Are you telling me that this bull###### has started because of a discussion over THE USEFULNESS OF AN INVERTED MOUSE OPTION!?
It's simple: Include it. Some people play with inverted mouse, just like how some people play with customized key bindings and customized sensitivity. It's been around for literally a decade. It's not feature creep. It's standard fare.
But you know what, let's remove inverted mouse. While we're at it, let's remove custom keyboard bindings, because the default bindings have been calculated to have the perfect balance of efficiency and sense. After that, let's make sure that the music and sound volume can't be changed independently of each other, since musical stings are an essential part of the Natural Selection experience.
Tell me: Has the feature creep escalated? I expect a 5 page essay tomorrow.
Incorporate this paragraph into your thesis statement: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'll do you one better than an FPS example: One of the foremost leaders in technology and science today still actively use a measurement system long ago abandoned by its own creators; it is silly, illogical and an all-around poor standard, one that very few of the rest of the world follow. Yet why does it still exist? Because we are hard-pressed to displace such an entrenched leader that carries much weight. This, however, is not the case with inverted mouse players, they are few and far between and finding decreasing support in the gaming community. The scheme has been shown to be illogical and is a holdover that will soon die out much like the proponents for keyboard-look. We can either choose to prolong its suffering by infecting NS2, or speeding its course to extinction, which I see as the sensible and progressive thing to do... despite the whole of 3 sales lost.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Renegade, I would rather that you not speak for everybody's preferences, considering the fact that preferences are preferences. However, if you REALLY WANT TO, you should post usage statistics around for everyone to see, and prove to the developers that the whole inverted mouse thing is the dying throes of a failed flight simulator, and that their lives will be <i>turned upside down</i> (HAH, GET IT) from this revelation.
You've shown yourself to be rather petty in this discussion, as evidenced by the quoted paragraph. Take your stupid crusade somewhere else.
hey, man (get it ^_^), its not necesarry to write such a long post just to say "preferences is preferences" :P.
But as the discussion now is about how inverted mouse would be useless, I do actually agree. It is just as useless as non-inverted, key look, trackball, mind controleld and so on. However, you need to have atleast one way of doing something (the most common is non-inverted mouse (I think, I recently got to know there is quite many ppl using those things you rou rotate an orb instead oh moving a "mouse" which in return rotates an orb (unless its optical or laser))).
So altough it is useless to have more then one way of doing something, it does not mean it is stupid. It is actually pretty smart, just as the whole custom bindings thing is smart. So why would you not be allowed to bind the mouse-x-speed input to something (like look left (normal) or look right (inverted)), and the mouse-y-speed input to something else (like lookup (normal) or lookdown (inverted))?
If you ask me however, anything said so far in this thread except what I said first time I posted in it, could be ignored. If UWE does not add it, I doubt it is hard for us to code it. Also, fun fact, you cant set players view yaw without changing the player models yaw XD. EDIT: Atleast it does with SetViewAngles(), player.viewYaw = might work (and might not).
<!--quoteo(post=1769587:date=May 3 2010, 08:41 AM:name=Feha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Feha @ May 3 2010, 08:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769587"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->hey, man (get it ^_^), its not necesarry to write such a long post just to say "preferences is preferences" :P.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If Renegade can write such a long post just to say "Invert mouse is useless." I can write just as long a post to argument it.
This entire thread is full of e-posture over the silliest thing I've ever seen. It's worse than anything Battle-Bug or FocusedWolf could incite.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you ask me however, anything said so far in this thread except what I said first time I posted in it, could be ignored. If UWE does not add it, I doubt it is hard for us to code it. Also, fun fact, you cant set players view yaw without changing the player models yaw XD.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1769569:date=May 2 2010, 09:58 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 2 2010, 09:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769569"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're right, not coherent, just delusional if you think inverted mouse is <i>that</i> common. You've been caught with your hand in the cookie jar - you want to have your inversion but someone else can't have their trackball support, or laser or keyboard-look (which I know off-hand of more people who use those to game than inverted mice).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is that common, so is left-handed people.
Remember in the "good ol' days" where you could be hit(beat) by a ruler(or worse) if you tried to write with your left hand in school?
I'm too young for that time period, but its things in history like that which are so lol bad its unbelievable(or not since how bad peoples' minds really are apparently it seems).
It is just as common as left-handed mouse users.
Inverted left-handed I do not know, you have to look at the variables seperately to get good results.
*****
So you support keyboard look but not inverted mouse, hypocrite much? That is something that could be deemed phased out, because you have less control than using a mouse. Just like a gamepad to a mouse, but, I do support keyboard look because it is useful for spectator controls. Which is why it has not been phased out(you probably were not thinking this, just trying to use fail examples again).
If inverted mouse was 1:100 players, or even 1:1000 players, it would be phased out by now. On all gaming, electronic devices, and physical peripherals by now(including joystick control).
*****
I still do not believe you in that you can use a laser pointer to control a FPS, say like Counter-Strike.
*****
At least kainzor was a funny troll. Even though spam is against the rules.
