is something like this:
- For thinner loops, use 2.5D movement. Allow changing opposite directions, speed, and your action (running, jumping off, rolling/boosting/etc) but lock Sonic unto a path where he can't stray to the left or right and fly off (unlock if you jump). Camera would do some movements similar to what you find in Unleashed, Generations, and et cetera; usually following Sonic from a decent distance away and displaying some pretty cinematic angles that still allow you to control everything properly.

- For thicker loops, have the camera follow you up and back down from behind, but in a different way similar to the ones from Sonic R:

Also like Sonic R, you could have side to side movement with things like rows of rings on them, but also an invisible barrier around all the loops to keep you from launching off of them at too high of speed.

And after all the 3D Sonic games I've played, having the camera zoom out as I go through some (fully or partially) automated sequence is boring as balls. I've stopped being wowed by the game doing something flashy; I'd much rather be in control, even if it means not having some crazy camera angle.

Have fun with this then:

Edited by Azukara, 12 May 2012 - 11:21 PM.

[Diogenes]

Anyway, what about the way the camera moves in that 3D park section of City Escape? That is a wide open 3D space, with lots of curvy geometry. The camera moves dynamically while you wander around that area pretty effectively without the motion being too jarring or upsetting your control over Sonic in any significant way.

I think we have different definitions of "wide open" and "lots". But regarding the camera, it's...neither bad nor notably good. It doesn't get in the way, but I don't think it provides any advantage over anything else.

I get what you're saying, but a totally static camera would be equally boring to look at and often an dynamic camera system can offer a better view of the area you are in than if it just constantly follows Sonic at a set height and distance. That is precisely why dynamic camera systems were created.

I think a "static" behind-the-back camera can still have some variation in height and distance. But I don't see how a static behind-the-back camera is really detrimental and "boring", especially in a game with Sonic's use of angled ground. I mean, if we're talking modern gameplay, where the ground barely deviates from flat outside of scripted sequences, sure. But when you're going to be running around freely on walls and ceilings, isn't having the world spin around you going to be enough flashy camera shit?

Actually what I'm talking about is something like this:
- For thinner loops, use 2.5D movement. Allow changing opposite directions, speed, and your action (running, jumping off, rolling/boosting/etc) but lock Sonic unto a path where he can't stray to the left or right and fly off (unlock if you jump). Camera would do some movements similar to what you find in Unleashed, Generations, and et cetera; usually following Sonic from a decent distance away and displaying some pretty cinematic angles that still allow you to control everything properly.

So while the camera's doing a backflip, which way is forward? And I think I'm of the opinion that if we need to clamp Sonic into effectively 2D controls for a gimmick in a supposed 3D game, we should question whether it's worth doing at all.

- For thicker loops, have the camera follow you up and back down from behind, but in a different way similar to the ones from Sonic R:
*snip*
Also like Sonic R, you could have side to side movement with things like rows of rings on them, but also an invisible barrier around all the loops to keep you from launching off of them at too high of speed.

Trying to move when going through a loop in Sonic R is disorienting as fuck, so I'm not sure how this is a good thing.

Have fun with this then:
*snip*

Is this supposed to make me not want it? Because I want it more now. I don't understand how this is boring.

[Scar]

I think we have different definitions of "wide open" and "lots". But regarding the camera, it's...neither bad nor notably good. It doesn't get in the way, but I don't think it provides any advantage over anything else.
I think a "static" behind-the-back camera can still have some variation in height and distance. But I don't see how a static behind-the-back camera is really detrimental and "boring", especially in a game with Sonic's use of angled ground. I mean, if we're talking modern gameplay, where the ground barely deviates from flat outside of scripted sequences, sure. But when you're going to be running around freely on walls and ceilings, isn't having the world spin around you going to be enough flashy camera shit?

A context sensitive camera system? Varying distances and heights I suppose could be good enough, but sometimes a camera that moves with the game can look a lot better than if a camera remains decidedly fixed on Sonic's back. Yeah, some things like loops may need you to be pushed into a little automation if only in terms of putting the player on a rail (physics and shit still apply) so things don't fuck up, and in loops and mobius strips a fixed camera that follows Sonic through can be either very boring to look at, or maybe even a little nausiating. In certain situations where it could be used to add a little spectacle sure - for instance that massive loop in Seaside hill. A little bit of both can work well, rather than having too much of either if you see what I mean.

Is this supposed to make me not want it? Because I want it more now. I don't understand how this is boring.

Because its so......static and so basic. You're moving but only forwards. There is nothing happening. I could see so much potential for a camera that just moved a little bit and changed the angle up that would make it look a lot less......dull.

Like I said, the camera doesn't need to move a lot, just a little here and there, sometimes pointing you in the direction you need to go in. Sometimes just making something that's mostly automated or on-rails look better.