Announcements
Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2
Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.
It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.
To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.
It's funny... every time I take a break from this thread it always keeps going on without me. So much for my supposed self-importance here. *shrugs*
You yourself mentioned that "you're responding to 3 pages of arguments I've have made for over 2 years". Do you really think I'm ever actually going to be "done" with this topic? ;)
Your only actual "argument" here is that you don't think it's worth the effort/trouble to include "body physics" in this game.
You've trotted out the two traditional "talking points" for that position several times already: A) it'll take too much Dev time/effort and B) the rehashing of a few anecdotal boogey-man stories about a few games which have handled body physics "badly" in the past and been skewered on the pikes of political correctness. While even I would admit that both of these points have some legitimate merit worth discussing it's been shown multiple times that neither one of these points are insurmountable and actually are both easily handled by the reasonable solutions that have been metaphorically yelled at you (by both the Devs and other players) countless times thus far in this thread.
It's clear we're likely always going to be on the opposite sides of this, especially considering you continue to remain mysteriously oblivious that you're basically on the wrong side of history when it comes to this issue. For what it's worth I will continue to concede that "you may get your way with this" specifically for CoT only because it would ultimately be easier for the Devs to do nothing about this rather than be proactive about it. But my consolation will always be that I stand on the "positive, optimistic, anything can be done" side of this argument while you remain on the "gloom and doom, it can never be done because it's too risky" side of things.
Again I'll accept that what you've said here is merely your opinion. But as a matter of historical fact I'll point out that at one time people made automobiles that did not include radios.
At first of course radios were not really well suited for the earliest cars. The technology was bulky and they had not become as cheap, ubiquitous or widely accepted as they are now. In fact there were people at the time that made the relatively legitimate argument that radios should never be installed in cars because they would distract the drivers and cause accidents. At any rate you could also easily make the case that radios were certainly NOT NECESSARY to have an otherwise fully functional car. Any of this sound familiar?
Now of course you'd be hard pressed to name a major car manufacturer that doesn't include radios in their cars. The technology for them has been so well perfected, miniaturized and streamlined that it's really almost unthinkable NOT to have one in every car. Despite this radios continue to remain COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY for the proper functioning of a modern car. Could you even imagine not having one in your car regardless if you ever turned it on or not? QED
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
My position is its not worth including which I support with my arguments. The arguments are, the two you present in a highly manipulative manner, increase in minimum and maximum requirements, conflicts with possible final art style, offensive use by a portion of the player base, evidence to lack of desire for this feature by the gaming population and what is considered acceptable (as in the Linda Carter gif) only represents that scaling of a body feature and would be very different with larger or smaller scaling due to the nature of body physics.
I never maintained that any issue I see as a possibility to be insurmountable but instead still do not see that the amount of effort to make them surmountable worth the end result. Unless you are specifically talking about the proposed 'jiggle slider', which I think is a horrible idea that only draws attention and almost dares special interest groups to challenge it.
Also, I am having a hard time seeing where a dev yelled at me?
Ok, I am going to ask you again to stop manipulating what I say with this hyperbolic rhetoric. I have never said it can't be done because it's too risky, I have said that the value body physics bring to the game is not worth the potential or actual issues that come with it. I supported my position with arguments backed by evidence. So far all you have done is twist my words and made misinformed claims about inevitability and the following nonsense:
There was also a time when this was done
[img=480x480]http://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2015/04/23/434b1b87-5fa3-4c89-bef6-3f334558dc0b/thumbnail/1200x630/a84937d67c8400e5916ae8c51701f80f/new-coke.jpg[/img]
Or to take your car example, these still get made despite advancements in body designs and gas consuption
[img=480x480]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/2007_Hummer_H3_--_NHTSA.jpg[/img]
What about actual trends in MMO's now. Action mechanics have become the new norm replacing tab targeting but that, just like your pointing to inevitability, is not a persuasive argument for or against including body physics in [i][b]this[/i][/b] game.
IT WON'T DIE...
I hope the devs don't get stuck on this subject as long as we have. Even my super powered ability to kill threads doesn't seem to work on this one.
"THE TITANS ARE COMING! THE TITANS ARE COMING!"
You know that scene in the movie Tin Cup where the golfer keeps trying to make the impossible shot and keeps failing? It is painful to watch.
Watching this argument continue is like watching him keep trying to make that shot. Painful.
But then in the movie, Renee Russo's character just says "aw hell, Go for it!" and all of a sudden its not painful anymore, his effort has been transformed into a glorious attempt by a man to achieve greatness, whether he fails or not becomes immaterial.
Likewise, in my eyes this thread which was a painful experience of watching two posters I admire become less than themselves has transformed into a glorious struggle of irreconcilable wills. Truly phenomenal and I think everyone who has laid out his or her best arguments in this thread will end up best of friends in this life and the next because of it.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Oh I keep coming back to this thread mostly because as Hero_Zero pointed out it seems to have an amazingly uncanny knack for surviving and/or being necroposted to. In its several year lifespan it's been necroposted to by other people at least several different times. I suspect that if this post somehow becomes the last one that anyone posts on this thread for a while we'll only have to wait a few months for someone else to eventually raise it from the dead again. ;)
As far as my recent "head-butting" with Brainbot goes I obviously don't mean him any personal ill-will. He has his uncompromising opinions on this subject and that's fine. To be completely honest there are probably dozens of other features out there that I would feel exactly the same as he does in terms of unilaterally declaring them to be "not worth the time/effort/controversy/etc." for this game. At the very least I'll bet there's at least one feature Brainbot either strongly wants or thinks will automatically exist in CoT that I could easily shoot down for being a pointless waste of time. This kind of "feature value" bickering always works both ways...
I'm mostly just picking (harping?) on this semi-trivial issue because I remember a time in CoH when we didn't have capes, wings, animated tails, auras and so on that we eventually did get. We've already been promised new things in CoT like animated hair and clothing. Even a three year old could connect the dots to see that at some point the "next" new feature we're going to get as a default in games like this is a reasonable implementation of body physics. I think even Brainbot would begrudgingly agree with me on that: The main quibble we seem to be having here is that I believe the technology threshold for that kind of thing is here and now in 2016 whereas Brainbot seems to think it's still many decades/centuries away. *shrugs*
I also feel sorry for Brainbot's unhealthy fear that anything that could be construed (by so-called "special interest groups") as being even remotely "controversial" like this needs to be avoided by the Devs of this game at all costs. He says things like that while characters in CoT are going to be able to run around in "virtual body paint" and what amounts to butt-floss while ERPing to their hearts' content. He continues to hint at hyperbolic examples of other games that have provided hentai-style "jiggle" fanservice as the only fate that could befall CoT even though it has been generally accepted by those that want body physics in this thread/game that NONE OF US want even a tenth of the degree of the overt stupidity that he's trying to promise is the only outcome that can come of this. He simply has no apparent concept that while too much of something may be collectively bad a reasonable dose of something may be perfectly fine or even desirable. Subtlety and/or nuance does not seem to be Brainbot's strong suit.
Bottomline I just hate close-mindedness in general. As long as people like Brainbot keep trolling threads like this with arbitrary censorship-oriented negativity it's going to be very hard for me to just let it go no matter how meaningless the actual point of argument is.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Wow...the topic that never dies.
Pokemon GO has now become the most downloaded game in the history of online gaming. It has higher concurrent user numbers than all other online games combined. It generates more revenue in a single day than World of Warcraft does in a year.
"Jiggle physics" has become a non-issue. Whether the game has them, limits them, or refuses to include them is irrelevant. If the success of Pokemon GO continues, and so far it shows no drop in overall numbers despite severe drops in some regions, then regardless of how masterfully City of Titans is once it is completed it will be far behind the curve and will forever be a niche product.
Don't misunderstand me. This breaks my heart completely in two. Reality is what it is, however, and Augmented Reality has now become the "next big thing".
Personally, I like the idea of realistic body physics, nipples pressing through spandex/lightweight shirts on both men and women, and maybe even a "packet" slider for the guys (or even for both so LGBT players can be themselves).