<!--quoteo(post=1769621:date=May 3 2010, 07:48 PM:name=Jimyd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jimyd @ May 3 2010, 07:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769621"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So you support keyboard look but not inverted mouse, hypocrite much? That is something that could be deemed phased out,<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You do understand my pining for keyboard-look was simply a gambit, right? It is intended to display hypocrisy over, on the one hand wanting "freedom to choose" a minority preference, but on the other hand, removing it from others because you believe one minority is "phased out" over the other. As for various pointing devices, I'm sure non-fail googling skills will corroborate an interesting array of minority preferences.
As for heymans woefully oblivious entry into this discussion (with rhetoric that was countered pages ago), I will do you this last service and summarize your error: you neglect to realize that <a href="http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html" target="_blank">each preference comes at a price</a>. Common ones are well worth paying, but if you support including an obscure preference such as inverse look, then (as I repeat myself) you must also be prepared to pay for inclusion of <b>all</b> such similar preferences (or else risk being labeled a bigot). FYI keyboard-look is a much more pivotal preference than invert mouse ever was; it has sparked community-wide "Quake" wars over the best players using keyboard vs. mice look (resulting in the traditional cvar "mouselook"). As I will venture a guess that neither you nor other proponents will be just as quick to adopt this and similar preferences, be sure to enjoy your cake while not eating it too.
The trackball(laser pointer in this case) of UI's?
How was this relevant to videogames.
Also, I pulled these bulletpoints out:
BAD UI *Just copying Apple and Microsoft.
GOOD UI *Free software doesn't innovate, just copies. (Then what is the point?)
^LOL?, so why break what isn't horribly broken(lets ignore the horrible Vista failure, and I do not use a Mac or Apple products; so I wouldn't know too much about them besides a new Ipod being released every 6 months to a year.)
Actually on this issue of percentage of people who use Inverted Mouse, they were all forum threads in game forums that only lasted to a max of 2-3 pages and less than 50 votes.
Couldn't google find a good(non-biased) scientific case study on it. Doesn't Valve ask this question in any of their surveys? That would be a decent start without physical evidence(assume like 0.5-3% of people choose the wrong option by accident or on purpose).
Anyways, in this case/scenario, it can only hurt this game by not including it. Yes that is anecdotal evidence, but it is true. Oh and you still keep jumping around this statement:
The videogame already supports a <b><u>MOUSE</u></b>. It is not like asking for <b>extra peripherals</b> like a trackball, novint failcon, halo controller(head movement/impulses), and etcetera. So all someone really asking for when asking to include Inverted Mouse, is to make that device "feature complete".
Yup. It is the very first thing to start crossing off on a checklist. Fully support the mouse, then go to a controller(NS2 DEVs talk about the XBUCK$), then similar mouse peripherals(in design and function; like a trackball), then finally novelty type of controllers for <u>this gametype</u>(FPS; so Joystick is pretty low... but not as low as a laser pointer because a Joystick is more used and mainstream).
TL;DR (I'll do it this time.)
Last 2 paragraphs. That is what is relevant, or what we are really arguing about here.
<!--quoteo(post=1769644:date=May 4 2010, 08:45 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 4 2010, 08:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769644"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As for heymans woefully oblivious entry into this discussion (with rhetoric that was countered pages ago), I will do you this last service and summarize your error: you neglect to realize that <a href="http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html" target="_blank">each preference comes at a price</a>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is not "pages". I hate when people use the kind of rhetorics where they argue like that (stating false facts).
And why do ppl still keep carrying on this discussion? Is it not obvius that some guy who know lua that prefer inverted mouse will try to code it if UWE doesnt?
EDIT: Altough I think that UWE should code it and make it easy for code to toggle it (People could code some kind of aircraft that automaticly makes the mouse inverted when you sit in it or such).
Odd idea really for a non-flight game. I only use it for flying planes because if I need to pull up fast it's easier to yank the mouse down than it is to push it further up as I usually have my arm mostly extended when using a mouse.
As I don't need to do that in FPS games though I don't bother with it, up is up and down is down.
<!--quoteo(post=1769644:date=May 4 2010, 02:45 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 4 2010, 02:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769644"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You do understand my pining for keyboard-look was simply a gambit, right? It is intended to display hypocrisy over, on the one hand wanting "freedom to choose" a minority preference, but on the other hand, removing it from others because you believe one minority is "phased out" over the other. As for various pointing devices, I'm sure non-fail googling skills will corroborate an interesting array of minority preferences.
As for heymans woefully oblivious entry into this discussion (with rhetoric that was countered pages ago), I will do you this last service and summarize your error: you neglect to realize that <a href="http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html" target="_blank">each preference comes at a price</a>. Common ones are well worth paying, but if you support including an obscure preference such as inverse look, then (as I repeat myself) you must also be prepared to pay for inclusion of <b>all</b> such similar preferences (or else risk being labeled a bigot). FYI keyboard-look is a much more pivotal preference than invert mouse ever was; it has sparked community-wide "Quake" wars over the best players using keyboard vs. mice look (resulting in the traditional cvar "mouselook"). As I will venture a guess that neither you nor other proponents will be just as quick to adopt this and similar preferences, be sure to enjoy your cake while not eating it too.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm going to just apologize now for my subtle ignorance.
