Your very own camera argument thread.

[videobastard]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

More options would be best. But if its only the default one i would at least like it not to zoom in further on agressive mode.

[hatisback]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

You do have options. You can either purchase it or not. Plain and simple.

Like I said in another thread, I bet Natural Motion could care less whether you buy the game because it doesnt have the Madden Cam. Regardless, their game will make enough sales for a sequel. Not to mention, they have sold Euphoria to Star Wars: Force Unleashed I and II, GTA, and now Red Dead Redemption and guess what? There will be plenty more games for them to sell the engine to. The Backbreaker Iphone App is putting money in their pockets as well.

[mestevo]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Apparently the camera will be slightly different in the retail copy. It will be pulled back more. It was confirmed by a dev (I don't have a link). But you can see the difference by looking at demo videos on youtube vs the tutorial videos they've posted on Running, Passing, and Defense.

http://forum.backbreakergame.com/showpost.php?p=276911&postcount=5

The camera in the demo is identical to the camera in the full game.

Todd

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

You do have options. You can either purchase it or not. Plain and simple.

Like I said in another thread, I bet Natural Motion could care less whether you buy the game because it doesnt have the Madden Cam. Regardless, their game will make enough sales for a sequel. Not to mention, they have sold Euphoria to Star Wars: Force Unleashed I and II, GTA, and now Red Dead Redemption and guess what? There will be plenty more games for them to sell the engine to. The Backbreaker Iphone App is putting money in their pockets as well.

Really? I'm 100 percent positive they will disagree with that.

[hatisback]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Really? I'm 100 percent positive they will disagree with that.

Really? We will see when they DONT implement it.

[RaginCajun]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Really? We will see when they DONT implement it.

So you think they are OK with losing sales?

[Epiffani]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

You do have options. You can either purchase it or not. Plain and simple.

Come on now. I understand there are a select few who wants to bash the game for whatever reasons, but there are people who really want to support this game, and more camera options will go a long way. The people at 505 seems to be receptive people, so who knows if people yelling about more camera options is falling on death ears. I remember when the producers of FNR4 seemed to be pretty set in stone about not including buttons, but enough people spoke loudly, and was heard and they got buttons implemented in a patch. Also, you don't want to just tell people to not to "buy it" because the more this game sells, the better chance that we have to realistically see a sequel and an even better fleshed out game in terms features, gameplay, and physics. Ignore people with obvious agendas, and try to listen to those who are in here with a legitimate axe to grind.

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Really? We will see when they DONT implement it.

Exactly, they wont implement it because they will lose sales, therefore no more Backbreaker. Basic business logic is you want sales not to lose them, especially for a game just entering the market. And BB getting more sales is one of the best things that could happen in the football video game market.

[hatisback]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Come on now. I understand there are a select few who wants to bash the game for whatever reasons, but there are people who really want to support this game, and more camera options will go a long way. The people at 505 seems to be receptive people, so who knows if people yelling about more camera options is falling on death ears. I remember when the producers of FNR4 seemed to be pretty set in stone about not including buttons, but enough people spoke loudly, and was heard and they got buttons implemented in a patch. Also, you don't want to just tell people to not to "buy it" because the more this game sells, the better chance that we have to realistically see a sequel and an even better fleshed out game in terms features, gameplay, and physics. Ignore people with obvious agendas, and try to listen to those who are in here with a legitimate gripe.

There isnt a legitimate gripe. Can you imagine how easy this game would be with a Madden cam with no exploits to cheese the user? Thats the whole point with this cam. You have to cycle receivers and that takes time to do, giving a realistic rush off of the line. Does the camera need to be tweeked? Absolutely. But god cam would cause more complaints than praise in the long run. People would be coming on here saying

"This game is too easy. I can hit about every pass I throw."

So they make it tougher to play and us with the field cam get sold out because we now have a millisecond to cycle.

[hatisback]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

Exactly, they wont implement it because they will lose sales, therefore no more Backbreaker. Basic business logic is you want sales not to lose them, especially for a game just entering the market.

Read my earlier post. They are making tons of money off of the Backbreaker App and selling the game engine.

[Epiffani]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

There isnt a legitimate gripe. Can you imagine how easy this game would be with a Madden cam with no exploits to cheese the user? Thats the whole point with this cam. You have to cycle receivers and that takes time to do, giving a realistic rush off of the line. Does the camera need to be tweeked? Absolutely. But god cam would cause more complaints than praise in the long run. People would be coming on here saying

"This game is too easy. I can hit about every pass I throw."

