Producer Question: Camera Height

[Kam]

Greetings all,

In the short time 8920 has been live we have received a great deal of feedback that the raised camera height is preferred.

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762028031

What are your thoughts?

 

[deepstrasz]

Er @Kam:
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
posts:

Spoiler

Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)
Patch 1.29 PTR (March 15 Update)

Also, what about a poll ?

 

[Korialstrasz]

Great to see that the height is an important topic for you. I really do hope we can figure some way out, to make it awesome for all of us.
I would also appreciate a poll, would be interesting to see what the majority thinks about this, and/or if I am part of the minority with my thoughts.

Anyways, even though deepstrasz linked one of my opinions, here they are quoted for this topic.

Great that the updates come in so fast, but I am really dissapointed that they reverted the height again. This was in my opinion, and I'm not alone with it, one of the best changes that they made.
I can understand that some pro players felt weird about it in the first place, and I do respect when it comes to nostalgia. But after a few days, many of us and of them got used to it really fast.
There is no upside to going back to the old height.

It was WAY better for watching streams like Grubby because you could follow the action much better. For the first time my girlfriend watched him a bit too, because she was actually knowing what was going on.
It was easier to get into the game for new players because they would not have to get used to a 2003 cramped view, that the successors of its mods did eliminate for something like 10 years now. (League of Legends and Dota2 for example)
And I would even say it was a lot smoother on any custom map too, because you just had so much more possibilities of greating bigger scenes with more units and more oversight. Of course there is always the -zoomout command workaround, but I still feel it should not be the way to go.

Maybe I'm a bit too harsh on the beaver, I just woke up and read the patch notes, and this was the first thing that came into my eyes. Maybe I should do more thinking about it.
However, enough of the sobbing in this matter: Still great work in all the other parts. They are really working on the game and that is nice to see. Especially the many upgrades to the World Editor and the fixes are amazing! Keep up that part, and maybe do the favor for me and others: Put the camera on 1.29 height again. It's 2018 and people should get used to something that is more up to date, even for an old game like this.

I would also be okay with a middleway. Let both groups sacrifice a bit. Change it to 50% or 60% of the PTR changes.
Or add options to change the height only for custom games, and keep it the same in ladder if it distracts pro players so much.
Just imagine huge 24 players fun maps with a more zoomed out height.
The bigger the maps get, the harder it will be to get used to it with the zoomed in view. Especially for new and/or returning players, should you be aiming for that, with a possible "Remaster" or big Wc3 announcement thing.

 

[tulee]

I do not want to seem like the person who wants to keep something just because it is the one I am used to (even if the nee one is superior) but I would prefer keeping the camera in the way it has been all this time. Having a zoomed camera makes me feel like heroes are less important because they are smaller.

 

[Chaosy]

To not step on anyone's toes, make it optional. A simple checkbox in the options.
An even cooler idea would be to be able to change it with code.

This means that you could force the 1.28 camera on competitive maps but custom maps could use the 1.29 camera if they want to

 

[millzy]

i my self did prefer the new height in 1.29 tho i believe it may change things for the people that play competitive ladder matches

 

[Kaijyuu]

I'm in the "set it in some sort of options menu" camp. I dunno about a checkbox, but inputting a bounded value (500-3000 or so) would be ideal.

Hardcore ladder people would set whatever's ideal for them. The one downside I can think of is newbie traps; it'll likely be considered ideal to pan the camera out as far as possible, and newbies will follow this advice blindly, making it difficult for them to click on things and then would blame the game for their poor performance. This sort of thing is pretty much a universal cultural problem in any game out there, though perhaps less of a big deal for wc3, due to being an old game with few new players.

 

[A Void]

I know I'm in a minority here of those who prefer 1.28 camera and we both know how this is gonna end. I'd say to make an average of 1.28 camera height and 1.29 (new) camera height. Use that average and that would satisfy both sides.

Say for example that old camera height was 400 and the new was 600.

400 + 600 = 1000 / 2 = 500

So average would be 500.

 

[PrinceOfThaWest]

I'd also prefer camera height to be just like when 1.29 hit the PTR. For me personally its always better having more space and view of the situation.

