How important are cockpits, crew stations and vehicle interiors in games?

[NoRailgunner 0]

How important is that every knob, every switch and almost everything has to be portrayed like the real vehicle has? Or would you say that you can live and enjoy beeing in a vehicle with interiors which do look authentic /believable? When or how fast do you switch to 3rd person view or even avoid playing with vehicles in a game in 1st person view??

[dmarkwick 261]

Depends on the scope of the game. Obviously something like DCS Black Shark requires a full cockpit, because that's the game setting. That's where you play the game. In ArmA however (which I guess is the reason for this thread ;)) the focus is on the battlefield and the battle. So many vehicles cannot all be modeled to the same fidelities as DCS, so I should say that as long as they're functional, and can be used as intended, then they're good to go.

ArmA is about making use of the vehicle, not simulating the real-world control systems of that vehicle.

That said, I believe more work should go into realistic tank/helo behaviors and tactics, rather than control detail.

[mr burns 132]

Depends ... for RTS games i could´nt care less.

But in racing games for instance, cockpits are an absolute must. (hey GRID2, you fucked up, but nobody liked you anyway)

And since this is an ArmA forum, i dare say it´s yet another genre where i am not satisfied staring at a 2d overlay slit for probably an hour or more.

RO2 could be benchmark here. Character animations inside their (feeeeew) tanks are amazing and carry a sense of atmosphere.

Being a driver or commander never gets dull, when any moment you could see one of your crewmates being dismembered by some shell travelling through your chariot.

ArmA is about making use of the vehicle, not simulating the real-world control systems of that vehicle.

Use of the vehicle you say..

Like not having to worry about silly RPG´s penetrating the front of your mighty MBT?

Tanks could be made much more fun than they are now.

With Take on Helicopters they made clickable cockpits, tank nerds would LOVE something like it, prolly even if it only was an additional switch to replace "N" for nightvision..

What i´m saying here, it´s just a little work for a professional developer, with huge benefits attached.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Mr Burns

[NoRailgunner 0]

@DMarkwick what about new vehicle interiors in Arma which do look at least so good that people won't dislike/avoid them? Highly doubt that DCS like cockpits are needed or wanted - just interiors where players do feel like sitting in a MBT, IFV etc. What do you need a vehicle for if you can't enjoy using it? Does it feel authentic if you have to use 3rd person view just to avoid the quick'n'cheap 1st person view? Imo gamedevs should take their time to play their projects/games on their own and be critical about where does one feels kinda detached from the atmosphere/immersion.

[bangtail 0]

In sims, it's a deal breaker for me.

I can just about tolerate the hood cam in 'arcadey' car games, but for flight sims or serious racing sims, I won't touch them without a properly modeled interior.

I don't drive cars from 30 feet in the air, trailing 20 feet behind, so why would I want to do that in a simulator?

Some of the console port racing games are horrible - like the new NFS:MW that basically gave you the 'helicopter behind the car' view or a 'Mario kart' view and Criterion absolutely refused (despite numerous requests) to fix it.

Luckily the guy from TOCAedit wrote a patch that allowed you to modify the cam to your preference (among other things).

As far as the Arma series goes, none of the vehicle interiors have ever been modeled in obsessive detail (a la Eagle Dynamics) and that isn't really what this series aspires to imho.

ED can do that because they are focusing on one plane/helo at a time but with the Arma series, it is more of a 'jack of all trades' if you like and we wouldn't see an Alpha before 2020 if BIS took that much time on every unit ;)

[dmarkwick 261]

Use of the vehicle you say..

Like not having to worry about silly RPG´s penetrating the front of your mighty MBT?

Well, that belongs under "tactics" and "realistic use" which you'll remember I was in favour of :) realistic knob-filled interiors doesn't need to impact on this.

---------- Post added at 14:49 ---------- Previous post was at 14:47 ----------

@DMarkwick what about new vehicle interiors in Arma which do look at least so good that people won't dislike/avoid them? Highly doubt that DCS like cockpits are needed or wanted - just interiors where players do feel like sitting in a MBT, IFV etc. What do you need a vehicle for if you can't enjoy using it? Does it feel authentic if you have to use 3rd person view just to avoid the quick'n'cheap 1st person view? Imo gamedevs should take their time to play their projects/games on their own and be critical about where does one feels kinda detached from the atmosphere/immersion.

Well yes, but I was just answering the question as posed :) the interiors only need to be functional, but of course I'll accept a better model... :)

[Smurf 12]

you can live and enjoy beeing in a vehicle with interiors which do look authentic /believable

In a case like Arma where you won't be able to interact with every knob and switch, I go with that. Function and immersion over a 1:1 recreation.

[NoRailgunner 0]

So what do you think about people who excuse very simplified (eg only small viewports like in some A2OA vehicles) or no interiors at all with "moar vehicles!" in a game? Does it makes sense to create models which do look only from the outside great but are only enjoyable in 3rd person view??