Unfortunately, I'm certain it no longer matters.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
Well I can at least thank you for proving what I said in my last post correct. I gave it a few months but you only let it go a week. ;)
To be perfectly honest I'm not sure where the wild success of Pokemon GO has any relevance to CoT or to the question of "jiggle physics" being in CoT or not. I think it was always safe to say that no matter how cool or wonderful CoT turns out to be it's going to be extremely unlikely it'll ever be as remotely popular/huge as something like Pokemon GO. I don't say that as a knock to the fine folks at MWM - I'm just being completely realistic given the fact that almost nothing except something like a Pokemon GO type game could ever get as big/huge as it did. Remember MWM's stated goal all along has been to worry about making a GOOD game, not the next mythical WoW-killer.
As far as "Augmented Reality" gaming goes I'm sure it'll continue to be popular into the future but I'll state for the record that I have never personally played Pokemon GO nor do I have any overwhelming desire to try it. For what that's worth that means there's at least one person on the planet (myself) who doesn't think Augmented Reality gaming is going to "take over" everything and make all other gaming irrelevant. *shrugs*
I agree with all these things as optional features in CoT. None of them need to be "launch day priorities" but could be added later as continuing updates to the game.
But I will also mention one bit of trivia that will likely please the "anti-jiggle" folks out there. It turns out that CoH actually launched with noticeably significant nipples on both the main male and female models. The models had nips that "poked out" (polygon-wise) and were very obvious when looking at the bodies from the sides while wearing tight things like spandex. Ironically (or sadly?) enough the nips were nerfed back down flat in one of the very first nerfings the game ever suffered from about a week or so after launch. During that same nerfing the game also changed up the color selection options so that it was no longer easy to make costume items using "skin tone" colors (which naturally allowed people to make "nude" characters way too easily). So basically in historical terms the very first nerfings of CoH involved (among other things) the arguable "de-sexification" of our main body models.
So the main question I have now 12+ years later is whether or not the Devs of CoT will follow the same path of pretending human bodies don't have natural "bumps and bulges" in various places and stick us with playing with Barbie and Ken dolls again. Here's hoping we've finally grown up enough as a player community to actually be able to handle things like this without "freaking out" or somesuch.
Oh I'm sure such things will always manage to find a way eventually. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
The skin tone thing I think I remember, but I don't remember the nip thing at all. In either case, while the skin tone thing is a little silly, the CoH devs probably thought they had good reason to do this. I would not be surprised if the CoT devs follow suit for the same or similar reasons. Might even be a requirement of the "T" rating.
Why are "nips" and "packages" so important? Some would say that you are OVER-sexualizing the character models. The fact of the matter is our character models do not have to be THAT anatomically correct. We will never see them naked so the devs can go ahead and make them "barbies and kens". I mean is that kind of thing really common in western mainstream comics or comics movies nowadays (non-adult ones that is)? Not that I have seen. Real women in cosplay or sports apparel typically take great pains to cover the nips up - even when the cosplayers are displaying an incredible amount of cleavage. I would imagine make-believe superheroines would do the same as well.
Speaking of comics movies - does no one else remember the ridicule that the "bat-nips" received when that movie came out?
It's very much about the maturity level of the pro-nip-and-jiggle crowd that I have questions regarding. It all seems rather juvenile and fan-service-y to me personally. I just do not see the necessity of these things, while at the same time I can see the drawbacks to including them. *shrugs*
Then why did the CoH Devs include noticeable nips in the first place if they were supposedly so evil/controversial/unallowed for the "T" rating?
I'm simply hoping we're finally (in 2016) ready to move past the silliness of "burka-izing" comic book heroes in computer games considering their paper-based analogs have been running around with noticable "bumps and bulges" poking through their painted-on skin-tight clothing for decades.
I can accept your notion that SOME superheroines would do the same but I'm not sure you could speak for ALL of them. (Assuming of course they existed IRL in the first place...) Making sweeping statements about ALL of something or an ENTIRE type of people will always leave you proverbially shooting yourself in the foot.
Sure they were stupid and laughable because they were "fake rubber" nips.
So ever-increasing levels of graphical realism can only be equatable to fan-service? You better let the ENTIRE INDUSTRY that's making graphical improvements to games on a daily basis know that.
*sigh* Why do people always think whenever anyone advocates for these things they do so from a point of view where we think we ASBOLUTELY NEED these things in order to make the game playable? Obviously these things are NOT NECESSARY and never will be. But you can make that SAME EXACT ARGUMENT with just about every other QoL feature or body model detail the game will provide. The game doesn't need capes, animated hair or flapping wings to be playable either yet it will likely have all those things. The argument that certain things aren't necessary so they should never be included is the weakest, most pathetic excuse anyone could ever come up for anything like this.
I'm sorry you and others like you are against the natural progression of body model details like this. I can only imagine what people like you will be saying in 10 or 20 years when faced with all these things you think are now evil/pointless/excessive/etc. being as commonplace as colored graphics are today. *shrugs*
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I remember Nipple-gate but I can't recall being exercised about it, one way or the other. I remember Bat-nipples and I'm pretty sure I didn't care, either. I believe we can enjoy incredible graphical realism in this game, without nipples or 'body-physics' at all. 'Realism' is a null-argument for me, regarding this topic. It's just sex and I don't really need sex in my video games, since I can get plenty of sex elsewhere.
And we all know that 'sex sells', which makes sexual allusions and sexual illusions very popular with the marketers. But it's also become so prevalent, that many people are all but blind to it, unless it becomes extra-overt. It's also a hot-button topic for many elements in our society and most often draws Negative attention. You never hear commentators say, "Look at that person, they're nearly naked, aren't they cute!" Look at the recent flap about Overwatch being too blatantly sexualized.
But, despite all of these arguments, people who want 'jiggle' argue that it's 'realistic' and it's 'inevitable' because 'everyone is doing it' (except I've not seen it in an MMO, possibly because I'm not attracted to that sort of MMO). I'd like to respond that 'jiggle' has nothing to do with graphical realism, since it's part of the physics engine. So, clearly, we're all not rational about sex. Hell, that's a 'given' in modern society.
So, I'm sticking to my opinion: If it takes any effort to add 'jiggle physics' to the game, then it's not worth the effort.
Be Well!
Fireheart
I don't really know which rocks various people are living under these days but jiggle physics doesn't only exist in "that sort" of MMO anymore.
It only took a couple of minutes to find these two of many other examples I've seen in the past few years:
[youtube]XZNpQQ96U3o[/youtube]
[youtube]9bp5tTB3TUw[/youtube]
Oh and this one is from WoW... you know that "fringe" game that no one plays...
[youtube]ZJxdCuqzWgU[/youtube]
Well with that logic it's arguably not worth adding ANYTHING to a game because pretty much ANYTHING would take some effort. *sigh*
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Tera and Skyforge both fall into 'that sort of game' category. Tera very much so and Skyforge at least balancing the overtly sexy character models between both male and females.
I'll take your word for it that you're an authority on what "that sort of game" is even assuming we both define what "that" sort of game is exactly the same way.
But given that Tera and Skyforge (among many others) are doing the same thing that WoW is doing I'll assume you're fine with lumping the arguably single most successful MMORPG ever in with the rest of these games in terms of their reasonable use of jiggle physics. As they say "Fifty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong".
BTW, here are three more examples of reasonable jiggle physics from three other games that you would be hard pressed to malign as "those" sorts of games:
[youtube]ofwlZejsoSw[/youtube]
[youtube]1A1q2vK4Vws[/youtube]
[youtube]scWuI7oOBkk[/youtube]
How many more do you need?
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
'That sort of game' is one that includes breast physics as a means to enhance the sex appeal of the game and not to add a level of realism. All of those games, including WoW, are fan servicing bewbs and none of them have reasonable breast physics. You were better with your example of Tomb Raider.
So you are saying that regardless of how much technology improves, regardless of how natural we can make 3D models (including related physics and full body jiggle), regardless how we "consume" such content (say, VR becoming standard) female mammary gland should always be hard "rocks" and thus, when we progressed far enough, start to look unnatural in comparison to the rest of the body?
I'm certain that is what Lothic means when she says "it's inevitable".
You're most certainly right in that it's no graphics realism but that is not the only form realism one can strive for, in this case it's body or "world" realism.
