One question that might not have been asked - sub-displays/monitors

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
JSalzbrunn
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed, 21. Dec 05, 14:08

Post by JSalzbrunn » Sat, 11. Nov 17, 16:22

SamuraiProgrammer wrote:To be clear, I would love to see the game be capable of using multiple physical display devices. I think it would be great!
That! :D

patient zero
Posts: 305
Joined: Sun, 25. Mar 07, 19:19

Post by patient zero » Mon, 13. Nov 17, 06:42

I asked about multiple displays in another thread.
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
This is only a virtual reality.

rulerofallcheese
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu, 16. Mar 17, 02:38

Post by rulerofallcheese » Mon, 20. Nov 17, 17:32

Ahem...

NPC dialog shouldn't turn off the minimap or block user input! Come on guys! Just put that stuff into the ship's log if you don't want to implement a full monitor/watch window feature. This would be a huge improvement to the experience and seems like something that should be easy to implement because the functionality already exists to support it.

Pretty please? Would a round of beers for the team convince you?

gbjbaanb
Posts: 630
Joined: Sun, 26. Dec 10, 00:07

Post by gbjbaanb » Fri, 24. Nov 17, 01:21

patient zero wrote:I asked about multiple displays in another thread.
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
CBJ is wrong. Plain wrong. Immersion is not provided by displaying a fixed cockpit on a (in my case) 25" monitor with flowery wallpaper behind it. Immersion comes from the gameplay that lets you ignore the flowery stuff, and focus on the game. Moveable windows, no problem if you get the game right.

Now if X4 used a 360 VR system going, he might have a point.

User avatar
The Q
Pancake Award Winner 2017
Posts: 342
Joined: Fri, 20. Nov 09, 22:02

Post by The Q » Fri, 24. Nov 17, 10:33

gbjbaanb wrote:
patient zero wrote:I asked about multiple displays in another thread.
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
CBJ is wrong. Plain wrong. Immersion is not provided by displaying a fixed cockpit on a (in my case) 25" monitor with flowery wallpaper behind it. Immersion comes from the gameplay that lets you ignore the flowery stuff, and focus on the game. Moveable windows, no problem if you get the game right.
Immersion comes exactly from the flowery wallpaper behind the gameplay. If this wouldn't be the case, you would be able to "play" any spreadsheet software by calling it a space game.
Morkonan, Emperor of the Unaffiliated Territories of the Principality of OFF-TOPIC, wrote:I have come to answer your questions! The answers are "Yes" and "Probably" as well as "No" and "Maybe", but I'm not sure in which order they should be given.
xkcd: Duty calls

Cdaragorn
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue, 20. Sep 05, 17:53

Post by Cdaragorn » Mon, 27. Nov 17, 14:53

The Q wrote:
gbjbaanb wrote:
patient zero wrote:I asked about multiple displays in another thread.
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
CBJ is wrong. Plain wrong. Immersion is not provided by displaying a fixed cockpit on a (in my case) 25" monitor with flowery wallpaper behind it. Immersion comes from the gameplay that lets you ignore the flowery stuff, and focus on the game. Moveable windows, no problem if you get the game right.
Immersion comes exactly from the flowery wallpaper behind the gameplay. If this wouldn't be the case, you would be able to "play" any spreadsheet software by calling it a space game.
It's called using your imagination. You can absolutely have an immersive experience from a game in a spreadsheet. Gameplay is the only thing that determines a good immersive experience.

