
Itanu wrote:Burinn wrote:NOOBY93 wrote:Unless someone finds clicking further more useful than the quest workaround is a detriment in which case the problem of not being able to pan in standard camera outweighs the problem of the quest bug with an extremely simple quick and easy workaround making it a matter of preference and not objectivity. Just because you prefer something doesn't mean it's objectively better.
Objectivity has nothing to do with whether or not someone finds something useful. Objectivity isn't a matter of preference. Having a component of the game not work is objectively worse than having it work. That's just indisputable, IE not a matter of opinion.
No one is making the argument that at the end of the day choosing one camera over the other isn't a matter of preference.
Cam ortho is objectively worse than cam bad in the following aspects:
- it's extremely hard to navigate the steepest mountains, to the point of being broken, due to the fixed perspective.
- its zoom out is limited. This caused many custom clients to allow further zoom out like cam bad has, but is not a cam ortho functionality.
- estimating distance and seeing certain items is much more difficult without a bird's eye view
As we all know, these points don't objectively make one better than the other. Please attention whore/troll somewhere else retard.
Jalpha wrote:I believe in my interpretation of things.
Itanu wrote:Cam ortho is objectively worse than cam bad in the following aspects:
- it's extremely hard to navigate the steepest mountains, to the point of being broken, due to the fixed perspective.
- its zoom out is limited. This caused many custom clients to allow further zoom out like cam bad has, but is not a cam ortho functionality.
- estimating distance and seeing certain items is much more difficult without a bird's eye view
Itanu wrote:Please attention whore/troll somewhere else retard.
sabinati wrote:do you expect me to just check the forum constantly, fuck off
Itanu wrote:Please attention whore/troll somewhere else retard.
Burinn wrote:Thanks. Glad we're having some real constructive dialogue.
Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 15 guests