Onto the meat: Appeal to Ethos!
Perhaps I'm wrong or even worse, petty. However, this entire discussion has turned into something rather stupid. And Renegade, now that I've had a chance too look at the statistics, I think that you could be right. However, I get the feeling that the thread is more than just about a simple inverted mouse option, and more about what is best for the company and the profits they turn.
But let's take a look at what else is could be important the developers. Let's take a look at Valve.
Anyone who knows a ######'s worth about PC gaming knows about Valve. They have an amazing business model, and have created games that sell millions. But that doesn't mean they don't waste money.
If they did, why would they have taken the time to include developer commentary, subtitles, and waste their time selling stupid (I don't think they're stupid) plush toys to their fans?
It's because they want people to enjoy their game.
Yes, making a game in the end is about making a profit, but then again: It's their life's work. Unknown Worlds is staffed by <u>people</u>, and as persons, perhaps they are willing to spend $5 to allow that 1 person out of 100,000 to play the game that they've spilled countless hours into in a way that is comfortable to that person. I know there's a chance that they would do that, because I would be willing to give that $5.
<!--quoteo(post=1769653:date=May 4 2010, 07:58 AM:name=Jimyd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jimyd @ May 4 2010, 07:58 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769653"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So Gnome 2 is a new UI, akin to Linux?
The videogame already supports a <b><u>MOUSE</u></b>. It is not like asking for <b>extra peripherals</b> like a trackball, novint failcon, halo controller(head movement/impulses), and etcetera. So all someone really asking for when asking to include Inverted Mouse, is to make that device "feature complete". Last 2 paragraphs. That is what is relevant, or what we are really arguing about here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, that's not the point of our discussion or the article. The author is warning that in an open environment (like open source or indie communities), it is common for users to suggest many preferences and even implement themselves; however accepting each preference comes at a price to usability, adding complexity. You must weigh the cost against total benefit and how useful the preference is. If it inconveniences a small number of people or can be worked around it is likely not useful, and so the "tl;dr" of this thread is that since only a small minority of players require inverted mouse (most of which already use regular mouse for everything else), it can be seen as "the line between when a preference should exist and when it should not". (p.s., Linux is not a UI, GNOME is the UI that operates on <i>top</i> of Linux which is a kernel (operating system).)
<!--quoteo(post=1769664:date=May 4 2010, 10:33 AM:name=Feha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Feha @ May 4 2010, 10:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It is not "pages". I hate when people use the kind of rhetorics where they argue like that (stating false facts).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> huh, I suppose English is not your native language? I repeated my argument on preferences both on page #2 and #1, hence why it was addressed "pages ago".
<!--quoteo(post=1769704:date=May 4 2010, 04:03 PM:name=Heyman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heyman @ May 4 2010, 04:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769704"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They have an amazing business model, and have created games that sell millions. But that doesn't mean they don't waste money.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Before you get too enamored with Valve, I suggest reading some of their publications: <a href="http://valvesoftware.com/company/publications.html" target="_blank">http://valvesoftware.com/company/publications.html</a> Some quotes taken unashamedly out of context: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->L4D1: • Players identified different textures as clones • Used blood to differentiate similar textures L4D2: • Players should identify same texture as different • Apply blood masking to disguise identical textures Produce less content, more variation, iterate faster<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> They are above all, not wasteful, but <b>smart</b>. Smart at which corners they cut to achieve the best mileage with the least investment. What you list as "wastes" are all pre-calculated returns on an investment; they're not done purely for customer benefit. I assure you, if Valve were to conclude that a preference or feature had little mileage they would not hesitate to drop it, despite the repercussions of a handful of customers not "enjoying their game".
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Unknown Worlds is staffed by <u>people</u>, and as persons, perhaps they are willing to spend $5 to allow that 1 person out of 100,000 to play the game that they've spilled countless hours into in a way that is comfortable to that person. I know there's a chance that they would do that, because I would be willing to give that $5.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It was nicely expressed sentiment, but not relevant at all to the subject at hand. This is nothing to do with dev time or money spent implementing a preference (Max could do it in his sleep for less than a penny). What it is, is an issue of software design and HCI principle, whose costs are not a factor you can measure in dollar amount (as evidenced by the article).
<!--quoteo(post=1769747:date=May 5 2010, 02:17 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 5 2010, 02:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769747"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It was nicely expressed sentiment, but not relevant at all to the subject at hand. This is nothing to do with dev time or money spent implementing a preference (Max could do it in his sleep for less than a penny). What it is, is an issue of software design and HCI principle, whose costs are not a factor you can measure in dollar amount (as evidenced by the article).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your first venture into this thread goes:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I suppose it's an easy option, but I don't see why they need to afford it any time at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the rest of the thread talks about whether or not they needed to.
The answer is that they don't need to include it, but they can since they want to.