CBJ is completely wrong here. It honestly sounds like the excuse they made back with rebirth for not letting you fly capital ships by telling us it's boring. You don't get to decide for us what we do and don't enjoy. It is a far less immersive experience for me to not be able to pull another window over with extra info that's important to what I'm doing right now.
"All that is gold does not glitter; not all those who wander are lost.
The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." -- J.R.R. Tolkein

Cdaragorn
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue, 20. Sep 05, 17:53

Post by Cdaragorn » Mon, 27. Nov 17, 14:57

patient zero wrote:I asked about multiple displays in another thread.
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
That's odd. I thought they were using Vulkan. Assuming they are, there isn't a single technical barrier to doing this. I'd really like to know why he thinks there is.
"All that is gold does not glitter; not all those who wander are lost.
The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." -- J.R.R. Tolkein

User avatar
Ketraar
Moderator (DevNet)
Moderator (DevNet)
Posts: 8708
Joined: Fri, 21. May 04, 17:15

Post by Ketraar » Mon, 27. Nov 17, 16:43

Cdaragorn wrote:You don't get to decide for us what we do and don't enjoy.
You are wrong here though. A company making any product will have to decide beforehand what "you" will enjoy and what not. The confusion only lies within the notion that "you" stands for you personally and not as an audience composed of many "yous".

My other beef is then with the irony of being in a devs forum, telling them how they should make their game. :roll:

Still I dont think that CBJ put much emphasis on the technical part as such and defined it as more of a design choice, which is where the irony can be found of who gets to tell who how the game should be made. :-P

MFG

Ketraar

patient zero
Posts: 305
Joined: Sun, 25. Mar 07, 19:19

Post by patient zero » Tue, 28. Nov 17, 02:58

Cdaragorn wrote:
CBJ wrote:There are technical reasons why this wouldn't work, but a more important factor is that it would utterly destroy the immersion. Being able to move interactive displays within your cockpit might be nice, provided it made sense within the 3D game environment, but then they couldn't be Windows-windows. Making them Windows-windows and being able to drag them around your desktop would dump you back in the real world in a most unpleasant way.
That's odd. I thought they were using Vulkan. Assuming they are, there isn't a single technical barrier to doing this. I'd really like to know why he thinks there is.
Windows doesn't allow more than one window to be active, therefor you can't have one window active on one monitor and another window simultaneously active on another monitor. It isn't that MS couldn't do it, they just chose not to.
This is only a virtual reality.

RainerPrem
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed, 18. Jan 06, 08:39

Post by RainerPrem » Tue, 28. Nov 17, 07:27

patient zero wrote: Windows doesn't allow more than one window to be active, therefor you can't have one window active on one monitor and another window simultaneously active on another monitor. It isn't that MS couldn't do it, they just chose not to.
Hi,

it's a little different.

There can be only one window which has the keyboard focus. This is marked as the active window, so the user can see, where his next keystroke goes to. Today many programs use their own style of decoration, so it is possible to have several equally looking windows. But this is not in the least useful, since only one can have the focus.

cu
Rainer

User avatar
jack775544
Posts: 1117
Joined: Tue, 13. Dec 11, 09:27

Post by jack775544 » Tue, 28. Nov 17, 11:11

RainerPrem wrote:
patient zero wrote: Windows doesn't allow more than one window to be active, therefor you can't have one window active on one monitor and another window simultaneously active on another monitor. It isn't that MS couldn't do it, they just chose not to.
Hi,

it's a little different.

There can be only one window which has the keyboard focus. This is marked as the active window, so the user can see, where his next keystroke goes to. Today many programs use their own style of decoration, so it is possible to have several equally looking windows. But this is not in the least useful, since only one can have the focus.

cu
Rainer
This is correct in terms of things that aren't in fullscreen but when it does come to fullscreen that is where things start to become a little funky. There is actually 2 fullscreen modes you can have, fullscreen windowed and exclusive fullscreen.
Fullscreen windowed is basically where the game is running in windowed mode but the application doens't have any borders. In this case having the OS manage secondary monitors would be alright since it is just more of the same.
Trouble starts to happen when you are in exclusive fullscreen, this means that the game completely controls 1 screen (there is no desktop behind it) so there is a much worse transition between game and other programs.