OK so if I was better off using Tomb Raider as the main confirmative example that "reasonable jiggle physics" is going to become commonplace and accepted as a natural progression in the ever-improving state of computer game graphics overall then I'll stick with that. Forget all the other apparently "distasteful" examples that I've used in the past (including WoW) and just lock your focus on the fact that all games will eventually follow in Tomb Raider's footsteps in terms of steady graphics refinement.
Whatever floats your boats in terms of getting you to even remotely accept what I've been saying all along is fine with me. *shrugs*
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Tomb Raider is an example of reasonable and realistic breast physics not an example of it being common place. Breast physics are not common now or in the foreseeable future outside of fan service use. If your only argument for its inclusion in Cot is that they are common then THAT is the weakest, most pathetic excuse anyone could ever come up for anything like this.
I don't claim this kind of thing is "inevitable" just because an ever-increasing number of top-tier games are now providing reasonable implementations of jiggle physics. I claim its inevitable because after you catalog/review all of the improvements in computer graphics/animation quality in character body models over the last 40+ years there's really not that much left to "figure out" than how to get jiggle physics to look completely subtle and naturally acceptable. It's one of last "frontiers" of body model development left to be fully universally realized by the industry and I simply believe its time has finally come.
Now this may come as a shock to most people on this thread but this issue has practically nothing to do, as some have reflexively claimed, with an overt desire to "sexualize" the game just for that purpose alone. It has everything to do with taking the next logical steps in computer graphics advancement. Clearly many other games are now already seeing this area of improvement as the next logical step - I simply don't want to see CoT left behind just because too many people are content to bicker and quibble about half-baked controversies and spurious arguments about "questionable value".
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I've given at least a dozen examples (including among others Tomb Raider and WoW) of modern games that have implemented some form of reasonable jiggle physics over the several years this thread has been rolling along. If you'd like I could spend a few more short minutes digging up more examples.
Your singularly unique ability (superpower?) to disregard these plain facts is apparently the only thing that's keeping you from realizing just how hopeless and untenable you position on this issue really is in the long run. Wishing the inexorable march of progress to go away will not make it so. And just to save you some time sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "NA-NA-NA-NA" won't work for you either. Enjoy the bubble you seem to be calling home.
P.S. BTW, I'm pretty sure I used the operative phrase "weakest, most pathetic excuse" against you at some point on this thread. I'm honestly not sure if those were the exact words I used but it was something pretty close to that. You do realize how pathetic and weak it is to basically throw back the same verbiage at someone just because you can't think of anything new to say right?
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
So your only argument in favor of breast physics is that its becoming common and the game will suffer without it? I'm actually asking because I have gone back over all your posts and this seems to be the one thing you maintain as the reason for breast physics to be included in CoT.
I don't know what controversy is being referred to here by you and Lothic, but I agree that I don't see the need to 'sex up' a superhero game any more than the comic genre already does.
And I would also remind that the controversy caused by sexed up games and comics is growing, rather than diminishing. The whole gamergate/sjw ugliness has become centered largely around this subject after all. Several games these past years have become caught up in the controversy about the ridiculous (critics words, not mind) amount of sexualisation and objectification of their (female) characters that they became critical and economical failures as a result.
Actually, it is patently obvious to everybody but the marketeers that sex does not sell. Bayonette sold a fraction of a franchise like devil may cry, bayonetta 2 was a critical failure in every aspect (for trying to sex up a game on a platform marketed primarily towards family entertainment, but also because the crassness of its depiction of S&M sex as a substitute for combat appeals and appealed to only a small fraction of the gamer population, and by marketing it so heavily they drove away players who might otherwise have enjoyed a more subtle application). None of the mobile games that market heavily (or extremely heavy) with sex are doing well, most close shortly, or are hanging on marginally. MMOs that bet heavily on hypersexualised female characters tend to do much poorer than the games that keep it toned down. None of the popular franchises bank heavily on sex, the most popular games avoid the topic entirely (angry birds, minecraft, call of duty)
There is this whole mess of cultural notions about nudity, sexiness and sexuality that we are wading into with this discussion. Not to mention the baggage of gender roles, and of the history of games.
It is making discussions difficult without running into threatening the identity of the participants, and there is a minefield of entrenched positions to wade through that threaten to overwhelm positive marketing efforts if one step is set wrong.
And I am still sticking to my question: what positive purpose does it serve to add this to a game, given the generally negative connotations potential customers are likely to have?
I do not see ANY negative connotations. Jiggle is the norm, not the exception.
SJWs ruin everything they touch. the mild jiggle examples provided is all anyone is looking for.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Being fair here, a lot of that is caused by overinflation of the issue by said critics. The trick is that Video Games have very commonly had this sort of thing in them in the past, it's just becoming poked at now that video gaming is becoming less of a thing meant for dweebs in their mom's basement. I mean, take a look all the way back at Super Metroid; your reward for beating the game very, very well was Samus coming out and showing off in a bikini, to say nothing for Lara Croft or the female characters in the Turok series
Now, see, this is incorrect conclusions. the reason games like that are popular is not, in fact, because they lack oversexualized female characters. It's because they're primarily simple games with simple mechanics that are nonetheless versatile in implementation.
Minecraft is one thing; blocks that you can stack on top of each other like a big lego set. everything else is peripheral. Angry Birds is a toilet game, or the sort of game you play on the bus, or when waiting for a meeting. It's just throwing a bird at things. And, finally, Call of Duty is "shoot the other guys" writ large. they all have extra subsystems to go with their basis, but the point of them is that they're simplistic to a level where anybody can pick them up, understand them, and utilize them, even if they aren't churning out the works of art some people are (such as perfect teamkills in CoD, or incredible houses in Minecraft). It has nothing to do with sex, and these aren't even in the same REALM as a story driven and based MMO like CoH was and CoT is going to be. For an example of a popular set of franchises that do rely heavily on sex appeal, look at basically any fighting game other than super smash bros. And even then, Smash Bros has zero suit Samus, which basically exists for the male gaze. and that's STILL a bad example because fighting games are, once again, not the same sort of thing as an MMO. An MMO is Story based in most cases; even WoW, with it's touted mechanics and raids and classes and whatever, spends just as much time with storywriters as it does with mechanics balance specialists, and CoT promises to be more story focused than that. Story is based on conflict, which is what makes supers compelling, and one of the most primal conflicts available to humans is sexual; literally, wars have been fought over who is banging who. A sexual angle can add a fair amount to the game, as long as it's handled in moderation. It can't become a focus.
Bayonetta is a poor example because the games she features in break away from the mold a lot. Specifically Bayonetta is hypersexual in her presentation; everything she does is either risque or bordering on softcore porn. That said, a lot of feminists actually really like her due to the fact that she's commanding. She's sexual, sure, but every bit of her movement shows that she's in control, of the situation, of her sexuality, and even the game in a few ways. There was an entire article written about it, and if I wasn't writing this at 9 AM with no sleep, I'd go and find it for you. She's niche because a lot of men - who make up the majority of gamers at this point, though the number of women is rising - don't actually feel comfortable with that. A lot of men play video games to feel powerful, so the sense of the female character sex idol person they're playing being more in control than them is a bit awkward. Plus, there's the embarrassment of trying to explain to your roommates or parents that "I'm just here for the gameplay, honest, just ignore Bayonetta saucily winking at the camera". She's very popular though, in spite of poor sales.
Furthermore, "sex doesn't sell" is frankly just wrong. Even among franchises that don't involve sex objects, people will find ways to objectify them - going to Overwatch as an example, there is Overwatch porn. Lots, and lots, of porn. Of Reinhardt, of Tracer, of Mei, and so on. When something doesn't have enough sex in it, yet people care about it, they will [i]add sex to it.[/i] The reason marketing strategists have the saying "Sex Sells" and still follow that is because they're not wrong. The difficulty is in keeping it attractive without getting it oversexed; Bayonetta is what happens when you push it too far into sexy territory. I agree that pushing the sexy angle too far would only hurt the game, but having none isn't the correct response either.
I agree with you here, but i'd like to shed some light on t he Overwatch thing; as it happens, Tracer's "Butt pose" was replaced not because of outcry regarding it being sexy, but because it didn't fit her character. there was an argument made that it was far too sexual, and didn't fit the whimsical themes that Tracer is sort of meant for. Because of that what they did was make a different sexy pose; the difference is important however, because the pose in questions hearkens back to old pinups; the stance is fitting with Tracer's personality and whimsy, it's still sexy, and it's a callback. Win on all fronts. The big takeaway there, though, is that they didn't make the change to de-sexify her, it was to put in a pose that was more in-line with her personality. If they didn't want her to be sexy, she wouldn't have pants that ride up her ass.