[dmarkwick 261]

So what do you think about people who excuse very simplified (eg only small viewports like in some A2OA vehicles) or no interiors at all with "moar vehicles!" in a game? Does it makes sense to create models which do look only from the outside great but are only enjoyable in 3rd person view??

I suppose the term "enjoyable" is entirely subjective, I don't get my enjoyment by how awesome the interior of a vehicle is, I get my enjoyment by how I can use it. As long as the interiors are not actually awful, then they're good. I'm more interested in scope views & looking outside to see what I need to do. More vehicles in game, as long as they're functional and somewhat realistic in their behaviors means more to me, personally, than extremely fine detailed interiors of only a few vehicles. But, that's just me :)

[NoRailgunner 0]

Like I said its not so much about making every switch, button clickable its about getting the feeling of sitting + playing from inside of an vehicle and not beeing forced to like odd design/project decisions or need go into 3rd person view. Kinda like 'Some great looking exteriors hide some shoddy interiors'. Lets say if MBT's would have no or awful/extremely basic interiors - why should people use these in a driver/gunner/commander seat? Imo if a game has its main focus on 1st person gameplay - primarily all of the game should be enjoyable in this view. :)

[ProfTournesol 956]

The main factor IMHO is immersion over functionality. That what OFP had captured and understood, and what has slightly disappeared since. How can i STILL feal more immersed in OFP than A2 or A3 ? And no, that's not nostalgia :)

[katipo66 94]

In terms of Arma i hate the window stuck to screen option, would love to see some effort placed here, no need for perfect detail, just something believable.

[R0adki11 3949]

In terms of Arma i hate the window stuck to screen option, would love to see some effort placed here, no need for perfect detail, just something believable.

I remember OFP having a partially textured drivers position, this was a nice touch. As was created interior for commander and gunner. I remember in the M1a1 it added a bit of depth :)

[papanowel 120]

I remember OFP having a partially textured drivers position, this was a nice touch. As was created interior for commander and gunner. I remember in the M1a1 it added a bit of depth :)

Especially when you have to stay an 1hour 30 as a commander/driver without external view.

[JdB 151]

I remember OFP having a partially textured drivers position, this was a nice touch. As was created interior for commander and gunner. I remember in the M1a1 it added a bit of depth :)

Damn right. After OFP vehicles without an interiour have lost their appeal to me, I have hardly ever played with armor, APCs and IFVs in the sequels.

[Sealife 22]

Depends on what your playing really

For example in A3 against ai pointless , in A3 on pvp then maybe some point however that depends on the mission maker and terrain too.

Steel beast its essential , lock on again essential , but to justify all that extra work in A3 to me its not worth it beyond some PiP maybe .

TOH it was essential to bulk up the interaction because it was very cockpit centric game play .

[vilas 477]

i also vote : "depends",

in OFP, Arma etc. i always played "tactically" (3rd person , large battle, commanding platoon to conquer island etc.) or first person as rifleman only (infantry shooter)

but i know that many people play in "life" multiplayer , for them such dashboard is very important , but usually i (personally) drive vehicle at 3-rd person view and rifleman from 1st person,

but let's say that most problematic is getting good photos of dashboards, especially military equipment, cause lots of things can be "confidential" , in some countries you cannot even take photo of usual jeep or AK if it belongs to army, especially new vehicles, without being soldier of officer there , you cannot look inside,

some older vehicles have only exterior photos - you have problem to get them inside view, for example only photos are black-white photos dimension 400*500 pixels etc. some of them are closed in museum and noone from museum workers will let you in,

lets say truth gents, only good documented interiors are modern civilian wheeled vehicles , cars, vans, truck (photos on ebay etc)

i tried to take some photos of military equipment in past and only answer was "it is secret" and it were usual truck or jeep so i made fictional dashboards in OFP for usual military 4x4 offroad or truck (unless someone do not have daddy officer) , i even been refused to take photo of AKMS in past (in my country hardly noone has acces to gun)

dashboard can be secret (by army) and making it real is impossible when you have zero photos in google

Edited June 25, 2013 by vilas

[Janez 534]

In sims, it's a deal breaker for me.

I can just about tolerate the hood cam in 'arcadey' car games, but for flight sims or serious racing sims, I won't touch them without a properly modeled interior.

I don't drive cars from 30 feet in the air, trailing 20 feet behind, so why would I want to do that in a simulator?

Some of the console port racing games are horrible - like the new NFS:MW that basically gave you the 'helicopter behind the car' view or a 'Mario kart' view and Criterion absolutely refused (despite numerous requests) to fix it.

Luckily the guy from TOCAedit wrote a patch that allowed you to modify the cam to your preference (among other things).

