Don Bradman Cricket 17 General Discussion

[Deleted member 9102]

However the images are not displayed in 2D, as the game uses perspective to mimic the "binocular vision" effect... it is not 2D - this would involve no z dimension being apparent, which it clearly is!

A true 2D representation of a 3D image would contain no element of perspective or depth!

Think about the bowlers run up, he gets bigger as he gets closer, this is a perceived change of depth, indicating a 3D envionment... it may be on a 2D screen, but he appears to be getting closer, ie: bigger!

I think you must be trolling, this line of reasoning is just ridiculous. It's getting late now so maybe I'll try to explain it to you tomorrow, but I'm figuring that I'd probably be wasting my time anyway.

 

[First.Last]

I think you must be trolling, this line of reasoning is just ridiculous. It's getting late now so maybe I'll try to explain it to you tomorrow, but I'm figuring that I'd probably be wasting my time anyway.

Try this article:

You Play Video Games Like A Cyclops | Kotaku Australia

Specifically the passage:

"Even with the vision coming from only one eye, we still have no problem determining depth in a 3D video game. That's because the images are realistic enough to provide plenty of visual clues to depth, and when you're actually playing, a strong depth cue called motion parallax comes into play, as objects closer to you fill more of your visual field. So without binocular vision we still have depth perception."

If your line of thinking is correct, then you are suggesting that it is technically impossible for anyone to play this game without the visual aids, as we wouldnt be able to determine the line and length of the ball based on its lack of z dimension, which is obviously incorrect!

 

[NursingHomeFire]

second online game online last night
holy crap was it bad

ball goes to fielder for a catch
fielder just turns around, no catch, well done

and still the dumb thing for the wielder runs forward then has to turn around and try and chase the ball
the more i play, the more i find, the more i wonder, will they ever get it fixed or are they becoming more like EA Dice with BF

very sad though

 

[Deleted member 9102]

Try this article:

You Play Video Games Like A Cyclops | Kotaku Australia

Specifically the passage:

"Even with the vision coming from only one eye, we still have no problem determining depth in a 3D video game. That's because the images are realistic enough to provide plenty of visual clues to depth, and when you're actually playing, a strong depth cue called motion parallax comes into play, as objects closer to you fill more of your visual field. So without binocular vision we still have depth perception."

If your line of thinking is correct, then you are suggesting that it is technically impossible for anyone to play this game without the visual aids, as we wouldnt be able to determine the line and length of the ball based on its lack of z dimension, which is obviously incorrect!

Ah Kotaku, the Daily Mail of games journalism...

Perspective/parallax and other cues do not fill the void by lack of binocular vision, for one we already have the former in addition to the latter in real life! The logic in saying we have "no problem determining depth" due to there being other indicators is like saying blind people have "no problem" counting money because they can feel it... It also talks about FPS games where the same level of intricate vision is not essential in the same way as a sports game such as cricket.

Clearly I do not propose that depth is literally impossible to determine in a video game... You just don't have the same level of information to work with, so you can't be as precise and this is a big factor in sports games that requires split second reactions heavily reliant on fractional differences in depth perception. There's also the fact that you have no reading the ball out of the hand in DBC due to there only being one animation so it is actually more difficult than real life to react and choose an appropriate shot to the same pace of bowling.

The reason you can play DBC14 without the marker is because the speed of the pace bowling is significantly reduced from realistic levels, if it were not then nobody here would have a snowball's chance in hell because a) lack of information compared to real life and b) we are not professional cricketers. I guess you think that compromise for the sake of playability was unnecessary too?

 

[Plotinus]

Not wishing to interject on the fascinating debate on visual perception and the nature of 2D and 3D images...I offer, instead, something that I really do like about DBC17, which is bowling spin on turning pitches...and having tail-enders batting like tail-enders. Here's a snippet of me bowling a googly to finish off an innings. It pitches just outside off and clips leg. In over 900 hours of DBC14, I didn't get this type of dismissal. Nice. [Video clip offered as a 2D facsimile of a 3D event...as you were.]

 

[blockerdave]

Not wishing to interject on the fascinating debate on visual perception and the nature of 2D and 3D images...I offer, instead, something that I really do like about DBC17, which is bowling spin on turning pitches...and having tail-enders batting like tail-enders. Here's a snippet of me bowling a googly to finish off an innings. It pitches just outside off and clips leg. In over 900 hours of DBC14, I didn't get this type of dismissal. Nice. [Video clip offered as a 2D facsimile of a 3D event...as you were.]

that's a lovely video. the only thing that spoils it slightly from my perspective is the AI playing a helicopter: not really something your bog standard tailender would attempt, even if it accurately displays the calamity that would result

 

[azkhan]

A question on fielding?

Am i right in saying that when you field using semi control setting i don't need to do anything to catch the ball apart from when its slow mo? In DBC14 you would need to push the R stick in the direction the ball was coming at you. In DBC17 i am sure it automatically catches and drops it without any user input. Please correct me if i'm wrong. Thanks.

 

[Razpor]

Not wishing to interject on the fascinating debate on visual perception and the nature of 2D and 3D images...I offer, instead, something that I really do like about DBC17, which is bowling spin on turning pitches...and having tail-enders batting like tail-enders. Here's a snippet of me bowling a googly to finish off an innings. It pitches just outside off and clips leg. In over 900 hours of DBC14, I didn't get this type of dismissal. Nice. [Video clip offered as a 2D facsimile of a 3D event...as you were.]

this video makes me wanna start over as a spin bowling all rounder,fast bowling in this game is simply not this satisfying,this seems on other level.

 

[Plotinus]

this video makes me wanna start over as a spin bowling all rounder,fast bowling in this game is simply not this satisfying,this seems on other level.