Please don't take offense to this, but I feel this is narrow thinking. It hinges on the idea that It holds no value, or that people don't want it. That's not true; flow in animation is important. You see a lot of things like that, actually; take recent web animations for example; Monty Oum (RIP) originally did a series called Dead Fantasy that was basically just characters from the Dead Or Alive series fighting with Final Fantasy characters, with absolutely no plot put in. You can feel the times when he lets flow break because animations stop feeling fluid, hair stops moving in the wind and becomes plastic wire. It feels wrong, and while you may be distracted by the overwhelming movement of the scenes the first time through, it's obvious on subsequent watches.
that's what we're looking for here. Most of the people here that are lobbying for flesh jiggle to be added to the game aren't asking for something ridiculous; we don't want a pair of volleyballs flapping in the breeze so hard they could clap. What we want is subtle, something that helps the feeling of flow, and helps with immersion purposes. That's a large part of what roleplayers want if nothing else, and we all remember how in-depth CoH's roleplaying server (Virtue) was, and the fact of the matter is everybody who plays these games spends an exorbitant amount of time in the costume creator making their characters perfect - it'd be bitter irony to finish making your perfect design and then later have to scrap it because the character's body feels like it's made out of concrete with joints. Subtle movement and flow help sell the illusion of realism, which is what really supports immersion, which is part of what makes a game sell well. That's why this is a valuable addition to the game.
Will there be juveniles that abuse any sort of jiggle slider that might be available? Of course. People with a juvenile sense of humor and attraction are extremely common. But they'd go out of their way to do that sort of thing regardless; do recall all the female characters you've seen in CoH and other games that are dressed in little more than slutwear even in games that [i]don't[/i] support any sort of jiggling movement.
An infinite number of tries doesn't mean that any one of those tries will succeed. I could flip an infinite number of pennies an infinite number of times and, barring genuine randomness, they will never come up "Waffles".
The fact something has been done for a long time is exactly zero justification for continuing to do so. There's an enormous list of things we stopped doing because as a culture wer realised that they were horrible things to do to other human beings.
Grandted, sexism in video games is not on the same level (or depth) as, say, slavery or burning people at the stake, but the principle applies. The discussion of how video games came to be the mess they are today (or rather, were a few years back) does not belong on this forum, in my opinion (there's plenty of blogs around that have this as their subject, if you want to wade through the gamergate ugliness). For what it's worth I blame marketing forces rather than innate sexism in game creators for kicking off the downward spiral.
However, this is tangential to the reality that more and more attention is being paid to this implicit and explicit sexism in games and that the 'games are for boys' attitude no longer flies. Cross an invisible (and sadly, moving) line and game critics and game reviewers will sable your game down for it. What was once normal for games is no longer automatically acceptable.
regardless of how anybody feels about it, this is now becoming a fine line to thread.
you are moving the goalpost here, with a bit of 'no true scotsman' thrown in.
The reality is that games that are more popular by a huge margin than the biggest MMO do not rely on sexing up the visuals. That does not mean that sex doesn't sell, only that it is not /required/ for success (the way the marketing machinery seems to think when promoting games).
The more important argument I made was comparing games with a reputation for using sex to sell with games that do not. In all cases the games that do not emphasise the sex angle in their marketing do better than the games that do. There are several franchises that I did not mention, besides Bayonetta, where the marketing thought they could make up for lackluster gameplay by heavily sexing up the visuals. In all cases those games performed worse, sometimes catastrophically so, than the precursors.
This does in fact serve as proof that 'sex sells' may be common trope in marketing, but that it is not supported by facts.
That out of the way, I did not say a game can not be sexy or contain sex. Ignoring the games that are all about sex, pretty much any bioware or project cd red title would prove such a claim wrong. Interesting though is that Bioware chose to tone down the sex in their MMO (star wars: the old republic). It is unlikely that their games have gotten significantly more sales because of a few bare cgi boobs and a few fade to black scenes. These games didn't do well because they had sex, but because they were in their genre excellent games. Even without the novelty of sex and sexuality in the games Mass Effect, Dragon Age and The Witcher would have been commercial successes.
I also never said that Bayonetta wasn't popular or a commercial success. I said it did worse than games with a similar mechanic. And I said that when the developers decided to increase the amount of sex in the second game it not only failed to sell more, it actually did much worse than the original. Turned out that the fans of the series had not bought that game for the teased nudity either, but for the gameplay.
That a lot of men play games for a power fantasy and demand female characters in the game to be objectified, does not exactly support any point you might want to make. In fact, it supports my point that this sexualisation of female characters is problematic in and of itself /for a game that means to attract women/. Again, the fact that something was common practice in the past does not mean we have to blindly keep doing it and can not possibly reject or critically examine it.
That more men than women play games is no longer a truism. The number is pretty much equal, and women may actually be a small majority by now. That said, there are still huge differences in the male to female ratio between different genres. But it turns out those differences are not because of the genre but because of the theming and marketing actually designed to drive one gender away. Give a first person shooter (portal) a female lead and a non-violent theme and it suddenly is as popular with women as it is with men. Final Fantasy has a huge female fanbase, despite it being a genre that common marketing wisdom has appealing only to male players. More men play MMOs than women, but in large part this is because these games are heavily marketed towards men (and the sexualisation of female characters plays a big role in this). Another reason is that these games have (earned) a reputation of requiring a lot of time. Women still tend to have even more demands on their time than men (feminism is not remotely dead given how unequal men and women are treated still in almost every aspect of culture and everyday life) and shy away from games that require hours long play session (or are rumoured o require these).
Cartoon series like the Teen Titans, prove that superheroes can be as popular with girls as they are with boys. If the writers, artists and game developers pay attention to what girls tend to find off-putting in what is the norm for the genre. Or as Shortpacked stated it over the DC 52 Starfire controversy/outrage: Teen Titans had two million viewers each week. A succesful comic may have as many as hundred thousand readers.
Not half but still a huge minorty of those viewers were girls. And it makes no sense at all to actively drive away half again as many potential readers by going out of your way to insult and squick them out. For MWM the same applies. A niche MMO would do extremely well if it gets and holds a hundred thousand players. Anything that increases that number even slightly must be considered, and anything that may drive away potential players should be put under a magnifying class before implementation.
Rule 34 is not at all the same as disproving the trope that 'sex sells'.
Despite my examples to the contrary you keep insisting that sex sells more products. It doesn't, and what is more, this fact was even known to the man who pretty much invented modern marketing (and it's not that he wasn't as sexist as they came in the early 1960s). I won't point you towards League of Angels Adverts (or any of its predecessors as the game keeps getting reissued under a new name because it keeps failing badly) because those ads tend to be badly infested with malware, but if you follow any games news site you will have a hard time avoiding those ads anyway. For safer examples I refer to the Bikini Armor Battle Damage tumblr. Now if you look at those adds with impossibly slender o-faced girls in bikini
and saying suggestively submissive lines, are you even remotely tempted to try out such games? I'd wager the answer is no, because you know the ad is a lie and there is no soft-porn in the game. Sex, even blatant sex, does not sell games. Good games sell games.
Sexiness on the other hand does not drive (many) women away. Generally we like being and feeling sexy. Culturally it is expected of women to be sexy and it is impossible for women in western cultures to grow up without both this desire and a firm grasp of what is culturally considered sexy. A game does not need to shy away from sexiness, as long as it does not cross the line of being either obligatory or being pandering. (i.e. we like being sexy, but we do not like being forced to be slutty, if the shaming language can be forgiven).
The argument that I, and several others are making has little to nothing to do with sexiness. We are arguing that jiggle physics have little or nothing to do with sexiness, and instead risk being seen as pandering to sex and fan service /because of the way this has been used in the past, and still is in the games that dominate its use. In other words, we fear that use of jiggle physics will associate City of Titans with Team Ninja games (or worse, with Studio Gainax), and we would like to hear what advantage there is for the game to risk such an association.