So they make it tougher to play and us with the field cam get sold out because we now have a millisecond to cycle.

It may not be legitimate gripe to you as you've already decided that you are getting the game regardless. You may even like the current camera as it stands (as do I), but ideally, there should be no reason to have a problem with those who are asking for more camera options. Maybe I missed something in this thread, but who is calling for a traditional camera like the one in Madden? More options doesn't necessarily equate to going the traditional route, and I'm sure there can be cameras put in that you wouldn't have to sacrifice those elements in the game you've name. Let me reiterate, I don't have a problem with the camera and I've fully adjusted and will be coppin day one, but there can be improvements, and additions as well.

So they make it tougher to play and us with the field cam get sold out because we now have a millisecond to cycle.

The problem (as it stands from playing the demo) lies however is that the game can be difficult because the user field of view is extremely limited due to how far the camera is zoomed in, and how low it sits. If you're asking me specifically do I want more camera options to make the game easier? The answer is no, but I want as many people as possible to give the game a shot. Unfortunately, the camera is a huge hurdle that some are not able/willing to jump over.

How about this thread actually go some place and people start being more specific as to what camera angle that they have in mind to play this game? Again, in my opinion I just want the camera to be a little higher and not zoomed in so much (especially when I'm at QB). On defense, I don't really have a problem with the camera at all.

[nbluedevils]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

I think there are two different things going on here.

On one hand, there are people who are legitimately interested in the success of this game and see the potential it carries. They believe that adding a more traditional camera angle OPTION will open the game up to a larger customer base and ultimately improve sales and increase the viability of the Backbreaker platform. At the same time, these people are willing to buy the game, flaws and all, because they support the mission. These people are very rare on these forums.

The vast majority, I am afraid, are simply people who have had trouble playing from this particular camera angle and are struggling to play the game to their satisfaction (whatever that may be). This set of people use the "we want to see the game succeed" position as a mask for what is really happening: they are frustrated with a game they thought they would love.

There is no right and there is no wrong. Both sets of people have the right to request that options be included.

But please, be honest in what it is that troubles you about this game. If you are not, then your opinion stands for nothing.

[CMH]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

When will people just learn to agree that options are always the best thing a developer could offer gamers?

I've been reading both sides of the argument here and I truly just don't understand why there even has to be an argument.

Some people don't like the camera. They are right for wanting a better one.

Yes, maybe the developers wanted you to have a specific experience, but the truth is: when you push for a specific experience, you alienate the ones that don't want that experience.

There is nothing wrong with someone wanting a different experience than the one being offered. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that anyone could disagree with that statement.

[TIm]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

You know...I'm so pissed at the people who complain about the camera... From the getgo, These developers had said their goal is 2 things.. Bring a total different experience "Is which the camera is like it is" and 2) To showcase the Euphoria engine... The camera has always been from 1 view.. If you don't like that view then too bad... It's not changing..

[kehlis]

Re: Your very own camera argument thread.

This is a very risky design decision on part of Backbreaker developers to just go with one optional camera. It's almost comparable to All-pro deciding not to include a franchise mode in their game, or not giving the player more customization options. I will say however that its a little far-fetched to say that they are appealing to a limited amount of gamers because of the camera due to the fact that the sale numbers aren't in. The camera will inevitably turn some people off, but there are some who will buy simply off the strength of it offering something different and new. And technically speaking, they are already appealing to a niche audience seeing as though they aren't offering a brand of football with a license.

Finally I can appreciate someone with an opposing view.

If I'm not mistaken, you are someone who enjoys the current camera, but understand the request for a different camera angle.

I completely agree that my assumptions that the camera will turn away a good amount of sales is nothing more than an assumption (and I have admitted this) but I am basing this off of reception here on this forum and nothing more.

I'm not clamoring for them to change the primary camera that they designed the game for nor am I berating that camera angle. My simple argument is how can you justify not adding in another camera angle as an option?

We have heard some really weak arguments up to this point, and to be honest, I would rather have heard something along the lines of they didn't have the time or the resources to add it.

I mentioned it earlier but I think it is worth reiterating, we are all on the same side here, everyone in this forum would like to see this game succeed but some people seem to see criticism as an insult when it shouldn't be seen that way.