Suggestions / Ideas / Wishlist

[las_faiz]

the movement of camera is a serious issue.
We don't want people applying cucumber to their faces after a gaming session!

Lol..
Well the first person camera would give us similar experience to wht a batsman or bowler see's The concept is similar to 1st person shooter .. Only problem is the camera angle .. It should follow the ball otherwise u would have no clue whr the ball pitched
I cant wait for a bouncer to go rght in front of the eyes .. never experienced tht in a game

I personally think we've given enough ideas to LM, now he has to take them into consideration. Adding more ideas will make the game better, but too overloaded in both playing and making. I think the ideas LM has received will certainly make the game top box, but giving these big ideas will just be more hard work and more wait . Now i think we should just give small adjustment ideas eg i will giv one now:

LM i noticed in the vid that when batsmen come back for two and touch the crease, It isnt a fluent movement. Its like their running, running, running, and suddenly the player changes shape and puts his bat down, i reckon it shud be fluent

I think the game is in initial period of development .. so i think this is the best time to get ideas out if u hav one .. n at the end its LM 's decision to implement those ideas

 

[blackleopard92]

Lol..
Well the first person camera would give us similar experience to wht a batsman or bowler see's The concept is similar to 1st person shooter .. Only problem is the camera angle .. It should follow the ball otherwise u would have no clue whr the ball pitched
I cant wait for a bouncer to go rght in front of the eyes .. never experienced tht in a game

If u play cricket, u will know how much your eyes move, we don't realise it because it comes naturally to us.If the camera moves at that pace, we would surely need to apply cucumber

However, I again say, things like these can only be found out at testing phase.till then we can surely apply these options.

 

[ziad123_2005]

If u play cricket, u will know how much your eyes move, we don't realise it because it comes naturally to us.If the camera moves at that pace, we would surely need to apply cucumber

However, I again say, things like these can only be found out at testing phase.till then we can surely apply these options.

I wud luv to see bouncer coming ryt into the eyes, but after that i wud need to apply a cucumber, especially when ure running. The camera wud move too much

 

[blackleopard92]

I wud luv to see bouncer coming ryt into the eyes, but after that i wud need to apply a cucumber, especially when ure running. The camera wud move too much

I didn't even thing of camera while running, however the first person camera in c2k05 was very cool, it feels great to see ball running away from u towards fence and/or a fielder chasing it.

I think LM would simply remove bobing when running.

 

[las_faiz]

I try to explain it
ex whn u r batting
the camera goes in the first person mode; camera first focuses on the bowler n thn after the ball is released frm the bowlers hands, the camera thn focuses on the ball .. whr it pitched. then u select the shot n after tht it exits the first person mode n goes to normal mode. So whn ur running, the camera would be in the normal mode .. the camera would be pretty static so u dont hav to worry abt shaking n cucumbers
i hope LM understands wht I m trying to say here

If u play cricket, u will know how much your eyes move, we don't realise it because it comes naturally to us.If the camera moves at that pace, we would surely need to apply cucumber

However, I again say, things like these can only be found out at testing phase.till then we can surely apply these options.

The camera remains static .. it doesnt moves with the eyes of the batsman ( like whn he is wandering arnd ) .. the camera just focuses on the bowler n thn it focuses on the ball .. thts all

 

[daleroy]

I try to explain it
ex whn u r batting
the camera goes in the first person mode; camera first focuses on the bowler n thn after the ball is released frm the bowlers hands, the camera thn focuses on the ball .. whr it pitched. then u select the shot n after tht it exits the first person mode n goes to normal mode. So whn ur running, the camera would be in the normal mode .. the camera would be pretty static so u dont hav to worry abt shaking n cucumbers
i hope LM understands wht I m trying to say here


The camera remains static .. it doesnt moves with the eyes of the batsman ( like whn he is wandering arnd ) .. the camera just focuses on the bowler n thn it focuses on the ball .. thts all

Maybe try using proper English in your posts, to make it easier for him to understand. You aren't typing an SMS!

 

[las_faiz]

Maybe try using proper English in your posts, to make it easier for him to understand. You aren't typing an SMS!

Dude .. I was just trying to help here ..

 

[blackleopard92]

Dude .. I was just trying to help here ..

And his english is understandable too.

And yeah, I get your point.
but from the way I see it, it would be too quick for normal reaction time of humans.

However, all this can only be tested in testing phase.LM can sure implement it and after testing we decide whether it should be included or not.

 

[legend_master]

i actually gave this a test last night...while it looked really cool as the ball zooms away from you towards the fence, it sufferes from a similar problem to the EA implementation, where, even though the camera follows the ball, it still is too hard to see where you need to swing...i.e. pot luck if you actually connect with the ball...the best thing i could suggest would be to have a thing like 'world of warcraft' where you can have the camera sitting outside (behind) the batsman and you could then zoom in right into his eyes so you can have like a 3rd person right through to 1st person view, whatever suits you most..but it is really hard to see the ball as it comes so fast...maybe with practice though? Anyway would do no harm to include it anyway...like i said, it's very simple to implement.

i think it would also be cool to have the camera bob (very slightly) as you run, kinda give a more 'saving private ryan' feel....

the '1st person view' while cool for some variety probably is not the best view for actually batting in..but bowling (and fielding?), now that's a different story

 

[blackleopard92]

I would rather test it .
And some facts:
normal reaction time of humans - 0.7-0.6 sec

Time take by a ball going at 150km/hr to reach batsmen : 0.6 sec.

In short it would be miracle if u connect with bat if u play through 1st person.

