Relic hasn’t stated anything definitive as far as I’m aware. That’s likely a large part in why these discussions keep going in these circles. Nobody knows for sure. That’s irrelevant to you wanting more zoom options, but again, I’m not against you wanting more zoom options. I’m not posting here to say “people shouldn’t have more zoom options”, right?
Like I’ve already said, the fact that wide and ultrawide monitors impact the field of view - in the event zoom is related to unit design and balance - doesn’t mean that the developers should exacerbate that.
To come back to me missing the point on performance . . . how am I? You have no data, merely an anecdote. That’s my point. You cannot say performance doesn’t vary significantly because I’m pretty sure (though you can correct me) you’re not running on min-spec hardware. You haven’t tested across different hardware configurations, different driver combinations . . . you’re just saying “I’ve tested this on my machine and it’s fine”.
Its not our job to worry about this stuff. Its Relic’s job. If they can’t make an RTS game with a non-fixed zoom level then have Forgotten Empires do it, they clearly can do it. Don’t choose an engine which can’t accomplish basic RTS tasks such as zoom. They had four years and this is the best they could do apparently, put out a half finished game with fixed zoom, no ranked, inferior micro options, and units uglier than other Age games from 15 years ago. It looks just like the game ‘Empires Apart’, which an indie studio in Europe made in half the time with a tiny tiny budget and just a few programmers.
It is highly unlikely that Relic couldn’t make the game zoom out more if they really wanted to. They don’t want to. The main guy Mr. Isgreen said he thinks the game cannot be played that way. If we take him at his word, it means he doesn’t want to do it, not that he can’t do it. He didn’t say ‘we would love to enable players to choose their own zoom levels, but unfortunately that would make the game inaccessible to those with lower powered computers and affect game balance’. He did not say that.
Ah, you mean about whether the tiny change in zoom is meaningful or not. Okay, well I stand by my view that the vast majority of people would not regard seeing half a tree more on one side and a quarter of a patch of gold more on the other side as a meaningful increase.
The issue with ultra wide monitors isn’t whether or not it is a “problem” that should or shouldn’t be exacerbated, rather it speaks to their intent. If their intent were that all players should have the same field of view for competitive fairness, they would have locked ultra wide players to 16:9 (like some other competitive games have done in the past). The fact that they didn’t do this suggests this wasn’t their intent. If it is their intent, then they can just come out and say it, lock ultra wide players to 16:9, and I’ll uninstall the game. Even if that is their intent for competitive fairness, there’s no reason not to allow it in single player, like they’ve done with the score.
So, to be clear, you are speaking for a majority that you have no way of proving?
People argue over 0.5 damage per second on a single unit in a single Age. I don’t understand why balance suddenly gets ignored just because you’ve decided you want a change that could impact balance more than you care for the balance it impacts.
Nobody can speak for the developers’ intent. Ultrawide monitors are an absolute minority of any hardware survey conducted. They could’ve easily ignored it for the sake of prioritising things that affect a majority of players.
You have proven that a bunch of people are interested. You can’t extrapolate beyond that.
Also, again, it’s not that I don’t see the need for it. I’m mainly engaging with arguments that claim the developers are writing bad code, or that there are “no reasons” why the zoom can’t be extended. There are always reasons. You might not like them, but that doesn’t invalidate them.
If you don’t want to entertain that there could possibly be reasons why the zoom can’t be extended further, then that’s just dogma. There’s no arguing with that. No discussing that.
If that’s where you’re at, cool. Just say it, so people stop wasting their time trying the whole “discussing things on a forum” thing.
Its about visual clarity. Either they rework the attack ranges of units so it all fits on screen, or they increase zoom.
In 1v1 matchmaking we should be able to zoom out to see at least a quarter of the map if we so please. It’s just better for supervising tactics. What’s the point locking us down? Let players decide when a specific zoom is appropriate instead of making the smaller zoom unplayable and alienating half the player base wishing we could feel like we’re on a game more recent than the 800x600 resolution era.
If there aren’t technical issues with relic’s engine that prevent this game from providing the same zoom levels as all previous age games, then we should expect this fixed immediately.
If there are technical issues with the engine that prevent this game from providing the same zoom levels as all previous age games, then they should never have decided to use relic’s engine, and I trust that mistake will never again be made.
This is why I prefer the balance arguments, personally. But, like I’ve said more than a few times, I support people who want more zoom options. I just don’t support strawmen and baseless attacks on the devs. We are what we eat, to massacre to a proverbial.
I’m used to it (being the zoom) personally; I come from Relic games (my experience with AoE games isn’t small, but it certainly is historical). Which is why I’ll always laugh at “it’s not a real RTS game” or arguments like that. Relic make RTS games. Folks not liking them is relatively immaterial. When we get into the DNA of what an Age game is, then it gets understandably more contentious. To that end, more (or better) explanations from the developers on why certain things are why they are may help draw lines in the sand.
It might not stop discussions, but hey. I don’t mind discussions at all.
Zoom in observer mode is okay for sure. Its possible to give small room for zoom in/out, but for online ranked its not balanced to play against expirienced stratosphere camera player, significant camera differences are basicly cheats in any real competetive rts (sc/sc2/aoe2).
Okay, I’ve heard this one a few times, but theres a lot of reasons (which have already been stated by others) why this isnt an issue. I’ll restate them for you anyway.
Most pro players in AOE2 do not play at the full level of zoom, which pretty much definetivley proves theres no competitive advantage
It’s entireley possible as it is currently to see the whole map rapdily, simply have having hotkeys and cycling through them to see different points of the map, so extra zoom is not conferring any additional advantage it’s just a preference/usability thing. To this point, it would actually make the game more accesible to newer players by not forcing them to learn how to quickly cycle hotkeys
Since everyone has the same option to zoom out, there is no competitive advantage that is confered to anyone, because everyone has options to the exact same camera. If this were an issue, which as we have just discussed, it isnt: then it would be just as big an issue for people to be able to use multiple monitors, or use 4k resolution, however everyone accepts that these options are not “cheating” and confer minimal advantage, but make the visibility and user experience of the game much more enjoyable.
and another one… and another one…how many will continue to do same “argument” about “fairness”
Firstly, check aoe2 - they(pro) can play at stratosphere camera, but never do. (I wont explain why)
Secondly, what the difference between my 240Gz monitor, 30ping to server, RazorNaga mouse (which way more cheating than stratosphere camera.
Can suggest to play any TG game, let’s see on you after a few games. For some hilly maps u literally dont understand the positions. In 1vs1 u have time to explore the whole mapm but in TGs sometimes it’s total disaster.
I would prefer no “rating” or “competitiveness in ur understanding” but the zoom, so i can play comfortably.
PS 10k times said in aoe2 TGs were the most popular regime(twice more players), here TGs barely near 1vs1.
Don’t change the zoom. I like it fine, and you’ll never satisfy everyone with any change you could possibly make, so just tell us that the camera is not changing and hopefully we all move on with our lives.
If 107 people worldwide decide “omg, unplayable - uninstall!” so be it.
This kind of post describes the people that are coming to these forums just to complain and at the same time not be useful to anyone nor the development team by not providing any constructive feedback.
Also, your statement is just not true as they’re doing the opposite of what you are claiming they are doing.