It is confirmed that there will be more vehicles in JA than in JO. While this information by itself undoubately proves exciting to many of you as evidenced by the reactions on these forums, I'd like to present some cause for concern.

Raven's AT-ST sequence in JO was horribley implemented. Here is a list of problems I had with that experience:

1. First and foremost, the AT-ST run felt absolutely contrived and tacked on. While AT-STs appeared numerous other times in the game you could only operate one during the designated 'AT-ST level.'

2. Operating the AT-ST felt like you were just awkwardly pushing pixels around. Anyone that has ever played a game prominantley offering the use of existing, if fictional, vehicles knows that immersion while using those vehicles is priority #1. Otherwise you don't feel as if you are operating the vehicle, just pushing a blob of pixels around the screen. Proper immersion is achieved any number of ways, the most successful being:

Multiple perspectives. Vehicles need a first person view inside the 'cockpit' to go with any 3rd person persepctive- period. 3rd person angles make vehicle navigation easier at times but you need the 1st person perspective to stay connected with the environment. It also provides a better sense of scope and a more tangible way to measure the power of the vehicle at your disposal. Switching between perspectives in vehicles is just as effortless as doing the same with your Jedi when you want to use guns.

3. Fighting with the AT-ST was more of a chore than reward. It was easier for me and anyone else I've ever heard discuss this sequence to get out and fight the enemies without it. Turrets could be easily dodged with force speed and missles pushed away even easier. Compare to how many times you were ambushed by mer-sonn foolios.

This post is too long. I'll comment on the Do's some other time.

you forgot to mention how the vehicle would obsucre your view of the target and the crosshair if you looked up.

And that the crosshair wasn't dead on, a lot of the time, as it is on foot. So if you have the enemy in your crosshair with the AT-ST, your shot wouldn't always land a hit.

Having just completed MoH:Spearhead (I know, I know I keeping referring to this) - all I can say is that driving the AT-ST, flawed as it was, was TONS better than driving the tanks in Spearhead or regular MoHAA.

I didn't like Yavin Canyon first time through, as I thought I had to make the whole thing in the AT-ST. What a pain. When I realized I had choice about using them or not, it became more fun.

Are there good examples of driveable vehicles in a FPS? It seems to me that most of them are crap. Honestly, riding the Tauntan looks pretty well done. But that's different than an offensive vehicle like a tank/AT-ST. I assume the AT-ST will play like in JO.

But I agree with your ideas - the more they can implement multiple contexts, the more immersive the game becomes.

Mike

I jsut wanna be able to kill the taun taun by accident (sitting on top of a donkey thing while it's running around while you wave your lightsaber, accidentelly hitting your donkey thingy should merit a death.) BUT I DON'T WANT A MSSION FAILED SCREEN. I would rather be forced to walk it while your health goes down as you freeze to death trying to beat the clock.
Even if it is impossible to complete without it, freezing your ass off trying to find away (even though it's impossible) is much more immersive.

I agree that the AT-ST was a bit difficult to handle in JO. A first-person view from the cockpit would be a nice addition, too. Volition managed to implement that for Red Faction, and it worked well, so I don't see why it would be beyond the bounds of possibility.

I also agree that you should technically be able to commandeer such a vehicle on any level where one is standing idle and not firing at you. Yavin canyon was a bit contrived, and it would be nice to have the choice to steal a vehicle anywhere, even if you can't do a great deal with it.

I remember in Red Faction (again) that you could get aboard the mining drill and take it for a ride, squishing your enemies as you went along. It was a short ride, and you couldn't take it too far due to the level design, but that was fine. It was immensely rewarding. Other vehicle rides lasted considerably longer. And, of course, as with the AT-ST in JO, you could ditch the vehicles at any time (except for the sub).

Now that would be something to see...an underwater vehicle in JA. With a well-designed underwater level. That would rock, IMHO, and provide a needed break from all the land-based missions.

Anyway, I hope the situations involving vehicles are not too contrived, or too limiting in scope.

Most of all, I hope they manage to convey the raw speed of that Swoop bike. There absolutely must be a chance to have a chase sequence using the Swoop...

I'm just going to put what I expect out of the vehicles I've heard of:

AT-ST: I want a 1st person cockpit view, a more accurate crosshair, and more "feel" to it.

Swoopbike: I want this to be fast , and be a little bit difficult to get used to (but not too difficult), I also want the option to shoot a pistol while on it.

Tauntaun: I want the "bounce" and a knight on horse with sword or bow feel to it.