<!--quoteo(post=1769877:date=May 5 2010, 12:06 PM:name=Heyman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heyman @ May 5 2010, 12:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769877"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your first venture into this thread goes: And the rest of the thread talks about whether or not they needed to. The answer is that they don't need to include it, but they can since they want to.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The quote clearly implies that "time" for implementation is not the important factor here, hence why "affording" any amount of it is unneeded. I'm not sure how you got the impression this was about wasted implementation time (if this is in fact what you're implying), but to be clear it's not (it's about good design).
Your's is not much of an answer since we don't (yet) know what they want. A more useful contribution is to explain why you think it's inclusion outweighs its cost (again, refer to the article I linked for a definition of "cost").
<!--quoteo(post=1769881:date=May 5 2010, 03:11 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 5 2010, 03:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769881"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The quote clearly implies that "time" for implementation is not the important factor here, hence why "affording" any amount of it is unneeded. I'm not sure how you got the impression this was about wasted implementation time (if this is in fact what you're implying), but to be clear it's not (it's about good design).
Your's is not much of an answer since we don't (yet) know what they want. A more useful contribution is to explain why you think it's inclusion outweighs its cost (again, refer to the article I linked for a definition of "cost").<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't mention anything anything about design until your second post in the thread, which was an overreaction to JimyD's overreaction.
<!--quoteo(post=1769063:date=Apr 28 2010, 09:40 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Apr 28 2010, 09:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769063"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It wasn't worth editing to appease pedantic priggery. I won't quote you on it because all your reasoning is a load of hooey; inverted mouse is a carry-over from the yoke of an airplane which was developed for reasons <u>entirely separate from FPS gaming</u>. A mouse on the other hand has been analyzed by psychologists and usability experts since its invention to be found that - surprise! - up is up and down is down makes sense for just about everything; as much sense as left is left and right is right.
The only reason for inverted mouse is because some game had it on by default, then someone played said game and got used to it and so on. Indeed, it's sole reason for existence is as a <u>usability virus</u>; and like trackballs and keyboard-look the industry has decided to leave the last few infected and move on. So rather than push a new game to suit literally "backwards" needs, I am going to take the stance that this is something you need to implement yourself, much like I would not expect an option provided if I wanted to play NS2 with left/right reversed.
Oh, What about aviation? Like I said inverting pitch is such a poor approximation of a yoke (how is it that you can overlook left/right movement but not up/down?) that you're better off using a joystick if you truly care that much for emulation; otherwise you can fly just the same with mouse movements you've been using for 99% of all other tasks.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In other words, the topic changed.
However, I do admit that we have no way of knowing what the developers want. As for being able to outweigh the inclusion of whatever cost you've put forth, I'm also unable to do that, since moral and ethical actions can be seen subjectively, and attempting to weigh between your objective sacrifices and my subjective tendencies is just going to end badly.
Just be glad the Mouse is being supported at all, and not turned into a Point-and-Click adventure like Sam & Max(although that actually does sound kind of fun).
Save your energy Renegade for when _special gets rewritten by LUA so it can to be used ingame where it functions just like old times, that is what you should be rajing about preemptively .
^Can't really stop it either, good luck Mr. Tin Foil.
IIRC there was a "pro config" for quake going around, that had the mouse axis y inverted by default and many people adopted it from there. The reason, why I used invert from the start was that it made more sense, to control your own body instead of moving pixels.
When pulling the mouse towards you, you "lean back", thus making the gun point up and vice versa. It just makes sense, I guess :D
<!--quoteo(post=1769932:date=May 6 2010, 02:31 AM:name=Faskalia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Faskalia @ May 6 2010, 02:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769932"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->IIRC there was a "pro config" for quake going around, that had the mouse axis y inverted by default and many people adopted it from there. The reason, why I used invert from the start was that it made more sense, to control your own body instead of moving pixels.
When pulling the mouse towards you, you <u>"lean back"</u>, thus making the gun point up and vice versa. It just makes sense, I guess :D<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is how I always looked at it, even all the way back in Goldeneye and before that.
Unless you are a robot/wierdo who only looks with your head and no eye movement, inverted mouse makes sense.
How do you look over a railing next to a ledge, do you stand as close as possible and only turn your head downwards? No you don't, you lean <b>forward</b> to peer over.
And this is why it shouldn't be thrown on the cross and try to be removed from all parts of society because it is the "outcast".
*****
The counter argument, is that physical full body movements do not translate the same as hand-to-screen movements. RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE useless citied ####, non-sequitar related example. <!--coloro:#FFA500--><span style="color:#FFA500"><!--/coloro--><b><i><u>DOOMSDAY</u></i></b><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--coloro:#FFFF00--><span style="color:#FFFF00"><!--/coloro--><b><i>.</i></b><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
(Might as well do Renegade's part in more of a fun way.)
<!--quoteo(post=1769912:date=May 5 2010, 10:02 PM:name=acker)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (acker @ May 5 2010, 10:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769912"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why is Renegade still arguing about this?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not, I'm done. I've already made my points clear, there's no use in further re-iteration and less so in expending any further logic on a person who lacks the ability to form a staple of writing, the paragraph.
