Mustard

Did anyone else notice Deckard Shaw on his cell phone in the background during the reverse engineer god's eye scene, right before Dom and Cypher break in? Who is he calling? Is it important?... It's the only thing in this movie that I haven't written off as either dumb for a reason or dumb because it's just dumb. It seems like a very intentionally filmed moment as well, because they make sure he is in the background during at least two or three of the other characters close-up lines, and also isn't involved in the scene at all, otherwise, when there is no reason he wouldn't be. Was he talking to Dom to setup the fake death, already? That can't be, because Dom is just about to bust in. I thought for sure it would come up in one of the later scenes, during the Ocean's 11 "here's how it all happened" bit, but it didn't... maybe it will be referred to in a following movie?

Also... I may never know, because this movie is terrible, and most of what it did was confirm to me that Fast 7 was the moment the series "jumped the shark." I'm gonna need some serious convincing to see Fast 9 in a theater, because these last two movies are not doing much more than ruining a series I hold very dear to my heart. :(

@sgtsphynx:Thats really interesting, Sphynx. I like the idea of "banking," to bridge the gap of abstraction.

@tobbrobb: Indeed, multiple preferences for two different scenarios makes sense. I also wasn't trying to imply that inverted was learned rather than normal. I think we, in fact, disagree. I am trying to say/argue/determine that people have a natural preference (inverted or non, not unlike handedness or dominant snowboarding foot), which they may be able to overcome (to whatever extent). This is opposed to tabula rasa idea that we are all blank slates before we see or touch a controller/mouse and an FPS game, and whatever version we are exposed to the most early on is the one we end up preferring. A snowboarder who has been riding "normal stance" their entire life, when exposed to a properly executed "push test" (ie. not expected) will still put out their preferred leg which may or may not be the same leg they thought it was.

But this is exactly why I am intersted in trying to develop a physical test to determine it for fps camera controls ;)

@spaceinsomniac:Yes, this is the common way people describe it, however, the analogy breaks down slightly when you consider that while the right-left control follows the same principle for the eye movement, it does not for the neck... if it were the same for the neck, as the controller is held flat push right and left, the movement should cause a "roll" of the camera.

To be clear, I'd like to create a simple physical test for y-axis preference. Which is why the Halo stuff is interesting to me.

@tobbrobb: There seems to be a lot of people that believe y-axis controller preference is learned, but i'm not entirely convinced this is true yet. Things change dramatically when you are playing a third person game vs. first person. There are additional levels of abstraction taking place, and the camera is no longer being represented as part of the character, like it is in an FPS game. This is why many third person games offer an X-axis inversion option.

@ohagan: Yup, lots of the common arguments being made there. Good stuff. I laughed pretty hard at the "Inversion Conversion Therapy camp"... saw it coming but still couldn't help but laugh really hard.

I should probably note that I have no intention of determining which one is better or worse, I have taken a stance that this is very similar to snowboard riding or surfing with right or left foot forward... people have a preference, simple as that. They may even be able to use the other setting to some very high degree of success, which is great. I want to know if there IS a performance difference, and if that difference is more pronounced in those who are naturally "normal" vs naturally "inverted" when you force them to switch. But before I can do that, I'd like to know if I can determine people's natural inclination towards one or the other, even if they think they prefer one or the other. I think it's important because I have come across other FPS controlled devices in fields like medicine and construction that force a control style. Which could be remarkably detrimental if a choice was not given.

Either way.

Can anyone get me in touch with any of the developers of Halo 1 or 2... specifically the first level tutorial section! :P
Or, can someone test out the sequence for me? Trying to figure out what triggers the suggestions to change?

@sinusoidal: That is a quite strange... was it the same across mouse FPS, and controller FPS?

Hello Giantbomb community,

I'm a long time reader, but rarely post, so please accept my apologies from coming to the board for basically the first time in a long time immediately asking for help :P

That said, I would love the help of the community, if any of you have time.

Background: I am a graduate student at a University in Canada who has decided (read. somehow managed to convince my supervisor) to pursue a thesis looking into the effects on performance that forcing people to use a normal or inverted control schemes for first person games/simluations has regardless of preference,.

As you all are probably quite aware, there are countless arguments online as to which is best or which is the correct scheme. While these opinions and arguments are often fun, they will not be the basis for a lot of my thesis (sadly). I've also found very little in the academic literature actually testing it (save an article or two)

What I am currently working on is developing a way to determine a novice's preference for y-axis inversion in a way that doesn't require exposing them to both schemes.

In the same way that a novice snowboarder's forward facing leg can be determined with a push from behind, I'd like to determine a way to best way to figure out if people prefer inverted or normal quickly and accurately (controlling for previous experience, where possible.)

I've become interested in the way that games like Halo have become well known for their in-game checks for preference disguised as calibration of a suit or something (Giantbomb Wiki Concept: Tutorials Disguised as Diagnostics).

What I'd like to know relates specifically to how the games handle those particular sequences.

In Halo, you are asked to walk over to "optical diagnostic station" (lol), and then look at a cross of lights. Then, as far as I can tell from video I've watched, they force you go to inverted, and look at the lights again, then decide if you want inverted or not.

In Halo 2, however, while the same basic thing happens there is a difference I want to explore. In the video I've found of the first level, when you wake up, you are asked to look up and then look down, (then up, then down...) then, it branches. In the video it shows the npc saying its looks ok, and you move on- no option to change to inverted is forced or suggested. BUT from what I have gathered from a level transcript, there is a situation where he says, "Tracking looks sketchy, I'm gonna run you through the full diagnostic," which seems to followed by a forced switch and then option to change back or not, similar to Halo.

My question, that I'm hoping someone can research for me, is what triggers that? Is it a timing thing, if you take to long, they assume you're having difficulty? Is it an error thing, if you look at the wrong target they figure you want inverted? I'd really like to know. And I'd prefer learning what it is on the original version of the game... on an Xbox.

Moreoever, I can't seem to find out if Halo 3 does the same thing? They have a sequence at the start, looking up and down, but in all the videos I've watched, they aren't offered a change, and I can't find a transcript mentioning it.

I've discovered that Halo: ODST straight up asks you if you want to be trained or not, and Halo: Reach hides it by looking at some waypoints while the ship is landing, and then asking if it feels ok. These seem to be less creative, to me, and I'm more insterested in the first ones. Halo 4 really seems to hide it by making you only look up to see the lever to open the stasis pod... again, not sure what happens if you take to long or get it wrong. Halo 5 seems to finally skip going through the charade all together...?

In addition, I am also interested if for the games Halo 3 and onwards, if/how the game takes into account the pre-loaded settings that you can set in the Xbox 360 OS- game preferences like y-axis invert, and in-car/outside car for racing games. Presumably, if you have it set to preferred inverted, it will start you with that scheme... but does that effect the sequence otherwise?

If anyone has any incite into this, or have some examples from other games, I would super appreciate your help/thoughts.

Thanks, in advance, team!

I remember when I ran into this game for the first time at PAX Prime 2014

The guy working the booth handed me and my friends a controller and said "4 player split screen death match, where you are all invisible and the only way to find the others is to look at their screen"

I stopped, looked at him, and said they were a team of geniuses.

Anyone who grew up playing Golden Eye on N64, like I did, screaming at the other players to stop looking at your screen, saying it was cheating, and then arguing for another hour as to whether or not it actually was, probably thinks like me... This is SUCH a great concept/mechanic!

I really hope it does well for them.

Woah... :(

Woah... :(

@ShadowVirus: WOW! Incedible!

you took this to a whole new level. hahaha

@jakob187: ???