To deal with the issue of exclusive fullscreen the devs would have to enable different behaviour of in game components based on graphics settings which adds a whole layer of complexity onto things. For such a small company this just wouldn't be high priority.
1940s - Various "computers" are "programmed" using direct wiring and switches. Engineers do this in order to avoid the tabs vs spaces debate.

ajax34i
Posts: 1804
Joined: Tue, 8. Sep 09, 01:32

Post by ajax34i » Thu, 30. Nov 17, 03:53

Capital ships can have as many screen devices on the bridge as are needed to display all sorts of external views, the map, comm logs, etc. The difficulty is in providing the same views / information when you're in an M3 / small fighter-class ship.

The difficulty is the fact that the player is a special snowflake who progresses from one measly scout ship (or whatever), to the commander of a possibly large fleet, and with an inflated ego to always demand to take personal control of any ship they own, without losing access to data or visual feeds about all their other ships.

One laughable solution could be text-to-speech. As in, you choose to jump into the control chair for that capital ship, fine, the captain stands up and moves out of the way, then stands behind you and recites to you the commentary of what's happening to the rest of your property. You don't get any screens, just a lot of audio commentary.

Cdaragorn
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue, 20. Sep 05, 17:53

Post by Cdaragorn » Fri, 1. Dec 17, 18:30

Ketraar wrote:
Cdaragorn wrote:You don't get to decide for us what we do and don't enjoy.
You are wrong here though. A company making any product will have to decide beforehand what "you" will enjoy and what not. The confusion only lies within the notion that "you" stands for you personally and not as an audience composed of many "yous".

My other beef is then with the irony of being in a devs forum, telling them how they should make their game. :roll:

Still I dont think that CBJ put much emphasis on the technical part as such and defined it as more of a design choice, which is where the irony can be found of who gets to tell who how the game should be made. :-P

MFG

Ketraar
I honestly think you're gleaning meaning from my statement that has nothing to do with what I meant.
Of course they have to make difficult decisions about what they will and won't do in the game. That has nothing to do with my issue with CBJ's statement. If they just stuck to "I'm sorry, but that's just more than we can do with the time/resources we have" that's fine and a perfectly good explanation.
His statement clearly goes far beyond that and tries to tell me personally why I wouldn't enjoy what I think I want anyway. And no, addressing the statement to "everyone" does not make it different than addressing it to an individual. If it is not true of any individual in the entire group then it is simply even more false.
No one as far as I've seen is trying to tell them how the game should be made. We're expressing desire for a feature we think would be awesome. That's fine. There's no irony, you're pretending we're doing something we simply aren't.
"All that is gold does not glitter; not all those who wander are lost.
The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." -- J.R.R. Tolkein

Cdaragorn
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue, 20. Sep 05, 17:53

Post by Cdaragorn » Fri, 1. Dec 17, 18:40

jack775544 wrote: To deal with the issue of exclusive fullscreen the devs would have to enable different behaviour of in game components based on graphics settings which adds a whole layer of complexity onto things. For such a small company this just wouldn't be high priority.
There's no need to go to that kind of complexity to find a solution for this. One could easily just accept the user's choice to use multiple windows when the main one is in exclusive mode. We could easily just be using the other windows for information and have no need to directly interact with them.

Another simple approach would be to not allow multiple windows when the main one is in exclusive mode. Both of these solutions wouldn't require anything other than the graphics settings to even be aware that there are multiple windows.
"All that is gold does not glitter; not all those who wander are lost.
The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost." -- J.R.R. Tolkein

brevi
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat, 2. Jun 12, 00:06

Post by brevi » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 06:59

To be fare I'm not a developer so I don't know how hard it is to implement this feature even if just on a single screen.

But.....

Welcome to 2009 WoW
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/surround ... w/wow8.jpg

And Rift from 2011 (picture is large, I didn't want to post it)
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FoHti-gHu74/maxresdefault.jpg

These are old (ancient?) games that can do what we would like a new game to do.

Full disclosure: WoW does not support that ability natively but UI elements can be moved around with some modding. Rift natively allows you to remove/move UI elements around even on 1 screen.

I understand if Ego doesn't want to do it, but don't make it sound like it's technically impossible.

My humble two cents.


{Images posted directly to the forums should not be greater than 640x480 or 100kb, oversize image now linked - Terre}

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”