I can understand that for example Dota would struggle with things like this, but Warcraft as a RTS game, should have option like that available for it's players.

 

[Mechanical Man]

Depends what pros think of it.

For custom maps, there should be some Set default camera setting in triggers, so those camera zoom keys won't default the camera the custom game isn't designed for.

 

[Shar Dundred]

To not step on anyone's toes, make it optional. A simple checkbox in the options.

I second that.

 

[Sieben]

I'd say to make an average of 1.28 camera height and 1.29 (new) camera height. Use that average and that would satisfy both sides.

Say for example that old camera height was 400 and the new was 600.

400 + 600 = 1000 / 2 = 500

So average would be 500.

If the toggle option is not satisfactory enough, this could be a good solution.

If camera height in melee games really is an issue, even with a toggle option (we'd need to see what pros think, like @Mechanical Man said), a good solution would be to allow a toggle option in almost every games (custom maps, campaigns, melee vs AI...), but keep the height locked for competitive melee games only. In general terms, I think it's always better to give users the choice.

 

[deepstrasz]

Having a zoomed camera makes me feel like heroes are less important because they are smaller.

Heroes are usually the biggest units in the game anyway and they have glow too...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just make the mouse scroll be the thing that moves it close and farther away and this way players would use/change/set it depending on the situation.

 

[Selaya]

The problem with changing the camera right now is that it will very likely break a lot of maps.
Even if it's toggleable I can imagine that a lot of people will forget to change it and then go complain WTF MAP BREAK???? CANT PLAY )))
If any, the toggle should only affect maps that are classified as melee (rip spoofers), or otherwise have a flag set for it when created with >= 1.29, or anything like that.

 

[opium911]

I have attached a picture to show you what people actually see on a 4 X 3 resolution and on a 16 X 9 resolution from movies and you can apply this to videogames as well.

The exact same scene on a 4 X 3 resolution will enable you to see more vertically than horizontally.
The exact same scene on a 16 X 9 resolution will enable you to see more horizontally than vertically.

This means that a specific moment in time, someone could be seeing stuff that the other person would not see.

Scenario 1:

Spoiler: Scenario 1

In scenario number 1, in the top image where you see Gandalf from Lord of the Rings knocking on the door with his stick.

You can clearly see that on the 16 X 9 resolution (Wide screen), we can see the following details that do not appear in the 4 X 3 resolution (Full screen):
-A small bench on the left side of the screen
-A tree on the left side of the screen
-A lantern on the left side of the screen
-A complete view of the tree on the right side of the screen

You can clearly see that on the 4 X 3 resolution (Full screen), we can see the following details that do not appear in the 16 X 9 resolution (Wide screen):
-Details of the upper side of the house on the top of the screen
-A complete view of Gandalf's pointy hat on the top of the screen
-The first step leading to the house at the bottom of the screen
-A complete view of the grass at the bottom of the screen


All of that to say that even though adding a "widescreen option" to the game was "up-to-technological-standards" for 2018, we still broke somehow the old mechanics of the game with that first major change ; meaning at some point in time during the games, some people will see stuff that other people are not seeing.

Now you are adding another game breaking factor which is a "zoomed out" perspective of view (Camera height) which would also mean that some people might be seeing even more stuff that other people are not seeing.

So with those 2 major changes, you have created (intentionally or unintentionally) a very big gap between what some people might be able to see on screen and what others might not be able to see.

Those two major changes have a considerable psychological impact on the way you get surprised or the way you plan your attack and defenses.


In my opinion, a widescreen option is really where you should have drawn the line before you brake the game mechanics even further by playing with the camera height.
If it was for me, I wouldn't have even added a "widescreen option" and would have kept it the way it was for the past 15 years.

 

[deepstrasz]

In my opinion, a widescreen option is really where you should have drawn the line before you brake the game mechanics even further by playing with the camera height.
If it was for me, I wouldn't have even added a "widescreen option" and would have kept it the way it was for the past 15 years.

Actually, a camera from up high would "fix" that "issue".

 

[chusrubi2]

I've been only playing melee all these years (RoC in fact) and I see this question a little hmmm naive?