<!--quoteo(post=1769990:date=May 6 2010, 03:02 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 6 2010, 03:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769990"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not, I'm done. I've already made my points clear, there's no use in further re-iteration and less so in expending any further logic on a <u>person</u> who lacks the ability to form a staple of writing, the paragraph.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like I said, I do it so people don't Wall of Text(WoT) comment at me, or TL;DR, as people like to do when it is properly structured into chunks.
You could at least have <u>cited my name</u>, LOL Z!!! Being lazy I see.
How did this thread reach 3 pages and turn into a debate about adding a simple inverse function that will probably take the devs an hour to make movement negative in the y axis and then add the command to console and multiplayer options?
<!--quoteo(post=1770251:date=May 8 2010, 07:31 AM:name=brownymaster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (brownymaster @ May 8 2010, 07:31 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1770251"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How did this thread reach 3 pages and turn into a debate about adding a simple inverse function that will probably take the devs an hour to make movement negative in the y axis and then add the command to console and multiplayer options?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Mez showed exactly how easy it was (*-1 (I have kept telling ppl it cant be hard)), and for the devs I imagine it would take less then 1 hour as they know what file to look in, what would take the most time would be making the button in options, and I still doubt that takes 1 hour.
And this became 3 pages because of renegade I think (he kept stating such an option cost to much to be included or something (cost as in code complexity (I think))).
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
For me it is very simple. The first game I ever played with any kind of directional aiming was elite. Elite is a space sim, and like in any flying vehicle you pull back on the stick to climb and push forward to dive. I played this when I was around 10 years old and it's just what I'm used to. I don't care about what makes most sense in terms of transformation of your view or any other rationale anyone can make for why my <b>preference</b> is wrong.
"It is computed that eleven thousand persons have at several times suffered death rather than submit to break their eggs at the smaller end."
i learned playing inverted from duke nukem and since then played inverted, i am also playing loads of flight sims so its natural for me, if i try to play "normal" my head starts hurting, its not possible for me.
but dont worry, i am pretty sure the devs will implement this as it is piss easy to do as ppl posted here.
Comments
It's simple: Include it. Some people play with inverted mouse, just like how some people play with customized key bindings and customized sensitivity. It's been around for literally a decade. It's not feature creep. It's standard fare.
But you know what, let's remove inverted mouse. While we're at it, let's remove custom keyboard bindings, because the default bindings have been calculated to have the perfect balance of efficiency and sense. After that, let's make sure that the music and sound volume can't be changed independently of each other, since musical stings are an essential part of the Natural Selection experience.
Tell me: Has the feature creep escalated? I expect a 5 page essay tomorrow.
Incorporate this paragraph into your thesis statement:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'll do you one better than an FPS example: One of the foremost leaders in technology and science today still actively use a measurement system long ago abandoned by its own creators; it is silly, illogical and an all-around poor standard, one that very few of the rest of the world follow. Yet why does it still exist? Because we are hard-pressed to displace such an entrenched leader that carries much weight. This, however, is not the case with inverted mouse players, they are few and far between and finding decreasing support in the gaming community. The scheme has been shown to be illogical and is a holdover that will soon die out much like the proponents for keyboard-look. We can either choose to prolong its suffering by infecting NS2, or speeding its course to extinction, which I see as the sensible and progressive thing to do... despite the whole of 3 sales lost.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Renegade, I would rather that you not speak for everybody's preferences, considering the fact that preferences are preferences. However, if you REALLY WANT TO, you should post usage statistics around for everyone to see, and prove to the developers that the whole inverted mouse thing is the dying throes of a failed flight simulator, and that their lives will be <i>turned upside down</i> (HAH, GET IT) from this revelation.
You've shown yourself to be rather petty in this discussion, as evidenced by the quoted paragraph. Take your stupid crusade somewhere else.
But as the discussion now is about how inverted mouse would be useless, I do actually agree. It is just as useless as non-inverted, key look, trackball, mind controleld and so on.
However, you need to have atleast one way of doing something (the most common is non-inverted mouse (I think, I recently got to know there is quite many ppl using those things you rou rotate an orb instead oh moving a "mouse" which in return rotates an orb (unless its optical or laser))).
So altough it is useless to have more then one way of doing something, it does not mean it is stupid. It is actually pretty smart, just as the whole custom bindings thing is smart.
So why would you not be allowed to bind the mouse-x-speed input to something (like look left (normal) or look right (inverted)), and the mouse-y-speed input to something else (like lookup (normal) or lookdown (inverted))?
If you ask me however, anything said so far in this thread except what I said first time I posted in it, could be ignored.
If UWE does not add it, I doubt it is hard for us to code it.
Also, fun fact, you cant set players view yaw without changing the player models yaw XD.
EDIT: Atleast it does with SetViewAngles(), player.viewYaw = might work (and might not).
If Renegade can write such a long post just to say "Invert mouse is useless." I can write just as long a post to argument it.
