Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
Thanks: 2
Given 45 thank(s) in 19 post(s)
I recently sent some PMs out because I've had an idea for awhile. Making a playermodel that was actually indicative of the hitbox. I've grown tired of shooting and clearly hitting what I think is a shoulder/foot but ends up being nebulous space. I've also noticed that there is some space around the back/front area that is not really "true" hitbox material. I've consulted a few people about the /dghbox problem of wire frames.
My question is, would it be ethical/fair to implement a playermodel that only was the hitbox?
Cheers
Posts: 890
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2010
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 0 post(s)
No. For the same reason /dbghbox was not fair. It grossly enlarges enemy players. They may be seen around corners before they can see you.
It would also be ugly as sin.
Posts: 2,331
Threads: 45
Joined: Feb 2011
Thanks: 154
Given 55 thank(s) in 32 post(s)
Maybe the devs can make the playermodel & hitbox more synced by default. :3
Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
Thanks: 2
Given 45 thank(s) in 19 post(s)
09 Nov 12, 02:16AM
(This post was last modified: 09 Nov 12, 02:17AM by Waffles.)
It's not really aesthetics I'm worried about. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I'd like to hear more opinions on this. The whole argument "it could be available to everyone" etc. etc.
I know that the ability to have the same advantages does not mean everyone will have that advantage. From those few I've talked to, most are in agreement, but what if the box was smaller than hit boxes? say, the box is as slim as the current playermodel, and the head is the same size as current, it wouldn't give an advantage but would be more bare bones. I feel like I'd have an easier time aiming at a box than aiming at nebulous nothingness, even if it was smaller.
Posts: 56
Threads: 12
Joined: Aug 2012
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 0 post(s)
Highest visibility I can get is with /texreduce -1 and setting the model skins to full team color.
Posts: 2,331
Threads: 45
Joined: Feb 2011
Thanks: 154
Given 55 thank(s) in 32 post(s)
11 Nov 12, 02:19PM
(This post was last modified: 11 Nov 12, 02:19PM by Nightmare.)
F1 I hate the no textures look. Placebo Effect #45
Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
Thanks: 2
Given 45 thank(s) in 19 post(s)
The fun of the game to me is not the visuals. If i wanted to play a pretty game I'd play chrysis or some shit.
I had conversation with my brother when i first got a playstation. I was playing final fantasy tactics and he was like "looks like shit" (it does) but for me, it's fun. Strategy and tactics are more important than seeing a dude with a gasmask and not being able to hit it.
I've already asked some people to do this, but I want to gauge more of the community response if there'd actually be an issue/would be considered cheating or an unfair advantage.
Posts: 205
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2012
Thanks: 14
Given 17 thank(s) in 9 post(s)
How do the hitbox system in ac works then? I would expect localized damage as in any other game. How many hitboxes is comprised the player model and where are located those hitboxes?
Since .md2 format does not support skeletal animation, do you store a hitbox for every frame? I guess not. Can someone clarify on this?
Posts: 96
Threads: 5
Joined: Dec 2011
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 0 post(s)
Hitboxes do need to more accurately match playermodels. This needs to be added to a future version AC though, not as a mod. If you can see any area of a player outside of the playermodel that is hit-able and i cannot, you have an unfair advantage.
Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
Thanks: 2
Given 45 thank(s) in 19 post(s)
im not saying to have it be exactly the size of the hitbox (which would be slightly larger than the playermodel). I am fine to be able to see slightly less total hitbox in favor of having myself be able to see exactly what im actually shooting at. The head hitbox would be normal ofc.
If the hitbox problem was fixed then i'd much rather play with a playermodel. And many people would say that this a small deal. But it certainly gets annoying when the difference of getting a frag and not is a small bit.
Posts: 992
Threads: 35
Joined: Mar 2011
Thanks: 2
Given 45 thank(s) in 19 post(s)
I agree completely mael. It's not about detection for me. It's about personal preference for the eyes. Like i've stated previously, i don't care about having that "seeing round corners one millisecond before the other" nonsense. I just want an accurate target to be trying to aim at and I don't think that is too much to ask. reforming the hitbox itself would be a great step in the right direction for play in general though.
Posts: 446
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2010
Thanks: 4
Given 3 thank(s) in 3 post(s)
In can't imagine a hit box change being that hard either, afaik that was done concerning the head hit box from 1.0 to 1.1, right? I like Waffles/Mael's idea, the discrepancies between hit box and player model should be minimal. What happens now (to me) is that the player model makes me instintcly aim dead central to the torso while I would problably get better results aiming for the legs and working my way up using recoil.
Seeing exactly what you shooting at certanly wouldn't hurt...
Posts: 96
Threads: 5
Joined: Dec 2011
Thanks: 0
Given 0 thank(s) in 0 post(s)
I'm for Mael's idea. Although if an option isn't built-in to the game a large percent of AC players would still have no idea that the ability exists.