Overwatch was critised for more than that one pose. There also was a lot of criticism regarding the fact that most male characters had a unique (and wildly exaggerated) body type, while the limited number of female characters pretty much were interchangable. Blizzard felt compelled by this criticism to do a radical redesign of Zarya, and later added Mei. The criticism was that male characters could be cartoons, but female characters had to be conventionally pretty (by western standards). There also was, less outspoken controversy that, before Zarya, female characters had were all in supportive and ranged roles.
so, for what it's worth, and derailing the subject retty far, there was a lot of critical scrutiny of Overwatch and its implicit sexism.
I can not speak for others, and I feel that you (and Lothic in previous exchanges), tend to assume motivations on my part and then run with it as if your assumption is fact.
All I am saying is that /I/ do not see a positive to jiggle physics that outweighs the potential negatives that I do see. And that Brainbot and Cinnder at least are also seeing from what they wrote. Which is why I keep returning to the question: What will jiggle physics add to the game that improve it to the point of necessity?
And do not object to sexy characters at all. I played on Virtue too, and had many characters with the maximum number of costume slots. Every of my characters had sexy clothing, party clothing, practical clothing, sewer run clothing, winter clothing and so on. One of the things I love in The Secret World, is how much attention they paid at the start, to giving female (and male) characters every day sexy as well as practical clothing (lots of outfits on my characters there too for different occasions ranging from tank armour to boudoir sexy).
It seems obvious now that you consider jiggle physics to be sexy. And that I think it crosses the border of pandering territory. We're not likely to reconcile that difference, and I am guessing that my question as to the why of it does not make sense in how you see the issue.
I still feel that a critical examination is in order of what jiggle physics add to a game in light of the potential negative impressions it may leave. And while it is not your argument but Lothic's, the fact that other games are doing it is not particularly relevant. Those are single player games and the jiggle physics are pretty much restricted to cut scenes. Which, especially in the case of Tomb Raider, have been commented on as being mini movies showing the lead character as sexy as possible while she dies gruesomely. (and yes, I know that this does not apply to the quicktime events and it shows at best only a partial understanding of what is going on in the game at that moment. The relevant point is that some critics feel that the character of Lara Croft is unneccesarily sexualised in these scenes.) In an MMO this is more problematic as these physics would allow players to sexualise other players' characters. (because I do not think the processing power of mid level graphics cards is remotely near what would be needed to give potentially a hundred or more characters on screen each their individual animation rig).
I agree with a lot of what you say in this post. Particularly these points you made:
All very good points that sadly get lost in a conversation like this. I would like to add that a game does not become bad or indefensible just for including a sexual element. Games like Heavy Rain, Wolfenstein: The new order, Far Cry 3 and the Mass Effect series all feature sex to a varying degrees yet are still well received overall. It becomes all too common for respectful depictions of sexual elements to get lumped in with the less respectful games like Ride to Hell: Retribution or the recent example of Chun Li which is unfair.
I do think you are wrong though with this:
I do agree the manner in which Fireheart and Nadira present their opinion is extreme but I don't think they are not saying it holds 'no' value, they are saying it does not hold as much value as the negatives.
So your contention is that the game will feel incomplete without body physics? I am honestly asking because this was what I was hoping to discuss.
I work in machinima myself and have spoken to Monty, who is still a personal idol of mine. The problems with flow in Dead Fantasy were not due to the characters but the software he was using to animate them. You can see the vast improvement in quality he was able to achieve in RvB and most specifically RWBY because he had better software to use. You can actually see certain action sequences he took from his work on Dead Fantasy and improved on them in RWBY. Monty was incredible in his ability to create intensely frantic action sequences. This will always be my favorite work from Monty:
[youtube]Ke9wtbzGjCI[/youtube]
I can understand this reaction, but you can't seriously mean to imply that 'jiggle physics' is of equal importance to 'Anything' else in a game? Also, bear in mind that, if 'jiggle physics' is already built into the game engine and it just has to be configured, or whatever, then it would take more effort to take it Out. So the corollary of my statement is that, if it takes any effort to Remove 'jiggle physics', then it's Also not worth the effort to do so.
My objection to 'jiggle physics' is that it's a distraction. If the purpose of the game is to simulate conflict involving super-powered people, then I maintain that players will never see any subtle or even reasonably realistic 'jiggle'. This 'QoL feature' will only be seen in slow-action close-ups, such as seen in the many 'demonstration videos' being quoted in this thread. In other words, mere titillation and not game-in-play action.
I also point out that these demonstrations are only showing a single figure and not the effect of dozens of active characters. My fear is that 'jiggle physics' will eat up so much processing power, that most computers the game is played on will simply freeze, or melt-down. Similar to the effect of animated capes in Cimerora. I could, thereby, argue against animated clothing and animated hair, but at least these effects are large enough to be seen in play.
So, when might 'jiggle physics' actually be seen in a game? Well, there's social interaction. That's the one venue, in-game, where players might be looking at each others' 'details', such that I could see 'jiggle physics' displayed and appreciated. And yet, _I_ for one, would rather we concentrated on what people were Saying, in social interactions, rather than whose breasts had natural movement. So, to me, that's 'mere titillation' again.
I ask what the purpose of 'jiggle physics' is and the answers I get boil down to 'because I want to see it'. Sure, they say it's important for Realism, but I contend that there's so Much detail involved in reality, realism, realistic, that movable breasts seem irrelevant.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Massive walls of Text convince no one. Brevity is the key to wit.
I've been following this argument for a while now and I'm not wasting time reading novels.
Clue: make a point-ONE point at a time.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Heh - I would be very cautious about declaring something "the next big thing". Just like google glass and 3D TVs - it could very well NOT take off.
Now - that's not to say that AR wouldn't be very useful in certain applications or for certain types of games. Combined with special visors/glasses [url=https://gfycat.com/ColossalMistyHornedtoad] tabletop games[/url] could see a new renaissance. I'd kill to have a fully animated AR Battletech battlefield on my table. But much like the issues VR currently have, it could require a significant hardware cost to fully realize the potential.
Basically, it may find it's niche, but I don't necessarily see it as the death knell of traditional gaming. I mean - people (especially the console crowd) have been predicting the death of PC gaming for a decade or more, but the fact of the matter is the hardware keeps getting cheaper, PC gaming profits keep increasing and the consoles are ironically becoming more PC-like.
All is not lost - not until they perfect full-body sensory immersion VR that is - just plug in the IV and catheter off you go! Then the entire human race is boned.
You may want to take a look at Halting State by Charles Stross
It is a wonderful, and at times unnerving as well as hilarious, story about what might be normal in a near future when augmented reality become ubiquitous.
It was written before Google Glass was a thing, and may well have been the inspiriation for that development project.
I will not spoil the story but let me assure you that the author knows his technology (and can write his science fiction as if it is actually existing technology) and has a way with words. The title alone has three meanings, maybe four, within the story. He also can convincingly argue that H.P.Lovecraft wrote spy thrillers, while the work of Len Deighton constitutes mostly of horror novels.
I've added "Halting State" and the sequel, "Rule 34" to my Kindle. I'll get to them before year-end, but not this month.
The problem with any form of strap-on VR is that a person must wear it. Whether it is goggles and gloves, a full-body suit, or a full immersion perfluorocarbon tank, the physical technology that makes immersion possible also detracts from the immersive experience. The advantage to AR as it has been implemented on mobile phones in everything from restaurant recommendations to Pokemon GO is that the physical technology is something the user is already comfortable with and the augmentation factor dramatically improves the experience by enhancing a pre-existing reality in a way that is both convenient and intuitive.
Once upon a time I believed VR was the future of human experience. Nowadays, I'm convinced it will never be anything more than a tiny niche product. Augmented reality, on the other hand, is already omnipresent in the world around us in ways that almost no one recognizes until it is pointed out to them. Simple things, like television screens overlooking the parking lots of sports stadiums so people can have tailgate parties while they watch an NFL game, HUD applications in automobiles that display fuel, speed, and compass direction on the windshield, Google Earth Streetview on PCs and smartphones, all of these are AR applications. Ingress and Pokemon GO (and soon many other games) use variations on the same basic experience people have already incorporated into their daily life.
