Archive: 19 posts

---

I am sick and tired of being killed by the camera in multi-player. Either someone moves too quickly(not always their fault) or I can't see what is in front of me, so I die. I really think that this needs improvement, and that each player should get their own camera, maybe even split screen for local multi-player.

2008-12-26 09:31:00 Author: Walter-Kovacs Posts: 542

---

Seconded, split screen should happen because, it's a bit hard to make a CTF level if the camera focuses in on another sackperson.

2008-12-26 09:43:00 Author: Unknown User

---

Although split screen does sound like a good idea, it would kind of destroy the fine tuned camera angles you set up from a creator point of view. If you have the camera zoomed out to maximum, you may find that sackboy is quite a small dot. Depending on the background, it might be hard to see your player character at all. Although it's a nice idea and could open up independent sort of playing, and prevent the whole "death from being out of shot" problem, I fear it might cause more problems than it's worth. Maybe if there was some setting the creator could put on the level, it might help. Like always split or never split or something, or having the camera go independent if there are multiple people playing online that get too far away. In short, I don't think it's ideal how things are, but I can't think of a good way to fix things. Compulsory split screening I don't think is the answer, either on or offline.

2008-12-26 10:11:00 Author: Elbee23 Posts: 1280

---

I think independant cameras would be fine for any player who is online in the group. If there are two players on one PS3, then they have to share a camera, but each PS3 should be able to have its own camera. I would hope this is what they do for co-op create mode. It's pretty hard to co-op create on the same PS3 with only one camera. there's really no reason to force all players into the same camera when it's online with multiple PS3s... that is, unless they want to prevent one player from sitting at the beginning of the state while the other player finishes, then just try again to reach the end. That would be lame. Then again, there are already lame things that people can do like that. But I definitely agree that dying because one player managed to grab some fast moving object first (and many other similar cases) is pretty annoying.

2008-12-26 17:37:00 Author: Unknown User

---

I remember when I played the 1st Wilderness level with 3 people, when the race started I took the lead, but ended up getting killed because I was TOO far ahead and the camera was focused on one of the players behind me. gg, Media Molecule So yeah, I agree they need to fix the camera somehow.

2008-12-26 17:51:00 Author: isthiswhereiputm Posts: 57

---

I think independant cameras, but no split screen for local play, could be the best option. I'm bored to create very accurate camera zones in my levels and see them destruyed in multi ( with, in addition, a big block of black matter appearing where the cam should not be!)...

2008-12-26 20:07:00 Author: Takelow Posts: 1355

---

I blame bad creators. In most of the story levels it's not a problem at all for multiplayer, because theres plenty of places you can stop and wait, and you don't have to wait long normally. It's when people make rubbish huge levels that consist of a piston which rockets you up into the air for about a minute. Mindless AND boring, who'd've thought! Don't complaing about it unless you can fix it. And split screen would completely ruin the effect of playing it with a friend, you'd feel detached and you'd always have to be looking at their screen to see how far ahead/behind they were. *incorrect buzzer* EDIT: only thing I could suggest is to stop people with an invisible wall when they get too far away from each other, so you'd be encourages to play closer together Or always focus on the farthest ahead player and teach the slowpokes a lesson

2008-12-26 21:26:00 Author: Pinchanzee Posts: 805

---

I blame bad creators. In most of the story levels it's not a problem at all for multiplayer, because theres plenty of places you can stop and wait, and you don't have to wait long normally.That's not true. The Tundra level, the dog sleds right at the start, if there are 4 players and 2 in each sled, it's extremely awkward to time it so that both of them stay on screen. And like I mentioned above, with the way the camera is implemented, people dying to time outs is almost unavoidable in multiplayer races since, y'know, you're trying to stay as far ahead of everyone as possible.

2008-12-26 22:05:00 Author: isthiswhereiputm Posts: 57

---

And like I mentioned above, with the way the camera is implemented, people dying to time outs is almost unavoidable in multiplayer races since, y'know, you're trying to stay as far ahead of everyone as possible. I don't like races much because with checkpoints, people can spawn right next to you and beat you, even though you were winning by a lot.

2008-12-26 23:18:00 Author: Walter-Kovacs Posts: 542

---

That's not true. The Tundra level, the dog sleds right at the start, if there are 4 players and 2 in each sled, it's extremely awkward to time it so that both of them stay on screen. And like I mentioned above, with the way the camera is implemented, people dying to time outs is almost unavoidable in multiplayer races since, y'know, you're trying to stay as far ahead of everyone as possible. Ok so you gave me one weak example.. I could give you thousands of examples to prove my point for online ones. Most race scenes (for example your tundra one) have vehicles which travel at the same speed.. meaning to make a big enough gap for you to die you'd have to wait about a second till the other vehicle reached the end of the screen, which is reallyyy bad reaction time. In race scenes, to me it's not about "trying to stay as far ahead of everyone as possible", it's more about helping people along and having a laugh, making a dash for it when appropriate then letting them catch up so you can all enjoy it together. I'd regard someone that races of the screen and gets somebody slower killed, to be just arrogant and downright selfish.