And thats all. :)

I believe if they had a system similar to Bf1942(battlefield 1942) that would be sweet. I liked the team work aspect of it, having vehicles where 1 person drives and another uses a mounted weapon or missles and so forth. Also what would be great is having a transport vehicles, no major damage weapons mounted on it, but you could bring a large group to storm the base. Larger levels would be the best, even if it took 3-4 minutes to reach the other base on foot. This would create the idea of a larger universe (something we tend to stress) as opposed to the small area of ctf_bespin. What I really hope for vehicles is there are a large variety while still stressing on-foot combat.

I wanna be able to use the missle launcher on the AT-ST, and also since when I'm on foot shooting at them the lasers just bounce off, I want the little stormtroopers lasers to just bounce off, let me watch them run in pathetic fear! MWAHAHAHAHA!!!

You CAN use the missile launcher... it's secondary fire on the side cannons or somthing...

I think Halo did a great job of implementing vehicles in the game. I liked how the swoop bike was done in Shadows of the Empire, it doesn't have to be exactly like that, but perhaps similar.

I found the vehicles in C&C Renegade really good. Like BF1942 you could also have the driver and gunner parts assigned to a single driver or to the driver and passenger/gunner.

Every vehicle had it's own speed and maneuvrability and weaponry conveing a diferent feel to each.

Something in the likes of Renegade would be good enough for me.

i thought the AT-ST in JO was REALLY bad... not only didn't it feel like you were piloting a big walking machine, but it just wasn't any fun. As soon as i realised i could jump out and forget it i did just that. :rolleyes:

and the fact you could only get in the ones they wanted you to came accross as stupid.

I'd want it to be entirely 1st person, with a decent 3d cockpit around you and the noise and clunky movement to actually suggest you are in a Walker... rather than it seeming like a badly implemented version of the normal foot physics.

It's uncanny how entirely on the same page we are regarding this, toms.

If they dont dramatically improve the vehicles, it will be a clear failure on their part to do so.

The physics engine is supposed to be vastly improved, so, we'll see.

I know I'm new around here, but I totally agree that the AT-ST level was just sooo poor. What I'd really like to see done is something either very akin to Halo or Battlefield 1942 in terms of control and style. The footage thus far of the Taun-taun "sequences" (hopefully they will be sequences, and not levels. You should be able to ride your taun taun anywhere you damn well please, providing the animal/vehicle is capable of covering the terrain. Or not ride your taun taun if you prefer) seems promising.

My big stickler is balance. Games must achieve a certain balance with the features and things they put in. One weapon shouldn't just be "Better" than another, as it is in some games, but it should have its advantages and disadvantages. Too many games focus on slowly implementing bigger and more bad-ass weapons as the game goes on so that new content is constantly fed to the player like candy. Play long enough and you get another new piece. I think that's lame. I don't want the vehicles to suffer this. Just because the developer wants to focus on the swoop bike or the taun-taun in one mission doesn't mean that if I see them in another mission I shouldn't be able to mount up, just for the ****s and giggles of it. I also thought putting the AT-ST in was stupid in the first place, just because it's a 2-man vehicle. We're pretty sure, based on footage from the films, that they have a pilot and a gunner. An AT-PT, now THAT would have made sense and, considering it only has one weapon to fire and no swivell-mounted head, much easier to design and control.

Oh, I'm sure this is probably already been answered, but do we know if the internally and externally foul-smelling reptillian/mammallian Taun-tauns will make it to multiplayer? It'd be a shame if they didn't.

I realy would like it, if you could pull someone out of his vehicle and take it over like chewbacca did in return of the jedi with that guy in the at-st.

or, if you could jump onto them, use the saber to open the hatch and then kill the crew.... you might not be able to pilot it, it might just stand there, unmoving... :D

Tauntaun SEQUENCES rather than levels? definately.... it will really bug me if the tauntaun dies and i have to restart the level, rather than just carrying on on foot....

The BF1942 method of vehicle operation is quite successful. I've played a LOT of that game, and I can tell you that the vehicles are easy to drive and shoot with, yet have subtle aspects to them that will distinguish a skilled user from a casual user. Plus, they're all over the map. :)

I think it'd be great to have vehicles just hanging around on certain levels, and ones that allow you to basically fly around anywhere (as opposed to the rail-shooter experience of the AT-ST level). Personally, I enjoyed the AT-ST level initially, but after the novelty wore off, I got bored with it. I get pretty irritated with any "keep object X alive" missions in games. In MOHAA, JO, etc., these kinds of missions drive me NUTS specifically because your friendly AI is always rock stupid and the enemy AI is deadly accurate.