You got a bunch of players asking to go 1.29 height and a bunch wanting the 1.28.

Why don't you just make it customizable?

There won't be "advantages" and everyone would be able to choose the preferred height.

 

[DarhKoopa]

When 1.29 PTR was released I was so happy about the zoomed out camera view.

Many people argue that it was zoomed in for 15 years now, well but 15 years ago we played with less powerfull pcs on old CRT monitors with lower screen resolutions.

Lets take a look at other games, AoE2 (released 1999) if you increase the resolution from 800x640 to e.g. 1024x768 the game is more zoomed out, anyway this wasn't a real problem for competitive gaming.

Also the Warcraft 3 pros showed, that it is possible to make pro gaming with the zoomed out camera too.
I fail to see why it makes it so much harder, you still can zoom in via mouse if needed.

If we look at other Blizzard games, Starcraft (Remastered) and Starcraft 2, they are more like the zoomed out feature you introduced in 1.29 than what Warcraft 3 <= 1.28 provided.
I think the zoomed out feature was a big improvement and was disappointed that you rolled it back. The new camera feelt fresh, more modern, was just fun to play parts of the campaign again, because finally I could see more than just a small area of the game.

 

[pyf]

I know I'm in a minority here of those who prefer 1.28 camera and we both know how this is gonna end. I'd say to make an average of 1.28 camera height and 1.29 (new) camera height. Use that average and that would satisfy both sides. [...]

@A Void: ...or probably none of them.

 

[A Void]

@A Void: ...or probably none of them.

What do you mean? Can you elaborate?

 

[deepstrasz]

What do you mean? Can you elaborate?

Maybe your idea of the average might not satisfy both->none of the sides actually.

 

[pyf]

It is exactly that.

 

[W3Sour]

Kam, please just zoom the 1.28 out a bit.

Or zoom the original 1.29 widescreen in by some amount.

Thankyou KAM!

 

[N1.FAKE]

Hello Kam and HWS community! Please make sure you check this Classic forum post:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762028031?page=1

And this poll made on Reddit (When the cammera was zoomed out):
What do you think of the 1.29 WC3 camera zoom?

There were alot of people (and there's alot now...) that loved the new vision!

I think there's 2 options that might be helpful, first one is let us pick the zoom, and second one is find an intermediate point, something like NetEase or W3Arena.
Right now, with widescreen hd monitors, the current zoom on PTR feels cramped, even grubby said that bases feel cramped.

Thanks in advance, N1.FAKE. - Clan aG - USEast.

 

[A Void]

Hello Kam and HWS community! Please make sure you check this Classic forum post:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762028031?page=1

And this poll made on Reddit (When the cammera was zoomed out):
What do you think of the 1.29 WC3 camera zoom?

There were alot of people (and there's alot now...) that loved the new vision!

I think there's 2 options that might be helpful, first one is let us pick the zoom, and second one is find an intermediate point, something like NetEase or W3Arena.
Right now, with widescreen hd monitors, the current zoom on PTR feels cramped, even grubby said that bases feel cramped.

Thanks in advance, N1.FAKE. - Clan aG - USEast.

That's what I literally said.. They should use an average or intermediate point. I'm against these nonsense toggle options.

 

[deepstrasz]

That's what I literally said.. They should use an average or intermediate point. I'm against these nonsense toggle options.

It's not nonsense at all. Players should be able to set the camera ingame (=while playing) how they like it: classic style, new style and any value in between...

 

[pyf]

Camera hacks for previous, now unsupported versions of the game, allow to do this.

 

[Wrda]

This discussion is getting absurd.
1. Custom games don't need toggle or this new camera height, you can just make the trigger yourself, but of course if you're too lazy just ask to change it for everyone.
2. As a melee map, concept is standard so it should have standard camera height too, there's a reason for the height to be like that.
3. New camera height is not practical for melee maps AND some custom maps, can't see small units, heroes, units behind trees, cliffs, cliff levels, sometimes hard to see the pathing at all, some colours will be hard to see on specific units.
4. The whole point of a new patch was NOT TO BREAK existing maps, which is exactly what you are doing.