Convenience for the user is what creates rapid expansion and adoption of any technology. AR meets that requirement far better than VR. Very quickly, within the next two years, AR RPGs played on smartphones will be as commonplace as game consoles. In fact, within three years they will probably be more common than game consoles.
Sure, there will be a niche market for CoT. I, for one, will certainly download it, install it, and play it passionately, but that niche is shrinking every single day. There is only a finite number of people willing to spend money on digital content. Granted, it is a huge number, but it is still finite. The most likely future for CoT will be hundreds of private servers played on by small groups of people who already play together, with each private server offering some degree of UGC ranging from minor tweeks in spawns to complete story packages. Even if, say three years from now, an AR version of CoT is released as a mobile phone app where instead of a pre-built virtual city your hometown becomes the location for the game, CoT will still remain a very small niche product.
I'm not saying this is a bad thing. In many ways, this is a good thing. However, one inevitable consequence of this shrinking niche market will be the dramatic decline in importance of things like realistic body physics. If it is implemented as a toggle, some private servers will toggle it on, some will toggle it off. The important design paradigm that I am trying to emphasize is that it is now too late to even consider meeting the requirements of a mass public market. By the time CoT is released, the mass market will be focused on AR game apps on mobile phones because those apps will meet the convenience requirement far better than the best PC game imaginable.
Instead of arguing over the morality and ethics of bouncing breasts and oversize packets, a far more realistic focus would be on finding ways to maximize customization of the experience in an environment where most of the game's customers will be setting up and playing on private servers. No matter how high the quality of the final game, I doubt there will be more than 30,000 people who actually purchase it, and possibly as few as 10,000. Most of those people will be setting up a private server for a small group of friends and family. A small portion will be setting up private servers with individualized content and public access. Some of those public access private servers will want to include realistic body physics and some will prefer to exclude them. It might even be a good idea for MWM to not bother setting up a public server of their own. Instead, they might be better off setting up a gateway that lists all of the available private servers with public access along with small descriptions of how each server is set up (and maybe even player ratings and reviews). Players would log onto the gateway, pick a public access private server that meets their individual preferences, and be redirected to it.
At least, this is where I see the market going. Others may disagree.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
The game "The Secret World" would be an absolute perfect fit for an AR game. I can see where you are going with this and fully believe you are right on. It's the human machine interface that a full keyboard and mouse provides that will be the hardest to emulate in AR.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Pokémon Go was a big success - but it could have been a fad - it's too early to say if it and other games of it's ilk will have long-term staying power. According to [url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-22/these-charts-show-that-pokemon-go-is-already-in-decline]Bloomberg[/url], the app shed fully 1/3 of it's users - or 15 million people - last month between July and August and is on a downward trend. It would have been an even worse drop off if the app didn't launch in Singapore and Japan at the end of July/early August, which kept it afloat.
What will be interesting to see is if other AR games (which are UNDOUBTEDLY under development) can capture the same public attention that Pokémon Go did. THAT will be the greater indicator of how big AR gaming will become. It's difficult to come to such a conclusion with a sample size of one. Entertainment is full of one-hit wonders or "brightest stars" after all.
This is the one I read! But then I... nevermind.
(...then I did read a few paragraphs written by posters I like reading and appreciated them for their meter. Jingle physics.)
[size=14]"The illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths." - Pushkin[/size]
[size=14] "One piece of flair is all I need." - Sister Silicon[/size]
If anyone has any questions about the future of augmented reality, we need only to see where the next step is here: (by the way, notice the jiggliness)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f1fCCb3hVg
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
I have never said jiggle physics is of equal importance to "anything" else in a game. But it is of the same level of "unimportance" as hundreds or thousands of other little QoL details that will likely be included in this game regardless. Will my CoT characters need a cape to accomplish anything in the game? Probably not, but that wouldn't stop me from wanting capes to be available in the game regardless. As I have already proven (probably dozens of times) the "argument of necessity" is moot when applied against jiggle physics because you could easily make the same accusation against nearly countless other things that'll be included but aren't necessary to have a workable game.
Again you could claim this of many things such as the dozens of detailed face sliders we'll likely get in the game. How often did you ever notice whether the "checkbone depth" slider of anyone's character was set at 60% or 80% while you were playing the game? The fact that you might not notice something like breast jiggle ALL OF THE TIME is not an argument against having it at all. In fact I contend if the Devs of CoT do it right the subtle amounts of jiggle I'm proposing would NOT be overtly obvious/noticeable by design. If the jiggle is a distraction then it's been IMPLEMENTED wrong - its mere presence would NOT by definition be the distraction. *shrugs*
This is another strawman against jiggle physics that's almost nonsensical to bring up in 2016. If your computer hardware is so old/limited that you're going to have trouble with multiple animated capes/wings/hair/clothing/etc. then you've got a lot more to worry about than a trivial amount of jiggle physics. Stop pretending that what we're talking about here would require "so much processing power" that it would seriously impact ANYONE's ability to play the game. If we were back in 1996 I might give some credence to this argument but as of today this line of reasoning is semi-laughable.
So, again, here's another weak attempt to equate "jiggle physics" to something that's "not worth having" in the game. I can accept your somewhat narrow viewpoint that you don't see it as being worthwhile but just because YOU don't care about it doesn't mean NO ONE would care about it. I'm quite sure there's at least several "details" you'd like to see in the game that I could make very solid cases against with actual facts instead of having to handwave and demonize the concept with (supposedly negative) phrases like "mere titillation". Stop pretending this is like trying to get you to dance to rock music while you want to live in [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footloose_%281984_film%29]Elmore City, Oklahoma[/url].
Opinion noted. Just keep in mind practically EVERYTHING that exists in a game like this is there because somebody "wanted to see it".
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
There have been far more arguably "useless" things added to games for far less reasonable reasons than this. *shrugs*
You seem to think that having only "one" reason isn't enough and you're absolutely right about that. That's why I've given MULTIPLE reasons and rationales throughout this thread over the years. Your sad attempt to reduce my position down to "only one thing" is pathetic even for you. But even if I only had that "one" reason that would be the only one I'd need compared to anything you've tried to offer against it. Being the Champion of Anachronism is always going to put you on the losing side of an issue like this.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
No Lothic, you have not given multiple reasons. You have made arguments against others reasons but your only argument for this is that its a common feature in other games, which is isnt. Again, instead of trying to discuss anything you resort to insults.
Your only argument here is your whimsical attempt to unilaterally CLAIM (without any evidence) that jiggle physics does not exist in many other modern games when it clearly does based on video examples provided among other supporting evidence. It's even in WoW for goodness sake. You saying the sky isn't blue because you desperately want it to be yellow will not make it so. Since all of your other so-called arguments here are based on the similar logical equivalent of "2+2=5" I categorically disregard them for the useless handwaving they are.
Sorry but if you take my insults against your position on this topic (which I have now cleanly eviscerated multiple times) as an insult against you personally there's nothing I can really do about that...
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Thanks! I hope you noted that everything in that post was merely my opinion and my speculations.
My computer is only about 5 years old and happily runs the games I play. However, I don't have the several-hundred dollars it would cost to upgrade my graphics card, so I'm hoping CoT won't require me to do so.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Well considering it's probably going to be another year or two before CoT's even playable and hopefully another 5 or 10 years beyond that before the end I would plan accordingly hardware-wise. I'm not made of money either but I don't seriously assume the machine I'm using now will be the same one I'm using 10 years from now.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
So this type of statement is not an insult towards me?
Sure seems insulting to me.
Increased requirements, development time investment, multiple body scaling issues,art style, actual degree of interest in the feature and, yes, even potential backlash are all hand waving?
I a curious though, if you have dismissed them as hand waving how have you 'cleanly eviscerated' my points 'multiple times'?
I'm sorry Fireheart, but I hope it does. Please this was not meant at you specifically, but I don't want a shiny new game to be playable on a seven year old computer. I want it to have features and capabilities that take advantage of the capabilities of newer machines. I'm not making a case that everyone should have a custom-built rig with a pair of the latest $2000 graphics cards, although I do hope that the game will be able to take advantage of such a rig for those that do. But I don't want the game engine to be watered down so much as to be lackluster for the average gamer either.