Remember the level where you had the R2 or R5 droid that had to open the door in that hallway where all of the Rodian snipers were firing at you? Remember how that dumbass droid would calmly roll through CLEARLY OBVIOUS laser tripmines? How much fun was THAT level? I'll tell you how much fun: enough to make me turn on god mode, run through the damn mines, and then spend my time leisurely picking off the annoying Rodians.

I'm happy trying to keep myself alive, but when I have to worry about myself and someone else, it gets pretty damn annoying. The one exception was the level where Luke fought with you. HE was actually a badass (as he should be), so he could take care of himself mostly.

well said!

I disagree about the R5 level, Solo :D
I thoguht it was one of the better puzzles in the game - simple shooting of the mines before you run out of time (droid walknig through) while dodging sniper fire from the nasty rodian. I thoguht of it as more of a puzzle rather than daft allie AI.

On the other hand i do hate 'Protect the good guy or fail the mission!!!' Realisitcally, if your famous friend died, You would still continue, maybe you get on the stupid ship (talknig about Lando here) and then it shows you a cutscene of you crashing it (you die)... much better than a stupid MISSION FAILED thingy and make the game jsut have the illusion of being open ended.

On vehicles, BF 1942 worked very well i thopught, if they adopted that method then i would be sound as a pound :D

I like how sometimes you can "subvert" the puzzle if you're clever enough.

Like during the droid sequence, I pushed him behind a wall obstacle (accidentally of course) and he was stuck there. So I realized I could just keep him there and destroy all the enemies and mines, then pull him back out again and he was safe. ; )


The vehicles in MP have a great potential to be good. I have always dreamed about hopping onto a speeder bike and driving it through a battle ever since it was first shown in Jedi Knight (screenshots still exist of it, but it was never implemented into the final version of the game).


I hope they do take a cue from games that do vehicles well.

I actually thought it was pretty cool, nfact I could say I loved the ATST level BTW what is all this bitching of JO ever since the a new game was announced, I think JO is great!

Yes , we know JO is great . But i mus admit that if there was one level that really anoyed me was that AT-ST level.

Originally posted by Agen_Terminator
I disagree about the R5 level, Solo :D
I thoguht it was one of the better puzzles in the game - simple shooting of the mines before you run out of time (droid walknig through) while dodging sniper fire from the nasty rodian. I thoguht of it as more of a puzzle rather than daft allie AI.

While I also liked that context, I do think the premise of the R5 unit simply trundling into the laser mines was a bit far-fetched, and therefore disappointing. Self-preservation, even for a droid, should have been an obvious factor yet it was ignored in favour of the puzzle element. I think that section would have worked just as well without the mines, to be honest.

[b]On the other hand i do hate 'Protect the good guy or fail the mission!!!' Realisitcally, if your famous friend died, You would still continue, maybe you get on the stupid ship (talknig about Lando here) and then it shows you a cutscene of you crashing it (you die)... much better than a stupid MISSION FAILED thingy and make the game jsut have the illusion of being open ended.

I agree with you. You should not simply have to reload a level after a mission 'fails'. You should have to deal with the consequences of your failure, such as NPCs reacting to you differently, or subtle plot changes. However, in terms of protecting someone else from harm, there is a very easy way this can be handled without having to stop the game and reload the level, if the developer simply spent a little more time and forethought on it. If you have an important ally (who is integral to the plot, and must not be allowed to die), then you should indeed have to protect them...but, instead of them dying, why don't they simply bolt for cover when they have sustained a high level of injuries, and tell you they are sorry but cannot continue with you due to their injuries? From my POV, this is far more realistic for characters that 'must not die because of the plot'. Yes, you have failed to protect them, and must continue without them while they either hide, or make a run for it to get away. Continuing without their help is the consequence of your failure, but the most important element is that you can continue the game in this context. I think of it like the scene in ROTJ when they ask for R2 to come and open the door to the facility on Endor. R2 gets blasted, and Han has to improvise by hot-wiring the door...and then another opportunity for gaining entrance presents itself. This kind of on-going change of options in a game context would be excellent, and far less restrictive than the 'Mission Failed - Game Over' screens that plague too many games these days. It may take more effort in terms of programming or level design, but the resulting flexibility in terms of gameplay is something I would whole-heartedly applaud.

This is why I hope that the vehicles are all additional elements to the gameplay, rather than you being forced into a situation where you have to use a particular vehicle to complete a particular section, and if the vehicle is too heavily damaged you fail the mission. We should be able to continue on foot if the vehicle is put out of action for some reason - or simply as a matter of choice from the outset. It might be more challenging, but each to their own style of play.

Originally posted by txa1265
Are there good examples of driveable vehicles in a FPS?


battlefield 1942 :D