Hmm, you''re talking about zoom _in_ in particular, ey? I can''t see any real gameplay reasons for it... zooming _out_, on the other hand, would be usefull to many players because then they could see more playing area, and be more of a power user. In fact, I never zoom in, I always zoom out - but maybe that''s just me. I wouldn''t put it on the GUI or anything, I''d just have it hidden away in your (well designed) options menu:
Camera Zoom - Close / Medium / Far
or something. Because more options = better game in many peoples'' books.
No Point In Zooming IN?
In my RTS spec I have decided upon multiple levels of zoom. I am attempting to incorporate things on a grander scale and to add additional importance to things like intelligence gathering and reacting with strategic hypothesis when presented with this intelligence. I use these multiple views to allow the player quick shots of the land. There is a super high up view that can encompass vast plots of land, a somewhat lower view that can encompass an entire battlefield, and a playable view that is suitable for manipulating units.
***Note: Fog of War style hiding is implemented; the high view doesn''t give you free reign to see what you;re not actively spying on!***
To add the ability to make better choices based on superior intelligence, I felt that this was the best way to get the info to the player quickly without detracting from the real time gameplay. However, these are switchable camera views, and I do not know if they fit your definiton of zoom. If you mean smoothly approaching and focusing in on a rock, then no, for a RTS iso that would be silly. Maybe acceptable for some sort of Puzzle Adventure game, but those tend to be more of a first person deal.
So I am curious, do some of you anti-zoomers support my zoom style, as it is based on intelligence (as opposed to rock collecting)?
--OctDev
***Note: Fog of War style hiding is implemented; the high view doesn''t give you free reign to see what you;re not actively spying on!***
To add the ability to make better choices based on superior intelligence, I felt that this was the best way to get the info to the player quickly without detracting from the real time gameplay. However, these are switchable camera views, and I do not know if they fit your definiton of zoom. If you mean smoothly approaching and focusing in on a rock, then no, for a RTS iso that would be silly. Maybe acceptable for some sort of Puzzle Adventure game, but those tend to be more of a first person deal.
So I am curious, do some of you anti-zoomers support my zoom style, as it is based on intelligence (as opposed to rock collecting)?
--OctDev
quote:Original post by freshya
In fact, I never zoom in, I always zoom out - but maybe that''s just me.
So once you zoom out you never zoom back in?
Eliminating zoom is not the answer. Concentrate instead on the camera''s initial position (zoomed in, zoomed out or in between) and how close to the ground the view should ever get.
chronos - no that''s not wht I meant. What I mean is that the default zoom level for all games I play is adequate if not too close - therefore I tend to zoom out, if at all.
Sorry about that freshya. That question was meant more as a hint than a question. In games where it''s possible to zoom out it should also be possible to zoom in. Generally it doesn''t make sense to have one without the other.
Zooming in can serve a purpose. Zooming in provides an intimate view of the game world just as zooming out allows for a more detached perspective. Lots of games can benefit from this contrast, where both directions of zoom are important.
Zooming in can serve a purpose. Zooming in provides an intimate view of the game world just as zooming out allows for a more detached perspective. Lots of games can benefit from this contrast, where both directions of zoom are important.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