2008-12-27 01:53:00 Author: Pinchanzee Posts: 805

---

I'd like you to look at the term "Race". A race is a competition of speed, against an objective criterion, usually a clock or to a specific point. The competitors in a race try to complete a given task in the shortest amount of time. Typically this involves traversing some distance, but it can be any other task involving speed. Now, in a sprint, would you wiat for the other person? I wouldn't, because it's not my fault they are not slow. But I've died from this "Out of camera" death for every possible reason: Leader falling down pit while i'm trying to get out of trap. not being able to get on a lift fast enough. being able to get on a lift too fast. Heading in opposite direction from party leader. People runnung away while typing. And I only got the game christmas. IU think independant cameras is a good idea. You'll be able to concentrate better and be able to go to certain areas that the others ignored.

2008-12-27 02:40:00 Author: Ninteen45 Posts: 67

---

A problem with independent cameras online is that you might completely lose track of people. Say if someone goes to a secret area without telling others, well, how are people to know they have found it? Certainly, there is voice and typing. Not everyone has a microphone though or is allowed to use it, and not everyone types or has a keyboard or keypad, so they may be slow in communicating. And all of that is completely ignoring the fact that other people online might speak a different language to your own. So... let's take a cynical view then and say the person gets lost. Why does it matter? Well, if you come to a multiplayer section, you often need others to be there. And if they have a sensor switch set to sense all players, say for a lift for you to continue... well, you won't be able to continue if some player is off screen and lost and unable or unwilling to communicate.

2008-12-27 03:22:00 Author: Elbee23 Posts: 1280

---

A problem with independent cameras online is that you might completely lose track of people. Say if someone goes to a secret area without telling others, well, how are people to know they have found it? Certainly, there is voice and typing. Not everyone has a microphone though or is allowed to use it, and not everyone types or has a keyboard or keypad, so they may be slow in communicating. And all of that is completely ignoring the fact that other people online might speak a different language to your own. So... let's take a cynical view then and say the person gets lost. Why does it matter? Well, if you come to a multiplayer section, you often need others to be there. And if they have a sensor switch set to sense all players, say for a lift for you to continue... well, you won't be able to continue if some player is off screen and lost and unable or unwilling to communicate. I agree with this, but there should be a way to have independent cameras and avoid this problem. I would suggest teleporting distant players when someone reaches a check point. This would keep people relatively close, while still avoiding all the annoying parts.

2008-12-27 03:45:00 Author: Walter-Kovacs Posts: 542

---

Ok so you gave me one weak example.. I could give you thousands of examples to prove my point for online ones. Most race scenes (for example your tundra one) have vehicles which travel at the same speed.. meaning to make a big enough gap for you to die you'd have to wait about a second till the other vehicle reached the end of the screen, which is reallyyy bad reaction time.Except it doesn't work that way. I know because I played that level several times online trying to get the 4-player prize bubbles and every single time, the occupants of one of the sleds were wiped out. It doesn't matter if you can give examples of situations where the camera works out fine, because you're not trying to prove that the camera sometimes works, but that it always does, which is clearly not the case.

2008-12-27 14:01:00 Author: isthiswhereiputm Posts: 57

---

yeah, mp-cams are very annoying.. especially when your mate has died, and you get a bit too close too the check point.. bang boom bam!!! the cam is twisting and flipping out, and then your friend is there again..

2009-01-10 17:23:00 Author: SmallLargeEarthling Posts: 29

---

What a forceful name for a thread... Nothing like forcing your opinion on people... "What do you think of the multi-player camera?" or something is a bit more.. fair.

2009-01-10 18:44:00 Author: Pinchanzee Posts: 805

---

I hate the MP camera. It's awkward and causes more problems than it solves. I voted independent cameras. Or they need to implement a wider array of creator controls/options for the camera system.

2009-01-14 15:33:00 Author: Jaeyden Posts: 564

---

What it needs to be is that it stays on one screen as much as possible, but instead of walking outside the camera zone and dying, doing that actually means a portion of the window becomes paned. So theoretically, it's a flexible full-screen/split screen, which adjusts as needed. So you aren't tied down, but you can have the "all together now" of everyone on one screen at the same time, over everyone with their own screen showing the exact same thing.

2009-01-14 16:52:00 Author: Mark D. Stroyer Posts: 632

---

I would definately prefer each player through the internet to have their own camara angle. It works FINE if a level is designed in a specific way where the players CAN only be a limited range from each other and there is plenty of platform space to stand on (MM seems to follow these rules generally), but very few levels fit this description. ****************** edit: Although, in thinking about it, this is probably a very difficult thing for MM to pull off considering the entire design of LBP. Think about this scenario: 4 players are playing a game. 3 of them move forward through the level which triggers explosions and things falling apart (part of your design). The one player who didn't move forward (because he has his own view) get's to see the backend of your game happening, and could even continue triggering things that effect the rest of the players. This could HEAVILY complicate the designing of LBP levels. (the design would need to take into account a lot more possibilities) It's not that I also don't like the camera system, but I'm wondering now whether it would cause a lot of logistical problems trying to do it another way. The logic and scripting system in LBP games is much different than a first-person multiplayer game. Right now you only need to design your games based on what you see.

2009-01-14 17:50:00 Author: CCubbage Posts: 4430

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.