This entire thread is full of e-posture over the silliest thing I've ever seen. It's worse than anything Battle-Bug or FocusedWolf could incite.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you ask me however, anything said so far in this thread except what I said first time I posted in it, could be ignored.
If UWE does not add it, I doubt it is hard for us to code it.
Also, fun fact, you cant set players view yaw without changing the player models yaw XD.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, gonna have to agree with you there.
Edit: Now with 50% less rage.
It is that common, so is left-handed people.
Remember in the "good ol' days" where you could be hit(beat) by a ruler(or worse) if you tried to write with your left hand in school?
I'm too young for that time period, but its things in history like that which are so lol bad its unbelievable(or not since how bad peoples' minds really are apparently it seems).
It is just as common as left-handed mouse users.
Inverted left-handed I do not know, you have to look at the variables seperately to get good results.
*****
So you support keyboard look but not inverted mouse, hypocrite much? That is something that could be deemed phased out, because you have less control than using a mouse. Just like a gamepad to a mouse, but, I do support keyboard look because it is useful for spectator controls. Which is why it has not been phased out(you probably were not thinking this, just trying to use fail examples again).
If inverted mouse was 1:100 players, or even 1:1000 players, it would be phased out by now. On all gaming, electronic devices, and physical peripherals by now(including joystick control).
*****
I still do not believe you in that you can use a laser pointer to control a FPS, say like Counter-Strike.
*****
At least kainzor was a funny troll. Even though spam is against the rules.
You do understand my pining for keyboard-look was simply a gambit, right? It is intended to display hypocrisy over, on the one hand wanting "freedom to choose" a minority preference, but on the other hand, removing it from others because you believe one minority is "phased out" over the other. As for various pointing devices, I'm sure non-fail googling skills will corroborate an interesting array of minority preferences.
As for heymans woefully oblivious entry into this discussion (with rhetoric that was countered pages ago), I will do you this last service and summarize your error: you neglect to realize that <a href="http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html" target="_blank">each preference comes at a price</a>. Common ones are well worth paying, but if you support including an obscure preference such as inverse look, then (as I repeat myself) you must also be prepared to pay for inclusion of <b>all</b> such similar preferences (or else risk being labeled a bigot). FYI keyboard-look is a much more pivotal preference than invert mouse ever was; it has sparked community-wide "Quake" wars over the best players using keyboard vs. mice look (resulting in the traditional cvar "mouselook"). As I will venture a guess that neither you nor other proponents will be just as quick to adopt this and similar preferences, be sure to enjoy your cake while not eating it too.
The trackball(laser pointer in this case) of UI's?
How was this relevant to videogames.
Also, I pulled these bulletpoints out:
BAD UI
*Just copying Apple and Microsoft.
GOOD UI
*Free software doesn't innovate, just copies. (Then what is the point?)
^LOL?, so why break what isn't horribly broken(lets ignore the horrible Vista failure, and I do not use a Mac or Apple products; so I wouldn't know too much about them besides a new Ipod being released every 6 months to a year.)
Actually on this issue of percentage of people who use Inverted Mouse, they were all forum threads in game forums that only lasted to a max of 2-3 pages and less than 50 votes.
Couldn't google find a good(non-biased) scientific case study on it. Doesn't Valve ask this question in any of their surveys? That would be a decent start without physical evidence(assume like 0.5-3% of people choose the wrong option by accident or on purpose).
Anyways, in this case/scenario, it can only hurt this game by not including it. Yes that is anecdotal evidence, but it is true. Oh and you still keep jumping around this statement:
The videogame already supports a <b><u>MOUSE</u></b>. It is not like asking for <b>extra peripherals</b> like a trackball, novint failcon, halo controller(head movement/impulses), and etcetera. So all someone really asking for when asking to include Inverted Mouse, is to make that device "feature complete".
Yup. It is the very first thing to start crossing off on a checklist. Fully support the mouse, then go to a controller(NS2 DEVs talk about the XBUCK$), then similar mouse peripherals(in design and function; like a trackball), then finally novelty type of controllers for <u>this gametype</u>(FPS; so Joystick is pretty low... but not as low as a laser pointer because a Joystick is more used and mainstream).
TL;DR (I'll do it this time.)
Last 2 paragraphs. That is what is relevant, or what we are really arguing about here.
It is not "pages". I hate when people use the kind of rhetorics where they argue like that (stating false facts).
And why do ppl still keep carrying on this discussion? Is it not obvius that some guy who know lua that prefer inverted mouse will try to code it if UWE doesnt?
EDIT: Altough I think that UWE should code it and make it easy for code to toggle it (People could code some kind of aircraft that automaticly makes the mouse inverted when you sit in it or such).
As I don't need to do that in FPS games though I don't bother with it, up is up and down is down.