Most games give the player the ability to adjust graphics and performance settings on their client-side to reduce the amount of calculations that have to be perfomed. But then there are other things like DirectX 12 or 13 or whatever will be in use by then. These have minimum requirements as to the actual hardware that can support it. I don't want the game to be stuck on DirectX 11 or 12.1 just to accomodate people with outdated machines.
At some point in the development process, I would like MWM to make a commitment, if they have not done so already.
We can argue over hypotheticals and what is or is not a reasonable level of technology for a game that will be delivered in two years, but that wouldn't be very fruitful. I'd much rather have an actual decision by the developers upon which we can cast feedback.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Oh, that's all right, my computer IS a 'custom-built rig' and it has enormous power to spare, except in the graphics card. Even there, I'm running current games on max-settings, but they don't have elaborate 'physics' to deal with.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Very impressive!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
Point of pride: the latest video highlighting capes demonstrates hair clothing and cape physics with collision! ! little jiggle added would be NOT be difficult to do, the basics are already there!
Every day this game looks better!
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
ODG! NO!!!
Not only do I have to worry about being strangled and blinded by my cape; now I have to worry about losing the fight with my own breast. (Joking, but the imagery is hilarious.)
ODG! NO!!!
Not only do I have to worry about being strangled and blinded by my cape; now I have to worry about losing the fight with my own breast. (Joking, but the imagery is hilarious.)
"Imagines an Edna Mode type slideshow showing the dangers of excessive jiggle physics."
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
I really like the music with this one...
[youtube]qZPY4AgE57k[/youtube]
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Horrible video. Song is only thing good in it.
Man, I remember finding the dance mods for Skyrim. there's a ton of videos out there for both Skyrim and oblivion.
Really, I have no idea who has so much time for all that, but it does remind me that I hope there's some somewhat more complex dances in CoT than there were in CoH.
An infinite number of tries doesn't mean that any one of those tries will succeed. I could flip an infinite number of pennies an infinite number of times and, barring genuine randomness, they will never come up "Waffles".
I appreciate the jiggle, but I have to put this in the "ugly" category if choosing jiggle physics: good, bad, and ugly.
The bra/corset straps on her shoulders don't move at all even though everything else is jiggling. It looks entirely unnatural. And not only unnatural--it looks like nothing you would EVER see in a comic book. The shoulder straps make her look like a marionette who only has arms loosely attached to shoulders with a gap in between.
Champions Online also did this. They allowed chest/bust resizing, but kept the shoulder straps of bras and corsets and whatever fixed. It sometimes resulted in the shoulder strap taking some ridiculous (but fixed and never moving) line with lots of stretches and curves and weird angles. It just looked so bizarre that it was a turn off for me.
Again, I am not saying jiggle is bad. It is just that the model seriously looks like her arms are not attached to her body, with the fixed shoulder strap winding and weaving a fixed gap while everything else is jiggling.
Solution 1 (the easier one): Just have everything be strapless. Or at least offer some strapless options for those who are weirded out by this.
Solution 2 (more difficult): Try to get some basic physics with the strap.
This clip pretty much exemplifies every reason why I have issues with the notion of jiggle physics, and why I feel it does not belong in City of Titans.
This. We don't need no steenkin' Hot Coffee.
[i]Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...[/i]
I feel that subtle jiggle has a place, since it can make bodies seem more lifelike. Particularly flab.
That... was not subtle jiggle, and you are correct, that really doesn't have a place in CoT.
An infinite number of tries doesn't mean that any one of those tries will succeed. I could flip an infinite number of pennies an infinite number of times and, barring genuine randomness, they will never come up "Waffles".
Jiggle exists in real life and is doable in graphics engines now. So like lighting, hair/cloth, and other physics, there is no reason it shouldn't be in CoT in as much as it enhances things and is clamped to avoid abuse--unless it takes development time away from more important matters or significantly negatively affects performance.
On the other hand, if there is no jiggle I won't really care that much personally.
And that video was bad in just absolutely every way.
FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)
I can accept that level of jiggle and I can even accept the goofy exaggerated figure.
What bothers me is the clipping, the expressionless face, the carved in stone hair, the second skin clothing and the disjointed animation of the dance.The only thing the video concerned itself with was a twerking butt and a porn star bounce to the bewbs.
The 'realism' of bouncing breasts is far less important to me in this game than having other natural elements addressed first. Before bewbs lets see proper hair and clothing physics, a face that actually can have more than one vacant expression and animation cycles that are not only natural but compelling.
Some of those jiggling masses didn't appear to be attached to the model at all! Just sorta free-floating in loose association.
Be Well!
Fireheart
[youtube]jR0huQQCPuY[/youtube]
This isn't perfect but to me the addition of natural animation, decent hair physics, clothing that isn't just a second skin, minimal clipping and expressions all do more to breath life into a character than jiggle does.
THIS
Jiggle should wait until after we've got rippling muscles and the like.
[i]Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...[/i]
The thing about making things so lifelike is that you focus on the things that still aren't lifelike and they end up disturbing you. I think that's the whole phenomenon behind the uncanny valley. In the animation above, her elbows bugged me, and her concave triceps bugged me. I know, right. Such a small things like that.
I thought they did a good job of staying away from too much detail in the face. The face was cartoonish enough to be acceptable. And the shoulder movement was leaps and bounds above the best in the gaming world today. I even saw her shoulder blades come together a little when she stretched her arms back.
These are the details one sees when the model is this realistic. That's the problem with making things more detailed. It just opens up a whole new level of detail that needs to be done right. And then any single detail done not-so-right becomes uncanny.
I'd prefer a level of abstraction that doesn't require that attention to detail. And in CoT, with bodies being fully customizable, there is no way the devs could make their characters this detailed and still have them be acceptable.
Most of the modern MMORPG Games out there have the perfect amount of detail for me. But the problem with those games is that the body customization is nearly nil. All the bodies in Archeage and Tera are identical. FFXIV lets you scale the height of the character and provides a mammary slider, but otherwise the bodies are all identical. GW2 and SWTOR give you a couple of bodies to choose from, but otherwise limit customization to the face. Dragon's Prophet, ESO, Blade & Soul, and Aion let you scale parts of your body too and it is to these that we should begin looking. I say begin because I suspect we will be taking body customization even further.
I mention all this because if we want to avoid the uncanny valley, and if we also want to maximize body customization, then we are going to need to avoid hyper-realism like the plague. I would even like to see something like the art style in Everquest Next with the hair and clothing physics seen in Wildstar. But I realize not everyone agrees with that sentiment.
In summary, the more detail(realism) the devs add, the more detail they need to spend time on to get right and the easier it is for something to be not-right. I say back off the detail(realism) a bit and make sure what you give us is all right.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
If it's either/or, then agreed!
Agreed, and, luckily, being a comics genre game, realism isn't as important as the proper graphic art style.
FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)
Did someone already post this?
It seemed appropriate given your comment and the topic at hand.
That said, I'm in favor of minor jiggle for a level of realism, but I think it should be slightly less than real and definitely NOT accentuated like you often see in fan-service anime. A little makes them look less stiff and plastic, but too much would be distracting.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
I completely agree. Going for realism is both boring and REALLY hard. It's one of the reasons I really disliked Final Fantasy 8. Everyone was just a normal looking human... no animal people, nothing. Dull. There needs to be a balance for sure, but don't shoot for perfection. We don't need it, and we don't really want it either.
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
Absolutely brilliant addition. And thank you for introducing me to Kerry Callen.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
I'm not worried about uncanny valley. I don't think the devs have the resources, or even a desire, to get to a level of realism where uncanny valley is an issue. I also don't think the body customization is going to be as 'maximized' as people make it out to be.
I have been asking about art style for a while now with less response than I hoped for. I just hope the game goes with a unique art style and not the look from the video in the What You Know: The Five Dragons announcement.
I don't want GTA IV with capes.
I prefer minimal jiggle for realism. But I love to stir the pot! and no one had posted for so long.
I support the concept of a slider that affects the player's computer only. If I want I can record that, and make music videos. That would be a slider to take to the extreme...and people would need to pay CoT. Win Win.
Frankly, I think character creation will end up blowing us all away and this topic will be forgotten in the long run.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
I think so, but there's no way to tell since many of the image links in this thread (specifically the HTML ones) were later disabled by a forum security update.
[i]Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...[/i]
if girls get that tit wiggle, I want that dick wiggle...