As far as the Arma series goes, none of the vehicle interiors have ever been modeled in obsessive detail (a la Eagle Dynamics) and that isn't really what this series aspires to imho.

ED can do that because they are focusing on one plane/helo at a time but with the Arma series, it is more of a 'jack of all trades' if you like and we wouldn't see an Alpha before 2020 if BIS took that much time on every unit ;)

Thats right. It depends on what kind of racing game you play. If its some arcade that you can play with keyboard then it is easier to play in 3rd person and you dont really need cockpit cam. But if you play simulation that requires steering wheel then cockpit view is a must because you need to have your "head" in the middle of the car. In hood cam, cars are prone to oversteer and is hard to determine where your back end is, especially on tight tracks. In 3rd person you are late for apex and prone to understeer. It is also difficult to make small and precise corrections fast if not in cockpic view.

Edited June 25, 2013 by Janez

[R0adki11 3949]

Damn right. After OFP vehicles without an interiour have lost their appeal to me, I have hardly ever played with armor, APCs and IFVs in the sequels.

Personally for myself it hasn't lost the appeal for me, as i play as part of a PvP squad so when im in a tank im more preoccupied with looking for the opposing forces that looking at the tank details. However if we could have some interiors in Vehicles it would be a plus. :)

[NoRailgunner 0]

Most people I met in Armaverse don't like to drive in 1st person view with certain vehicles just because the interiors are very basic/ugly. They are increasingly annoyed about BIS ignorance and reluctance making interiors for all vehicles on the same level. Why some vehicles do have nice interiors and others not? There are photos and pictures showing the outside aswell as the inside of vehicles - shouldn't be that hard to find some ("walkarounds") on the web. Or maybe your next library around the corner has some books about history/technical documantions/vehicles? As for OPSEC/"secret stuff" - its more important what's in certain devices/instruments and what it does or not - less about how it looks. Its not about a "plus" its much more about an "even"! Stop cheering up such inconsistency, playing it down or/and putting a blind eye on!! :rolleyes:

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

I vote : Depends

My main focus is immersion. Having been with the series from the very start my feelings have changed along with the game. I was a staunch "realism" advocate when BI were pushing the "simulator" moniker, but now I lean heavily toward the sandbox aspect. Ever since OFP I have loved certain vehicles. It wasn't so much for their capabilities, but the feel they brought to the game. For example, if you've ever used the PRACS A-4, you'll recall the little "clunk" when you drop ordnance. Maybe its not completely realistic, or maybe it is. Either way, it adds a little "something" to the experience. I also enjoy both VTE and Unsung's A-1 Skyraider. Again, not so much for its capabilities, but for the "feel" they bring. Would I like a clickable cockpit, Hell Yeah I would, but I'd sacrifice that for other immersive effects. Maybe better sounds, damage effects, etc.

As for 1st person driving in ground vehicles, I prefer it over 3rd person. Though I still prefer the OFP style FOV. I think improvements could be made in turned out views though. The current view doesn't account for the swaying that occurs when standing in the cupola or when peering out from the drivers seat.

In the end, i definitely think interiors need improvement, but also alongside other improvements (you cant just put lipstick on a pig). Fortunately (or unfortunately) most of these improvements will most likely be done by the community and not BI.

[purepassion 22]

Why some vehicles do have nice interiors and others not?

What do you want to show the passengers of a APC? A black screen? When being in a tank, there is the viewport through which the drivers in reality look as well and operate with.

And yes, it would be a plus because none of these switches would have a function. The basic features of tanks will be the same.

Either way, there is already a specific thread for the presumably missing 3D interiors for tanks in Arma 3 so try not to create a duplicate of that discussion.

[vilas 477]

As for OPSEC/"secret stuff" - its more important what's in certain devices/instruments and what it does or not - less about how it looks.

yea, go to military unit and tell to guard "hi soldier, i wanna take some photos inside newest APC/tank for game mod" (i would not suggest taking photos without asking, may be shot dead) yea... i have still on my email 4 months long correpsondence about such things with MoD and HQ in my city, i wanted to know exact platoon weaponry to fill platoon of infantry and some dashboards and one scope for AK, the only thing that were done is that they collected my personal data and interviewed me what is OFP/Arma, for texture in OFP i get AKMS but from policeman i knew, not from Army,

i tried several times and i can tell that geting inside those vehicles without "uncle officer" is impossible "due to NATO standards we have" , before NATO it was easier as i remember my childhood (for example being scout)

Edited June 25, 2013 by vilas

[mr burns 132]

I think what NoRailgunner was saying is that, it doesn´t matter how dashboards look, if tehy´re realistic or not. Designers could simply make their own!

It´s not like knowing how a dashboard looks required a higher science degree ...

[NoRailgunner 0]

One should be creative if he can.... Btw just one webpage that got many photos/walkarounds: http://primeportal.net/home.htm.