As for heymans woefully oblivious entry into this discussion (with rhetoric that was countered pages ago), I will do you this last service and summarize your error: you neglect to realize that <a href="http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html" target="_blank">each preference comes at a price</a>. Common ones are well worth paying, but if you support including an obscure preference such as inverse look, then (as I repeat myself) you must also be prepared to pay for inclusion of <b>all</b> such similar preferences (or else risk being labeled a bigot). FYI keyboard-look is a much more pivotal preference than invert mouse ever was; it has sparked community-wide "Quake" wars over the best players using keyboard vs. mice look (resulting in the traditional cvar "mouselook"). As I will venture a guess that neither you nor other proponents will be just as quick to adopt this and similar preferences, be sure to enjoy your cake while not eating it too.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm going to just apologize now for my subtle ignorance.
Onto the meat: Appeal to Ethos!
Perhaps I'm wrong or even worse, petty. However, this entire discussion has turned into something rather stupid. And Renegade, now that I've had a chance too look at the statistics, I think that you could be right. However, I get the feeling that the thread is more than just about a simple inverted mouse option, and more about what is best for the company and the profits they turn.
But let's take a look at what else is could be important the developers.
Let's take a look at Valve.
Anyone who knows a ######'s worth about PC gaming knows about Valve.
They have an amazing business model, and have created games that sell millions.
But that doesn't mean they don't waste money.
If they did, why would they have taken the time to include developer commentary,
subtitles, and waste their time selling stupid (I don't think they're stupid) plush toys to their fans?
It's because they want people to enjoy their game.
Yes, making a game in the end is about making a profit, but then again: It's their life's work.
Unknown Worlds is staffed by <u>people</u>, and as persons, perhaps they are willing to spend $5 to allow that 1 person out of 100,000 to play the game that they've spilled countless hours into in a way that is comfortable to that person. I know there's a chance that they would do that, because I would be willing to give that $5.
The videogame already supports a <b><u>MOUSE</u></b>. It is not like asking for <b>extra peripherals</b> like a trackball, novint failcon, halo controller(head movement/impulses), and etcetera. So all someone really asking for when asking to include Inverted Mouse, is to make that device "feature complete".
Last 2 paragraphs. That is what is relevant, or what we are really arguing about here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, that's not the point of our discussion or the article. The author is warning that in an open environment (like open source or indie communities), it is common for users to suggest many preferences and even implement themselves; however accepting each preference comes at a price to usability, adding complexity. You must weigh the cost against total benefit and how useful the preference is. If it inconveniences a small number of people or can be worked around it is likely not useful, and so the "tl;dr" of this thread is that since only a small minority of players require inverted mouse (most of which already use regular mouse for everything else), it can be seen as "the line between when a preference should exist and when it should not".
(p.s., Linux is not a UI, GNOME is the UI that operates on <i>top</i> of Linux which is a kernel (operating system).)
<!--quoteo(post=1769664:date=May 4 2010, 10:33 AM:name=Feha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Feha @ May 4 2010, 10:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It is not "pages". I hate when people use the kind of rhetorics where they argue like that (stating false facts).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
huh, I suppose English is not your native language? I repeated my argument on preferences both on page #2 and #1, hence why it was addressed "pages ago".
<!--quoteo(post=1769704:date=May 4 2010, 04:03 PM:name=Heyman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heyman @ May 4 2010, 04:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769704"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They have an amazing business model, and have created games that sell millions.
But that doesn't mean they don't waste money.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Before you get too enamored with Valve, I suggest reading some of their publications:
<a href="http://valvesoftware.com/company/publications.html" target="_blank">http://valvesoftware.com/company/publications.html</a>
Some quotes taken unashamedly out of context:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->L4D1: • Players identified different textures as clones • Used blood to differentiate similar textures
L4D2: • Players should identify same texture as different • Apply blood masking to disguise identical textures
Produce less content, more variation, iterate faster<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They are above all, not wasteful, but <b>smart</b>. Smart at which corners they cut to achieve the best mileage with the least investment. What you list as "wastes" are all pre-calculated returns on an investment; they're not done purely for customer benefit. I assure you, if Valve were to conclude that a preference or feature had little mileage they would not hesitate to drop it, despite the repercussions of a handful of customers not "enjoying their game".
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Unknown Worlds is staffed by <u>people</u>, and as persons, perhaps they are willing to spend $5 to allow that 1 person out of 100,000 to play the game that they've spilled countless hours into in a way that is comfortable to that person. I know there's a chance that they would do that, because I would be willing to give that $5.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was nicely expressed sentiment, but not relevant at all to the subject at hand. This is nothing to do with dev time or money spent implementing a preference (Max could do it in his sleep for less than a penny). What it is, is an issue of software design and HCI principle, whose costs are not a factor you can measure in dollar amount (as evidenced by the article).
Your first venture into this thread goes:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I suppose it's an easy option, but I don't see why they need to afford it any time at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the rest of the thread talks about whether or not they needed to.
The answer is that they don't need to include it, but they can since they want to.
And the rest of the thread talks about whether or not they needed to.
The answer is that they don't need to include it, but they can since they want to.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The quote clearly implies that "time" for implementation is not the important factor here, hence why "affording" any amount of it is unneeded. I'm not sure how you got the impression this was about wasted implementation time (if this is in fact what you're implying), but to be clear it's not (it's about good design).