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
That's kinda rude.
Be Well!
Fireheart
this entire thread is filled with boob jokes, why am I rude for making one myself? It wasn't directed at any body at all, and it wasn't used to insult anyone or anything....
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Cleverness is approved of.
Poor taste rarely is, especially if it isn't clever.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
To be fair, they didn't say the others weren't rude too.
But seriously, I don't think waggling members would be very realistic. That would fall into the category of "excessive" that I was talking about before. Breast will move because they're hard to keep still, but even that I would like minimized (but not nonexistant as that would be artificial and strange looking).
//////************************************************************************\\\\\\
This summarizes my hopes and dreams for CoT. Check it out if you'd like.
All right fair enough, sorry... my actual opinion on jiggle physics is that it shouldn't be a prime focus, it's something that would be nice to have, and it shouldn't be limited to breasts or other features... If I where to punch someone I think it be nice to see a small ripple on their face, not enough that my target's face would contort around my face but enough that I would be able to notice it if I looked close enough, I think it would be nice to apply this method to environmental stuff to, like if I was fighting on a zeppelin I would want to look down and see my feet slightly making impressions on the blimp and go "Huh... neat..." or if I go out into the snow I could look at my foot prints in the snow, or see small ripples on the water when my speedster runs on it. Small aesthetics like that would be fun
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
IMHO there's no reason groin bulges shouldn't support jiggle mechanics if chest bulges have them. Size matters in both cases: nobody's going to care about something they can't see. And again, this should prioritize right after rippling muscles and "my god, it's full of mice!".
Granted, I wouldn't call it [i]dick[/i] wiggle. Maybe [i]groin[/i] jiggle. But if we're going to have objectification, let's make it cross-platform.
[i]Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...[/i]
Frankly the motion/jiggle of a male groin is by and large considered to be far more taboo than a woman's breasts. And in most cases would be imperceptible. As would face deformation during a punch. Heck until the invention flash photography I suspect that no one even knew that happened. Unless you could catch a screenshot just so you'd not notice it in game either. My stance on these two items is no.
Second Chance: https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/CityOfTitans/SecondChance/
Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments
It might debatably exemplify a "bad" way to implement it, but it also doesn't prove that a "better" way to implement it in CoT is impossible or undesired. For what it's worth I think the amount of jiggle shown in that latest vid would need to be dialed back at least to 1/3 the amount to be "reasonable" for CoT.
Basically I tend to have faith that if the Devs of CoT decide to provide for breast jiggle it'll be handled "better" than those other versions of it both YOU and I have "issues" with.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
My main argument all along is that I don't think there's any real reason this needs to be considered an "either/or" situation. Frankly I think acceptably minimalistic breast jiggle would be easier to implement than full body "rippling musculature" but in 2017 the software technology exists for BOTH of those things. As with everything else it would boil down to a matter of priorities for the Devs.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Ironically I'm reasonably sure either I already posted that pic at some point during this long running thread or at least someone else did. I'm at about a 95% confidence level on that. ;)
This is pretty much exactly what I and other reasonable people have argued for CoT all along.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
My feeling is that once a game provides for "natural animation, decent hair physics, clothing that isn't just a second skin, minimal clipping and expressions" that it would simply look very odd if it did not also include reasonable amounts of natural body jiggle. Breast jiggle (done right) just happens to be the one kind of jiggle that's likely the easiest to tackle first. It's sort of like being a little bit pregnant: a game can work without these subtle details (i.e. Pacman or a 1990s version of Lara Croft) but once you start down the path of adding these animation details there's really no reasonable way you can say that any of them are "more important" than any other. They ALL serve equally to breath life into a modern CGI character.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
[u]This is the mild jiggle that I like[/u] (I know sometimes I like to stir the pot), but it demonstrates a concept of solid unmoving armor, and jiggle at the same time. This armor would have fit right in with outfits available in the old COH game.
I like how it combines inflexible armor and mild bounce.
[youtube]71jB3Yqq22s[/youtube]
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Its looking increasing likely that jiggle and bounce may be in the form of player mods.
Pity. [u]I would prefer to pay MWM for the privilege.[/u] Devs don't give up on this. Let this be a store feature, please.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Oh hey, are we due for another bout of activity? Nifty.
I suspect that, more likely than getting a complete lack, we're looking at the same level of jiggle that's present in games like Guild Wars 2 and Final Fantasy 14.
That is "So subtle you only notice it when actively looking at your character's chest during high movement moments" which essentially means only when you look for it. I think that's a reasonable level.
An infinite number of tries doesn't mean that any one of those tries will succeed. I could flip an infinite number of pennies an infinite number of times and, barring genuine randomness, they will never come up "Waffles".
Queue up the Walking Dead music again lol...
For what it's worth that's pretty much all I've ever asked for when it comes to CoT. People who have ranted and raved on this thread against "any" amount of jiggle have (apparently?) always assumed that the people who want it in this game are asking for it to be stupidly exaggerated/hyperbolic which is NOT and never been the case as far as I can tell.
I still prefer the concept of having a "jiggle slider per costume slot" so that players would be able to control the amount of jiggle based on the type of clothing they are wearing. One end of the slider would represent zero jiggle (a.k.a. the CoH default) which could be chosen while wearing body armor or other heavy/thick clothing; the other end would represent your subtle/reasonable level of jiggle that could be chosen while wearing things like t-shirts or bikini tops.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Maybe I am alone in this, but in all honesty (and i love some jiggle), this should be the very LAST thing they need to worry about.
My DeviantArt page
http://shamanatdawn.deviantart.com/
You're not alone - many people make the "it should be the lowest priority thing" argument without understanding the engineering considerations involved.
Turns out if the Devs have already made the decision to implement any degree of jiggle into the body models for this game it would likely be easier to "bake" it in while the models are being developed at the beginning. If they decided to hold off until some kind of post-launch update it would involve having to redesign the existing body models which ironically enough would likely take more reengineering work (adjusting existing costume items, etc.) than just having the feature plugged in at the very beginning.
Look at it this way: We are already going to get dozens of sliders to adjust our facial features that will be nigh-unnoticeable or of questionable cosmetic value. At the very least a subtle/reasonable amount of jiggle would likely be a cosmetic detail that people would -actually- be able to notice in game. How can you argue that the facial sliders are any more/less important than a jiggle slider?
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Realistically speaking, given how close to completely done with the character modeling they are (if they haven't hit the point where they've finished it already) then the decision is likely already made on what they're going to be doing with this. We've discussed the situation ad nauseum, so it may be best at this point to just wait and see what comes.
An infinite number of tries doesn't mean that any one of those tries will succeed. I could flip an infinite number of pennies an infinite number of times and, barring genuine randomness, they will never come up "Waffles".
^^^^ What Lothic said!
A slider is all I ask. I will gladly pay for it. Let the devs collect cash for it, only the player will see it on his machine. Great. Lets do it now while its cheap and easy.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
As far as this topic goes CoT will, at worst, maintain the status quo established by CoH 12+ years ago. I'm simply expressing the reasonable expectation that this game will be able to provide what would be considered a modern level of body model detail that many games in the last few years have been able to provide as a standard default.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Someone mentioned this thread in another thread, and lo and behold, it has been resurrected. I hadn't weighed in on this previously, but when in Rome...
The Wedding Singer basically sums it up for me:
[youtube]eetoyOPtzLg[/youtube]
Basically, is it appropriate for the setting? High amounts of jiggle physics wouldn't seem realistically appropriate, in my opinion, in this particular setting. In regards to realism, would jiggle happen if superheroines were an actual thing? Sure, if it was just classic spandex, but why would superheroines just wear spandex? I wouldn't think they would, all factors considered, but I'm not a lady so I can't say for sure. But I have witnessed ladies at the gym, ballet, or involved in other various sports, and I can't say they've just worn something like spandex (e.g. compression shirt). It's always, in my observation, been paired with a sports bra, which significantly reduces not just observed jiggle but also, according to my wife, personally experienced jiggle.
So if they were to include it, fine but let's not go overboard. Additionally, on the condition that they were to include jiggle physics, I'd hope that in whatever form or fashion it's implemented, it's rendered completely client-side and therefore no one gets it included in their gameplay experience if they don't want it or don't want their family exposed to it.
Pages