 

[MattW]

normal reaction time of humans - 0.7-0.6 sec

I always thought that was around .3 of a sec, .6 seems very slow to me

 

[nightprowler10]

I would rather test it .
And some facts:
normal reaction time of humans - 0.7-0.6 sec

Time take by a ball going at 150km/hr to reach batsmen : 0.6 sec.

In short it would be miracle if u connect with bat if u play through 1st person.

So you're telling me that nobody has ever played a good stroke either Akhtar, Band, or Lee whenever they bowled over 150 km/h. I find that hard to believe.

 

[blackleopard92]

I always thought that was around .3 of a sec, .6 seems very slow to me

well here's the research paper on reaction time of drivers(how do I find these things?)

http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/reactiontime.html

And if u care to read it,(which u should, its in layman language) u will find these facts.

Reaction times are greatly affected by whether the driver is alert to the need to brake. I've found it useful to divide alertness into three classes:

* Expected: the driver is alert and aware of the good possibility that braking will be necessary. This is the absolute best reaction time possible. The best estimate is 0.7 second. Of this, 0.5 is perception and 0.2 is movement, the time required to release the accelerator and to depress the brake pedal.

* Unexpected: the driver detects a common road signal such as a brake from the car ahead or from a traffic signal. Reaction time is somewhat slower, about 1.25 seconds. This is due to the increase in perception time to over a second with movement time still about 0.2 second.

* Surprise: the drive encounters a very unusual circumstance, such as a pedestrian or another car crossing the road in the near distance. There is extra time needed to interpret the event and to decide upon response. Reaction time depends to some extent on the distance to the obstacle and whether it is approaching from the side and is first seen in peripheral vision. The best estimate is 1.5 seconds for side incursions and perhaps a few tenths of a second faster for straight-ahead obstacles. Perception time is 1.2 seconds while movement time lengthens to 0.3 second.

So you're telling me that nobody has ever played a good stroke either Akhtar, Band, or Lee whenever they bowled over 150 km/h. I find that hard to believe.

If u read above it says that for a alert person, it takes 0.7 seconds for a alert person to take response against situation.

For cricket, it takes a batmen 0.7 /0.6 second to see the ball and bring down the bat.
And yeah all this is instinctive, there is no thinking.

And this is the reason that all commentators talk about curbing your instincts u can't play fast bowling with brain, but by instincts.

 

[las_faiz]

i actually gave this a test last night...while it looked really cool as the ball zooms away from you towards the fence, it sufferes from a similar problem to the EA implementation, where, even though the camera follows the ball, it still is too hard to see where you need to swing...i.e. pot luck if you actually connect with the ball...the best thing i could suggest would be to have a thing like 'world of warcraft' where you can have the camera sitting outside (behind) the batsman and you could then zoom in right into his eyes so you can have like a 3rd person right through to 1st person view, whatever suits you most..but it is really hard to see the ball as it comes so fast...maybe with practice though? Anyway would do no harm to include it anyway...like i said, it's very simple to implement.

i think it would also be cool to have the camera bob (very slightly) as you run, kinda give a more 'saving private ryan' feel....

the '1st person view' while cool for some variety probably is not the best view for actually batting in..but bowling (and fielding?), now that's a different story

thx LM, I think u are right. It would be really difficult to bat. Anyways, it was just a suggestion. No harm done.
LM .. u can keep it as an option .. It would help when someone wants a challenge
It was really good to see u and so many others getting excited about the idea
And sorry for all those shortcuts .. thx to msn .. lol
keep up the good work .. cant wait for the bowlers screenies

well here's the research paper on reaction time of drivers(how do I find these things?)

http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/reactiontime.html

And if u care to read it,(which u should, its in layman language) u will find these facts.

Reaction times are greatly affected by whether the driver is alert to the need to brake. I've found it useful to divide alertness into three classes:

* Expected: the driver is alert and aware of the good possibility that braking will be necessary. This is the absolute best reaction time possible. The best estimate is 0.7 second. Of this, 0.5 is perception and 0.2 is movement, the time required to release the accelerator and to depress the brake pedal.

* Unexpected: the driver detects a common road signal such as a brake from the car ahead or from a traffic signal. Reaction time is somewhat slower, about 1.25 seconds. This is due to the increase in perception time to over a second with movement time still about 0.2 second.

* Surprise: the drive encounters a very unusual circumstance, such as a pedestrian or another car crossing the road in the near distance. There is extra time needed to interpret the event and to decide upon response. Reaction time depends to some extent on the distance to the obstacle and whether it is approaching from the side and is first seen in peripheral vision. The best estimate is 1.5 seconds for side incursions and perhaps a few tenths of a second faster for straight-ahead obstacles. Perception time is 1.2 seconds while movement time lengthens to 0.3 second.




If u read above it says that for a alert person, it takes 0.7 seconds for a alert person to take response against situation.

For cricket, it takes a batmen 0.7 /0.6 second to see the ball and bring down the bat.
And yeah all this is instinctive, there is no thinking.

And this is the reason that all commentators talk about curbing your instincts u can't play fast bowling with brain, but by instincts.

I agree with u .. its all about skills, talent and instinct .. Thats why even players who are masters in the demostic competitions look like amateurs in the International cricket

 

[MattW]

For cricket, it takes a batmen 0.7 /0.6 second to see the ball and bring down the bat.
And yeah all this is instinctive, there is no thinking.

How about if you were in the first person view the batsmans stats would set an instinct thing, so if they react slowly the ball will come at you quicker, if they have good instincts it would be a slower delivery to simulate the effect of the batsman having a different reaction speed/better instincts. This would make shots depend more on the batsmans skill rather than the players, and IMO more realistic.
About the numbers it didn't seem right to me, but I will believe a scientist, mostly because they know more about it than I do.