Sweet dreams tiny baby man

[iciz]

So apparently Valve likes the idea of adding elements to TF2 now that only have a cosmetic effect on it. In that case, I have a request for them. An Idea so crazy and wild it just might work. It's ridiculous yes I know, but very easy to implement.

It's just a little enhancement to the way we view AFK players in game called “snooze mode”. You can read the full explanation on my blog

 

[grazr]

Interesting. Although tuants don't actually change the hit box location as far as i'm aware. Or maybe that's just the [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5res1tsNPs]soldier taunt bug[/ame]. So that might be an issue. If they want to implement something like that, they'll have to animate their hitboxes. Which, if they couldn't be arsed to do with their own tuants.. i'm not sure they would consider this.

Although it is a fairly original idea, and i do like it.

 

[Ravidge]

Reply to grazr about hitboxes:
You're right, hitboxes don't move while taunting. http://213.115.191.55/procyon/taunt_hitbox.jpg

But they do actually move correctly when a player gets stunned (or bonked, whatever).

I also find this one pretty funny: http://213.115.191.55/procyon/disguised_spy_hitbox.jpg (disguised spies doesn't change their hitboxes at all)

ON TOPIC:
Feels like a very low priority task... Adding content only available when people aren't playing the game.

Good servers have methods to deal with afk players anyway.

 

[drp]

Reply to grazr about hitboxes:
You're right, hitboxes don't move while taunting. http://213.115.191.55/procyon/taunt_hitbox.jpg

But they do actually move correctly when a player gets stunned (or bonked, whatever).

I also find this one pretty funny: http://213.115.191.55/procyon/disguised_spy_hitbox.jpg (disguised spies doesn't change their hitboxes at all)

ON TOPIC:
Feels like a very low priority task... Adding content only available when people aren't playing the game.

Good servers have methods to deal with afk players anyway.

no wonder head shotting a cloaked spy is near impossible.

 

[iciz]

Wait.... what just happened?

I don't think I said anything about hit boxes. We're all reading the same topic right

 

[grazr]

Well your suggestion would require an animation, an animation that would need a synced hitbox if it were to appear believable/real to players. Players don't just afk in spawnrooms.

Plus the TF2 community is as 'finnickity as a finnickit'. You damn well know they'll complain if something like that wasn't addressed, and it's more work than you might imagine. It's not just the case of creating an idle animation.

 

[iciz]

Actually I don't think you understand the idea here. It would only require a modified version of the sandman stun mechanism (which already exist), with slightly changed body stance and facial animations. Ravidge just pointed out that these stun animations do animate the hitboxes correctly. So there would not be an issue there.

I think we're all smart enough to know this would take more then just a new idle animation to work.

 

[grazr]

I think we're all smart enough to know this would take more then just a new idle animation to work.

Famous last words?

Not that i don't have faith in the abilities and intelligence of those within this community, but experience tells that most individuals are more likely to overlook certain facts than they are not to.

The stun animation is the defualt model pose. They didn't have to sync animate the hitbox, they didn't have to do anything. If they havn't done it for disguised spy's and they havn't done it for tuants (and the stun is only the revertation to the defualt model pose).. I was only saying if Valve can't be arsed to animate their hitboxes for these pretty standard features, they probably wouldn't for this, and the TF2 community would rip into it's short comings upon such a discovery.

By the way, before you get all worked up into a defencive stance, i said i liked the idea. I was giving my opinion on how it would be recieved if it were to be implemented if Valve's production tendancies remain Valve's production tendancies. I do understand your idea, i don't think you understand where i'm coming from.

It would only require a modified version of the sandman stun mechanism

No it wouldn't. Do you even know how model animations work? Or you just couldn't find the proper words and/or their contexts to express your point here? There's no mechanism, it's a simple onEvent>trigger>animation (The only other thing is the temporary removal of a players control, and i presume you don't intend for afk players to recieve that). There's no copy and paste of code or short cuts. Infact it sounds like any new code involved would be pretty basic as the variables consist of "X amount of time idle /animate". Unless you know what you're talking about you should probably not pretend too.

edit: In which case you wouldn't need to pretend because you'd know ^^.

 

[iciz]

Your completely misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. There's no need to get upset. I was only trying to clear up your misconception about the player animation hit box issue.

Do you know what the word mechanism means? (mechanism = the agency or means by which an effect is produced or a purpose is accomplished.) So your description of the means by which this sandman function is accomplished is a “mechanism.” There is however more to it then just a simple command and temporary player control removal.


Let me break it down this way.

sandman stun -stun -bonk image +sleeping facial animations +snoring sounds +tweaked player stance animations +z particles spawning above the head = "snooze mode"

Everything else would remain the same. The event that would trigger the mode would of course be completely different and fairly simple. We all know that right?

I was trying to explain that the player's stance would remain almost exactly the same as the sandman stun. So there would not be any hit box issue. Players sleep in the same position as the stun.

Maybe you were confused by my concept art on the blog?