It really is a lot of fun. I'm batting at number 5 and bowling leg spin. The pitches make a big difference to the bowling experience..flat, hard, pristine pitches are tough to get wickets on and the ball will bounce over the stumps for most delivery types...but when you find a nice crumbling, worn, cracked pitch you get real value out of varying flight, bounce, spin and speed. I'm finding the DBC17 version of spin so much better than DBC14 (and I loved spin in DBC14). You even get more frequent stumpings now...which I had about two of in 900 hours plus in DBC14.

 

[First.Last]

Ah Kotaku, the Daily Mail of games journalism...

Perspective/parallax and other cues do not fill the void by lack of binocular vision, for one we already have the former in addition to the latter in real life! The logic in saying we have "no problem determining depth" due to there being other indicators is like saying blind people have "no problem" counting money because they can feel it... It also talks about FPS games where the same level of intricate vision is not essential in the same way as a sports game such as cricket.

Clearly I do not propose that depth is literally impossible to determine in a video game... You just don't have the same level of information to work with, so you can't be as precise and this is a big factor in sports games that requires split second reactions heavily reliant on fractional differences in depth perception. There's also the fact that you have no reading the ball out of the hand in DBC due to there only being one animation so it is actually more difficult than real life to react and choose an appropriate shot to the same pace of bowling.

The reason you can play DBC14 without the marker is because the speed of the pace bowling is significantly reduced from realistic levels, if it were not then nobody here would have a snowball's chance in hell because a) lack of information compared to real life and b) we are not professional cricketers. I guess you think that compromise for the sake of playability was unnecessary too?

That compromise is what makes the game playable, it still feels like a game of cricket because it "simulates" the actual cricket experience! I just cant understand how having colored markers that tell you exactly where the ball is going to go is more "cricket" than just increasing the timing window/similar...

 

[mattk]

that's a lovely video. the only thing that spoils it slightly from my perspective is the AI playing a helicopter: not really something your bog standard tailender would attempt, even if it accurately displays the calamity that would result

As a leg spinner I get way too many caught and bowleds from tailenders.
I do like that Big Ant has made helicopters a pretty useless shot though

 

[Chief]

The colour coding is there for people who need it and and use it to great effect. Once you have got the hang of batting you can switch the colour codes off.....it accommodates for the vast spectrum of players: you play that way, many dont....BA is trying to accommodate for everyone's need by making the game modifiable...in doing so they are giving themselves massive headaches as the chances of bugs and things need fixing manifest themselves on many different machines and configurations....

This is the danger. And I'm not sure it's solvable. The more you try and appeal to the core audience, the less you appeal to the mainstream and vice versa. It's a very delicate balance.
This is why I keep talking about a core "simulatory" PC version, constantly updated, and then pop out a mainstream console version every 2 years in order to pay for it. You make it clear to the core fans which version is for them (which you can do easily, because they're all here, or other forums!) - Everyone wins.
Your PC core (I reckon probably about 5000) cannot even start to pay for the development alone. I'd estimate that at the very bottom end you need at least 100k console sales every other year to break even. And that means something much more fun, simple and arcadey.

 

[blockerdave]

This is the danger. And I'm not sure it's solvable. The more you try and appeal to the core audience, the less you appeal to the mainstream and vice versa. It's a very delicate balance.
This is why I keep talking about a core "simulatory" PC version, constantly updated, and then pop out a mainstream console version every 2 years in order to pay for it. You make it clear to the core fans which version is for them (which you can do easily, because they're all here, or other forums!) - Everyone wins.
Your PC core (I reckon probably about 5000) cannot even start to pay for the development alone. I'd estimate that at the very bottom end you need at least 100k console sales every other year to break even. And that means something much more fun, simple and arcadey.

Problem with that is I think there are plenty of core people here who have console not PC.

I think both can be suited with the same game and options like the slider, making modes like Cricket Max or double wicket available.

However that would need much better explanation of the sliders, and a far far better implementation of custom modes and competitions and especially a move away from that horrible snapshotting of match types when you make a competition.

 

[Chief]

Problem with that is I think there are plenty of core people here who have console not PC.

I think both can be suited with the same game and options like the slider, making modes like Cricket Max or double wicket available.

You could always put out a digital-only self-published version for console - it wouldn't be a huge amount of extra work. But under a totally separate brand - keep Bradman for the purists and find another license for the mainstream.

I think you need 2 different products because people are ideological (and in the last couple of years, more than ever before!) and I think that that's true in games and movies as well as politics. No matter how much they *know*, what they *feel* often overrides it. People think they want choice, but it's confusing - give them one easy solution and they will tend to prefer it. People think they are better than they are, so they play it on "hard" and feel that their failure is down to the game. Because they feel foolish if they need to downgrade.

Give them loads of options and people are unsure what they are supposed to do, and although tutorials/hand-holding can aid that I don't think it can fix it entirely.

 

[Acid Burn]

This is the danger. And I'm not sure it's solvable. The more you try and appeal to the core audience, the less you appeal to the mainstream and vice versa. It's a very delicate balance.
This is why I keep talking about a core "simulatory" PC version, constantly updated, and then pop out a mainstream console version every 2 years in order to pay for it. You make it clear to the core fans which version is for them (which you can do easily, because they're all here, or other forums!) - Everyone wins.
Your PC core (I reckon probably about 5000) cannot even start to pay for the development alone. I'd estimate that at the very bottom end you need at least 100k console sales every other year to break even. And that means something much more fun, simple and arcadey.

I like the idea , but to force me thats a "Core Audience" player on Console , to now go and play the Game on PC makes no sense.

I have built up a good 30 + Strong contingent of Core Online Players playing tournaments on the PS4 , I cannot even start to think what we would do if it was only on PC.

What you proposed to Dave above with two different brands so to speak on all platforms , probably makes more sense.