Your's is not much of an answer since we don't (yet) know what they want. A more useful contribution is to explain why you think it's inclusion outweighs its cost (again, refer to the article I linked for a definition of "cost").
Your's is not much of an answer since we don't (yet) know what they want. A more useful contribution is to explain why you think it's inclusion outweighs its cost (again, refer to the article I linked for a definition of "cost").<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't mention anything anything about design until your second post in the thread, which was an overreaction to JimyD's overreaction.
<!--quoteo(post=1769063:date=Apr 28 2010, 09:40 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Apr 28 2010, 09:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1769063"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It wasn't worth editing to appease pedantic priggery. I won't quote you on it because all your reasoning is a load of hooey; inverted mouse is a carry-over from the yoke of an airplane which was developed for reasons <u>entirely separate from FPS gaming</u>. A mouse on the other hand has been analyzed by psychologists and usability experts since its invention to be found that - surprise! - up is up and down is down makes sense for just about everything; as much sense as left is left and right is right.
The only reason for inverted mouse is because some game had it on by default, then someone played said game and got used to it and so on. Indeed, it's sole reason for existence is as a <u>usability virus</u>; and like trackballs and keyboard-look the industry has decided to leave the last few infected and move on. So rather than push a new game to suit literally "backwards" needs, I am going to take the stance that this is something you need to implement yourself, much like I would not expect an option provided if I wanted to play NS2 with left/right reversed.
Oh, What about aviation? Like I said inverting pitch is such a poor approximation of a yoke (how is it that you can overlook left/right movement but not up/down?) that you're better off using a joystick if you truly care that much for emulation; otherwise you can fly just the same with mouse movements you've been using for 99% of all other tasks.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In other words, the topic changed.
However, I do admit that we have no way of knowing what the developers want. As for being able to outweigh the inclusion of whatever cost you've put forth, I'm also unable to do that, since moral and ethical actions can be seen subjectively, and attempting to weigh between your objective sacrifices and my subjective tendencies is just going to end badly.
Just be glad the Mouse is being supported at all, and not turned into a Point-and-Click adventure like Sam & Max(although that actually does sound kind of fun).
Save your energy Renegade for when _special gets rewritten by LUA so it can to be used ingame where it functions just like old times, that is what you should be rajing about preemptively .
^Can't really stop it either, good luck Mr. Tin Foil.
Surely Unknown Worlds could use extra money, and put that money to good use.
IIRC there was a "pro config" for quake going around, that had the mouse axis y inverted by default and many people adopted it from there. The reason, why I used invert from the start was that it made more sense, to control your own body instead of moving pixels.
When pulling the mouse towards you, you "lean back", thus making the gun point up and vice versa.
It just makes sense, I guess :D
When pulling the mouse towards you, you <u>"lean back"</u>, thus making the gun point up and vice versa.
It just makes sense, I guess :D<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is how I always looked at it, even all the way back in Goldeneye and before that.
Unless you are a robot/wierdo who only looks with your head and no eye movement, inverted mouse makes sense.
How do you look over a railing next to a ledge, do you stand as close as possible and only turn your head downwards? No you don't, you lean <b>forward</b> to peer over.
And this is why it shouldn't be thrown on the cross and try to be removed from all parts of society because it is the "outcast".
*****
The counter argument, is that physical full body movements do not translate the same as hand-to-screen movements. RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE useless citied ####, non-sequitar related example. <!--coloro:#FFA500--><span style="color:#FFA500"><!--/coloro--><b><i><u>DOOMSDAY</u></i></b><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--coloro:#FFFF00--><span style="color:#FFFF00"><!--/coloro--><b><i>.</i></b><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
(Might as well do Renegade's part in more of a fun way.)
I'm not, I'm done. I've already made my points clear, there's no use in further re-iteration and less so in expending any further logic on a person who lacks the ability to form a staple of writing, the paragraph.
Not even close.
Like I said, I do it so people don't Wall of Text(WoT) comment at me, or TL;DR, as people like to do when it is properly structured into chunks.
You could at least have <u>cited my name</u>, LOL Z!!! Being lazy I see.
local angles = Angles(-1 * input.pitch, input.yaw, 0.0)
Mez showed exactly how easy it was (*-1 (I have kept telling ppl it cant be hard)), and for the devs I imagine it would take less then 1 hour as they know what file to look in, what would take the most time would be making the button in options, and I still doubt that takes 1 hour.
And this became 3 pages because of renegade I think (he kept stating such an option cost to much to be included or something (cost as in code complexity (I think))).
What I wonder is why it havent been locked yet.
local angles = Angles(-1 * input.pitch, input.yaw, 0.0)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Best first post ever!
(Yes, you may sig that)
"It is computed that eleven thousand persons have at several times suffered death rather than submit to break their eggs at the smaller end."
but dont worry, i am pretty sure the devs will implement this as it is piss easy to do as ppl posted here.
/CLOSE THREAD