You may have the right to want some changes, and probably good in your favor, but you haven't the right to break the game if it affects other maps. If you want to have that new (custom) height, then edit the map yourself and add it, problem solved.

 

[deepstrasz]

You may have the right to want some changes, and probably good in your favor, but you haven't the right to break the game if it affects other maps. If you want to have that new (custom) height, then edit the map yourself and add it, problem solved.

I'm sorry but adding the option to set the height for melee games isn't breaking the game. If you don't like it, don't raise the height, big deal but don't tell everybody not to also because you don't like it.

 

[A Void]

This discussion is getting absurd.
1. Custom games don't need toggle or this new camera height, you can just make the trigger yourself, but of course if you're too lazy just ask to change it for everyone.
2. As a melee map, concept is standard so it should have standard camera height too, there's a reason for the height to be like that.
3. New camera height is not practical for melee maps AND some custom maps, can't see small units, heroes, units behind trees, cliffs, cliff levels, sometimes hard to see the pathing at all, some colours will be hard to see on specific units.
4. The whole point of a new patch was NOT TO BREAK existing maps, which is exactly what you are doing.

You may have the right to want some changes, and probably good in your favor, but you haven't the right to break the game if it affects other maps. If you want to have that new (custom) height, then edit the map yourself and add it, problem solved.

Well said.

 

[Sieben]

This discussion is getting absurd.
1. Custom games don't need toggle or this new camera height, you can just make the trigger yourself, but of course if you're too lazy just ask to change it for everyone.

This point is irrelevant. People can change camera height for their own maps, that's fine. But they won't do it every single time they download a new custom map... and what about protected maps? A toggle option will give us choice. I don't get why this would be such a problem.
As for the rest, see the previous pages of this thread. And deepstrasz summed it up well. If you don't like it, don't use it.

 

[Tal'Rarity]

It gives an unfair disadvantage if you don't use it, that should be fact and enough said.

 

[Sieben]

It gives an unfair disadvantage if you don't use it, that should be fact and enough said.

If you use it, you will have a better view on the field, but units are smaller and micro management is harder, and vice versa.
Since everyone can switch from one view to another at any time, this can't be considered unfair.

 

[Wrda]

This point is irrelevant. People can change camera height for their own maps, that's fine. But they won't do it every single time they download a new custom map... and what about protected maps? A toggle option will give us choice. I don't get why this would be such a problem.
As for the rest, see the previous pages of this thread. And deepstrasz summed it up well. If you don't like it, don't use it.

I'm sorry but having a choice is irrelevant if the map was made that way and won't affect the game at all. But at melee games and ladder that will just break the concept of the idea behind melee games, which is standard, so the camera height should be equal to everyone, it's not a question of choice, it's a question of being objective.
To be honest the widescreen was already surprisingand weird for me when i tried to look at text on command card and the gold and lumber amount, it hurts my eyes, and the widescreen is there for a little more view, looks too stretched for the proportion. And now adding a new height which was totally fine before just adds more difficulty to adapt to the screen. Not everyone has a 4k resolution, i have 1280x900x32, just because some people have a better screen doesn't mean blizzard needs to change the resolution for everyone... I don't want radical changes to the point I don't even recognize Wc3, some things are meant not to be touched.

 

[deepstrasz]

But at melee games and ladder that will just break the concept of the idea behind melee games, which is standard, so the camera height should be equal to everyone, it's not a question of choice, it's a question of being objective.

That's not true. The game was made so because of those years' graphic and performance situations. Seeing stuff from a higher perspective meant more resources to be processed.

more difficulty to adapt to the screen.

Key words in bold. That is your issue.

i have 1280x900x32, just because some people have a better screen doesn't mean blizzard needs to change the resolution for everyone

So, you're saying if you don't have a good monitor, I shouldn't benefit from advancements because I have?

 

[Chaosy]

Jesus, are we living in 1995?
The camera distance in wc3 is not a problem.

Normal mobile phones probably have enough power to run wc3, I am pretty sure 99.9% of the player base have a screen that is fine with the improved distance.
And among those 0.1 how many play competitively on a high rating where it actually matters?

I run a 4k monitor and I do not expect 4k support, but we are talking about camera distance here it is not a big deal.